|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..13~14~15~16~17~18~19 [Next] | ||||||||||
joeyjojo Regular user uruguay 126 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-27 11:10, John LeBlanc wrote: This is precisely the issue that I have with this particular book: the marketing techniques used precluded people like me from "doing adequate research" as the book was presold and the *contents* intentionally kept secret. You seem awfully angry, sir. It is interesting that despite being very happy with Minch/Maven/the Protocols you choose to vent your anger on this thread... adios, joey |
|||||||||
John LeBlanc Special user Houston, TX 524 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-28 13:03, joeyjojo wrote: Angry? Not at all. I simply have no patience for whining. And you are whining. And apparently this is the thread you've chosen in which to whine. It's almost amusing that you refuse to see the points I made above. They completely take the wind out of your sails, yet, you're back whining again. In the case of this book, if you don't have the $50 to spare to throw at something you can't adequately research, guess what? Don't buy it. If, as a result of that decision, you miss out on an awfully good book, well, them's the breaks. There's nothing left to complain about at that point. Yet here we are and we continue to get, "that's not faaaayyyyyeeeerrrrr." John |
|||||||||
joeyjojo Regular user uruguay 126 Posts |
Safe trip back from Iraq and good luck in the future.
HE-HA! HE-HA! |
|||||||||
Lance Pierce Special user 878 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-27 07:24, joeyjojo wrote: Actually, that's not quite true. Rather, let me rephrase: Actually, that's patently false. The situation in Uruguay may be different, but I regularly see products of all kinds and in all fields with pre-sales and limited runs. In fact, we have many companies here that do nothing but limited runs of whatever they sell. Limited runs are their specialty. And don't get me started on exaggerated ads; I can find those in just about any magazine at my grocery store. As for books sold without divulging their contents, that's also a regular practice. Perhaps one of the best known in the last quarter century is Madonna's Sex, which was sold in wrapper, and which no one could preview. Even beside that example, I can walk into literally any bookstore in my city and find books that will not allow me to preview them before buying it. When I first read the ad from Stephen Minch, I found myself intrigued. After all, that's what the ad was supposed to do: intrigue me. But I didn't feel led on or manipulated, and as word got around on what the book was, I certainly didn't feel as if anything deceptive was going on. In his ad, Minch said that the book was so unique that he didn't want to tell us what it was, but I didn't take this to mean that he meant for the book to be secret; I took this to mean that he didn't want to spoil the experience of reading the book. That didn't strike me as sneaky; that struck me as respectful and considerate of me, the potential reader. When he later asked people to not reveal the contents of the book AT LEAST UNTIL THOSE WHO BOUGHT IT COULD ENJOY IT FIRST, that didn't come across as underhanded, that meant to me that he wanted those who plunked down their fifty bucks to at least be able to get the a-ha out of it before some schmuck blew the punchline and ruined it for them. The book was never marketed as a "secret item," as you suggest, and the contents obviously were never meant to be kept secret. In fact, knowing how things go in the world of magic, Mssrs. Minch and Maven would have to be idiots to expect they could put 500 copies of a book out there and expect anything to be kept secret. That idea is so absurd that it's ridiculous to imagine them buying into it. Neither man could possibly be THAT doltish. I'm afraid that I just don't get your point. Sorry. Lance |
|||||||||
joeyjojo Regular user uruguay 126 Posts |
Yo Lance! Wow, you're so lucky to live in Florida: My family and I have tried to swim across to Florida so many times, but never with much success. Often, we would get caught by cool immigration cops (with groovy mirror-sunglasses), many of whom were called 'Lance'!
But to your very clever points: I must admit that I find it adorable when people use phrases like 'patently false' without quite knowing what they mean (you, in this case, mean 'false'. You must have gotten the 'patently' bit from TV court-dramas). Anyway, I find it strange that you *really* can't distinguish between exaggerated magic ads, and non-magic advertisements that toot their own horn, but stick to the facts. I'm not talking about someone who would publish a bowl routine and call it 'The World Famous' bowl routine (that's just cute; it makes me want to pinch the author's cheeks); what I'm talking about is carney-language. In the good ol' litigious US of A, there are more than enough lawyers who - had they the time or inclination - could make a career out of suing magic dealers for false advertising. Magic dealers don't have as much money as, say, tobacco companies or McDonalds, so they escape the claws of the ambulance-chasers et al. But my advice to you would be that you pick up a carpenter's catalog and look through it. Compare the language and tone of the ads with those of a magic catalog. Before too long you'll get the point. If not, then there's little more I can do but suggest you go back to high-school and get that elusive GED. Books in wrapping are ubiquitous, of course, and pre-sale techniques or limited runs are not unique to magic; you are right about that. But it is the combination of these three that makes this particular case problematic. Madonna's book was wrapped in plastic but there were enough copies available, sold on shelves (rather than by pre-sale) for reviews to emerge. Such was not the case with Protocols. The fact that you take what was blatantly a marketing ploy and interpret it as Minch/Maven being "respectful and considerate" of you and other buyers shows your bias. As I said to Mr. Brad, I prefer not to spend (read: waste) my time arguing with those too obtuse or biased to consider other perspectives. Perhaps, if I manage to swim to Florida successfully, we can meet and chat about this, Billy-Bob (sorry, but 'Lance' has too many painful associations of imigration officers). Until then... adios, joey |
|||||||||
Lance Pierce Special user 878 Posts |
Joey,
Thanks for your response. I don't remember personally insulting you even once. I think we'll have to agree to disagree. Respectfully, Lance p.s. patently |
|||||||||
shaunproof Loyal user Parts Unknown 228 Posts |
Correction (and replacement) to my previous post.
The money back guarantee wasn't offered when the book was initially sold. Now that sales on secondary markets like eBay are going for more than retail, and there still some demand for the book at > $50, of course the publisher is offering a money back guarantee. Offering a money back guarantee after the fact means nothing. Look at the initial ads for the book. No mention of a money back guarantee. |
|||||||||
truthteller Inner circle 2584 Posts |
Shaun,
I am sorry, but you are wrong. When I purchased my copy, before the book returned from the printer and before it was sold out, Stephen offered the buy back guarantee to me and informed me that this offer was made to all purchasers. Why was it not within the ad? I don't know. I do know that if _I_ were to offer a buy back, I would never let it be known from the outset. We have far too many people who would "buy" the book never intending to keep it, only get the information and return it. That was NOT Minch's motivation. Before speculating, Shaun, you might want to trouble yourself with getting your facts right. Thanks to John, Lance, David and Payne for their very thoughtful posts. I was begining to think maybe I was not seeing something. I am glad to know that I am not. Brad |
|||||||||
ClouDsss Inner circle 1799 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-30 10:59, truthteller wrote: I have to agree with you that if a buy back offer were given before the sale of any book, most people would just purchase it and those who do not meant to keep it, would sell it back after absorbing all the useful material. However, why only this book has this public buy back offer? I know I am not Minch, and we could never guess what hes thinking. However, it feels to me that he knows of the greviences caused by this book and hence, decided to offer this publically, not only as a means of allowing collectors to buy back the book, but also to smoother any unhappiness that can result in his way of marketing of the book in the first place. If not, why not offer it to all his other books too? For example, a buy back now would be profitable for him if he were to auction it at you know where. Well, I know that every now and then The Magic Menu 1st 5 years, an OOP book is being aucitoned, with Jim's autograph in it. I missed a copy that was deemed the last copy left, just to see the same seller with another copy that has Jim's signature, with "Last copy" in it. Guess who's selling it. anyway, not to say that Minch would do that, but I am just trying to stress that the buy back of this particular book would in no way injure his intended sales due to the high demand by people (including those that do not yet know of its contents). If there was less demand for his book, would he even buy them back if he were to have disatisfied customers? Why not allow buy back of his 2nd printing of Modus Operandi? Murphy still has lots of stock of that book. Probably due to the lower demand I guess and due to the proper marketing used, buyers know what they are buying before hand and hence, its their responsibility if they had bought it and hence, its not right to allow a buy back. The case is definitely different with regards to Protocols. Hence, I do not think that its the buyer's responsibility in this case as repeatedly stated by Truthteller
Think outside the box, cos people are all thinking inside now!! - ClouDsss
|
|||||||||
truthteller Inner circle 2584 Posts |
Clouds,
Re-read Minch's ad. It is clear that he knew that it was not to be everyone's "cup of tea." Consequently, he actively discouraged some people who contacted him with questions from buying the book and he offered the buy back to those who got it in case they realized it was not what they liked. No one has every disputed the fact that the book may not be enjoyed by some. No book is enjoyed by everyone. So, what does this have to do with buyer beware? When did I ever say, "buyer beware"? What I said was that those who bought the book from Minch had many recourses available to them not only to perform proper research to discover if the book were right for them but ALSO had a very kind offer to return the book should they find it not to their liking FOR ANY REASON. Which begs the question - you know the one - why are people complaining about the book with such passion and vehemence, who are these people, why didn't they email Minch before buying, why didn't they take him up on the buy back? (We know, those who bought it and didn't like it could return it, cheerfully.) (I see you changed the wording of your post from 'buyer beware', which was never said, to an issue of responsibility- which when one co)nsiders the FACTS and available resources is still a key issue. Thank you Thanks, Brad |
|||||||||
ClouDsss Inner circle 1799 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-30 11:33, truthteller wrote: So wheres the buy back of books such as Modus Operandi, Books of Wonders? (I love these books, but I am just citing an example when you say that he offered to buy back when he realised that there are people who do not like it and realised that fact after buying it) I believe there may be 100 out of a million who do not like those books which I have mentioned and are waiting for the buy back offer - that is if that's the reason for allowing the buy back of protocols. If its due to him knowing the misleading marketing then allowing the buy back, then its a different story. Quote:
So, what does this have to do with buyer beware? When did I ever say, "buyer beware"? What I said was that those who bought the book from Minch had many recourses available to them not only to perform proper research to discover if the book were right for them but ALSO had a very kind offer to return the book should they find it not to their liking FOR ANY REASON. Did I mention buyer beware in my post???? Quote:
(I see you changed the wording of your post from 'buyer beware', which was never said, to an issue of responsibility- which when one co)nsiders the FACTS and available resources is still a key issue. Thank you I changed it because you kept mentioning that its the buyer's responsiblity. I agree to a certain extent if the ad gives them the description of what they are purchasing and hence, its their responsiblity if they still chose to buy it. Well, I agree that they should have taken Minch's advise when it was said that the book was not for them. However, some might take it as a misleading statement, for example, the ad on Brian Tudor's Generation Xtreme tells buyers to stay off as its not for the. Its called reverse psychology. So we cant always blame people for not heeding advice, esp if they are still uncertain of things and that the seller refuses to disclose any contents. However, I have to agree that the buyer is at fault, but I do not deny that the seller should bear part of the blame too. I believe this is the reason as to why Minch only allows the buy back of the protocols. However, I may be wrong tho.
Think outside the box, cos people are all thinking inside now!! - ClouDsss
|
|||||||||
ClouDsss Inner circle 1799 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-30 11:16, ClouDsss wrote: I eat back these words of mine *Munch* *Munch* I just realised that I did not do proper research before citing this and hence, have wrongly accused the seller of this book. I was told that the one currently in the site IS THE last copy. Please get this book as its really a treasure. My sincere apologies to Jim, the seller and anyone who have been offended by my posting with regards to this matter as it is unfounded and dumb of me. Deepest Apologies ClouDsss
Think outside the box, cos people are all thinking inside now!! - ClouDsss
|
|||||||||
truthteller Inner circle 2584 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-30 11:58, ClouDsss wrote: I did not EVER say this. The buy back offer was made PRIOR to the books going out, before they even returned from the printer. Minch made the guarantee before ANYONE had an opportunity to complain. (Actually, that is not true. People WERE complaining on the Café about the book prior to it ever being released.) The decision to not disclose the punchline has been discussed and established already. While you believe it to have been entirely a marketing ploy, having talked with both men before and after the release of the book, I know that marketing was not their motivation. Others agree with me (even though Lance, Payne, and John's posts received little comment, they are worth re-reading.) M/M wanted to protect the experience for the buyer. So, they took a RISK and in taking that risk took more than reasonable steps to ensure that the buyers did not take that risk with them. Money back offer from the get go = no risk to the buyers. Emails discouraging purchases from those willing to ask = no risk to the buyer. (READ THAT AGAIN. NO REALLY. IT IS APPARENTLY THE PART PEOPLE WANT TO IGNORE!) Now, Clouds, you have raised the question about whether or not it was fair for these men to sell a book based solely on their reputations. I did not overlook that point. I said that it was worthy of thought. You say this book was sold only on their reputation. Is this true? Well, there was an ad, and the resource of emailing Minch and finding out more about the book was always available. So, I disagree with the premise of your statement. But I also disagree with its relevance. All magic products are sold on reputation. Look at the people chomping at the bit for news of the next Harris/Garcia/insert name here product. All we have are ads and reputation. Reviews do NOT sell products. The creator has nothing to do with the review. It is not nor cannot be part of ones marketing. It is, a gamble. So, the Protocols had an ad, and a publisher willing to answer questions from those who CARED ENOUGH to ask. (Funny how people care afterwards and not before, huh?) Tim Trono gave me an excellent piece of advice, "In magic, your name is your brand." So, it makes sense to protect that brand. And here, Clouds, is where your fixation upon reputation becomes confusing. In one breath, people accuse M/M of a Machavellian scheme, a crafted assault on the minds and hearts on the world of magic, as they intentionally suckered us into buying what they knew would have been a lousy product. that's takes planning and smarts. But, both men have a career in providing material and products to the world of magic. Would men so clever as to orchestrate this con not see that if they truly offered something they knew to be inferior - a scam, as has been accused - that they would never be able to sell a product to us again? This is true of EVERY performer/creator/merchandiser. Put out a bad product and your sales of future products WILL suffer. Do you not think these men know that? But yet people are willing to accuse them of tarnishing their reputations WILLINGLY by intentionally conning us into buying garbage in order to make a paltry sum off of one book. Think about the logic there, please. So, I think it is reasonable for people to assume that both men must have thought the book interesting enough, important enough to not only take the financial risk of publishing it, but the risk to their reputation as well. I think this is the only logical conclusion for anyone to draw, even if they have not actually bothered to ask either man what his thoughts were (why not? Why are people willing on the Café to make these stupid accusations and not be bothered to drop a single email to the people whose minds they are trying to read - or in other cases, steal from?!?) NOTE: Thank you for your correction to you post re:Sisti. But isn't that part of the problem. People say things without knowing the facts. Shaun made a statement about the buy back guarantee which was WRONG. You made the statement about Sisti and the Cards a Weapons sales (admittedly a small misrpresentation) but both were wrong. Can we not be troubled to ASK or check before taking or accusing? Now, Joey will cynically/socialistically tell us it is all and always about the "buck". That is why Minch only releases such blockbusters as the Encyclopedia of Egg Magic and the Anna Eva Fay Biography. Joey clearly does not know Stephen Minch. But has no problems disparaging him, his work, and his motivations. Perhaps someday Joey could be troubled to email either person and ask them what they did and why they did it. Maybe he will look at the history of magic publishing and see that all the details of the Protocols sales have been used before, and even in combination. Maybe he will read a little magic history and see that even more extremes have been required of purchasers, such as signed non-disclosure agreements on books going back to the turn of the last century. But then his pie in the sky arguements would be all messed up with facts. Then he would have to reconcile his unfounded accusations with a face and a voice and a human at the other end of the line. Why do that? Isn't it more fun to complain about a book which you never bought and don't own? So we come full circle. The buy back guarantee was ALWAYS in place. Any potential purchaser had Stephen as a recourse for "proper research." So, the question is, and has always been, why is ANYONE complaining? Brad Brad |
|||||||||
Lance Pierce Special user 878 Posts |
The fact that all products in magic are sold on reputation is a pertinent one, I think. To amplify it as succinctly as I can -- and also address comments of Joey's and some others that I or others here may be biased toward Misters Minch and Maven -- if I am indeed biased in their favor, it's because they've earned it, and they've done so over the course of years. (And if, in the winding and wending of this topic, it seems that I've recently become biased against certain others, it's because they have also earned it, and remarkably enough, in a much shorter time.)
Some of the motivations assigned to Minch and Maven (or the speculation about what they could possibly be) dissolve with just a teeny-tiny bit of thought (and, perhaps, the fair inclination to offer just a moment's benefit of the doubt). Edward DeBono once pointed out that criticism is absolutely the laziest form of thinking because it requires no thought or contemplation. In many arenas of human activity, it's also the what we easily fall into out of habit, but it tends to be more destructive than not. It takes a bit more work to reason things out and try to discern what's really happening, but overall, I think it's worth it. The fact is that it's absurd to imagine either of these men doing what some have suggested. They simply have too much at stake, and it's hard to conceive they would do so just for a moment's small profit in the very short run. Or, rather, I certainly can't imagine it. Cheers, Lance |
|||||||||
John LeBlanc Special user Houston, TX 524 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-30 13:21, Lance Pierce wrote: I did what most, apparently, did not do: I spoke to Stephen when I placed my order, and I spoke to him again after I received the book. I told him before and after that I was buying the book based on the reputations of both men -- and both reputations were well earned over the years. As to the repeated diatribe that either Minch or Maven (or both) perpetrated some scam, it seems to me if ever there was a case to apply Occam's Razor, this is it. But I suppose that's no fun; better, instead, to talk out of your hat (or some other dark place.) John |
|||||||||
mplegare Veteran user Forest Grove, Oregon 310 Posts |
... sorry. I got lost back around page 3 back there.
... so okay... I got a large popcorn here... a couple diet cokes... nachos... who wanted the jujubes? Payne? Was it you wanted the jujubes? At this point, I honestly have to say that all of the back and forth, the complaints, accusations, and (sadly) invective that's been cast about makes me *more* intrigued than ever regarding this "unpleasant little book". Would I spend $50 on it? That's entirely likely, and for reasons which some folks here have already touched on (collectability, my fondness for Maven's work and his sense of humor, an increasing curiosity as to the actual content and, just maybe, some discourse on the nature of this rediculous profession we all pursue to one degree or another). In a way I look at it as an opportunity similar to that which I never had - to talk to Orson Welles in regard to magic. It's a chance to get some insight that I didn't have before, and possibly improve my entire experience from said insight. Or at least get a good laugh, dry though it may be. Hey - I ordered milk duds! Who the heck took my milk duds?
Matthew Legare aka Tobias the Adequate! - http://www.adequateblog.today.com - you know you want to.
|
|||||||||
Payne Inner circle Seattle 4571 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-30 23:28, mplegare wrote: I did cause I hate jujubees. Now that your in God's country will you be going to Kramiens in May?
"America's Foremost Satirical Magician" -- Jeff McBride.
|
|||||||||
mplegare Veteran user Forest Grove, Oregon 310 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-31 11:15, Payne wrote: Lord willin', the river don't rise, and I'm not booked, yes. (memo to self: Payne. Jujubes. Mwahahaha.)
Matthew Legare aka Tobias the Adequate! - http://www.adequateblog.today.com - you know you want to.
|
|||||||||
shaunproof Loyal user Parts Unknown 228 Posts |
I'll take Brad Henderson's word on this subject. However, I have a copy of 4 emails, including the first that Minch sent out advertising/discussing the book and there was no mention of money back guarantee. It might have been done after the fact, or in personal emails, or with a follow-up email, but the initial email had no mention of a money back guarantee.
So, from my perspective I don't recall seeing a money back guarantee offer. |
|||||||||
ClouDsss Inner circle 1799 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-30 12:27, truthteller wrote: I too still have the copies of emails in my gmail account there were sent by Minch with regards to the book. The first is an advertisement on the book, the 2nd is one that says only a few copies are left, the 3rd is on all being sold and the last is when the book is on the way and thanking all those who placed trust on Minch and Maven despite not knowing the contents of the book (Trust? I thought reputation, according to truthteller and many others is not an important factor. Then why did Minch acknowledge this? weird) Just for fun, a quote from the email "Finally, we would like to thank all of you who have purchased this "pig-in-a-poke" project, without knowing its precise nature. The trust you have put in Max Maven and the Hermetic Press by doing so is extremely gratifying. " Oh ya, I think Minch knows the discussion with regards to his marketing "...people to buy something without knowing exactly what it is is certainly an unusual and risky approach. Some have accused us of creating a "shrewd marketing scheme". " And there was NO mention of a buy back guarantee. So why was it mentioned that the buy back was given prior to the sales of the book? I am confused here. Did Minch only email a few people? (READ THOSE EMAILS AGAIN. NO REALLY. IT IS APPARENTLY THE PART PEOPLE WANT TO IGNORE!) ClouDsss
Think outside the box, cos people are all thinking inside now!! - ClouDsss
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Books, Pamphlets & Lecture Notes » » The Secret of Protocols revealed!!! (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..13~14~15~16~17~18~19 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.11 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |