"Clear Cast" $38 Antenna Hype Ad

[whosbest54]

This ad just appeared in a newspaper I subscribe to today. First I've
seen of this.

<http://stopthecap.com/2011/12/19/hype-clear-cast-a-38-new-invention-tha
t-eliminates-cablesatellite-bills-forever/>

If you see it, call or email the local media and see if they'll
investigate it as was done in Syracuse so the facts can come out.

whosbest54
--
The flamewars are over...if you want it.

Unofficial rec.audio.opinion Usenet Group Brief User Guide:
http://whosbest54.netau.net/rao.htm

Unofficial rec.music.beatles Usenet Group Brief User Guide:
http://whosbest54.netau.net/rmb.html

[Sal]

"whosbest54" <whosb...@NOSPAM.yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:20120123-1...@whosbest54.news.shared-secrets.com...

> This ad just appeared in a newspaper I subscribe to today. First I've
> seen of this.
>
> <http://stopthecap.com/2011/12/19/hype-clear-cast-a-38-new-invention-tha
> t-eliminates-cablesatellite-bills-forever/>
>
> If you see it, call or email the local media and see if they'll
> investigate it as was done in Syracuse so the facts can come out.
>

<sigh> This is just the latest-and-greatest version of Sucker Born Every
Minute.

At age 68, retired from a career in Electronics, I've been working with RF
signal reception, among other things, all my life. There isn't any Magic
Pixie Dust to be sprinked into a box that will pop out later as a
revolutionary new antenna. Not happenin'. Nope, nope, nope.

The engineer who appeared in the video version of the story was exactly
right. Just about everything that can be designed has already been tried --
if for no other reason than there aren't any new physical principles on
which to base a radical new design. The last major discovery was the
development of the Yagi antenna, a gain antenna with multiple elements.
(That happened in the 1920s.)

Indoor antennas are frequently a crapshoot. What works poorly in the living
room may be great upstairs ... or in the next-door neighbor's living room.
Outside, high and clear, is virtually always superior to indoor. Move it
away from people and "stuff."

Sorry if your personal situation precludes the use of an effective outside
antenna. I don't make the rules.

Your pal,
"Sal"

[T. Keating]

On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 09:39:58 -0600, whosbest54
<whosb...@NOSPAM.yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

>This ad just appeared in a newspaper I subscribe to today. First I've
>seen of this.
>
><http://stopthecap.com/2011/12/19/hype-clear-cast-a-38-new-invention-tha
>t-eliminates-cablesatellite-bills-forever/>
>
>If you see it, call or email the local media and see if they'll
>investigate it as was done in Syracuse so the facts can come out.
>
>whosbest54

Yup it's just hype..

http://www.digital-tv-converter.net/clear-cast_digital_x1_antenna.aspx
3" by 11.5" (or about the size of an old UHF bow tie antenna).


I build and install Custom reflector less outdoor 4 bay, upper VHF/UHF
antennas for the South Florida area that is ~20 times the size of that
tiny thing.

Once installed correctly, it allows one to receive nearly all of the
HDTV channels in two Designated Market Area's(West palm Beach-Ft
Pierce, Miami-FortLaderdale).

http://www.dtvusaforum.com/dtv-hdtv-reception-antenna-discussion/1199-fcc-dtv-coverage-area-maps-reports.html

[Gene E. Bloch]

On 1/23/2012, Sal posted:

> Indoor antennas are frequently a crapshoot. What works poorly in the living
> room may be great upstairs ... or in the next-door neighbor's living room.
> Outside, high and clear, is virtually always superior to indoor. Move it
> away from people and "stuff."

Don't forget the great reception you get from your indoor aerial until
there's an extra person in the room, namely the guest you invited over
for show (and show off) and tell.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

[Sal]

"Gene E. Bloch" <bloc...@someplace.invalid> wrote in message
news:9o6etu...@mid.individual.net...

I know! Awful! The fix was often to have your kid stand and hold one of
the rabbit ears.

(The whimpering refrain: "Is this gonna be over soon, I hafta pee.")

"Sal"

[Sal]

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-719D49....@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> What the fuck is to "investigate"?

21 years USN active duty conferred on me a Ph.D in Profanity Studies. You
DO NOT lead with the profanity. The profanity goes in the punch line --
last or next-to-last sentence.

Square away, Rookie.

Your mentor,
"Sal"

[J G Miller]

On Monday, January 23rd, 2012, at 16:26:34h -0800, Sal wrote:

> There isn't any Magic Pixie Dust to be sprinked into a box that will
> pop out later as a revolutionary new antenna.

Not even the plastic suction cups to attach the thing to the window? ;)

I have a vague recollection of those being used before for a mini Yagi-Uda
type indoor antenna, which was very poor, and the suctions cups did not
stay stuck to the window for very long.

If you must use an indoor antenna and if the signal strength is good
enough, then a full size log periodic should do an adequate job, eg

<http://www.antiference.co.UK/sitefiles/antiference/imagecache/product/images/photo%20shoot%202006%20LP28.jpg>

And you may be able to "hide" it on top of a cupboard or something ;)

[J G Miller]

On Monday, January 23rd, 2012, at 20:13:26h -0500, Elmo P. Shagnasty observed:

> Me, I *love* watching the ignorant of the world "discover" broadcast TV.

Yes but is it legal to watch broadcast TV without paying for it? ;) ;) ;)

[Gene E. Bloch]

On 1/24/2012, J G Miller posted:

No, and I'm glad you asked.

Call me and I'll help you set up a monthly transfer of funds to my
account. You will then be able to watch OTA TV with a clear conscience.

Glad I could help.

(No, I am *not* in Nigeria!)

[Jim Wilkins]

"J G Miller" <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote in message
news:jfmpvi$tjh$3...@dont-email.me...

Legal in the US, not in Britain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licence

But you pay for US TV whenever you buy advertised brands. Ads are a tax on
food and clothing.

jsw

[robinlos]

On Jan 23, 8:41 pm, "Sal" <sob...@aol.com> wrote:
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in messagenews:elmop-719D49....@news.eternal-september.org...

>
>
>
> > What the fuck is to "investigate"?
>
> 21 years USN active duty conferred on me a Ph.D in Profanity Studies.  You
> DO NOT lead with the profanity.  The profanity goes in the punch line --
> last or next-to-last sentence.
>
> Square away, Rookie.
>
> Your mentor,
> "Sal"

The Navy might do things differently than some others.
According to US Army FM-7734 "intensifiers" should be placed, when
required, in an expanatory position, before final instructions, and
after intial instructions. Intensifiers, particularly strong ones,
should never be made a part of the actual instruction or orders.
Example:
Sergeant!
(Sir!)
We're ready
(A .. ten.. UTTTTTTTTT)
(Pah... RADE .... res.......)
We have been asked by the Provost Marshall to assist in the
investigation of
some spurious, illegal, or otherwise undisireable device used for
recieving Television
transmissions. This is something I know nothing about. Sergeant....
(Sir!)
Could anybody at the Provost office tell you anything?
(No, sir. Nobody could tell me anything)

What the fuck is to investigate?

(I don't know, sir)
No matter. I fully expect everyone under my command to comply with any
reasonable request for assistance from the Provost Marshall.
Are threre any questions?
.
Sergeant!
(a....ten.........HUTTTTTTTTTT)
(DIS....mi..........)

[Sal]

"J G Miller" <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote in message

news:jfmps0$tjh$2...@dont-email.me...

I've always been afraid of suction cups on glass. I never know how close I
am to breaking the glass. I do have one UHF bow-tie antenna in a window and
it dangles near the top, hanging from the drapery rod.

Long ago, I used some outdoor-type antennas inside, hidden above a suspended
ceiling and they worked fine. But, most people don't have a suspended
ceiling. Best they have is an attic and that rules out apartment and condo
dwellers.

"Sal"

[Sal]

"robinlos" <robi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ca1180f5-24f9-4498...@c20g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Congratulations! You out-ridiculous-ed me! <grin>

"Sal"

PS: The Navy does EVERYTHING differently. Sample slogan from those days:
"The right way, the wrong way and the Navy way."

[J G Miller]

On Tuesday, January 24th, 2012, at 13:19:55h -0500, Jim Wilkins wrote:

> "J G Miller" <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote in message
> news:jfmpvi$tjh$3...@dont-email.me...
>> On Monday, January 23rd, 2012, at 20:13:26h -0500, Elmo P. Shagnasty
>> observed:
>>
>>> Me, I *love* watching the ignorant of the world "discover" broadcast
>>> TV.
>>
>> Yes but is it legal to watch broadcast TV without paying for it? ;)
>> ;) ;)
>
> Legal in the US, not in Britain.

Well I was not really thinking about the TV broadcast receiving or even
"on the premises" licence required in some countries.

Incidentally there are one or two areas of the USofA where a
tv receiving "licence" is in *effect* required.

I read that in in a few rural areas out west, where translators are operated by,
I think the county, or maybe a cooperative, and are the only form of terrestrial
tv, you are required to either pay a subscription or sign a declaration that you
do not watch any TV broadcasts from those translators.

[TJ]

On 01/23/2012 10:39 AM, whosbest54 wrote:
> This ad just appeared in a newspaper I subscribe to today. First I've
> seen of this.
>
> <http://stopthecap.com/2011/12/19/hype-clear-cast-a-38-new-invention-tha
> t-eliminates-cablesatellite-bills-forever/>
>
> If you see it, call or email the local media and see if they'll
> investigate it as was done in Syracuse so the facts can come out.
>
> whosbest54

I saw that ad in the Post-Standard, but I missed the WSYR story. I was
going to bring it up here, but apparently I was distracted.
Pre-Christmas activities, perhaps.

The ad did "look" like a news story, but it's not the first and won't be
the last. The Amish heater ads have the same style. Yes, the word
"advertisement" appeared on the top of the page. I remember the ad said
you could receive up to 3(?) hundred-odd "shows," not "channels," and I
don't remember any claims that you could get channels normally cable-only.

The antenna was obviously a repackaged bowtie, going by what showed in
the photo. It would probably work better than rabbit ears in the
Syracuse area, because all our stations broadcast on UHF, but possibly
not better than a properly-designed, well-aimed, bent coat hanger.

There have been no more ads for this product in the paper since, but
it's only been a little over a month. Give 'em time.

TJ

[TJ]

On 01/24/2012 02:40 PM, Sal wrote:
> Congratulations! You out-ridiculous-ed me!<grin>
>
> "Sal"
>
> PS: The Navy does EVERYTHING differently. Sample slogan from those days:
> "The right way, the wrong way and the Navy way."
>
>

Funny - I seem to recall from my service in the early seventies that the
Army had a similar slogan - "The right way, the wrong way, and the Army
way." The Navy must have plagiarized it.

TJ

[Gene E. Bloch]

On 1/24/2012, Sal posted:

Which I finally interpreted to mean this:

"Don't concern yourself about whether it's right or wrong. *This* is
how we do it. Period."

But I think I didn't figure it out until I was a civilian...

[Les Cargill]

it's still better than "rum, sodomy and the lash".

--
Les Cargill

[Les Cargill]

For a while...

<http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/01/retail-in-the-age-of-the-internet/251857/>

and there's another link ( that I can't find ) that
indicates that households with no TV are very
slowly on the rise.

--
Les Cargill

[Rick]

"Les Cargill" <lcarg...@comcast.com> wrote in message
news:jfni05$b8b$5...@dont-email.me...

Rum, bum and concertina..

[robinlos]

On Jan 23, 10:39 am, whosbest54 <whosbes...@NOSPAM.yahoo.com.invalid>
wrote:

> This ad just appeared in a newspaper I subscribe to today.  First I've
> seen of this.
>

In otherwise casual conversation this morning with several others, I
was told this ad appeared yesterday.
I seemed to be the only one who had any idea what this thing was. When
I declared it was a TV antenna, the subject had no interest any more.
I'd be interested in how well they are selling.

[Gene E. Bloch]

On 1/25/2012, robinlos posted:

I have my hopes on that last issue...

[ChrisCoaster]

On Jan 23, 7:26 pm, "Sal" <sob...@aol.com> wrote:
Move it
> away from people and "stuff."
>
> Sorry if your personal situation precludes the use of an effective outside
> antenna.  I don't make the rules.
>
> Your pal,
> "Sal"

________________
And get the BIGGEST BASTARD you can haul up there on a mast!! And
avoid the A-word at all costs...

:D

-CC























...amplifier

[Sal]

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message

news:elmop-77BA84....@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <jfmpvi$tjh$3...@dont-email.me>, J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>

> You mean when I record it and watch it using my automatic commercial
> skip system?
>
> Hollywood would say yes....I would say right back to them, fuck you.

Well said!

[Sal]

"Gene E. Bloch" <bloc...@someplace.invalid> wrote in message

news:9ob22d...@mid.individual.net...

I went to the Clear Cast website. Despite the earlier quoted price of $38,
I note that Clear Cast's balls have gotten considerable bigger. On the site

www.clear-cast.com

I clicked on <Shop Now> and was offered the antenna for $68. Going to
Checkout, I found they also add $9.95 for shipping and $5.00 for a two-year
extended warranty on the TV set. (Good luck with that extended warranty;
the warranty can be deleted from your cart.)

I have nothing else to say.

"Sal"

[Sal]

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message

news:elmop-28E55C....@news.eternal-september.org...

> In article <jfq4nl$m4l$1...@dont-email.me>, "Sal" <sob...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> I went to the Clear Cast website. Despite the earlier quoted price of
>> $38,
>> I note that Clear Cast's balls have gotten considerable bigger. On the
>> site
>>
>> www.clear-cast.com
>>
>> I clicked on <Shop Now> and was offered the antenna for $68. Going to
>> Checkout, I found they also add $9.95 for shipping and $5.00 for a
>> two-year
>> extended warranty on the TV set. (Good luck with that extended warranty;
>> the warranty can be deleted from your cart.)
>>
>> I have nothing else to say.
>

> BUT DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND??? THAT'S HALF THE PRICE OF ONE MONTH'S CABLE
> BILL--AND THAT'S ALL YOU PAY!!!!! FOREVER!!!!! TV FOR FREE, MAN!!!!!
> AND ALL LEGAL!!!!!!

I caught that. My cup runneth over with love.

But there's even more. On the main page, Clear Cast provides a
sophisticated calculator which converts monthly recurring costs to their
annual equivalents. I appreciate having a website in my Favorites, such
that I can go there if I have some number that needs multiplying by twelve.

Wahoo ... sort of.

"Sal"

[TJ]

Favorites... Ah yes, almost forgot these aren't Linux groups. Over here
in Linux-land we don't play "Favorites." That's so... Microsoft-like.

We "bookmark" things that we wish to keep for future reference. Much
more democratic.

TJ

[TJ]

After watching the video it's all becoming clear now. It's all in the
$30 suction cups. My old-fashioned 50-cent bowtie (from a garage sale)
doesn't have $30 suction cups. I have to suspend my antenna in the
window with some dollar-store cotton string.

That explains why I can only get an estimated 450 "shows" (I lost count
after 200) instead of the 953 promised by Clear-Cast.

Suction cups. So simple, yet so elegant. Who knew?

TJ

[Daniel who wants to know]

"whosbest54" <whosb...@NOSPAM.yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:20120123-1...@whosbest54.news.shared-secrets.com...

> This ad just appeared in a newspaper I subscribe to today. First I've
> seen of this.
>

> <http://stopthecap.com/2011/12/19/hype-clear-cast-a-38-new-invention-tha
> t-eliminates-cablesatellite-bills-forever/>
>
> If you see it, call or email the local media and see if they'll
> investigate it as was done in Syracuse so the facts can come out.
>
> whosbest54

> --
> The flamewars are over...if you want it.
>
> Unofficial rec.audio.opinion Usenet Group Brief User Guide:
> http://whosbest54.netau.net/rao.htm
>
> Unofficial rec.music.beatles Usenet Group Brief User Guide:
> http://whosbest54.netau.net/rmb.html
>

It figures, made/sold/whatever by the same company as the scam "Amish"
electric faux fireplace. All of these scams need to be nipped in the bud,
and all who peddle them drawn and quartered, but they won't be, I am sure of
that People would have a fit if "Al" from Home Improvement and Bob Vila
were to be executed. I am still waiting for an Eden Pure, "Amish", iHeater,
Etc. to die completely so I can dissect it, I know of several owned by
people around me, I am too cheap to buy one just to tear it apart, plus I
wouldn't want to be seen using one.

[Daniel who wants to know]

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message

news:elmop-F4CF35....@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> This isn't a scam. It's an antenna that allows televisions to receive
> OTA broadcasts.
>
> A scam would be not receiving the product or functionality that's
> advertised.
>
> That they have a slick marketing campaign designed to get ignorant
> people to spend a bunch of money on their product, doesn't make it a
> scam.
>
> The world is full of ignorant people who throw lots of money at useless
> crap. That doesn't make them all scams; if people think they got
> something of value out of it, that's all that matters.
>
> That YOU don't think YOU would get value of it, doesn't make it a "scam".
>
> Yes, it hurts to think that people are so ignorant that they'd pay $100
> (or ONLY $68 if you use their marketing code) for something like this.
> You hate to think that you live among people who are so stupid, because
> they affect YOUR life. For example, they're allowed to vote.
>
> But that doesn't make it a scam any more than Starbucks is a scam, or
> Ruth's Chris steakhouse is a scam.

OK maybe the antenna is just overpriced, but there are things out there,
like the heaters, that aren't just overpriced, they have outright false
advertising but yet haven't been shut down, and I see more and more of them
being sold at more and more places every season.

[J G Miller]

On Wednesday, January 25th, 2012, at 22:57:45h -0500, TJ declared:

> Over here in Linux-land we don't play "Favorites."

Be honest now -- are you really claiming that you do
not have favorite bookmarks? ;) ;) ;)

What is much more annoying is the way that both GNOME and
KDE uses the Windoze term "folders" for directories.

Directories are directories: folders are virtual things
such as mail folders.

[J G Miller]

On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 06:42:16 -0500, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

> That YOU don't think YOU would get value of it, doesn't make it a
> "scam".

Surely something which is vastly overpriced on the cost of the components
and is being sold by close to deceptive advertising is a type of scam.

> But that doesn't make it a scam any more than Starbucks is a scam, or
> Ruth's Chris steakhouse is a scam.

Are you getting better value for money at Starbucks or Ruth's steakhouse?

Maybe it is Taco Bell which is the scam for not using 100% beef
but filler? ;)

[robinlos]

On Jan 26, 11:23 am, J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 06:42:16 -0500, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> > That YOU don't think YOU would get value of it, doesn't make it a
> > "scam".
>
> Surely something which is vastly overpriced on the cost of the components
> and is being sold by close to deceptive advertising is a type of scam.
>

My opinion, based not on qualitative values, but pragmatic ones, is
that, rather than a scam, it is in the best traditions of American
commerce. How do you think we got to where we are?



-......" it is never what peolpe get that matters; it
is what they think they get"

[J G Miller]

On Thursday, January 26th, 2012, at 11:50:27h -0800, Robin Los wrote:

> My opinion, based not on qualitative values, but pragmatic ones, is
> that, rather than a scam, it is in the best traditions of American
> commerce. How do you think we got to where we are?

I do agree entirely with the point you are making -- today people
pay for many things, particularly branded clothing, not a cost based
on the materials, manufacturing and transport costs, but mostly on
"what people are prepared to pay".

Apple products are surely a good example of this.

> -......" it is never what peolpe get that matters; it
> is what they think they get"

Very true -- ask many people if they think they got value for money
and they will be only too glad to tell you that they did.

The best trick to this is to put something out at a ridiculous
price, leading people to think that it is uber-top-quality,
and then reduce the price by say 20-25% for a limited period
of time and people will think that it is just too good an offer
to pass by and rush en masse to the stores to buy it.

Man Dies After Wal-Mart Stampede
December 1st, 2008

[TJ]

One of the things I do to pay my bills is sell vegetables at a roadside
Farm Market. ("Stand" is so last century.) One of the things I've heard
my fellow direct marketers advise is, "If something isn't selling, try
raising the price." The idea being that if people see a premium price on
a product, they will think that it must be of premium quality and snatch
it up.

Personally, I have more respect for my customers' intelligence than
that. But then, having done this for only fifty years, I still have much
to learn.

TJ

[J G Miller]

On Thursday, January 26th, 2012, at 16:12:19h -0500, TJ wrote:

> The idea being that if people see a premium price on a product,
> they will think that it must be of premium quality and snatch
> it up.

Exactly.

Just like why it is more expensive to buy processed food with
less added salt, less added sugar etc.

[robinlos]

> TJ- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I hope we never get too old to learn. I was sort of running a business
and bought some tools and a carrying device for X. I
determined that 2X was a fair price to sell them. I made a sign
declaring the whole lot for 2X, the tools alone for 2.5X. There was
interest, but it took a while before anybody would give me the 2X for
everything. One fellow was sure he could talk me into letting him
have the tools alone for 2X. He couldn't do it. I.m still processing
what I can learn from that.
One thing that did work was to raise the price of lesser valued items
while dropping the price of greater valued items. Seeing a price drop
on some things encouraged sells. When this all quiet downs, I'm going
to think on selling antennas.

[ChrisCoaster]

On Jan 26, 6:42 am, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com>
wrote:
> In article <jfr7qq$9i...@dont-email.me>,

>  "Daniel who wants to know" <m...@here.edu> wrote:
>
> > It figures, made/sold/whatever by the same company as the scam "Amish"
> > electric faux fireplace.  All of these scams need to be nipped in the bud,
>

> This isn't a scam.  It's an antenna that allows televisions to receive
> OTA broadcasts.
>
> A scam would be not receiving the product or functionality that's
> advertised.
>
> That they have a slick marketing campaign designed to get ignorant
> people to spend a bunch of money on their product, doesn't make it a
> scam.
>
> The world is full of ignorant people who throw lots of money at useless
> crap.  That doesn't make them all scams; if people think they got
> something of value out of it, that's all that matters.
>

> That YOU don't think YOU would get value of it, doesn't make it a "scam".
>

> Yes, it hurts to think that people are so ignorant that they'd pay $100
> (or ONLY $68 if you use their marketing code) for something like this.
> You hate to think that you live among people who are so stupid, because
> they affect YOUR life.  For example, they're allowed to vote.
>

> But that doesn't make it a scam any more than Starbucks is a scam, or
> Ruth's Chris steakhouse is a scam.

______
If an antenna mfg markets an antenna without specifying what bands it
will receive(VHF-Hi, UHF, etc) but simply touts it as HD Ready or
'digital capable' that could be deceptive advertising.

-CC

[Daniel W. Rouse Jr.]

"J G Miller" <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote in message
news:jfmpvi$tjh$3...@dont-email.me...

> On Monday, January 23rd, 2012, at 20:13:26h -0500, Elmo P. Shagnasty
> observed:
>
>> Me, I *love* watching the ignorant of the world "discover" broadcast TV.
>
> Yes but is it legal to watch broadcast TV without paying for it? ;) ;)
> ;)

Yes, it is. (I realize it was sarcasm.)

However, there are some people out there--talk about a DTV converter box +
antenna to receive TV over the air: "isn't that illegal?" they will ask.
(Not making this up, some actually do think it's illegal.) Then explain to
them about analog NTSC: but, you're using the box, it still seems like it
should be illegal, well I wouldn't do that (they will say, as if they are
morally correct not getting OTA TV reception).

I suppose they didn't have analog NTSC cable during the A/B switch days nor
the "smart converter box" days-- and so apparently, if it comes from a
converter box, it has to have a cable coming from it and not an antenna.

[Daniel W. Rouse Jr.]

"J G Miller" <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote in message

news:jfrtm5$np3$4...@dont-email.me...

> On Wednesday, January 25th, 2012, at 22:57:45h -0500, TJ declared:
>
>> Over here in Linux-land we don't play "Favorites."
>
> Be honest now -- are you really claiming that you do
> not have favorite bookmarks? ;) ;) ;)
>
> What is much more annoying is the way that both GNOME and
> KDE uses the Windoze term "folders" for directories.

Ah yes, the trite "Windoze" troll. Sorry, but Apple computers (Lisa, II GS,
Macintosh series) and the Commodore Amiga series had folders long before
even Microsoft Windows 1.0.

>
> Directories are directories: folders are virtual things
> such as mail folders.

And yet they are still symbolic links to actual items in directories or
within a monolithic file.

[Sal]

"TJ" <T...@noneofyour.business> wrote in message
news:jfqivq$o3n$1...@dont-email.me...

> On 01/25/2012 09:41 PM, Sal wrote:

, snip >

>> I appreciate having a website in my Favorites, such
>> that I can go there if I have some number that needs multiplying by
>> twelve.
>>
>> Wahoo ... sort of.
>>
>> "Sal"
>>
>>
> Favorites... Ah yes, almost forgot these aren't Linux groups. Over here in
> Linux-land we don't play "Favorites." That's so... Microsoft-like.
>
> We "bookmark" things that we wish to keep for future reference. Much more
> democratic.
>
> TJ

I think of "favorites" as a generic term, equivalent to "bookmarks." I
don't much like IE and I use Google Chrome on this Windows machine and on my
Linux box. I use Safari on the iMac. I have my Linux on a P3 with only
250Meg of RAM. It's slow, so I rarely surf with it.

"Sal"

[TJ]

On 01/26/2012 09:21 PM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article<jfrul9$np3$5...@dont-email.me>, J G Miller<mil...@yoyo.ORG>

> wrote:
>
>>> That YOU don't think YOU would get value of it, doesn't make it a
>>> "scam".
>>
>> Surely something which is vastly overpriced on the cost of the components
>> and is being sold by close to deceptive advertising is a type of scam.
>

> Not at ALL.
>
> There is zero obligation on the part of the vendor to correlate his
> costs with his selling price, and only a fool expects there is.
>
> So, put on your man pants and grow up. No one is obligated to sell you
> whatever he's selling at anywhere near his cost of goods.

Absolutely. One charges what the market will bear. Cost of components
plus a little profit is a minimum price, not a maximum.

My vegetable operation enjoys certain advantages that keep my costs per
unit lower than that of many of my competitors. I operate on a
pay-as-I-go basis, so there's no debt service cost. My partner and I do
all the work, so there's no labor costs. (The profits, if any, pay for
our labor.) And there are others. Contrary to common opinion, sometimes
the economies of scale favor the small operation.

Yet I charge a price in line with what the rest of the market is
charging, not one necessarily in line with my costs. AFAIK, my customers
are very happy. Several have said, in fact, that we do not charge
enough, because they claim our products are better than our competitors.

So, if the customer perceives these antennas to be worth what is being
charged, there is no scam involved - even if they build them for $1 each.

TJ

[TJ]

20 years ago (when the following prices were about right) a mechanic
friend of mine told me that a long time before the dealership where he
worked had found that they sold more than twice as many cans of gas
dryer at 4 cans for $1 as they did at 25 cents a can.

TJ

[J G Miller]

On Thursday, January 26th, 2012, at 15:44:21h -0800,
ChrisCoaster observed:

> but simply touts it as HD Ready or 'digital capable'

Just watch out for the price on "3D ready" antennas ;)

[Daniel W. Rouse Jr.]

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message

news:elmop-A1C021....@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <jfrtm5$np3$4...@dont-email.me>, J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG>

> wrote:
>
>> What is much more annoying is the way that both GNOME and
>> KDE uses the Windoze term "folders" for directories.
>>
>> Directories are directories: folders are virtual things
>> such as mail folders.
>

> directories, folders--it really doesn't matter what you call them, as
> long as you're communicating.
>
> If you insist on talking Linux-geekese with Aunt Mabel and confusing
> her, you'll be there all night. Just call them folders, get out of
> there, and go drinking.

Give them FreeBSD with the default twm window manager to start with.

They don't have to use it regularly, but at least show them file
manipulation with the command line but the GUI applications launched from
the command line still open in a window. Go slowly and gradually, if they
are not resistant to learning they will eventually learn a few basic file
manipulations. Tell them never to use rm -rf * anywhere. Then at least
they'll partly understand what is going on behing a GUI like KDE or Gnome,
likely they will prefer either of those over twm.

(True, twm may be a very sparse window manager, but I ran FreeBSD on an AMD
486DX4/120 Mhz with a Connor 850 MB IDE hard drive on a separate partition
from Windows 95. I had decent performance with twm--compared with how
Windows 95 sometimes bogged down--due to not having a more resource heavy
window manager and GUI. I actually got used to using twm and kept it as the
main window manager up until the hard drive actually crashed. Now I use
Windows Vista at home and Windows 7 at work and won't use Linux or FreeBSD
again unless I am forced to for a specific work project.)

[TJ]

On 01/27/2012 06:47 AM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article<6NmdnRmxmpGXir_S...@nethere.com>,

> "Daniel W. Rouse Jr."<dwro...@nethere.comNOSPAM> wrote:
>
>> However, there are some people out there--talk about a DTV converter box +
>> antenna to receive TV over the air: "isn't that illegal?" they will ask.
>> (Not making this up, some actually do think it's illegal.) Then explain to
>> them about analog NTSC: but, you're using the box, it still seems like it
>> should be illegal, well I wouldn't do that (they will say, as if they are
>> morally correct not getting OTA TV reception).
>

> And believe it or not, THOSE people require a large, heavy marketing
> campaign to grasp the facts.
>
> And they pay for that campaign. It might be a two dollar antenna, but
> two dollars cost of goods translates to $75 by the time you've convinced
> them that they should try it.
>
> They pay for their ignorance.
>
> NO one can disagree, one always pays for one's ignorance.
>
> It's not a scam; it's simple proof that people are ignorant.

Yup. On the rare occasion when someone is handed education free of
charge, they distrust it and think it untrue, whether it actually is or
not. And when they pay for half-truths and outright lies, they believe
them above all else, even their own eyes.

TJ

[ChrisCoaster]

On Jan 27, 7:12 am, TJ <T...@noneofyour.business> wrote:
And when they pay for half-truths and outright lies, they believe
> them above all else, even their own eyes.
>
> TJ

______
Fox News doesnt charge for stuff like that - not counting the cable
bill.

-CC

[TJ]

Neither do ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, etc., etc., etc. Neither "side" of the
political spectrum is innocent. We believe what we want to believe, not
necessarily what is true.

Thanks for illustrating that point so well.

And that includes me, BTW. I'm as human as the next guy, just as willing
as you are to be deceived by my own prejudices. But please, let's not
let these groups degenerate into political quagmires. If you like that
sort of thing, go to rec.boats.

TJ

[Daniel W. Rouse Jr.]

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message

news:elmop-739E5E....@news.eternal-september.org...

> In article <6NmdnRmxmpGXir_S...@nethere.com>,
> "Daniel W. Rouse Jr." <dwro...@nethere.comNOSPAM> wrote:
>

>> However, there are some people out there--talk about a DTV converter box
>> +
>> antenna to receive TV over the air: "isn't that illegal?" they will ask.
>> (Not making this up, some actually do think it's illegal.) Then explain
>> to
>> them about analog NTSC: but, you're using the box, it still seems like it
>> should be illegal, well I wouldn't do that (they will say, as if they are
>> morally correct not getting OTA TV reception).
>

> And believe it or not, THOSE people require a large, heavy marketing
> campaign to grasp the facts.
>
> And they pay for that campaign. It might be a two dollar antenna, but
> two dollars cost of goods translates to $75 by the time you've convinced
> them that they should try it.
>
> They pay for their ignorance.
>
> NO one can disagree, one always pays for one's ignorance.
>
> It's not a scam; it's simple proof that people are ignorant.

It most certainly is a scam. If a $2 antenna was being sold for $75, what
would the US Federal Trade Commission say? They'd likely say it was a scam
too.

[Daniel W. Rouse Jr.]

Except that Fox News is an excellent source of news. Excluding the
conservative spin on political issues (which I actually don't mind it's
because it's a welcome change from the mostly liberal spin by the mainstream
media) and just focusing on only news stories that are told as it happened,
they will often cover a few news stories that somehow missed most of the
mainstream media until much later.


"ChrisCoaster" <ckoz...@snet.net> wrote in message
news:f6715fca-829e-42e3...@o12g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...

[Daniel W. Rouse Jr.]

"TJ" <T...@noneofyour.business> wrote in message

news:jfub8m$2h2$1...@dont-email.me...

I'm also suggesting alt.politics.conservative, alt.politics.liberal,
alt.politics.republican*, alt.politics.democrats.*, or even
alt.politics.independents.

[Remysun]

On Jan 26, 3:33 pm, J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote:

> I do agree entirely with the point you are making -- today people
> pay for many things, particularly branded clothing, not a cost based
> on the materials, manufacturing and transport costs, but mostly on
> "what people are prepared to pay".
>
> Apple products are surely a good example of this.
>
> >                  -......" it is never what peolpe get that matters; it
> > is what they think they get"
>
> Very true -- ask many people if they think they got value for money
> and they will be only too glad to tell you that they did.
>
> The best trick to this is to put something out at a ridiculous
> price, leading people to think that it is uber-top-quality,
> and then reduce the price by say 20-25% for a limited period
> of time and people will think that it is just too good an offer
> to pass by and rush en masse to the stores to buy it.

NPR's Fresh Air just had an interview that said how Glock applied
these principles to maximize its run at the gun market.

[Remysun]

On Jan 26, 6:51 pm, TJ <T...@noneofyour.business> wrote:

> 20 years ago (when the following prices were about right) a mechanic
> friend of mine told me that a long time before the dealership where he
> worked had found that they sold more than twice as many cans of gas
> dryer at 4 cans for $1 as they did at 25 cents a can.

That's a widely known marketing fact. Sometimes a single item costs
more, but I wonder if it's a Pavlov's exception that strengthens the
perception even if it's not the case that the single item costs more.

[J G Miller]

On Thursday, January 26th, 2012, at 19:17:08h -0800,

Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:

> but, you're using the box, it still seems like it should be illegal,
> well I wouldn't do that

Because they have been indoctrinated into the line of thinking that
a set top box which delivers TV programs is something a cable company
does and since it is wrong to steal TV from cable, then it must be
wrong to use this new type of box.

After all, you have to connect a cable from the box to the TV,
just like you do with a cable box.

Point proven. It is just plain wrong.

;)

[J G Miller]

On Friday, January 27th, 2012, at 06:26:46h -0800,

Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:

> Except that Fox News is an excellent source of news.

The very clever and subtle problem with FOX NEWS is that most
people do not perceive the distinction between FOX NEWS News
content and FOX NEWS Commentary and Opinion, which of course
FOX NEWS so cleverly does it best to hide.

[J G Miller]

On Friday, January 27th, 2012, at 09:10:29h -0500, TJ wrote:

> We believe what we want to believe, not necessarily what is true.

Even when we are told the truth.

I do not know if the followin is a true story or an urban legend,
but it illustrates the point regardless.

A teacher told his class that they were going on a treasure hunt
and took his class out to a place in the woods or whatever where
he said that he had hidden the treasure and that the first one
to find it could keep it as a reward.

Well after 30 minutes or whatever of searching, nobody could
find anything. The teacher then explained that he had not
told the truth and that there was nothing hidden there just
as they had proved by the fruitless search and that the moral
of the lesson was that just do not accept what somebody says
but check to see if it was true, and they all went back to class.

Only problem was that one or two of the students did not believe
the teacher when he said that there was no treasure and they kept
going back to the place and digging it up trying to find it.

(Rather like people who fall for 419 scams and still believe
that there really is millions in a storage box somewhere.)

[J G Miller]

On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:34:29 -0800, Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:

> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197

Seems like you are the Windoze troll.

[J G Miller]

On Thursday, January 26th, 2012, at 23:13:18h -0500, TJ wrote:

> Absolutely. One charges what the market will bear.

That is exactly what I said in my earlier posting.

[Gene E. Bloch]

On 1/26/2012, J G Miller posted:

Presumably, if it's truly 3D ready, it won't be flat like the Clear
Cast antenna :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

[robinlos]

That happened to me. I determined not to believe any teachers about
anything. Now the question: why go to school?
Answer: in those days, people like me were kicked INTO school, not
out.............

[Sal]

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message

news:elmop-7048EA....@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <bICdnTCbc4SOLr_S...@nethere.com>,

> "Daniel W. Rouse Jr." <dwro...@nethere.comNOSPAM> wrote:
>
>> It most certainly is a scam. If a $2 antenna was being sold for $75, what
>> would the US Federal Trade Commission say? They'd likely say it was a
>> scam
>> too.
>

> Why?

Yeah. If they said you could get stations from around the world (or even
across the country), that would be scamming. But if they tell you you can
get crystal-clear HD reception of your local stations, that's a "yes" and
they're OK.

My wife orders our pizza from a place that charges three times what we'd pay
for Domino's. Is she getting scammed? Nope. (If was eighteen times or
forty-two times as much, maybe we could talk.)

"Sal"

[Daniel W. Rouse Jr.]

"J G Miller" <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote in message
news:jfui1u$1ct$7...@dont-email.me...

> On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:34:29 -0800, Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:
>
>> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197
>
> Seems like you are the Windoze troll.

I don't think you understood.

By posting "Windoze" it is a trite, one word troll, intended to disparage
Microsoft Windows in some immature way. Thus, the poster of "Windoze" is the
troll.

Have you used Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit? I mean using it more than just
trying out the GUI and launching a few applications? If not, there is no
basis for writing "Windoze" without significant user experience in the
latest released version of Microsoft Windows that is also not a developer
preview release.

[Daniel W. Rouse Jr.]

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message

news:elmop-7048EA....@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <bICdnTCbc4SOLr_S...@nethere.com>,

> "Daniel W. Rouse Jr." <dwro...@nethere.comNOSPAM> wrote:
>
>> It most certainly is a scam. If a $2 antenna was being sold for $75, what
>> would the US Federal Trade Commission say? They'd likely say it was a
>> scam
>> too.
>

> Why?

Do you work in marketing--is that why you keep insisting its not a scam?

Let's see, take that $2.00 antenna and find the required markup to get a
$75.00 price.

I get a 3750% markup.

3750% markup isn't a scam???

[Alan]

In article <FOednaaoybZjHL7S...@nethere.com> "Daniel W. Rouse Jr." <dwro...@nethere.comNOSPAM> writes:

>Do you work in marketing--is that why you keep insisting its not a scam?
>
>Let's see, take that $2.00 antenna and find the required markup to get a
>$75.00 price.
>
>I get a 3750% markup.
>
>3750% markup isn't a scam???

No, not in and of itself.

Alan

[TJ]

Something tells me that if you fold in the cost of those full-page,
over-hyped ads, as well as the cost of the lawyers needed to defend
against frivolous lawsuits, the cost of that antenna rises significantly.

Is the antenna a good value? Certainly not. Is it a scam? Not if it
lives up to the claims made for it.

Because I'm debt-free, hire no labor, don't advertise (couldn't handle
the extra volume), use small, older equipment, and use minimal
pesticides, it cost me about $1 a dozen last year to grow sweet corn,
half or less than most of my bigger, more conventional local
competitors. I sold it all retail at $4 a dozen, a bit less than the
going local retail rate.

That's a 300% mark-up.

Am I scamming people? My customers don't think so. They think I should
be charging more, my corn tastes that good. My competitors don't think
so, either. Well, some do think I'm scamming myself. They don't know how
I've stayed in business so long.

Thing is, I could sell that corn at $50 a dozen if I wanted to. Few
would buy it, but then at that price I wouldn't need to sell much to
make as much as I do now. As long as all I claim about it is that it's
good-tasting sweet corn, it would be a really lousy value, but it
wouldn't be a scam.

Now, if I were to claim it would prevent warts, cure cancer, and grow
hair on your bald head, THAT would be a scam.

TJ

[TJ]

Sigh. J G, Daniel... Not the right group for a Windows/Linux debate,
either. There are advocacy groups for that.

Sheesh. Amazing that the most innocent little joke can spawn such a big
noise. All I meant to generate was a chuckle or two.

TJ

[J G Miller]

On Friday, January 27th, 2012, at 20:17:25h -0800, Sal wrote:

> My wife orders our pizza from a place that charges three times what we'd
> pay for Domino's.

Well if you must insist on Caspian Sea caviar topping, you
can expect to pay rather more. ;)

[TJ]

It's not price-gouging, either.

If you normally sell portable 500-watt generators for $7000 that your
competitors sell for $700, you're probably an idiot, but that's not
against the law.

If a storm knocks out power for a week, your competitors sell out of
generators, and you're the only one left with any in stock and still
sell them at $7000, you'll be vilified but it's not price-gouging.

But, if you normally sell generators at $700, and raise them to $7000 in
the wake of the storm, THAT'S price-gouging.

TJ

[TJ]

On 01/28/2012 11:35 AM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article<jg14du$p0g$1...@dont-email.me>, TJ<T...@noneofyour.business>

> wrote:
>
>> But, if you normally sell generators at $700, and raise them to $7000 in
>> the wake of the storm, THAT'S price-gouging.
>

> ...even though it's really supply and demand talking.

Yep. That's the way it's defined in the State of New York, anyway.

Your governing entities may vary, of course.

TJ

[Daniel W. Rouse Jr.]

"TJ" <T...@noneofyour.business> wrote in message

news:jg12oo$f60$1...@dont-email.me...

> On 01/27/2012 11:06 AM, J G Miller wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:34:29 -0800, Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:
>>
>>> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197
>>
>> Seems like you are the Windoze troll.
>
> Sigh. J G, Daniel... Not the right group for a Windows/Linux debate,
> either. There are advocacy groups for that.
>

Yes, like comp.os.linux.advocacy.

> Sheesh. Amazing that the most innocent little joke can spawn such a big
> noise. All I meant to generate was a chuckle or two.
>

Maybe a joke, but both are correct.

A directory is a sublocation of files off the root directory of a file
system. A folder is a GUI symbolic link to a directory. In a GUI environment
also providing a command prompt, the command cd (change directory) will be
used in that command prompt (e.g., Windows Command Prompt, Linux xterm). In
the GUI environment without using the command prompt, only folders will be
accessible.

Same with Favorite vs Bookmarks. Both are correct. A browser bookmark is
just saving a link to a website for future access. But were you aware that
MSIE Favorites, in addition to bookmarking the link to the site, allow
tracking the number of visits (if the user prefers, but they can clear the
access history), allows setting user security for accessing that Favorite,
and allows rating the site and adding notes (IE8+)?

Not an advocacy discussion, but just clarifying the differences.

[TJ]

On 01/28/2012 03:12 PM, Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:
> "TJ" <T...@noneofyour.business> wrote in message
> news:jg12oo$f60$1...@dont-email.me...
>

>> Sheesh. Amazing that the most innocent little joke can spawn such a
>> big noise. All I meant to generate was a chuckle or two.
>>
> Maybe a joke, but both are correct.
>

Got it. Humor is OK, but only if precise and rigidly accurate. Filing
for future reference...

Sigh.

TJ

[Drewdove]

TJ wrote:

> On 01/25/2012 09:41 PM, Sal wrote:
>> "Elmo P. Shagnasty"<el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message

>> news:elmop-28E55C....@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> In article<jfq4nl$m4l$1...@dont-email.me>, "Sal"<sob...@aol.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I went to the Clear Cast website. Despite the earlier quoted
>>>> price of $38,
>>>> I note that Clear Cast's balls have gotten considerable bigger.
>>>> On the site
>>>>
>>>> www.clear-cast.com
>>>>
>>>> I clicked on<Shop Now> and was offered the antenna for $68.
>>>> Going to Checkout, I found they also add $9.95 for shipping and
>>>> $5.00 for a two-year
>>>> extended warranty on the TV set. (Good luck with that extended
>>>> warranty; the warranty can be deleted from your cart.)
>>>>
>>>> I have nothing else to say.
>>>
>>> BUT DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND??? THAT'S HALF THE PRICE OF ONE MONTH'S
>>> CABLE BILL--AND THAT'S ALL YOU PAY!!!!! FOREVER!!!!! TV FOR FREE,
>>> MAN!!!!! AND ALL LEGAL!!!!!!
>>
>> I caught that. My cup runneth over with love.
>>
>> But there's even more. On the main page, Clear Cast provides a
>> sophisticated calculator which converts monthly recurring costs to
>> their annual equivalents. I appreciate having a website in my
>> Favorites, such that I can go there if I have some number that needs
>> multiplying by twelve.
>>
>> Wahoo ... sort of.
>>
>> "Sal"
>>
>>
> Favorites... Ah yes, almost forgot these aren't Linux groups. Over
> here in Linux-land we don't play "Favorites." That's so...
> Microsoft-like.
>
> We "bookmark" things that we wish to keep for future reference. Much
> more democratic.
>
> TJ

In Windows land we bookmark things all the time with Firefox, Opera &
Netscape (if you like to go old school).

Favorites are played in Internet Explorer and, oddly enough, Quicktime movie
player.

Just sayin' ;-)

[George Kerby]

On 1/28/12 5:22 PM, in article jg2003$qs3$1...@dont-email.me, "TJ"

Some folks don't want you makin' fun of their TV or OS, ya know?!? They got
a whole mess of other things to worry about. Show some sympathy already!

;-) <<<<<<<<<<<<<< NOTE!

[Sal]

"J G Miller" <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote in message

news:jg13gs$int$2...@dont-email.me...

... if you've never tried it ...

"Sal"

[Sal]

"TJ" <T...@noneofyour.business> wrote in message

news:jg12b2$cku$1...@dont-email.me...


< snip >

> ... and grow hair on your bald head ...

OK, you have my attention.

"Sal"

[Gordon Burditt]

>> >> It most certainly is a scam. If a $2 antenna was being sold for $75, what
>> >> would the US Federal Trade Commission say? They'd likely say it was a
>> >> scam
>> >> too.
>> >
>> > Why?
>>
>> Do you work in marketing--is that why you keep insisting its not a scam?

marketing: the use of false advertising to convince someone to buy
a product. Isn't that what they teach in business school?

Remember, if you advertise that your cookies are "made by elves",
they had better be made by genuine elves, and no, teamsters wearing
Spock ears are not an acceptable substitute.

> No. But why do you think it's a scam?
>
> What is YOUR definition of scam? Apparently, a "scam" is anything you
> don't like.

If they represent that a $2 antenna WILL receive watchable TV signals,
that's false advertising. There are some areas which will not receive
OTA TV (too far away, and terrain issues such as being on a lake surrounded
by mountains), nor cable (not enough population density to support
installing the cable), nor satellite (in a fringe area, with terrain
issues, such as mountains to the south, southeast, and southwest).

There are probably much larger areas of the USA which cannot receive
*HD* because there are no nearby stations transmitting it.

[Patty Winter]

In article <EZqdnQn7h7hGWbnS...@posted.internetamerica>,
Gordon Burditt <gordon...@burditt.org> wrote:

[spurious quotage removed]

>marketing: the use of false advertising to convince someone to buy
>a product.

Apparently you don't know the difference between marketing and
advertising.

>If they represent that a $2 antenna WILL receive watchable TV signals,
>that's false advertising.

Tell that to my $2 antenna that gets 45 channels:

http://www.wintertime.com/Personal/DTV/bowtie2.jpg

>There are some areas which will not receive
>OTA TV (too far away, and terrain issues such as being on a lake surrounded
>by mountains), nor cable (not enough population density to support
>installing the cable), nor satellite (in a fringe area, with terrain
>issues, such as mountains to the south, southeast, and southwest).

Yes, and those people need a Netflix subscription. But that proves
nothing about a $2 antenna being able to receive signals in a good
area.


Patty

[Gordon Burditt]

>>If they represent that a $2 antenna WILL receive watchable TV signals,
>>that's false advertising.
>
> Tell that to my $2 antenna that gets 45 channels:
>
> http://www.wintertime.com/Personal/DTV/bowtie2.jpg

You left out the qualifier: "in a good area". It won't receive
squat in a bad area, and if they represent performance without
qualification about the reception environment, that's false
advertising.

Last time I went shopping for antennas, they had a bunch of color-coded
ratings for antennas (by their design) and stations (approximate
by distance, and they also had a web site where you could get more
accurate data). You need at least a "yellow"-rated antenna to get
a "yellow" rated station reliably. There were also disclaimers about
local anomalies like being behind a large skyscraper or mountain.

>>There are some areas which will not receive
>>OTA TV (too far away, and terrain issues such as being on a lake surrounded
>>by mountains), nor cable (not enough population density to support
>>installing the cable), nor satellite (in a fringe area, with terrain
>>issues, such as mountains to the south, southeast, and southwest).
>
> Yes, and those people need a Netflix subscription. But that proves
> nothing about a $2 antenna being able to receive signals in a good
> area.

And if they advertise clear pictures *IN A GOOD RECEPTION AREA*, fine.
If they advertise clear pictures, period, that's false advertising.

[Patty Winter]

In article <uc6dne6LTcI7SbnS...@posted.internetamerica>,

Gordon Burditt <gordon...@burditt.org> wrote:
>>>If they represent that a $2 antenna WILL receive watchable TV signals,
>>>that's false advertising.
>>
>> Tell that to my $2 antenna that gets 45 channels:
>

>You left out the qualifier: "in a good area".

No, I didn't. You did. I quoted your first sentence exactly as
you wrote it.

If you want to change your statement to add that qualification,
then I'll agree with it.

>It won't receive
>squat in a bad area, and if they represent performance without
>qualification about the reception environment, that's false
>advertising.

If they said, "Here's a $2 OTA antenna," it's truthful. If they
said, "Here's a $2 [or $100 or $5,000 antenna] that will get
TV stations anywhere," that's untruthful. Without seeing exactly
what wording they used, neither you nor I can judge the truthfulness
of the ad or catalog description.

So what was the exact wording of the $2 antenna description you're
so incensed about?


Patty

[J G Miller]

On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 22:02:35 -0600, Gordon Burditt wrote:

> they had better be made by genuine elves

They must also be approved by the Elf and Safety Administration.

[Daniel who wants to know]

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message

news:elmop-C20D32....@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> Not at ALL.
>
> There is zero obligation on the part of the vendor to correlate his
> costs with his selling price, and only a fool expects there is.
>
> So, put on your man pants and grow up. No one is obligated to sell you
> whatever he's selling at anywhere near his cost of goods.

I can sure see this as true in a way that is somewhat on topic for the
group: CECB pricing.

The ones at Wal-Mart were $50, AKA $10 more than the coupon and sitting on a
shelf next to the el-cheapo DVD players for either $25 or $35 (not sure
which) at the time. When I saw this I immediately thought "What could
possibly make the crippled CECB with only composite and RF output and no
S/PDIF be worth more than a progressive scan DVD player with S/PDIF
component, S-video, and composite output?"

Did a little bit of S-RAM or flash, an RF modulator, and a tuner can instead
of an optical transport really make it cost that much more?

[J G Miller]

On Sunday, January 29th, 2012, at 01:00:31h -0500, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

> You're under the impression that telling the truth, but not the whole
> truth, is lying.

It is not lying but it is being deceptive.

[J G Miller]

On Saturday, January 28th, 2012, at 19:12:10h -0800, Sal wrote:

>> Well if you must insist on Caspian Sea caviar topping, you can expect
>> to pay rather more. ;)
>
> ... if you've never tried it ...

I have seen it at the supermarket but the price was rather steep,
something like EUR 1500 per kilogramme.

Here is some Bulgarian caviar at only EUR 1200 per kilogramme --
125 grammes for EUR 150.

<http://www.auchan.FR/caviar-oscietre-bulgare-boite-de-125-g/achat4/32577>

Does Donald Trump eat it for breakfast? ;)