Do you know what happens to your cue inside your case?

[classiccues]

BTW John,

As far as the "reputation" comments, they aren't coming here to see your video, they are coming to see the train wreck thats about to ensue.

JV (---All aboard... ChOOOOOO ChOOOOOOOOOO

ps: Before anyone gets their panties in a bunch.. JB invited the critisism... so the onus is on the invitation

 

[Rabbit]

Thats right. You or I don't know. What we do know is that your case allowed contact.

However using your logic, since you like to make a mass of assumptions like people constantly drive down excessively bumpy roads, a snap could fail, people throw there cases down stairs, off buildings, shake them violently, mistreat them in general etc.. based on all that we can assume that the impact shown on the video is minor, but could be major if there was force behind it. So being that your case allowed a small interval of contact, it could be construed that with more force and impact, without question damage would occur.

How do you like it when people assume the worse of your case? Not so pleasant. The fact is that your case, as shown in the video can and will damage a cue. Since its on video, there is no denying the fact. Everytime you attack Jack you can rest assured that I will be there posting about your video and your case.

Happy to point that out to you.

JV

BOOM


Lol

It all comes down to the owner

 

[SloMoHolic]

You posted what slomo said on 4/9 when your camp was in awe of the video, now that its been mythbusted, he hasn't said a WORD.

Not here arguing protection, just your stupid video...

I will speak up when I think it's necessary.

Are there any questions you have for me?

You can direct them at ME.

I shot the video. Not JB.

I've been reading this thread all along. I haven't seen any reason I needed to respond until now.

I've seen some indirect accusations, and some offhanded remarks, but nothing that needed defending, so far.

But now I see that you are questioning my integrity.

Bring it.

What do you want to know?

-Blake

Apparently, you missed this post.

What would you like to know?

Questions about dropping the case onto the rail?

Questions about cases falling off of bars?

Talk to me. Don't make a passing swipe at me and the integrity of my work, then dismiss me by deflecting the blame onto JB. They are my videos, whether JB likes it or not.

I understand that the recent part of this thread is mostly between you and JB, and I'm happy to let the two of you figure this out, and I'm willing to shoot and post more SloMo if it helps either of you sleep better at night.

If I had time, I could go back through this thread and note all of your complaints about the videos.

But it would be easier if you would just tell me what the problems are. I'll reshoot the videos on my wood floor, on the pool hall carpet, or drop a damned car on the cases (yes, I can do that).

Speak up. I'm not trying to start a war here, I just want to know what your problem is with the videos I shot.

If you're so confident that my videos are fraudulent, SEND ME a sample of your favorite cases (and some expensive cues if you want), and I will do the same as I did for JB: an unbiased, uninfluenced, slow motion video of these cases falling, crashing down, or getting crushed.

I'm a pretty nice guy overall, but I'm not willing to let anybody sneak in a comment like you did, and just let it go.

What do you want?

-Blake

 

[classiccues]

First off.. there is no passing swipe at you. I clarified my position on the video. Its not YOUR video that is the issue between John and I, just the end result. The fraudelency lies in the claim, not the video.

However it is my opinion, since you're asking that a fully dressed (manufactured) case is a more realistic representation of what would happen if it was to fall. People don't walk around with shell cases, and they do not drop them on table rails.

So since you are asking yes, your video is unrealistic and quite misleading. From the standpoint of reality that is.

The fact is John placed his eggs in this basket and the basket had holes in it.

But it is what we are evaluating, is it not? I would rather you not reshoot anything, because its gold just the way it is.

JV

Apparently, you missed this post.

What would you like to know?

Questions about dropping the case onto the rail?

Questions about cases falling off of bars?

Talk to me. Don't make a passing swipe at me and the integrity of my work, then dismiss me by deflecting the blame onto JB. They are my videos, whether JB likes it or not.

I understand that the recent part of this thread is mostly between you and JB, and I'm happy to let the two of you figure this out, and I'm willing to shoot and post more SloMo if it helps either of you sleep better at night.

If I had time, I could go back through this thread and note all of your complaints about the videos.

But it would be easier if you would just tell me what the problems are. I'll reshoot the videos on my wood floor, on the pool hall carpet, or drop a damned car on the cases (yes, I can do that).

Speak up. I'm not trying to start a war here, I just want to know what your problem is with the videos I shot.

If you're so confident that my videos are fraudulent, SEND ME a sample of your favorite cases (and some expensive cues if you want), and I will do the same as I did for JB: an unbiased, uninfluenced, slow motion video of these cases falling, crashing down, or getting crushed.

I'm a pretty nice guy overall, but I'm not willing to let anybody sneak in a comment like you did, and just let it go.

What do you want?

-Blake

 

[justadub]

He wants to get John to go crazy here, as he has done in the past.

He is like a schoolyard bully, teasing a kid that he knows will react, just to see it happen.

Some folks get their jollies that way.

Sheesh.

 

[classiccues]

Sorry Dr. Phil, not the case. (no pun intended)

Need you be reminded... "We are open to all discussion of what is seen here."

JV

He wants to get John to go crazy here, as he has done in the past.

He is like a schoolyard bully, teasing a kid that he knows will react, just to see it happen.

Some folks get their jollies that way.

Sheesh.

 

[quadrary]

A small dose of common sense might be in order. There are hundreds of cases that provide adequate protection for transporting your cue under normal conditions. As a case builder I strive to go the extra mile with my cases as some other case makers do, some features of my cases are unique to my cases, and I am proud of those features and as a league and tournament player they are features I first tried and used in my personal case. As such they were designed for durability and ease of use as well as protection both in transport and storage as well as while playing. That doesn't mean that if you don't use one of my cases you are abusing your cue. I believe any person with a modest amount of common sense can examine a case and decide if it will protect your cue. I will only use a tube style case myself but will build whatever a customer requests be it a prolite tube style or butterfly, as well as several others. It is in poor taste as a business to stress the perceived faults of your competitor rather than just stressing your own products unique advantages and values. The best way to find out about a case is to talk to the man who built and designed it. Any potential customer is free to ask me anything about the construction and features of my cases and why it is built the way it is. This gives me constant source of feedback on changes and improvements I try to make in designs
as well as features they would like to see in their own case.

 

[JB Cases]

Blake,
The video is fraudulent based on the claims it shows Johns case does not harm cues. The video itself, as a video, not fraudulent.

JV

What claims? I made no such claims. And in fact since we didn't examine the cues used we dont' know if any of the cues were damaged in any of the test on any of the interior types. The video serves to show people the AMOUNT of movement in each type of interior shown. It's clear that in our interior the amount of movement of the cues is LESS in our interiors.

And you said that the video IS a fraud.

Thats right. You or I don't know. What we do know is that your case allowed contact.

However using your logic, since you like to make a mass of assumptions like people constantly drive down excessively bumpy roads, a snap could fail, people throw there cases down stairs, off buildings, shake them violently, mistreat them in general etc.. based on all that we can assume that the impact shown on the video is minor, but could be major if there was force behind it. So being that your case allowed a small interval of contact, it could be construed that with more force and impact, without question damage would occur.

Of course, any contact with any hard surface COULD result in damage, that is the WHOLE POINT Joe. Cushioning the blow reduces the chance of damage no matter how small that chance was to begin with. SImple concept.

How do you like it when people assume the worse of your case? Not so pleasant. The fact is that your case, as shown in the video can and will damage a cue. Since its on video, there is no denying the fact. Everytime you attack Jack you can rest assured that I will be there posting about your video and your case.

I want people to assume the worst. That way I can address those assumptions and show what I do to prevent the worst. I have no problem at all with someone making a claim that chalk dust embedded in fabric might scratch a finish. When someone says that I go test out and see if it's true and see what I can do about it.

And again the video does not show that our case "can and will" damage a cue. It shows that with a fall in the testing circumstances the shafts might touch for a 1400th of a second. And when I am done tweaking the interior design then not even that will be possible.

As to the comment about me attacking Jack I have no problem with you jumping in to any conversation I am having with anyone to make it a discussion about protection. The video clearly shows that out of 13 fall tests our cases only allowed the cues to possibly touch once whereas with the other test interiors the cues slammed into each other repeatedly in each test. So the more people who see this video the better and if it is your intention to promote it I am very supportive of that.

The comparison is as if you had two cars and one of them completely disintegrated every time it hit the wall and the other one disintegrated after the hundredth time and you were to jump up and down screaming "see, see, I knew that it would fail, I knew it".

So now that we established that in a fall that your case causes damage I have a question: Are you going to recall them all, or are you going to offer a free JB Upgrade when you redesign them.

Happy to point that out to you.

JV

See you keep making statements of fact that are not facts. You have NOT established that in a fall our cases cause damage. You have pointed out that in ONE instance the shaft MIGHT have touched for a 1400th of second. You have not shown any damage to the cues.

I will offer the same thing I always offer to my customers, 100% satisfaction guarantee, if any of them wishes to talk to me about anything they are not happy about I will certainly accomodate them.

BTW John,

As far as the "reputation" comments, they aren't coming here to see your video, they are coming to see the train wreck thats about to ensue.

JV (---All aboard... ChOOOOOO ChOOOOOOOOOO

ps: Before anyone gets their panties in a bunch.. JB invited the critisism... so the onus is on the invitation

The train wreck? The one you think will be caused by you constantly making false statements and hoping I will be upset and go off on you for it?

Look, I am happy when someone finds something on our cases that isn't right. That's what gives me a chance to go back and change the design and tighten up the product. To me that's how it should always be. So if your rabid hatred moves you to be ultra-critical then I am ok with that because it effectively makes you my best unpaid R&D man.

That everyone on the forum gets to see you going out of your way to attempt to make a touch of 1400ths of a second into a crater of a ding is just a bonus. Everyone here can easily see that you are looking for any possible way to discredit me and my work. All you do is give me more legitimate reasons to continue this thread and show the board how I have further improved the product.

First off.. there is no passing swipe at you. I clarified my position on the video. Its not YOUR video that is the issue between John and I, just the end result. The fraudelency lies in the claim, not the video.

What claim?

However it is my opinion, since you're asking that a fully dressed (manufactured) case is a more realistic representation of what would happen if it was to fall. People don't walk around with shell cases, and they do not drop them on table rails.

So since you are asking yes, your video is unrealistic and quite misleading. From the standpoint of reality that is.

You are more than welcome to send examples of cases to be filmed in slow motion.

However here is an example of a "fully dressed" tube case in the same fall test.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=tftnJJmgLO0#t=577s

Everyone can see that the parts hit the sides of the tubes several times. The cues were placed both directions to simulate the impact on the bottom.

Your assumption that a complete case might soften the blow may well be correct, certainly it makes sense to assume that the more material between the cues and the hard surface the case falls on would serve to absorb and diffuse the force. That still doesn't change the fact that INSIDE the tube the cues will move as much as they are allowed to with any movement of the case.

The fact is John placed his eggs in this basket and the basket had holes in it.

But it is what we are evaluating, is it not? I would rather you not reshoot anything, because its gold just the way it is.

JV

I find nothing wrong with putting a video up and having it chopped up by critics. That's what leads improvement in our product. Are you going to be as critical of those who use less padding than we do? Somehow I doubt it.

Sorry Dr. Phil, not the case. (no pun intended)

Need you be reminded... "We are open to all discussion of what is seen here."

JV

Absolutely I am open to discussion. But your stated intent is not to discuss it is to harass. In any event that doesn't matter because I can fade your harassment if the end result is a better product.

 

[JB Cases]

A small dose of common sense might be in order. There are hundreds of cases that provide adequate protection for transporting your cue under normal conditions. As a case builder I strive to go the extra mile with my cases as some other case makers do, some features of my cases are unique to my cases, and I am proud of those features and as a league and tournament player they are features I first tried and used in my personal case. As such they were designed for durability and ease of use as well as protection both in transport and storage as well as while playing. That doesn't mean that if you don't use one of my cases you are abusing your cue. I believe any person with a modest amount of common sense can examine a case and decide if it will protect your cue. I will only use a tube style case myself but will build whatever a customer requests be it a prolite tube style or butterfly, as well as several others. It is in poor taste as a business to stress the perceived faults of your competitor rather than just stressing your own products unique advantages and values. The best way to find out about a case is to talk to the man who built and designed it. Any potential customer is free to ask me anything about the construction and features of my cases and why it is built the way it is. This gives me constant source of feedback on changes and improvements I try to make in designs
as well as features they would like to see in their own case.

I agree and have said NOTHING less during my entire time here. I have said that MOST cases are adequate. Some are clearly inadequate and some are superior when it comes to protecting the cue.

Any case maker who is willing to adjust to his customer's needs is ok in my book. Anyone who stands firm with the attitude that his cases are fine and there is no way that a cue can be damaged is not ok to me.

I started in this business BECAUSE of my cue falling out of a case and getting damaged. So my foundation is all about protecting the cue first and then wrapping pretty around it.

And while I do agree that most people should be able to easily evaluate the protectiveness of a case I think that it's harder with drop in cavity cases. This was my own error when i went from a Porper with a tapered cavity that held the cue snug to a J.E.F Q Case with tubes that I assumed would hold the cues just as snug.

In fact when I first got the Porper, I was the first one in the pool room with one, I was so proud of it showing people that I could invert the case and nothing would fall out, even though falling out had never been a problem before with my McDermott soft case. Why I got the Porper though was because a door had gotten slammed on my soft case and snapped the cue. Anyway after the Porper I got the J.E.F and had the incident where the case got knocked off the table and the cue shot out and the buttcap broke. While the cue was out for repair I decided to see if I could modify the tubes so that the cue would be held in a similar manner as the Porper. And I did figure it out.

So my point is that a normal person looking at a drop-in type case can only really see the first couple inches and thereby naturally assumes that the rest of the interior is as good as what they can. And this is not always true. In fact and unfortunately it's often not true at all.

To me this is not unlike finding out that the points on your cue are done with sharpie markers. I think that the player has a right to have adequate protection throughout the case and even superior protection if the case maker wants to provide that.

 

[Banks]

I agree and have said NOTHING less during my entire time here. I have said that MOST cases are adequate. Some are clearly inadequate and some are superior when it comes to protecting the cue.

I don't always agree with JB, nor do I always read the length of his posts. That said..

Most cars are adequate, too. You don't see a freeway full of Geo Metros, though. JB's cases are in demand for a reason.

JB, I think they've found the one topic that you can't really go on tilt about, because you're so thorough and involved with it. Sort of like trying to argue profit/loss with an accountant.

 

[SplicedPoints]

Realistic and cue touching of 1000th of a second or not, it's quite clear from watching the video which type of inside is better in making the cue stay still during any type of case movement, big or small (JB's). Anyone trying to argue against that is going against common sense and being a troll.

There is a perfect way to shut JB up if you're another case maker. Develop a better or at least equally good interior/construction technique. Take his ability to claim better protection away. Better for you and for your customers.

 

[classiccues]

Not arguing protection, your 1400 of a second could be 14000 of a second. Thats all it takes. The cues hit at every interval I mentioned, that is a fact. You want to downplay it and thats fine, I would hate to be proved a fraud by my biggest foil, but thats the fact.

Sorry John, you cannot and will not play the victim here, you bring this on yourself. If you end up making a better product because you got caught, then fine. I don't think I care one way or the other.

You have said many times "my cases don't harm cues", and they can. As proved by the video. Now I am not going to go spend good hard earned money on some junk just to prove they can damage a cue. Thats obvious. There is no need for me to reiterate or repeat the test. Anyone can see it.

Harrassment? Like getting involved in a sneaker thread because you think its about you, when it clearly isn't, or screwing with someone's for sale thread because you don't like the way he worded his ad, or calling the local authorities on a competitor because he hurt my feelings? Good luck with that.

Tube case:
Yes the cues hit the side of the case several times because the case is unrealistically bouncing off a rubber rail. DUH.. You know that case hits the floor with a thud, with the initial impact and maybe one or two very minor bounce impacts. BUT is that enough to damage a cue?

I could rip the premise of the video apart, the video itself, and you. However, I hope people have the common sense to realize that what you show in this video is an exaggeration based on the cases, the rubber rails, and the way the cases bounce in general. But hey if thats what you need to do, its akin to false advertising, and we know YOU wouldn't do that. Your sparkling history speaks for itself.

JV

.

 

[scsuxci]

Not arguing protection, your 1400 of a second could be 14000 of a second. Thats all it takes. The cues hit at every interval I mentioned, that is a fact. You want to downplay it and thats fine, I would hate to be proved a fraud by my biggest foil, but thats the fact.

Sorry John, you cannot and will not play the victim here, you bring this on yourself. If you end up making a better product because you got caught, then fine. I don't think I care one way or the other.

You have said many times "my cases don't harm cues", and they can. As proved by the video. Now I am not going to go spend good hard earned money on some junk just to prove they can damage a cue. Thats obvious. There is no need for me to reiterate or repeat the test. Anyone can see it.

Harrassment? Like getting involved in a sneaker thread because you think its about you, when it clearly isn't, or screwing with someone's for sale thread because you don't like the way he worded his ad, or calling the local authorities on a competitor because he hurt my feelings? Good luck with that.

Tube case:
Yes the cues hit the side of the case several times because the case is unrealistically bouncing off a rubber rail. DUH.. You know that case hits the floor with a thud, with the initial impact and maybe one or two very minor bounce impacts. BUT is that enough to damage a cue?

I could rip the premise of the video apart, the video itself, and you. However, I hope people have the common sense to realize that what you show in this video is an exaggeration based on the cases, the rubber rails, and the way the cases bounce in general. But hey if thats what you need to do, its akin to false advertising, and we know YOU wouldn't do that. Your sparkling history speaks for itself.

JV

I don't get it?Is the video false?Can people see with there own eyes?
I would think no matter what is on the video, people will see it and draw
there own conclusions.To lambaste John with your inner findings on the video,
is already out there for people to see cause John put it there in the first place.

Not sure what your getting at but it seems to run deeper than a video
and alot more personal.

 

[JB Cases]

Not arguing protection, your 1400 of a second could be 14000 of a second. Thats all it takes. The cues hit at every interval I mentioned, that is a fact. You want to downplay it and thats fine, I would hate to be proved a fraud by my biggest foil, but thats the fact.

Sorry John, you cannot and will not play the victim here, you bring this on yourself. If you end up making a better product because you got caught, then fine. I don't think I care one way or the other.

You have said many times "my cases don't harm cues", and they can. As proved by the video. Now I am not going to go spend good hard earned money on some junk just to prove they can damage a cue. Thats obvious. There is no need for me to reiterate or repeat the test. Anyone can see it.

Harrassment? Like getting involved in a sneaker thread because you think its about you, when it clearly isn't, or screwing with someone's for sale thread because you don't like the way he worded his ad, or calling the local authorities on a competitor because he hurt my feelings? Good luck with that.

Tube case:
Yes the cues hit the side of the case several times because the case is unrealistically bouncing off a rubber rail. DUH.. You know that case hits the floor with a thud, with the initial impact and maybe one or two very minor bounce impacts. BUT is that enough to damage a cue?

I could rip the premise of the video apart, the video itself, and you. However, I hope people have the common sense to realize that what you show in this video is an exaggeration based on the cases, the rubber rails, and the way the cases bounce in general. But hey if thats what you need to do, its akin to false advertising, and we know YOU wouldn't do that. Your sparkling history speaks for itself.

JV

What's funny here is that you have said so many times that "under normal circumstances" the cues would not be harmed in any case. So here on this video you claim that this is ABNORMAL circumstances and claim that under these ABNORMAL conditions the movement of the cues is magnified out of proportion to what would happen if the case were to fall over when skinned.

So under your own premise you then find one time out of 13 examples where the collars appear to touch and conclude that this means the case WILL damage the cues and in fact has damaged the cues.

You can't rip anything apart. The video shows that cues move when the case falls over. How much the move depends on the type of interior.

The contact time for any contact can be measured.

I am sure Blake will be happy to make more videos on this because he loves the slow motion stuff. As Blake and I discussed I have seen things that will help me to be a better case maker.

The FACT remains though that the video clearly shows that our cases protect far better than the other two interiors.

IF I had asked Blake to make sure that the shafts were inserted all the way or IF I had made the caivites taller THEN there would have been absolutely no chance to touch even for a 1400th of second. Now, you are not an engineer and you are not a physicist. So you do not understand the elasticity, penetration, or anything about how a ding could occur.

BUT

Let's assume you are right and a 1400th of a second touch in our case COULD produce a noticeable ding with the case falling over. If you think so then you have to agree that in the same situation with the same force the damaged could be greater to the cue internally with interiors that have less padding. If one premise is correct then it follows that the other one is also correct.

SO

You can see AGAIN that the case STILL protects better from multiple dings and against internal cracking.

I think most people would live with a ding if the force were great enough to overcome the padding and produce ONLY a ding. If the force were enough to crack the cue and only a ding resulted then the case did it's job, kind of like an airbag on the car where you ONLY end up with whiplash instead of your face through the windshield.

Keep the thread going, the more people who see the video the more who will see that I am correct in this. It only generates more sales.

 

[SplicedPoints]

Look on the bright side people.

I think a "potential" or suspected flaw in John's original design is caught. John's aware of it and has stated he'll be addressing the issue. Voila. A (even) better interior. Good news to pool players!

Props for the good detective work ClassicCues! Everyone should be giving you greenies!

 

[lorider]

Not arguing protection, your 1400 of a second could be 14000 of a second. Thats all it takes. The cues hit at every interval I mentioned, that is a fact. You want to downplay it and thats fine, I would hate to be proved a fraud by my biggest foil, but thats the fact.

Sorry John, you cannot and will not play the victim here, you bring this on yourself. If you end up making a better product because you got caught, then fine. I don't think I care one way or the other.

You have said many times "my cases don't harm cues", and they can. As proved by the video. Now I am not going to go spend good hard earned money on some junk just to prove they can damage a cue. Thats obvious. There is no need for me to reiterate or repeat the test. Anyone can see it.

Harrassment? Like getting involved in a sneaker thread because you think its about you, when it clearly isn't, or screwing with someone's for sale thread because you don't like the way he worded his ad, or calling the local authorities on a competitor because he hurt my feelings? Good luck with that.

Tube case:
Yes the cues hit the side of the case several times because the case is unrealistically bouncing off a rubber rail. DUH.. You know that case hits the floor with a thud, with the initial impact and maybe one or two very minor bounce impacts. BUT is that enough to damage a cue?

I could rip the premise of the video apart, the video itself, and you. However, I hope people have the common sense to realize that what you show in this video is an exaggeration based on the cases, the rubber rails, and the way the cases bounce in general. But hey if thats what you need to do, its akin to false advertising, and we know YOU wouldn't do that. Your sparkling history speaks for itself.

JV

after reading some posts in this thread and world pros thread about lee van corteza i just gotta ask. why do you two have such a hard on for john ?

it seems like you two are obssesed with him. do you two spend every waking moment thinking about him ? do you two go to sleep at night dreaming of what kind os shit you can stir up on here the next day concerning john.

you two may think you win the battle of wits on here every now and then with your posts. john has won the war because both of your lives are consumed with thoughts of john all the time.

both you and world pro have made posts that sound like kids saying my brother "jack " can beat up your brother " john ".

both of you need to get a new life. the one ya'll have now must be pathetic with it being consumed by thoughts of john all the time ....geez.

 

[justadub]

after reading some posts in this thread and world pros thread about lee van corteza i just gotta ask. why do you two have such a hard on for john ?

it seems like you two are obssesed with him. do you two spend every waking moment thinking about him ? do you two go to sleep at night dreaming of what kind os shit you can stir up on here the next day concerning john.

you two may think you win the battle of wits on here every now and then with your posts. john has won the war because both of your lives are consumed with thoughts of john all the time.

both you and world pro have made posts that sound like kids saying my brother "jack " can beat up your brother " john ".

both of you need to get a new life. the one ya'll have now must be pathetic with it being consumed by thoughts of john all the time ....geez.

Oh stop. You're just another fanboy....

 

[lorider]

Oh stop. You're just another fanboy....

i see what you did there.:wink:

just telling it like i see it. i definitely am not a jb nuthugger but its just getting plain rediculous when the only thing they post is something to stir shit up with john.

 

[JB Cases]

after reading some posts in this thread and world pros thread about lee van corteza i just gotta ask. why do you two have such a hard on for john ?

it seems like you two are obssesed with him. do you two spend every waking moment thinking about him ? do you two go to sleep at night dreaming of what kind os shit you can stir up on here the next day concerning john.

you two may think you win the battle of wits on here every now and then with your posts. john has won the war because both of your lives are consumed with thoughts of john all the time.

both you and world pro have made posts that sound like kids saying my brother "jack " can beat up your brother " john ".

both of you need to get a new life. the one ya'll have now must be pathetic with it being consumed by thoughts of john all the time ....geez.

I find it flattering the lengths they are prepared to go to hurt me and my business. I suppose if I had $130,000 tied up in a brand and I hoped to sell or trade those items for at least what I paid or more then I would be defending that brand rabidly as well.

As for Joe, well he is simply the kind of person who is ok with you when he wants or needs something and later when he has no use for you then the mask of civility comes off. When we were "cool" with each other he had nothing but good things to say about our products and now that we are not cool with each other he goes out of his way to defame and attempt to discredit me.

Neither of them had the nerve to come and talk to me at the SBE and try to settle our differences. I was there for two weeks and they could have come to me and we could have sat down and worked it out.

Now that I am on the other side of the planet though they continue to use the forum as their personal venue to attack me and my work. Everyone can see through the thinly veiled jabs that Bobby and Joe try to insert into many of their posts. But it's fine with me now because I just get to put up another ad in the response.

I have told them both that they should simply leave me alone because each time I get to post and advertisement I get another order. And it's true that I generally get an order from threads like these and also several "attaboy, way to stick up for yourself" type congratulatory notes.

A good friend told me yesterday that I should just smile at them and let them do their thing. That's kind of hard to do on the forum but I understand the meaning completely. So all I can do is try to be pleasant and firm in my stance while posting any rebuttals.

 

[JB Cases]

i see what you did there.:wink:

just telling it like i see it. i definitely am not a jb nuthugger but its just getting plain rediculous when the only thing they post is something to stir shit up with john.

Yeah you know it's really hard to shoot with all you guys hanging on my nuts. Even CTE can't help me dragging all that weight.

You know what the easiest way is to get a nuthugger in this business? Deliver a product that far exceeds their needs and expectations. And if you do it on time they will be superglued to your sac for life. We are still working on the on-time part of it.

What's funny is that we can discuss the intricacies of how to build a cue to the Nth degree but if it's a case to protect that cue then it's somehow low-class to say that one method is better than another one.

If someone shows X-rays of various cues then that's all good but if I show a video of various case interiors then this is somehow bad? I don't get that and never will.

To me the only people who would not want to discuss how well a case protects relative to other cases are people who KNOW that what they use isn't that great but they want to maintain the value of it.

This case right here, the black C241C, has the same interior as Jack's does and it retails for $60 online.

IF we were talking about THAT case and the construction of the interior then NO ONE would have an issue and even those who support Jack's product - but who didn't know it's the same interior - would be condemning it.

But when it's a Justis then all of the sudden any talk of protection and padding is off limits? Why? Why can't we all be free to talk about case construction to whatever level of detail we want to?

Why is this somehow a taboo subject?

I mean if someone says Murnak is the "the best" because of xxx then why can't someone else say I own a Murnak and I don't like "zzz" and therefor don't agree that it's the best.

What's wrong with me dissecting every case I have and showing the world how they are built? Is there any downside for you as customers to knowing more about the products you use?

I don't think so.

Does Apple or Samsung sell any less phones because of Ifixit's teardowns?

www.ifixit.com