One of my sources sent me a pre-release copy of the 2015 poster. I think its a winner.
![]()
One of my sources sent me a pre-release copy of the 2015 poster. I think its a winner.
![]()
Maybe I'm just getting old, but I think this a wholly inappropriate post from CSI's media manager. Yes, I realize this was probably done without the official support of CSI, but it still seems unprofessional.
FWIW...After the CSI event in the summer, I would have felt the same if one of your competitors had posted similarly.
Maybe I'm just getting old, but I think this a wholly inappropriate post from CSI's media manager. Yes, I realize this was probably done without the official support of CSI, but it still seems unprofessional.
FWIW...After the CSI event in the summer, I would have felt the same if one of your competitors had posted similarly.
Yeah...that whole thing didnt work with TAR and it wont work with CSI.
Its a joke. Lighten up. Or don't. Whatever.
After what happened this summer there should of been a flood of meme's. As I recall there was plenty of crap thrown around. Some rightly so. The event was a disaster.
You think because I posted something you don't like you can make some half ass passive aggressive threat to where I make some of my money and it will have an affect.
Good luck with that.
Passive agressive threat? Are you for real? I'm stating an opinion nothing more, nothing less.
After the summer event, there certainly was no shortage of criticism. But if one of your competitors or industry colleagues had decided to join the witch-hunt, it would have been equally unprofessional.
And FWIW, being called out for acting unprofessionally is not a passive aggressive threat, it's simply an opinion/observation...what you do with it is your choice.
Good luck with that.
Maybe I'm just getting old, but I think this a wholly inappropriate post from CSI's media manager. Yes, I realize this was probably done without the official support of CSI, but it still seems unprofessional.
FWIW...After the CSI event in the summer, I would have felt the same if one of your competitors had posted similarly.
Inappropriate...how so? Let's review:
1. Barry has extended himself in the past....checkbox
2. Barry still owes some money from previous years...checkbox
3. Barry has claimed all money in the past is locked down and this year there won't be a problem...checkbox
4. Barry has overstated the truth and found to be fibbing...checkbox
5. JCIN is an individual and free to express his opinion and not acting as a representative of CSI..checkbox
Nope. Your wrong. Now stop defending the undefendable.
Nick
I am absolutely NOT defending Barry, his antics, or his business practices; you are 100% incorrect in your assertion that I am defending him. In fact I feel he deserves every bit of the criticism he receives.
However, when that criticism comes from a person who is closely associated with a competitor, even when it is done independently, makes both Justin and CSI look small and unprofessional. That is just my opinion. Obviously you and Justin disagree...and those are your opinions.
Good day.
You might be right if JCIN indicated he represents CSI (IE SPEAKS FOR, Not simply works for CSI) and that CSI competes with BB. By the simple fact that they as well put on pool events doesn't necessarily make them competitors. As I recall Mark G has some sort of interest or association with Diamond. This didn't stop Barry from using Diamonds at his event. In short I think you are reaching.
Nick
"it's simply an opinion/observation" Nobody asked for it though? Right?
No Justin never indicated that he was speaking on behalf of CSi...and I noted that in my original post. However, I (and I'm guessing many others on AZB) know Justin exclusively through his work/ownership/association with TAR and CSI. So when Justin speaks, it is difficult to simply dissasociate his comments from CSI, especially when his comments happen to be pool related, and more specifically when they're related to the business of pool promoting. The fact is maybe nobody cares, and that's ok too.
And the term "competitor" is an absolutely appropriate and accurate term to describe two pool promoters. Just because two organizations may have some mutual interests, that in it and of itself generally does not disqualify them from being considered economic competitors. Now, if you were to tell me that Mark Griffin owns 50% of the U.S. open 9b...then I would possibly agree with you. And in that case, I would have probably considered Justin's comments to be a good natured attempt at self-deprecation.
Fair enough. Sounds like you have at least thought it through. I don't happen to agree but can respect that.
As a side note I'm coming to Chicago this week on business and plan on hitting some balls. Other than Chris's can you recommend another place to play?
Nick