The last word
I think the previous post showing the Flowers case was a lovely end to this thread. Jack, John, and many others certainly owe a lot to the innovative design aspects of this case which continue to be used throughout the spectrum of cases available today.
In that John Barton is an employee of my company, and in that our company has been directly threatened by a poster in this forum, I would like to submit the following:
1. Sterling Gaming, Inc. has not at any time planned to import any type of pool cue case that could be called a knock-off of a Justis case. John Barton does not have the authority to make these kinds of decisions for Sterling.
2. I have spoken to Mr. Justis about this thread. We have no "issues" between us.
3. John stated, "I tend to get a little too involved in AZ and neglect work which I am sure some of you can understand.
." I understand this fully. On *that* note, I'd like to ask you, John, to get your butt back to work.
4. The Sterling cue that was mentioned earlier in this thread requires a slightly longer statement. In 2002, when we were importing our first non-
laser-sighted cues, we selected roughly a hundred models out of a catalog. We consulted several industry people about our selections, and were given the thumb's-up on what we elected to carry. Among this selection was
a model very, very closely visually resembling a Ginacue. This was a complete surprise to us. I believe it was Charlie Fleming of Charlie's Pro Shop in Baltimore that first brought this to our attention. He had said that Ernie Guiterrez probably wouldn't be very pleased knowing that his $5,500 cue had been knocked off in an under-$100 model; a point well-understood. Charlie (I believe!) told me he'd contact Ernie, and to expect a call, where I could explain that our carrying of this cue was simply out of ignorance to the existence of the original. The call never came, and when we wrote the text for the 50,000 copy catalog containing this cue, we made sure to give credit where credit was due. We named the cue "Gina", and describe the cue as follows:
"This is a 'tribute cue,' the design being a replica of a very famous Ginacue. However, instead of costing $5,500, this one is in your price range. Though these aren't actual inlays, they appear to be the real thing."
To this day, we have never heard a word from Mr. Guiterrez that he is displeased with the use of his design in this way. Some members of the ACA have expressed their disdain that we carry this cue, but the fact of the matter is, it is good publicity for the original. With 50,000 copies of the original catalog, and countless thousands of website page views, we are certainly helping to promote the high-value of the Ginacue brand. Should Mr. Guiterrez ever state to us that he is not happy with the situation, we would do anything required to satisfy him, including discontinuing the model. We also had two other cue models we ordered on that first order that greatly resembled a Viking and an Italian-made cue. Barry Hart had no problem with us selling that model (I approached him first and apologized for the situation once I learned of the similarity), and the Italian manufacturer simply asked us to not use their name in the marketing of that model. We obliged. In closing, our company does not willingly pursue the marketing of designs that are not of our creation, and we do what it takes to make things right if we hear of any problems.
If allowed a little more leeway, I would also like to state that John has been working with some very skilled craftspeople during the development of his new cases. Yes, these people are living in China. What language a person speaks, what country in which they reside, and the wages they earn are in no way factors concerning the quality of work that person can perform.
My familiarity with message boards and forums goes back to 1998 (the
Gene Spafford days), when Usenet, IRC, and email were about all there was to the internet. Flame wars are nothing new, and I still don't quite understand why people continue to engage in them. Be sure to see Spafford's quotes, especially his takes on
Sturgeon's Revelation. Yes, John Barton is a repeat offender...with emphasis on the "offense" part. While I seldom agree with the way he expresses his points (and I frequently disagree with the points themselves), I believe we can ALL agree that John is a very passionate and vocal evangelist for pool. I'd ask that you cut him some slack. Just maybe we can get him to realize that, just as in the movie Wargames, "the only way to win is not to play." For clarification, John "Mark" Barton, I'm speaking of your pool playing, and not your long-winded tirades. =)
May this thread rest in peace.
With kind regards to you all,
S. Scott Taylor, President
Sterling Gaming, Inc.
http://www.sterling-gaming.com/
PS: If you are a billiards professional, please contact us to get a copy of our new catalog, which just hit the streets about a week ago!
. . .
JJ posted just a few hours ago on page 11, post number 156
