Chuck, great write up, I really enjoy it. Its a shame that others has to
flame write ups like this. My dad use to tell me that people who has to find
anything to complain about are usually not happy with there life. Chuck, as
always I enjoy your writings and I had a chance to ride in my old boss sea
ray, it was a very fast and very nice looking boat. Thanks Again

Ed
"*JimH*" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
oups.com...
Where did I say that $1,500 was too much to pay? The boat was close to
20
years old and for all I knew it had a value of $1,000....thus my
advice. I
am not nor ever have been a used boat salesmen. You have so you
definitely
have a leg up on me.

*********
You still don't get it. That's even funnier. There's no meaningful
"book value" on a 30 year old boat. The value of a boat like that is
going to be whatever two people agree that it is. There's not much risk
of seriously overpaying for a boat reported in fair or better condition
that floats and runs at $1500. If you knew about boats, you'd know
that. You ought to keep your mouth shut rather than dispense goofy
advice.



Fine. You are the only one arguing that fact to give you some sort of
credibility.



Your "25 years of boating experience" sounds more like 90-days
experience repeated 100 times.



More persona attacks Chuck. Apparently you lost this discussion by doing
so.



******************

JimH wrote:


I have never been on that boat but if I did I am sure I would find some

positives and some negatives about it...unless of course I was being
paid
big bucks to write a fluff article about it.

But hell, I have morals and would never be paid off to do so.


You on the other hand................

**********

So let's get this straight:

You admit you have never been aboard the boat, but you are sure that my
description is so inaccurate that it indicates a lack of basic
morality?

Yep. All boats have flaws. You never describe them in your fluff
reviews. A lack of morals...accepting payments from the man to keep it
positive.......yep.



Tell us about your morality: Does it involve arriving at conclusions
about people and statements
without any evidence what-so-ever (as you admit to doing above)? Does
it involve posting endless personal attacks against perfect strangers?
Where did you learn this moral code?

You continue to claim the honor of being among the leading "on-topic"
posters here.
Google is not your friend, at all, in that regard. 90% of your crap is
dedicated to personal attack. Look yourself up and see. The only people
you're fooling with your claim are folks who don't follow your endless
spew of anti-Gould, anti-Krause, anti- (insert names here) drivel.

I believe you are second to Krause on Off Topic posts, somewhere in the
neighborhood of 10,000+.

Now if you can dispute that, in recent months. my on topic posts are
greater than yours please do so. You have relied on century old data.



So, unless you can post something actually related to the boat, your
negative opinion of the boat and your assertion that my description is
"immoral" isn't based on any knowledge of the boat, but rather on your
silly stereotype of Sea Ray owners and your hatred for most of the rest
of mankind (including yours truly). Right?

If you had any reason to hang around a marina, you'd soon meet some Sea
Ray owners and you would know how foolish your stereotype sounds. Most
bashers betray only their own ignorance, rather than any real knowledge
about a product. If you had any shame, you would be embarrass

I have spend many nights at my marinas and have seen many owners of newer
(post 189) SeaRays.

My impression:

1. They generally knew nothing about boats and boat quality (construction
wise) or value

2. They purchased on name recognition.

Your "look at me I own a Searay" review does nothing to negate that.

Have a good night Chuck.

I'm glad you enjoyed the description of the boat, Ed.

In a perfect world, people who disagreed with my comments would express
that disagreement
based on their own personal knowledge or research. I guess the lazy
approach is to just go directly to personal attack, and it works pretty
well for folks with no knowledge upon which to base a factual rebuttal.
My observations about various boats aren't going to be well received
by a couple of folks here, but that doesn't stop me from offering them
for the benefit of folks like yourself who say they enjoy them. (I
don't write any of them specifically for the NG, so there's investment
of additional time to post them here)

..

Chuck,
I find your comments to be as accurate and as well written as any I have
read in any boating magazine. Do you disagree with any statement I made
concerning the quid pro quo relationship between boat builders and boating
magazines?

Don't you believe it is in the best interest of those reading these reviews
and observations to understand that relationship?

I for one hope you keep posting your articles, but let's be honest, they are
PR pieces for the builders, they are not unbiased discussions about the
merits of the boat.


wrote in message
ups.com...
I'm glad you enjoyed the description of the boat, Ed.

In a perfect world, people who disagreed with my comments would express
that disagreement
based on their own personal knowledge or research. I guess the lazy
approach is to just go directly to personal attack, and it works pretty
well for folks with no knowledge upon which to base a factual rebuttal.
My observations about various boats aren't going to be well received
by a couple of folks here, but that doesn't stop me from offering them
for the benefit of folks like yourself who say they enjoy them. (I
don't write any of them specifically for the NG, so there's investment
of additional time to post them here)

.