Neither David Pascoe's web site or the fluff pieces written by you and other
boat magazine accurately represent the quality of SeaRay. At least David
Pascoe's web site accurately represents the boat he surveyed. The fluff
pieces written by you and others are PR pieces written for the benefit of
the builder, the last person they are written for is the prospective boat
buyer. Since the boat buyer is not paying you for your fluff piece they are
not important.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Larry W4SC wrote:

Piece of crap. See for yourself what's inside a Sea Ray boat:
http://www.yachtsurvey.com/Fiberglass_Boats.htm
It's made of "putty"??....

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

If you're going to slam a brand, please try to use information that is
up to date. That chunk of Sea Ray hull is probably at least 15 years
old, and does not represent the way the boats are currently built.
Using that as an example is like telling people to stay away from Ford
Motor Company vehicles because the Pinto isn't much of a car.

Here's a factual look at the modern manufacturing process used by Sea
Ray, rather than one basher quoting another and using a 15-year old
hull as evidence.

http://www.netcomposites.com/downloads/RTMaut04.pdf


Are you going to disclose to the group that your "Sea Ray boat" was a
glorified jet ski, offered for only a year or two, (and quite possibly
built by some outside company and rebadged as a Sea Ray), or not?

While you're at it, are you willing to admit that the shocking photo on
David Pascoe's site actually represents a failed repair, and not OEM
construction?

Every time somebody brings up that David Pascoe link to slam Sea Ray,
they fail to point out that there are hull chunks from a wide variety
of very "high end" boats. Very few runabout boats are built with a
cored hull these days. Larger cruisers often use Divynicell or other
cores (hardly putty) but normally only above the waterline.

Neither David Pascoe's web site or the fluff pieces written by you and
other
boat magazine accurately represent the quality of SeaRay. At least
David
Pascoe's web site accurately represents the boat he surveyed. The
fluff
pieces written by you and others are PR pieces written for the benefit
of
the builder, the last person they are written for is the prospective
boat
buyer. Since the boat buyer is not paying you for your fluff piece
they are
not important.

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

?????????

I never submitted anything I ever wrote as a rebuttal to Larry's
insinuation that Sea Ray boats are made from "putty".

Do you have a comment on the actual evidence I submitted, (the website
showing photos of a Sea Ray layup and a description of the mfg
process), or is that also suspect because it appeared in print?

And while you're at it, oh wise one, please don't leave us dangling: If
you're in a position to dispute Pascoe's site as well as the European
article about Sea Ray layup schedules- please do so. Speak right up, no
need to keep it a secret.
Here's your opportunity to walk the walk, not just talk the
talk:_______________

By the way, Pascoe does not claim that his items are "sureys". He
admits they are very negatively oriented opinion pieces. He has stated
that it is his mission to attemprt to "balance" any and all positive
opinion pieces. Try reading the introduction to his site sometime.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Neither David Pascoe's web site or the fluff pieces written by you and
other
boat magazine accurately represent the quality of SeaRay. At least
David
Pascoe's web site accurately represents the boat he surveyed. The
fluff
pieces written by you and others are PR pieces written for the benefit
of
the builder, the last person they are written for is the prospective
boat
buyer. Since the boat buyer is not paying you for your fluff piece
they are
not important.

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

?????????

I never submitted anything I ever wrote as a rebuttal to Larry's
insinuation that Sea Ray boats are made from "putty".

Do you have a comment on the actual evidence I submitted, (the website
showing photos of a Sea Ray layup and a description of the mfg
process), or is that also suspect because it appeared in print?

And while you're at it, oh wise one, please don't leave us dangling: If
you're in a position to dispute Pascoe's site as well as the European
article about Sea Ray layup schedules- please do so. Speak right up, no
need to keep it a secret.
Here's your opportunity to walk the walk, not just talk the
talk:_______________

By the way, Pascoe does not claim that his items are "sureys". He
admits they are very negatively oriented opinion pieces. He has stated
that it is his mission to attemprt to "balance" any and all positive
opinion pieces. Try reading the introduction to his site sometime.

Chuck,
I agree completely with your premise that neither Pascoe article, your
boating reviews nor Sea Ray's web site accurately reflect the quality of Sea
Ray's boats.

The putty shown in Pasco's article was not part of SeaRay's lay up schedule,
but the putty could have been applied by the builder to correct a problem
noticed after the hull was removed from the mold.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Neither David Pascoe's web site or the fluff pieces written by you and
other
boat magazine accurately represent the quality of SeaRay. At least
David
Pascoe's web site accurately represents the boat he surveyed. The
fluff
pieces written by you and others are PR pieces written for the benefit
of
the builder, the last person they are written for is the prospective
boat
buyer. Since the boat buyer is not paying you for your fluff piece
they are
not important.

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

?????????

I never submitted anything I ever wrote as a rebuttal to Larry's
insinuation that Sea Ray boats are made from "putty".

Do you have a comment on the actual evidence I submitted, (the website
showing photos of a Sea Ray layup and a description of the mfg
process), or is that also suspect because it appeared in print?

And while you're at it, oh wise one, please don't leave us dangling: If
you're in a position to dispute Pascoe's site as well as the European
article about Sea Ray layup schedules- please do so. Speak right up, no
need to keep it a secret.
Here's your opportunity to walk the walk, not just talk the
talk:_______________

By the way, Pascoe does not claim that his items are "sureys". He
admits they are very negatively oriented opinion pieces. He has stated
that it is his mission to attemprt to "balance" any and all positive
opinion pieces. Try reading the introduction to his site sometime.

I find it interesting that David Pascoe is just on ONE boat. One boat does
not fairly represent the whole line of boats by that manufacturer. So in MY
OPINION, I give Pascoe website very little consideration. Now if he had
documented cases of several Sea Rays like that, then it might hold some
weight.

Ed
wrote in message
oups.com...
Neither David Pascoe's web site or the fluff pieces written by you and
other
boat magazine accurately represent the quality of SeaRay. At least
David
Pascoe's web site accurately represents the boat he surveyed. The
fluff
pieces written by you and others are PR pieces written for the benefit
of
the builder, the last person they are written for is the prospective
boat
buyer. Since the boat buyer is not paying you for your fluff piece
they are
not important.

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

?????????

I never submitted anything I ever wrote as a rebuttal to Larry's
insinuation that Sea Ray boats are made from "putty".

Do you have a comment on the actual evidence I submitted, (the website
showing photos of a Sea Ray layup and a description of the mfg
process), or is that also suspect because it appeared in print?

And while you're at it, oh wise one, please don't leave us dangling: If
you're in a position to dispute Pascoe's site as well as the European
article about Sea Ray layup schedules- please do so. Speak right up, no
need to keep it a secret.
Here's your opportunity to walk the walk, not just talk the
talk:_______________

By the way, Pascoe does not claim that his items are "sureys". He
admits they are very negatively oriented opinion pieces. He has stated
that it is his mission to attemprt to "balance" any and all positive
opinion pieces. Try reading the introduction to his site sometime.