|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
Author |
Message |
ed g
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:27 am |
|
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 2:55 pm Posts: 185 Location: saylorsburg Pa Been Liked: 54 times
|
yes, added sc to rig 2
(originally just typed yes but system said Your message contains 3 characters. The minimum number of characters you need to enter is 10)
|
|
Top |
|
|
timberlea
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:31 am |
|
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 12:41 pm Posts: 4094 Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada Been Liked: 309 times
|
No, because we have almost 28,000 titles and do not need it.
_________________ You can be strange but not a stranger
|
|
Top |
|
|
chrisavis
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 7:29 am |
|
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:38 pm Posts: 6086 Images: 1 Location: Redmond, WA Been Liked: 1665 times
|
Yes.
-Chris
_________________ -Chris
|
|
Top |
|
|
johnny reverb
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:10 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 1:05 pm Posts: 3376 Been Liked: 172 times
|
JoeChartreuse wrote: johnny reverb wrote: Now let me get this straight....you put the lime in the co......I mean....you're actually asking.... Who on here was a pirate, that Sound Choice forced to by their Gem series?........lmfao....... You are the fourth person to ignore the OP: It's like the N-Word.....it's implied........ save you the trouble I am the second person to ignore your request twice.....it's part of the sequestor....they're comming to get you Joe....
|
|
Top |
|
|
Kuelman1
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:30 am |
|
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:01 am Posts: 780 Images: 0 Location: Champaign IL Been Liked: 180 times
|
No...but if I was just starting I would.
|
|
Top |
|
|
dave
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:53 pm |
|
|
Senior Poster |
|
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 5:35 pm Posts: 130 Been Liked: 10 times
|
No--because Foundation 1 and 2 plus 5 bricks--1200 .00 Dk library--freeware All Hits--freeware Pioneer--freeware Heelavadisk--freeware Doctor Music--freeware Georgia Brown--freeware Chartbuster 12000 song library--2000.00
|
|
Top |
|
|
chrisavis
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:58 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:38 pm Posts: 6086 Images: 1 Location: Redmond, WA Been Liked: 1665 times
|
dave wrote: No--because Foundation 1 and 2 plus 5 bricks--1200 .00 Dk library--freeware All Hits--freeware Pioneer--freeware Heelavadisk--freeware Doctor Music--freeware Georgia Brown--freeware Chartbuster 12000 song library--2000.00 At risk of derailing this thread..... Are you saying that you would pay money for the Foundation and Chartbuster content, but would freely download the remaining brands simply because they are not being policed by anyone? -Chris
_________________ -Chris
|
|
Top |
|
|
JoeChartreuse
|
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 12:05 am |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm Posts: 5046 Been Liked: 334 times
|
OK, so far a grand total of 2 non-SC shoved GEM users. Also, out of 26 replies, 5 read and comprehended the OP. So far, a very teeney percentage of non-coerced GEM users. Though he hasn't replied, I will add DannyG as a Yes, making three, or 0.0188% of over 16,000. Anyone else?
_________________ "No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"
" Disc based and loving it..."
|
|
Top |
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 2:20 am |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm Posts: 22978 Songs: 35 Images: 3 Location: Tacoma, WA Been Liked: 2126 times
|
dave wrote: No--because Foundation 1 and 2 plus 5 bricks--1200 .00 Dk library--freeware All Hits--freeware Pioneer--freeware Heelavadisk--freeware Doctor Music--freeware Georgia Brown--freeware Chartbuster 12000 song library--2000.00 Freeware = Piracy!! No such thing! If you didn't pay for it - it's illegal!!! Sorry, you lose!!!
_________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
Top |
|
|
MrBoo
|
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 4:06 am |
|
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 3:35 am Posts: 1945 Been Liked: 427 times
|
I don't have GEM. Don't want GEM.
|
|
Top |
|
|
Smoothedge69
|
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 4:23 am |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am Posts: 3885 Images: 0 Been Liked: 397 times
|
Lonman wrote: dave wrote: No--because Foundation 1 and 2 plus 5 bricks--1200 .00 Dk library--freeware All Hits--freeware Pioneer--freeware Heelavadisk--freeware Doctor Music--freeware Georgia Brown--freeware Chartbuster 12000 song library--2000.00 Freeware = Piracy!! No such thing! If you didn't pay for it - it's illegal!!! Sorry, you lose!!! !! You sound like a bad McRuff commercial. "Help take a bite outta crime!!!".
_________________ I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 5:26 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
JoeChartreuse wrote: OK, so far a grand total of 2 non-SC shoved GEM users. Also, out of 26 replies, 5 read and comprehended the OP. So far, a very teeney percentage of non-coerced GEM users. Though he hasn't replied, I will add DannyG as a Yes, making three, or 0.0188% of over 16,000. Anyone else? Do I really need to explain to you why this methodology is flawed? You can see a fairly up-to-date list on the SC website. Very few of those listed were defendants in lawsuits (also a public record). What is your point?
|
|
Top |
|
|
Smoothedge69
|
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 5:30 am |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am Posts: 3885 Images: 0 Been Liked: 397 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: JoeChartreuse wrote: OK, so far a grand total of 2 non-SC shoved GEM users. Also, out of 26 replies, 5 read and comprehended the OP. So far, a very teeney percentage of non-coerced GEM users. Though he hasn't replied, I will add DannyG as a Yes, making three, or 0.0188% of over 16,000. Anyone else? Do I really need to explain to you why this methodology is flawed? You can see a fairly up-to-date list on the SC website. Very few of those listed were defendants in lawsuits (also a public record). What is your point? I think he is trying to find out the percentage of SC shakedowns and the percentage of voluntary buyers. You already have one judge calling your efforts "shakedown suits". I am sure in time to come more judges will start to agree with that assessment.
_________________ I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE
|
|
Top |
|
|
johnny reverb
|
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 7:44 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 1:05 pm Posts: 3376 Been Liked: 172 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: JoeChartreuse wrote: OK, so far a grand total of 2 non-SC shoved GEM users. Also, out of 26 replies, 5 read and comprehended the OP. So far, a very teeney percentage of non-coerced GEM users. Though he hasn't replied, I will add DannyG as a Yes, making three, or 0.0188% of over 16,000. Anyone else? Do I really need to explain to you why this methodology is flawed? I don't know Jim, it sounds pretty scientific to me. Try putting on an aluminum foil hat, and go back and re-read what he said. ........like the Doc(Bones) would always say to Captain Kirk......he's dead, Jim.......
|
|
Top |
|
|
chrisavis
|
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 7:51 am |
|
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:38 pm Posts: 6086 Images: 1 Location: Redmond, WA Been Liked: 1665 times
|
Smoothedge69 wrote: HarringtonLaw wrote: JoeChartreuse wrote: OK, so far a grand total of 2 non-SC shoved GEM users. Also, out of 26 replies, 5 read and comprehended the OP. So far, a very teeney percentage of non-coerced GEM users. Though he hasn't replied, I will add DannyG as a Yes, making three, or 0.0188% of over 16,000. Anyone else? Do I really need to explain to you why this methodology is flawed? You can see a fairly up-to-date list on the SC website. Very few of those listed were defendants in lawsuits (also a public record). What is your point? I think he is trying to find out the percentage of SC shakedowns and the percentage of voluntary buyers. You already have one judge calling your efforts "shakedown suits". I am sure in time to come more judges will start to agree with that assessment. Which will be IMPOSSIBLE to calculate from responses on these forums. -Chris
_________________ -Chris
|
|
Top |
|
|
johnny reverb
|
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 8:06 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 1:05 pm Posts: 3376 Been Liked: 172 times
|
chrisavis wrote: Smoothedge69 wrote: HarringtonLaw wrote: JoeChartreuse wrote: OK, so far a grand total of 2 non-SC shoved GEM users. Also, out of 26 replies, 5 read and comprehended the OP. So far, a very teeney percentage of non-coerced GEM users. Though he hasn't replied, I will add DannyG as a Yes, making three, or 0.0188% of over 16,000. Anyone else? Do I really need to explain to you why this methodology is flawed? You can see a fairly up-to-date list on the SC website. Very few of those listed were defendants in lawsuits (also a public record). What is your point? I think he is trying to find out the percentage of SC shakedowns and the percentage of voluntary buyers. You already have one judge calling your efforts "shakedown suits". I am sure in time to come more judges will start to agree with that assessment. Which will be IMPOSSIBLE to calculate from responses on these forums. -Chris No (@$%!)?.......
|
|
Top |
|
|
Bazza
|
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 8:27 am |
|
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 8:00 am Posts: 3312 Images: 0 Been Liked: 610 times
|
chrisavis wrote: Smoothedge69 wrote: I think he is trying to find out the percentage of SC shakedowns and the percentage of voluntary buyers. You already have one judge calling your efforts "shakedown suits". I am sure in time to come more judges will start to agree with that assessment. Which will be IMPOSSIBLE to calculate from responses on these forums. -Chris Exactly. Statistically, what you will end up with is a very small sample base with a very LARGE margin of error...which in the ends means you have actually discovered nothing.
|
|
Top |
|
|
JoeChartreuse
|
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:23 am |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm Posts: 5046 Been Liked: 334 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: Do I really need to explain to you why this methodology is flawed?
You can see a fairly up-to-date list on the SC website. Very few of those listed were defendants in lawsuits (also a public record). What is your point? Nope, it's flawed- but just good enough to make my point. I was using this forum- because of the sheer size of a membership devoted to karaoke- strictly as a sampler. 1) Gem users by pure choice are a miniscule minority here. 2) The majority of the folks here have the perception ( the truth of which is not germain to the result) that Using Gems doesn't deem to be a sound business decision. The margin for error can be absolutely HUGE, but the majority/minority are clearly defined nonetheless. Of the current sampling, this tells me that- in my own opinion, of course- these sets would probably not sell all that well without some pushing from SC that didn't involve selling the sets qualities. What is on the website does not reflect how many people use the set- not because of quality or even song needs- but rather as a pre-emptive defense against SC's actions. I say that because of the following: The site shows 113 sets out there. It also shows states shown the most SC "attention" seem to have the most users. For instance, out of the 113 sets, California shows 24, Florida 25, North Carolina 9. That means 51% of total "sales" are concentrated in the 3 states most bothered by SC. Less hit states like Connecticut (2), NY ( 1 ), NJ (4- one's a double listing) seem to have very few sales. Now, consider the population density of NY, NJ, & CT- offering HUGE sales opportunities. Where are the sales? Now add the GEM deals made through "settlements" on top of that, and we see how the majority have been spread out there. I guess the fear tactic works for you, but call it what it is...
_________________ "No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"
" Disc based and loving it..."
|
|
Top |
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 2:04 am |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm Posts: 22978 Songs: 35 Images: 3 Location: Tacoma, WA Been Liked: 2126 times
|
JoeChartreuse wrote: I was using this forum- because of the sheer size of a membership devoted to karaoke- strictly as a sampler.
I thought I explained that, the membership number does not represent the 'actual' number of true users. The majority are spam members, then members that have not posted in years, then members that have done a 1 on hit & run post never to return. The actual regular users probably represent MAYBE 20% of this forums member count.
_________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
Top |
|
|
timberlea
|
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 3:52 am |
|
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 12:41 pm Posts: 4094 Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada Been Liked: 309 times
|
"Of the current sampling, this tells me that- in my own opinion, of course- these sets would probably not sell all that well without some pushing from SC that didn't involve selling the sets qualities."
And in the opinion of Ancient Astronaut Theorists, the Egyptian pyramids were electrical power generation stations or was it spacecraft landing stations. Maybe it was both.
_________________ You can be strange but not a stranger
|
|
Top |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 191 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|