BassTractor

I think it could actually work if we all just take everyone else out of our ignore lists 😁 (and we could, as you and some others did, post our own number as well as the new total).

Yeah, but a mistake once in a while won't mean much at the end of the thread. Or so we hope. ☺️ BTW, @KiOgonhas since rectified the little mistake, and as I said: my own post sadly is correct in that I've got zero basses right now (down from 15) so @Franticsmurf's number remained being the case

48 Edit: this post sadly is correct.

Maybe tangentially, but King Crimson, during their Double Trio period, had one guy on Stick and one on Warr guitar. Those do go lo'.

First of all, you don't wanna buy the dud someone is trying to get rid of, whether they're a shop or a private person, so if you can, then get someone to accompany you. Maybe someone from BC would be willing to, but you'd have to tell about your whereabouts. If you can't get help, then I'd say that amongst many other basses for example a Yamaha TRB, RBX or TRBX should be a safe bet. Squier are a lovely brand, but in their cheapest ranges, one can find not-that-good ones. I'd prefer a cheap Ibanez over those, but a Yamaha over the Ibanez (in the cheapest ranges, that is). As practice combos go, I've had experience with a cheap Beta Aivin outperforming a more expensive Roland. IMHO, @Dad3353's advice is good too. I'm a lefty myself, and I can't even play a lefty bass. Yes, in that aspect, a lefty bass is just as awful as a righty bass. 😀 Good luck!

Yeah, I understand and respect that there's "an element of". My original response was to someone else's post, one I felt made a more b&w statement, and I did say I was slightly playing the devil's advocate. IME you're right about the non-linearity. In our firm we chose to cater for many of them, but of course it comes at a cost: reduced revenue. For some firms this is ruining, and they're well-advised to be very mindful. Again, lest we lose focus, BD do have "a problem". Maybe they're unaware, maybe they wish to change it, and maybe they live well with it.

Piece of Vhit. You're welcome. (Point of view)

What if they handle 95% of the e-mail contact level, and (well-chosen or misguidedly) don't handle the last 5%? All I'm really saying is that things aren't black and white, and that there's no absolute in an unanswered mail being a sure sign of bad warranty response later. Of course, if you get no answer, it's your prerogative to not buy there, and I might respond likewise.

Nah. 95% of customers are OK, and they will get their answers either in the shop, by phone or by e-mail, and everything is fine and dandy. The last 5% though can ruin your whole business unless you're careful. I'm still talking about everyday consumers - not B2B or similar. In a local hi-fi shop the percentage of tyre kickers was so high (my estimate is roughly 25%) that the shop owner had to wisely wade; in my own line of work (mostly high-end sea kayaks, but locally we also catered for beginners), the percentage of loss-generating customers was felt to be well below 5%. Sfunny you should mention this about an initial enquiry possibly leading to them one day being your biggest and most important customer, as your words are nearly verbatim what I said to my wife before starting our last firm. I wanted to also cater for people who only asked for information, cater for undecisive types who use literally 40 of your hours before maybe buying ... the works. BUT: not cater to everyone all of the time. Some examples then from the kayaking firm: - a boarding school harshly demands we set up an offer for 15 cheap kayaks as well as a maintenance plan and budget. It's obvious to me the school wants to use my firm and my time so the school is better prepared when talking to the next firm, who sell enormous amounts of cheap kayaks cheaply. No go. - a customer living close to my brand colleague in Sweden (who can deliver the same kayak well under my Norwegian cost price) phoning me in the early hours on a Sunday and demands I spend several hours on giving her all the info she wants in Norwegian before she heads off to Sweden where that shop is open on Sundays. No go. (Or rather: Go that once, but I never repeated it.) - an anonymous, quite entitled, e-mail of which the full text literally (but in Norwegian) is: "<Competitor's boat> vs. <your boat>. Advantages and disadvantages. Discuss." No go. Pick up the phone and call me, and we'll analyse your needs, and after that, if I think you're best off with the competitor's boat (if I can without having seen you paddle), then I'll send you to that competitor. - most regular enquiries, including time consumers and people just after info: Go. It's not as if we hated customers. I only wish to express that the coin has different sides, not just the side of the customer-to-be, who can also sometimes act quite entitledly. In general, these things are not black and white, and your previous post seemed. to me. to describe that they are. In case: they may indeed be that way in your line of work, but then I don't get the impression everyday consumers are your main customer base.

Slightly playing the devil's advocate here, maybe the supplier is working hard taking care of their existing customers, and prioritizes that work above answering one of the gazillions of e-mail questions they receive - often of a quite entitled and/or frivolous character or the result of drugs or alcohol, and most of the time not leading to a contract. In several lines of business, typically selling goods to end-users, you can't do without e-mail, but a certain percentage of "customers" will shoot off mails that shouldn't be answered, or not answered in full. The business will have to wade and decide, and will unavoidably make mistakes when doing so. That's not to take BD's side. While Mark has been good with me on every occasion, I read the negative reports with growing sadness-not-anger. BD has a problem, and it stems not only from choices Mark has made, but also from stuff that was mentioned in earlier threads, but that I'm not willing to repeat. People in need of finding out could use BC's search function. Sorry for being cryptic.

Aye, from all of the examples of his communication, it's quite obvious our man Mick derives a warped sense of self-esteem from his destructive actions. He may be a sad little loser, but still a sad little loser who must accept responsibility for his actions, and one who must be stopped. Hm. Now why am I suddenly having thoughts about famous politicians?

Back then we were told that the band changed their name from Stranglers IV to The Stranglers, but this probably is untrue. The WP entry for RN now says it was more of a joke of sorts, as if RN was their fourth album.

IMS, the gambling was mentioned in the article about the court case after his rental caravan fraud, so: yes indeed. Edit: Yup! https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/local-news/single-mum-pensioners-ingoldmells-caravan-3743529

.

.

You haven't done the maths, have you? From Mark's pics it should be evident they go to -34.6Hz. 😉

Apparently we're slow to forget. Must be something about the excruciating, ball-grabbing absurdity of it all - - one that just won't leave ya.

Wot? @ambient is called Mark? ... 😱 I always thought he's called Kevin! 😐 😁

Ah, oui, mais en France nous avons "Le Zeppelin".

In the 80s, an English rock musician "had his own style" (or summat), as reported in the media. He responded along the lines of: "What they seem to not realise is that I just repeat my limitations". IMHO that deserves respect.

... as I said to Einstein once. 😁

I've just done it 170 times - once for each address on my road. BC robbers will have to break into many a house before finally finding my dwellings with the inconspicuous orange Aygo outside. Oh, and I've had to sell all my gear, so am already laughing when thinking of their faces. Sfun being poor! 😊

.

Yeah, it would've been.

Gentle Giant: The Power and The Glory" as in: the original album, without the ghastly bonus track that was the single "The Power and The Glory".