LN has been assimilated

derekcohen | Mar 20, 2009 11:57am | #15

There is plenty written in the "Wood River" thread: http://forums.taunton.com/fw-knots/messages?msg=45796.1

It is clear, however, that some do not agree and others do. I am tired of debating this issue. It has all been said before. Perhaps you were not listening. Or perhaps you have another agenda.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Edited 3/20/2009 4:59 am ET by derekcohen

dgreen | Mar 20, 2009 12:24pm | #16

I was only responding to your post .http://forums.taunton.com/fw-knots/messages?msg=45993.4

I think you are trying to back away and save face. If I am wrong I welcome your reasoned and referenced reply.

I have followed that thread.

I have no agenda other than the truth. No one sends me tools. Can you say the same?

................................................

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.~ Denis Diderot

dgreen | Mar 20, 2009 12:48pm | #17

I notice you have carefully avoided answering any of my questions.

................................................

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.~ Denis Diderot

Hendo | Mar 21, 2009 06:33am | #46

And all the world has noticed that you have avoided using your intellect.

You seek not to enlighten, but to argue. You are entitled to your viewpoints, but not to your rudeness.

dgreen | Mar 21, 2009 08:06am | #48

I am entitled to express myself as I see fit.

You are entitled to ignore me.

................................................

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.~ Denis Diderot

dgreen | Mar 21, 2009 09:13am | #49

By the way I read through your whopping 1.5 posts per month since you have been on the forum. When you were not being the politeness police you were pretty much asking for help.

Pardon me if I don't give much weight to the rants of a parasite.

The pimple on Derek Cohen's neighbors dogs butt is of far more concern to me than your opinion on forum manners.

................................................

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.~ Denis Diderot

Walnutz | Mar 21, 2009 09:13pm | #70

It's really too bad that the moderators of this site saw fit to re-instate your ability to post here. You bring scumminess to a new low, all from the safe and cozy protection of your home. Speaking for myself, I wish your ban would be re-instated for all time. This forum is a much more informative place, and more enjoyable to visit, without your personal attacks on every single individual that you come in contact with.....its parasitic. Some day, you are going to mess with the wrong individual, and then we won't have to deal with your sorry antics anymore.......I await that day.

I challenge you to spend one month on this forum without attacking anyone. I'll bet that it is no more likely to happen then for the crack addict to put down the glass pipe.

You, sir, are sad and pathetic. You also discust me.

BossCrunk | Mar 20, 2009 01:37pm | #18

I noticed the gavel.

Should we assume that you are speaking on behalf of Taunton regarding these matters?

Edited 3/20/2009 6:38 am ET by BossCrunk

9619 | Mar 20, 2009 04:04pm | #20

Derek,
Charles asked if you are are speaking for Taunton.
I believe he was being facetious, but with his usual impish humor.
I am not being facetious. You always seem to me to be acting as in defense of the tool makers, especially Lee Valley. I highly recommend that you make clear to all of us exactly what your relationship with the toolmakers is, especially Lee Valley, who you seem to advocate for the strongest. You have special relationships with plane makers.
What are they?
Is is monetary? Are you on their payroll? It would not be bad for you to be taking money or tools from them in return for your "reviews" and your continued defense of their practices, prices and quality. You have told me that getting a high-end plane in return for a "review" doesn't nearly pay for the time you have to put into the review, and that that does not affect the highly positive nature of your reviews. As you know, I do not accept that. You are only human, like the rest of us. I have been assuming that you are not on the Lee Valley payroll but are setting up for a business which involves being known as an expert in planes and sharpening, for after you retire as a psychologist. But I may be wrong. It is the only explanation that I can think of for the nature your writing, which almost always sounds to me like it is "sponsored", or at least as if it is aiming at becoming sponsored. Please note: because something seems like a reasonable explanation to me does not make it so. You are in a position to clear this all up, and I believe it would be in all of our best interests if you do. I really would like to hear from you: what are your understandings with the tool makers (especially Lee Valley), both for now and for the future. There are many on Knots who push for the use of good tools. One good example is Sean (Samson). He is an excellent example of a person who uses good tools and good practices, but I NEVER get the feeling that he is pushing for any particular maker. You are the only one that I get that feeling from. And it is bothersome. It seems to me that planes have been around for centuries. The modern plane makers have not added much to what has existed for a long time except for some newer metals and processes, which the plane makers didn't invent. In other words, what current plane makers have added to the planemakers of old is "derivative and incremental", and certainly not incisive. It is hard for me to understand how a current maker of planes that were originally designed by Stanley could be worried about the Borg copying the designs they copied from Stanley.Can't wait to hear the answer that I have been wondering about for a while. Of course, it is possible that you want and ask for nothing from Lee Valley and other tool makers (including free tools), and that anything they give you is simply their way of showing their gratitude for natural feelings for their work, and that you have no hopes of getting anything from them in the future.There is no doubt in my mind that Lee Valley and Lie Nielsen and Mr. Holtey could make great use of the Chinese in bringing very good planes to the woodworkers of the world at a much cheaper price than they are currently charging. If they dont, then Wood River and the Borg and others will do this. The train is coming through. Currently the Borg and Wood River are not up to Lie Nielsen or Lee Valley standards, but in no time at all, they have gone way past the current standards of Stanley, Kunz, etc. I understand that they are currently improving their wares as a result of recent feedback on their wares. There is no doubt in my mind that their quality will come very close to those of the boutique makers soon, and at a much more reasonable price. In the past, when I have asked you difficult questions, you have evaded and avoided. While I would like answers to my questions, I can't imagine that I will get them from you, and I can't understand why. MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

derekcohen | Mar 20, 2009 04:44pm | #22

You know Mel, you have asked this question before, on a few occasions, and I have been open and answered you each time. I try to remain an open book. I will humour you once more.

So again: I am not employed by anyone as their representative. I do not receive planes or tools for review from Lee Valley. Any planes I have received from them have been as compensation for my time in providing feedback at the development stage or pre-production stage. Any writing I do is done as a hobby. Neither LV nor LN have ever asked me to write a review. I have done a couple of reviews on request, these being a Marcou smoother and the Blum Fore Plane and Smoother, and I made it clear that this was the case. I also made it clear to the manufacturers that what I write and conclude is my business - that's the risk they take. I structure my reviews to represent the scientific model as much as possible, and present as much data (in the form of pictures) to document my observations - all in the interests of objectivity. In addition to working with wood, I have an intellectual interest in woodworking, and this includes the design and construction of tools.

I maintain a website and all the expenses are born by myself. I would like to believe that others find the information there useful. It is free. I left my previous website because attempts were being made to turn it into a commercial venture, and I also viewed the owner of the website as corrupt (he stole from Philip). I wanted no part of that. It cost me a lot of money to go it alone. I didn't care as I enjoy writing and I wanted a place where I could express myself.

Is that clear enough for you.

So you ask why I make a Big Deal out of the Wood River and Borg planes? Frankly, if you have to ask this then you would not understand the answer. I raised this issue with you about a month ago and your answer alarmed me. It revealed that you and I see the world very differently. Perhaps I am something of a romantic, with old fashioned ideas of honour and ethics, but I do not condone theft and, in your words, the survival of the fittest - meaning that innovative companies such as LV and LN should just accept that other companies are free to steal their work. My support of LV and LN here has sweet bugger all to do with my reviews. It has to do with human decency. And that is what alarmed me, since you do not showany evidence that you understand this issue.

I have been switching off my "hammer" when I make a personal comment. I forgot this with the post that Charles referred to. My apologies to FWW for that oversight.

Regards from Perth

Derek

BossCrunk | Mar 20, 2009 09:01pm | #29

Here's the simple truth. Until you come out of pocket for all expenses, including the item you are reviewing (regardless if the items are paltry compared to your own net worth or the value of your time), you are not going to be perceived by a large swath of folks as having provided an independent review. Why? Because you aren't independent in fact or appearance.

If your status as independent in not readily apparent, you find yourself constantly being asked to explain and proclaim it, then the chance you are really independent is remote.

There's no reason to read one of your reviews - you review tools you've received for free and you seem to like 'em all. You pen handtool hagiographies one after another and you've deluded yourself into believing that you're providing some sort of "service." I can't imagine what that service would be beyond "This company sent me a free tool and I really like it." Sign me up. I imagine that I'd like them too. Especially if I thought they would keep sending them.

And beyond that, I'm thrilled with the Woodriver line almost solely because of the paroxysms they send you, and others, into.

Edited 3/20/2009 5:58 pm ET by BossCrunk

Samson | Mar 20, 2009 09:12pm | #30

Come now, Charles, there is no such thing as an unbiased review. Some folks have less bias than others is all. Don't even get me started about tool pumping and pimping by magazines and their editors and writers.

Derek has always been very up front in his reviews, and he certainly tries to make them empirical when he can, as opposed to simply subjective, so that the reader can judge for themselves as much as possible. He might well have blind spots, like all of us, but his reviews are informative and worthwhile. And indeed, his initial takes on new Veritas tools, for example, are often borne out over time as regular users buy and use the stuff.

You seem to have an axe to grind against Derek. Did he con you into buying some Veritas doodad that let you down? Is there some review in particular that you thought more shill than substance? Because I haven't seen that one.

Edited 3/20/2009 2:16 pm ET by Samson

Tony Z | Mar 20, 2009 11:09pm | #32

I don't have a dog in this race, but I would like to expand on your comment to Charles about buying a LV doodad that didn't perform: LV has a very generous return policy that permits the return of any good that does not satisfy. I may be mistaken, but I believe you have up to three months to return the item.

I have to state that I am not an employee of LV, I do not own any LV stock and I do not receive any remuneration in any form from LV.

T.Z.

BossCrunk | Mar 21, 2009 12:42am | #35

I'm not terribly interested in tool reviews in the first place. So, there's my bias. But I am most certainly not interested in reviews when the tools are received gratis from the manufacturer, with the promise of more to come.

Sorry.

Edited 3/21/2009 8:38 am ET by BossCrunk

mapleman | Mar 21, 2009 04:03am | #42

I have been switching off my "hammer" when I make a personal comment.

Damn! You can turn that bad boy on and off? Sweeeeet! I gotta get me one of those ;-)

Lee

Joe Sullivan | Mar 21, 2009 06:18am | #44

As I said in another thread -- it must be the weather or the recession, or maybe you guys are all getting knock-off generic meds that look the same but are of inferior efficacy. So, knowing in advance that I need to thicken up my skin for the ad hominems to come (ad homicides the spell checker tried to say -- maybe it knows something), a couple of thoughts:First, for those who don't know, practically all reviews in the world except those written by non-profit organizations that made a big to-do about it are based on free review copies. No one should begrudge Derek his share. He does write good reviews. I could see a fair basis for complaint if his work was promotional fluff, or somehow slanted, but so far, I have not seen that. So, what's the gripe? Jealousy? You want some freebies, too? learn to write well and take pictures. Some of you guys come across more as Don Rickles wannabes than anything else -- specialists in empty insults.Second, there has been a great deal of over the top blather and babble about intellectual property and trade dress. Fact is there are very strict laws concerning same. Those laws provide considerable protection. While Lataxe is not completely right, he has a point when he says the laws are a bit overboard here in the US of A. He is right -- but that just makes the point more finely -- if real IP is infringed, there is adequate recourse. On the other hand, the recourse to competition is to be competitive in quality or price. Should we complain about that? Of course, Lataxe's point about all of these tools being the end result of centuries of other peoples thoughts and designs is spot on.Good golly.J

9619 | Mar 21, 2009 04:52pm | #54

Derek,

Thank you for the nice reply.

I can't help but believe you are kidding yourself. I didn't think you are formally "employed" by Lee Valley. I do believe you have a DEEP relationship with them, which is unwritten but very powerful. You say "Any planes I have received from them have been as compensation for my time in providing feedback at the development stage or pre-production stage." You are receiving planes from Lee Valley for giving them your feedback. You say that is compensation for your time. Call it what you want. I call it a "sweetheart deal". Such a relationship cannot, in my mind, is frought with problems with regard to being unbiased in reviews. I like David Savage's ideas about being at arms length with the manufacturers in order to be unbiased. I do no see you as any more or any less a human than the rest of us. You want the free planes to keep coming. Also, you want the accompanying signal that indicates you are an "expert" in evaluation of planes. IMHO you want the latter much more than the former, but both are nice.

Once one takes things for free from a maker, that person is beholden to the maker. I believe Lee Valley is VERY HAPPY with your string of reviews of their wares. I believe strongly that if your reviews were negative, the planes would stop coming. I wonder is there is anyone who disagrees with that?

If you are happy with the way things are, just keep trucking. I am not your "keeper", and you do not need my blessing. YOu say you are not employed by Lee Valley. Yet you say you get remunerated by Lee Valley for your time. That sounds to me like you are employed by them, albeit informally.

So much for that.

Now for the real topic at hand -- reasonably priced planes. We did go round about this. We think quite differently about it. As I assess your behaviour, you seem to favor high priced tools, and you like to put your hand made tools in hand made presentation boxes. Me, I favor the least cost tools that have the quality to get the job done that I want them to do. Ford was one of the innovators of automation in the automotive world. Others made cars individually and by hand. Ford reduced the cost and beat the competition. The competition was very upset about this, just as Lee Valley and Lie Nielsen will be when The Borg and Wood River get their quality up to speed, AND THEY WILL!. Toyota and Honda's first models in the US were not top quality. They are top quality today. Ford and Chevy will soon go broke because they didn't keep up on either quality or price.

You said " So you ask why I make a Big Deal out of the Wood River and Borg planes? Frankly, if you have to ask this then you would not understand the answer."

I find your answer that "if I have to ask then I don't understand" to be extremely weak. You indicate that I mean that " meaning that innovative companies such as LV and LN should just accept that other companies are free to steal their work". I find that response to be less than intelligent since in my message to you, I indicated that LV and LN's designs and mechanisms look much like the companies they borrowed them from". Heck, a plane is nothing more than a chisel in a holder. This is not rocket science or brain surgery. Let me put this a bit differently. Have you every tried to help a kid learn to play soccer (football)? Mine all went through a phase in which they realized that other kids push and shove and get away with it. It took a while, but I advised them to learn to live with it, since complaining won't solve anything. I advised them to learn to deal with it in a way that seems to work. They figured it out. Business is much the same.

The nub of it, Derek, is that I believe that there is room for people like yourself, who like to deal with high priced boutique planes, such as those that LV makes, and the smaller makers make. You seem to get personal satisfaction from such things. I know people who only eat at high priced restaurants. It seems to make them happy. That is fine with me. I would only ask that you make room for people who have different ideas - for people who believe that a $50 block plane of high quality is distinctly possible in this world, and if it works as well as the $300 one from Lee Valley (including shipping) then it is the one to get.

All I ask is that you not denigrate those who seek to find good tools at reasonable prices, and for the companies who try to provide that service. I find there is room for Marcou and Holtey and Larry and Mike and all the other makers of more upscale tools. They perform a real service. I also find room for those who shop at Wal Mart. They are people too.

I am just asking you to open your heart to those who would like to find lower cost alternatives. Be inclusive. It doesn't cost any more.

Enough for today. Here are two topics we can discuss in the future.

One is: your idea that you use a scientific method on your evaluations of tools. I believe you are kidding yourself there also. You have to use the most difficult wood around to find differences between the planes, and that is not an issue for most of the users of the planes, and on and on and on. What you need to do is to find out the parameters of performance of a plane that are needed by your desired audience, and check for compliance with those, not with irrelevant parameters.

Two is: why would a company like LV come up with a block plane that sells for $300 including shipping, when there are plenty of block planes that are close to perfect and cost less. Why didn't they use their immense engineering wisdom to come up with a cheaper plane that is just as good as the more expensive ones that are out there? Is it possible that your advice to them is filled with your bias toward high priced tools rather than the lowest price tools that can get the necessary quality?

You are right. Our ideas differ a great deal. Actually it is our values which differ so much. I was greatly affected by my 30 years at NASA. I watched many projects go over cost in their development. I developed an affinity for developing tools which get the job done as a reasonable cost, not at a high cost.

If you are interested in hard discussion on any of these points, I would be happy to discuss. If you like to be dismissive ,eg "if you have to ask the question, you don't undertand" then no real analysis is possible.

Have you thought of adding a tag line to your messages which says "I accept free tools from Lee Valley, but they are only of the pre-production type, so my reviews of their tools, which I helped design, are not biased."

MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

derekcohen | Mar 21, 2009 05:33pm | #60

Mel

You are one confused puppy.

Regards from Perth

Derek (also hitting the Switch Off Mel button)

BossCrunk | Mar 21, 2009 06:37pm | #63

I don't think he's confused at all. I think he's spot on. Your reviews are biased to the point of being fraudulent, but falling short of that, laughable - and for all the reasons Mel stated. Their laughable because they are perfectly predictable and not worth the read for this same reason.

Edited 3/21/2009 11:42 am ET by BossCrunk

derekcohen | Mar 21, 2009 06:53pm | #64

Ahh Charlie

You are late to the feed.

Is there any point in attempting to hold a rational discussion with you? History says no. You appear to exist only to annoy and destroy.

Pushing another Switch Off button.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Lataxe | Mar 22, 2009 03:06pm | #91

Charlie boy,

I liked the feel of expunging the toxic bits of Mel from my consciousness. Ha ha! I am getting another fix by pressing the red button on thee!

Of course, I am not thereby denying myself the other pleasures of reading silly wee Charlie posts, as you make them under at least 391 pseudonyms. The best of both worlds!

Perhaps a spreadsheet is necessary, to work out how many Charlie-avatars I can get red-button pleasure from before I am doing myself out of "guffawing at Charlie's antic" pleasures? Life is full of difficult decisions.

Lataxe

PS What a nasty little post you have made, by the way, concerning Derek. Feel shame! But I just realised: you can't.

9619 | Mar 21, 2009 11:31pm | #74

Derek,

I kinda figured you'd do that. I can understand your need to take the safe route.

When I look at today's Stanleys, Kunzs, Anants, etc, I am sorry that there is not much in the way of cheaper good tools. I would love to see LN or LV do something about that. Heck, even Toyota has a low price line, a mid price line and they have the LExus. But even their low priced cars are of excellent quality.

I look at the Wood Rivers, and they look a lot better than the Stanleys and the Kunzs, and I hear they are working on improving quality. I still haven't gotten a chance to use one. I am sorry that Wood River and the Borg made tools that look like LN tools. I would have rather they made them look like the old MIller plow plane, or some of the early Stanleys. They were BEAUTIFUL. Lots of curlycues, and a real sense of style. That 1872 Miller plane that someone reproduced a while back, may have been the best looking tool every made. IMHO, modern stuff doesn't compare. Why copy the rather dull faces of the current LV and LN planes, when there are really classics to copy :-)

But I think that making things like others make them is a natural human instinct. Teens are always copying hairstyles. Every year the fashion shows cause folks to buy new clothes to look like "they are supposed to". "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery." If I were LN or LV, I wouldn't worry about the Chinese making a tool that looked like one of mine. I would be VERY worried they are about to beat me on both quality and price. But as we have discussed in the past, If I were LN or LV, I wouldn't just be thinking about it, I'd be doing something about it, which co opted the Chinese.

Which brings up an interesting question. I have not looked up the Borg or Wood River. Could it be that they are subsideries of Triton or some other Australian company? Could they be a part of Freud, an Italian company with a German name with makes much of their stuff in Spain? Could they be a part of Lie Nielsen or of Stanley or Irwin? I have no idea. Sure would be interesting to find out. Heck, it is possible that Lataxe owns Wood River. :-) Actually, I don't care who owns them. I am just happy to see them doing their thing. I am certain that it will end up with a better situation (more alternatives) for the woodworkers of the world. I just hope that Wood River and the Borg don't go the Harbour Freight route. I don't get the sense that they are.

Please don't get me wrong. I would hate to see LN or LV be assimilated!!!! I am rooting for them to do something to insure that it doesn't happen. You are much closer to Rob and Tom than I am, so the next time you see them, please tell them that there is someone out there who doesn't want to see them assimilated, does want to see them get aggressive in taking positive steps to copy the Toyota and Honda approach of making a good quality lower priced line of tools. There are more people out there who can afford lower price good tools than who can afford high priced good tools. Ask Obama how he got elected. He appealed to the largest group he could find, and those aren't the super rich people.

Have a good day.

Mel

PS thanks for referring to me as a puppy. At 65, that doesn't happen to me much anymore. Measure your output in smiles per board foot.

mwenz | Mar 22, 2009 02:09am | #78

I would be VERY worried they are about to beat me on both quality and price. But as we have discussed in the past, If I were LN or LV, I wouldn't just be thinking about it, I'd be doing something about it, which co opted the Chinese...I would hate to see LN or LV be assimilated!!!! I am rooting for them to do something to insure that it doesn't happen. You are much closer to Rob and Tom than I am, so the next time you see them, please tell them that there is someone out there who doesn't want to see them assimilated, does want to see them get aggressive in taking positive steps to copy the Toyota and Honda approach of making a good quality lower priced line of tools. There are more people out there who can afford lower price good tools than who can afford high priced good tools.

This may be my one and only post in this thread, Mel. I will gladly read replies of you or others, but may not engage beyond this post.

Do you really think a company in NA can compete with a company in China or India in regard to price if manufacturing is based in NA? Do you think they, like so many NA companies, would need to off-shore in order to compete at a given price level?

At the beginning of the quoted text from one of your posts, you mention "If I were LN or LV...I'd be doing something about it." Pray tell, what exactly is there to do when what they pay for labor, land, facilities, electricity, and whatever, is so damn cheap and often can be and sometimes is subsidized by the government?

Are you aware of how both the companies you mention campare in manufacturing capabilities as Toyota or Honda within their respective industry? (btw, how's it working for either Toyota or Honda right now? I don't think their manufacturing is saving their bacon. Who knows, perhaps to stay afloat they too will move manufacturing to Mexico, India and or China.)

The fact is that currently there is an incredibly unlevel playing field. The only win-win would be for the costs to be within the same ballpark. While Mr. Scholz may well reply that the standard of living is increasing, the issue is far beyond simple standard of living issues, wages and the like. It also goes to health and safety, environmental, etc. These too are improving in China at a snail's pace. But it won't be in anyone's idea of near-term.

It is easy to romantically or even quasi-politically write that hopefully these issues will not force either company out of the woodworking widget market. The fact is that by allowing the rampant and accelerated importation of goods from "underdeveloped" countries to affect NA business is not good for NA people. It is, I believe, greatly responsible for widening the gap between the poor and the not-so poor in NA. By off-shoring and sourcing so much of our goods from these two worst offending nations, we have largely and systematically eliminated, or are in the process of eliminating, a whole large class of working positions. It does nothing for maintaining or raising our own standards of living. This ain't a good thing.

Take care, Mike

PS. And because you mention the Miller repop...here's mine...

View Image

Edited 3/21/2009 7:09 pm by mwenz

Samson | Mar 22, 2009 02:36am | #79

Amen.

And thanks. I was really kind of becoming disheartened. It's good to hear there are others out there whom I respect, who believe as you've so eloquently stated.

Seriously, thanks.

philip | Mar 22, 2009 03:42am | #81

Samson,
There are many others out there, believe me. Whole countries , almost.
I would like to post my take on this thing, but I feel my hands are tied- and the goblins will find opportunity to use words such as "biased", "shill", "prejudiced" etc. and keep raking over the coals by making extremely unjust accusations totally unfounded on fact.
I have the same sentiments as Mike - and will not post on this thread again.Philip Marcou

9619 | Mar 22, 2009 05:18am | #83

Sean,

I read your message to the eloquent Mike. Please never be disheartened. Be strong. Be proud. As the Army says, Be all you can be. I believe that is what you do.

Please note, if you read my words to Derek and just a second ago, to Mike. My message is one of possible good news for all, us and them (whoever us and them are). There is no need to make demons out of those we are not close to. Many countries have workforces that are waiting to be tapped. My message was about our companies teaming with theirs. We have the experience, the know how, and the designs. They have the manpower that is waiting to be trained. With the right people in charge, and the right contracts, and the right OVERSIGHT, this can be a win win situation.

What about my suggestions do you find disheartening? Would you suggest that Google get out of China? IF you do, I would suggest that Google is not about to follow suit. Would you like to see a list of big US firms doing business in China and doing well, and planning on a bright future in doing so? Do you think they are all making mistakes?

If so, is it because you have something against the Chinese? I can't imagine that in a person as intelligent as you? I know some yahoos who won't buy anything from China, but no intelligent people.

I would like your feedback. If I am making a mistake here, I would like some feedback as to where my errors are. I got nothing like that from Derek. I havent heard any specifics about not forging business arrangements with the Chinese or other third world countries from anyone on Knots. By the way, I am not suggesting that we send newbies over to do business with people who are very worldwise. I am not sure that a small company such as Mike's could make it work, but LN and LV are much larger. I believe they could make it work. Certainly Stanley or Irwin or Kunz could do something with China and end up with a line of much higher quality than anything they have now.

Please note, I am not saying they should ship all manufacturing to China. I am saying that they could work out a deal to make a line in China which is much like Toyota's entry level cars - HIGH QUALITY but less than the current LN and LV lines. THis would be done under strict supervision of LN or LV personnel who can put any tool in the "unacceptable" box on the Quality Control line.

Would surely like to hear from you.

THanks,Mel

PS this has nothing to do with China. Substitute any suitable third world country for China in the above text.

PPS I sure hope someone from Harvard Business School chimes in on this one. :-)Measure your output in smiles per board foot.

Samson | Mar 22, 2009 06:43am | #85

There is no need to make demons out of those we are not close to.

No one has made demons out of the Chinese. This is not about prejudice or xenophobia. Mike has explained what it's about. You can love your area and your neighbors without hating anyone on the other side of the world.

Many countries have workforces that are waiting to be tapped.

Yeah, and we're closing in on 10% of ours waiting to be tapped at the moment too.

We have the experience, the know how, and the designs. They have the manpower that is waiting to be trained. With the right people in charge, and the right contracts, and the right OVERSIGHT, this can be a win win situation.

No offense, Mel, but I think your view of China is a bit dated. I really don't picture them as the great untrained masses at this point waiting to be harnessed by Joe Capitalist.

What about my suggestions do you find disheartening?

I find it disheartening that "cheaper" is the driving force in too much of our society. Cheaper at any cost is an expensive way to live in the long run.

More generally, so many people here seem to think we can keep going the way we have been - outsourcing jobs to make cheap products abroad that we buy on credit that the Chinese provide. It's unsustainable.

Would you suggest that Google get out of China? IF you do, I would suggest that Google is not about to follow suit. Would you like to see a list of big US firms doing business in China and doing well, and planning on a bright future in doing so? Do you think they are all making mistakes?

You've now expanded from exporting our jobs to exporting our goods. They are not the same issue. Indeed, they are sort of the opposite.

If so, is it because you have something against the Chinese? I can't imagine that in a person as intelligent as you? I know some yahoos who won't buy anything from China, but no intelligent people.

I answered this in my first paragraph above. I don't hate Chinese products. I hate knock-offs of American products. I hate outsourcing of our good jobs. I hate the inequity of expecting the American worker to have to compete with Chinese workers who, for myriad socio-economic-political-environmental reasons will do the same job for some tiny fraction of of the pay.

I havent heard any specifics about not forging business arrangements with the Chinese or other third world countries from anyone on Knots. ... but LN and LV are much larger. I believe they could make it work. Certainly Stanley or Irwin or Kunz could do something with China and end up with a line of much higher quality than anything they have now.

I really don't think everything that might theoretically be done should be done. Think of a winery, for example. They grow select grapes on a specific plat of a land where a particular skilled vintner combines the grapes and makes the other decisions necessary to bring along great vintages. Could the product be approximated somewhere else? Perhaps. They could become to wine what Starbucks has become to coffee shops or McDonalds is to hambugers. Is this a change for the better? Not in my book.

Please note, I am not saying they should ship all manufacturing to China. I am saying that they could work out a deal to make a line in China which is much like Toyota's entry level cars - HIGH QUALITY but less than the current LN and LV lines. THis would be done under strict supervision of LN or LV personnel who can put any tool in the "unacceptable" box on the Quality Control line.

There really hasn't been any new good middle price point planes in the world for a while. It apparently didn't matter to most folks until planes became much more popular again over the last 15 years or so.

I think the ubiquitous vintage planes functionally fill this niche nicely, but those looking to sell planes, over anal magazine scribes, and others have perpetuated the myth that these vintage beasts are a terrible crap shoot that require days of hard labor to work even 1/10th as well as the high end stuff does "out of the box." It's a bunch of rubbish.

Pendulums swing. Success courts failure. My planes will last a my lifetime and my grandchildrens'. I should let someone else worry about it, I guess.

Oh, and Mel, you owe Derek an apology. He is a gentlemen enthusiast. I highly doubt the free bits buy anything with him. He may, like any of us, not wish to speak ill of folks he respects or considers his friends. (Luckily he is usually reviewing primo stuff, so it's not surprising his reviews are positive.) But these natural desires pale in comparision to the ethical quandries faced by the far more ubiquitous reviews in woodworking magazines - people dependent upon the good will, information, access, advertising revenue, etc. from the manufacturers. We know how to read even those to glean something useful don't we? As I said to Charles: there is no such thing as a unbiased review. We all have our own agendas of some sort, even where it is only our personal preferences or methods of work. Derek tells the truth as best he sees it. It was beneath you to ally yourself with Charles in whipping a valuable contributor.

BossCrunk | Mar 22, 2009 02:03pm | #86

Derek may very well be a 'gentleman enthusiast' but he's also become the internet equivalent of the guys the manufacturers hire to go to shows and demonstrate their tools. His postings are basically tool demonstrations under guise as 'reviews.' This was probably not Derek's intention starting out but that is surely where he has ended up.

Edited 3/22/2009 7:03 am ET by BossCrunk

KiddervilleAcres | Mar 22, 2009 02:45pm | #88

His postings are basically tool demonstrations under guise as 'reviews.'

Rubbish. Just because his agenda doesn't match yours?

Besides, if his reviews were demonstrations there can and is value in that. It's comments like this that have no basis and are nothing more than opinions, and everybody's got one of those too.

What value can you add to the original post in this discussion?

Regards,Bob @ Kidderville Acres

A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!

BossCrunk | Mar 22, 2009 06:58pm | #98

Nothing at all wrong with tool demonstrations. Just call them what they are - some are in person and some are done online by posting on woodworking forums.

And then there's morphing from psychologist to patent and trademark attorney...

derekcohen | Mar 22, 2009 02:48pm | #89

Charlie, Charlie

You do try so hard to find an explanation that fits your scheme of the world. So much invention ...

The reason LN Australia asked me to demonstrate was because I live in Perth, and the Woodshow was in Perth, and they needed someone who knew handtools to demonstrate for them. LN Australia is run by two very nice guys, who are based on the other side of the continent, and -interestingly - are not woodworkers. Thomas Lie-Nielsen suggested to the guys that they contact me. I thought it a lot of fun, and was happy to do it for no compensation whatsoever.

I really enjoy chatting to people, and there is such a buzz chatting to others with as strong an interest in handtools as my own. Woodworkers are the best people (well some ..). I run free workshops in Perth just because I enjoy helping others learn handskills. I happily accept requests to demonstrate handtool skills at the local woodwork club. I do these things because I find them fun, not because somehow, somewhere and someday they may be profitable (are you listening Mel). It is also why I run a website. I just enjoy sharing my passion with others. I do not make money out of woodworking. It is just a hobby.

This must all be very foreign to you.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Edited 3/22/2009 7:49 am ET by derekcohen

Edited 3/22/2009 11:12 am ET by derekcohen

BossCrunk | Mar 22, 2009 07:07pm | #99

I do not make money out of woodworking. It is just a hobby.

There are a whole lot of people who would feel very much enriched by the value of the tools you receive free for posting your whatever-you-call-them "reviews."

You are an internet tool demonstrator. That's cool. You are not an independent critical reviewer of tools. And that's cool too. Just quit claiming that you are. Any assertion otherwise is really just an insult to the intelligence of those who've come to know you online.

So, quit insulting our intelligence and we'll quit riding you about calling what you do "tool reviews." Just demonstrate the ruddy things, tell us why we MUST have one (you do anyway) and we'll all be cool because we all know where you're coming from.

Editors note: deleted insulting language

Edited 3/22/2009 12:31 pm ET by BossCrunk

pcott | Mar 23, 2009 04:50am | #108

What a pile of hooey. I am a born cynic, and I have always found Dereks reviews to be most helpful.

BossCrunk | Mar 23, 2009 01:29pm | #115

What a pile of hooey. I am a born cynic, and I have always found Dereks reviews to be most helpful.

I guess that's proof that being cynical and intelligent don't always go hand-in-hand. That, or you are confusing what Derek is offering up.

Derek's "reviews" are an exposition of features and materials - they're demonstrations, or full-length infomercials if you will. The outcome is known beforehand - there's never any real disappointment, the manufacturer 'laid an egg,' etc. He's the theatre critic who likes every play by a particular playwright.

You can also tell they aren't real reviews because you practically hear his breathlessness in the writing itself. He's a salesman, excited about his product. I have no quibble with that until it is asserted that there is something more serious going on.

Edited 3/23/2009 10:20 am ET by BossCrunk

derekcohen | Mar 23, 2009 01:50pm | #116

Charlie

It really gets to you that no one buys your version of reality. Keep trying.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Edited 3/23/2009 6:51 am ET by derekcohen

Edited 3/25/2009 7:30 pm ET by derekcohen

BossCrunk | Mar 23, 2009 05:07pm | #119

Yep.

MattInPA | Mar 23, 2009 07:04pm | #125

Boss is right. You are paid. There's no two ways about it. You might not see it as pay because it pales in comparison to what you get during the day. But for somebody who is an average hobby woodworker you get paid handsomely and are given incentive to review favorably.

You've built a wonderful niche for yourself that has no doubt inspired others to copy. In fact, you're probably what the average person here aspires to be. You get all the best tools in exchange for running a plane over a board for a few months and writing about it. You've created your authority status without creating anything a visitor to your house will judge you on. You work in your shop, have all the best and are welcome in every discussion. Most people here only want to work in their shop, have only the best while being an authority on Knots.

I read your stuff before I knew that you were given the tool. I felt betrayed in some respect when I found out here. It changes things. (At least it did with me.) I've never purchased anything that you've reviewed as a result of your review. But I do own a few things that you have reviewed. In my experience your descriptions are true. Your experiences are similar to mine with the few tools we share. But I bought mine and you were given the tool. We use it to accomplish the same things but our stated opinions cannot reasonably be based on the same things.

My opnion is that you're accurate. The facts are that you're not independent. No representation without taxation

derekcohen | Mar 23, 2009 07:33pm | #128

In my experience your descriptions are true. Your experiences are similar to mine with the few tools we share. But I bought mine and you were given the tool. We use it to accomplish the same things but our stated opinions cannot reasonably be based on the same things.

My opnion is that you're accurate. The facts are that you're not independent.

Matt, you have to make up your mind. Either my observations are accurate or not. If as you say that they are accurate, then where is the bias? Keep in mind - again - I do not get tools to review.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Lataxe | Mar 23, 2009 08:34pm | #130

Matt,

"I read your stuff before I knew that you were given the tool. I felt betrayed in some respect when I found out here. ....... In my experience your descriptions are true. Your experiences are similar to mine with the few tools we share. But I bought mine and you were given the tool. We use it to accomplish the same things but our stated opinions cannot reasonably be based on the same things".

That is possibly the silliest piece of paranoia concerning this reviewing business (amongst some extremely daft conspiracy theory bollocks) that I've read so far. You felt betrayed - by reading a description of something that you yourself admit is accurate and true!?

Only one looking for boogy men under his bed could manufacture this sort of "hidden and sinister motives" nonsense. I suggest you stop reading your Daily Frightener and get over your fear of folk not like you.

Another eejit reveals his true character whilst trying to assisinate that of another. Silly wee boy.

Lataxe

Edited 3/23/2009 1:36 pm ET by Lataxe

MattInPA | Mar 23, 2009 10:13pm | #138

I'm sure that many people feel betrayed by Bill Belichick. He coached what was nearly the best football team in history in the spotlight that followed a scandal that jeopardized the legitimacy of three superbowls he just won. There is no evidence that he's not the best football coach in the game today, but it will always be in question despite there being no evidence. His past and future will always be arguable. Same with Barry Bonds, Alex Rodriguez, Milli Vanilli, etc...

My opinions agree with Derek on a single point, but I don't know that that's not random. I don't know that it is, I don't know that it's not. His reviews have to be read with caution. I would only use his reviews if I needed to validate a tool purchase for some reason. This isn't how I used to read them.

Maybe "betrayed" was the wrong word. I do feel bad for people that base purchases on what he writes. At one stage I could have and I'm glad that I didn't. I would pity my-old-self if I had. He should present his work differently, less he risk betraying those that act on his action.

I'm glad these discussions take place because the information is absolutely relevant. There is no doubt that it could be presented better than 9619 did. If Derek did the presenting he'd have better control.

I suggest you stop reading The Daily Conspirator and start letting people become aware of the facts. It should be encouraged. This information is relevant. If Derek isn't up front about it on his site then he runs the risk of of Mel.

No representation without taxation

Edited 3/23/2009 3:27 pm ET by MattInPA

Samson | Mar 23, 2009 10:21pm | #139

Milli Vanilli - oh snap! You testify brother. Tears well up in my eyes when I see this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSqV3rWM4iQ

The betrayal ... the betrayal ...

Lataxe | Mar 23, 2009 10:44pm | #141

Matt,

Well, you make a reasonable argument for Derek to be impeccable in his presentation - although he's always been transparent concerning the fact that people send him their tools to review, so I can't really see that he's been underhand or even very lax in that presentation.

The very first review of his I read, some years ago now, was of a Marcou plane. He made it clear in that review that Philip had given him one. He invited two other people to use it and make their comments. One preferred a different plane from the compared three. The review was full of useful informtion about the plane in use and compared to two other very good ones.

Why do you think he has tried to hide anything? He simply hasn't. Perhaps you think every other sentence of his reviews should mention that LV or whoever sent him a sample? A flashing message writ large on the screen?

I take great exception to character assasination and concerted bullying, which it seems is the intention of Mel, Boss and others. These spiteful and malicious fok aren't content to remind us of what Derek has, anyway, already told us about his review sample sources. They want to pretend that he hasn't been transparent and also to accuse him of dishonesty and culpability in some sort of conspiracy to fool buyers of tools into going for LV, LN (or old Stanleys and such to renovate, presumably).

They have been kicking at him for a long time now. I believe they enjoy nothing better than some other bloke getting in on the act.

Mel goes even farther and invents all sorts of evil motives that he claims are driving Derek conspire in a way that he simply hasn't, to achieve all sorts of outlandish financial-advantage schemes that sound more like Mel's own dollar wet-dreams than anything Derek looks remotely interested in.

You have jumped on their bandwagon with your "betrayed" talk. Perhaps you fail to realise what a serious accusation that is against someone's reputation; how disrespectful in the extreme? You are not just disagreeing with one of their ideas or assertions but assasinating their whole person.

*****

"I do feel bad for people that base purchases on what he writes".

Why? As Samson says, who has been hurt? If you put aside your apparently in-built assumption that folk are all dishonest and hatching a plot to take advantage of all the other folk, what evidence is there - at all - that Derek's reviews are anything other than a useful source of information for tool buyers? Is there one post anywhere on the cybernetic planet claiming that a purchaser of an LN or LV was fooled into buying a pup by Derek?

Poor Derek - he is the witch who is guilty until proved innocent, by being ducked continuously in spiteful vitriol until he either fesses up or dies (cybernetically speaking).

Lataxe, never keen to watch a crowd of bully boys kicking at a victim.

Samson | Mar 23, 2009 11:03pm | #142

My friend, I think we share an interest in phtography, no? I was on a hike yesterday with my daughter and took this picture. It has nothing to do with this thread. I offer it as a palette cleanser of sorts, from me to you. There is after all beauty in the world too:

View Image

bakesale1 | Mar 24, 2009 08:03pm | #187

Here's one I caught in my house after it had flown in chasing a dove. I had them both in hand for awhile to let my two girls watch them

Samson | Mar 24, 2009 09:09pm | #191

That looks like a small or young one. Or maybe you just have really big hands?

Thanks for sharing. That is really cool.

Eef | Mar 25, 2009 05:54pm | #235

bake,

sharpshined hawk? coopers?

beautiful.

eef

bakesale1 | Mar 25, 2009 06:20pm | #237

Those are my guesses too. I still think a juvenile from the color of the eyes. The bird's behavior makes my think coopers as it didn't try put its beak on me. There had been a pair of redtails around eyeing our chickens so that's another possibility.

Samson | Mar 25, 2009 06:26pm | #238

My guess is juvenile Cooper's. The stripes on the tail make it unlikely that it is a red tailed.

Eef | Mar 25, 2009 07:32pm | #240

bake,

since being young, i love noticing the natural things around me. the last few years i have seen an increase in the coopers here abouts (los angeles).

heartening, ay?

eef

MattInPA | Mar 23, 2009 11:50pm | #143

I found out about the situation being discussed here on Knots, months after I became aware of his articles. Not every person that reads his posts is aware of this. Hence, the betrayal.

I've never said that every other sentence should mention that he's paid by the manufacturer. I've never said anything close to that. Nobody has. Much of what you write, including this, is you putting words into people's mouths. Don't. My opinion is that a person should be able to access that fact during a simple surf through his sight. If they can't, this will happen again. Stop arguing against your exaggerations.

I have not jumped on the bandwagon of Mel and everyone else. My opnion was formed uniquely. The bandwagon loves Derek. Like I said, he's what most people here wish to be.

Please look at the specific post I was replying to. Your opinion of Charles may be poor, in this thread he is correct, 100%. I believe that Mel was out of line originally. I believe that Derek was out of line in the post I responded to. That's why I responded. I mentioned the 'betrayal' thing because I wanted the record to show that I don't have any evidence that refutes him, but concern has been raised. Derek should want to know what his audience thinks. I was his audience.

Mel is going to post something like that again. We know that. Derek, however, is in control. He just needs to accept reality, which is that he's paid. I don't care either way because I don't read his articles.

No representation without taxation

Edited 3/23/2009 4:52 pm ET by MattInPA

SgianDubh | Mar 23, 2009 11:52pm | #144

My thoughts on this subject of perceived impartiality or not as the case may be regarding Derek's tool reviews at his website lead me towards suggesting a simple solution. It might satisfy everyone.

Over the years I have read quite a few of the reviews Derek offers and I have to admit it's not always clear in a specific review if there's any gain to Derek in financial terms, 'in-kind', or in any other form. There are some hints here and there in the text Derek creates and I was able to guess that in some cases that a tool was provided for him to review by the tool maker.

My suggestion is that Derek might consider modifying his Tool Review Home page with a bit of text to clarify his relationship with Lee-Valley/ Veritas, or with any other tool maker whose tools he reviews. A bit more text could state that within the first paragraph of a linked tool review he will mention how he came to possess the tool, and what will happen to it after the review is complete, or something along those lines.

That way everybody would know what the circumstances are, could draw their own conclusions, and attribute whatever weight and credence they feel like to what Derek says. However, having said all that I can't say I've ever perceived that any of Derek's reviews has felt like a hard sell or that he's an uncritical admirer. He is obviously enthusiastic about hand tools and I suspect he enjoys the reviewing process-- he wouldn't keep doing it otherwise, and it seems possible to me there is some sort of relationship between him and tool makers. None of those factors make him either a good or a bad reviewer, but I think a few small changes to his website might be helpful. Slainte.richardjonesfurniture.com

9619 | Mar 24, 2009 03:56am | #154

Richard,
Your post was fair and insightful, as usual. You provided an excellent suggestion for Derek to take. I wonder why no one else has responded to your post, Richard. Mel Measure your output in smiles per board foot.

Samson | Mar 24, 2009 04:25am | #156

Maybe it was because this horse -- to the extent there ever even was a horse and not just a small dog, or perhaps a tiny (imaginary) unicorn -- has been beaten to death.

Derek can do what he likes. I personally don't understand all the resentment being heaped upon a helpful and informative guy. No good deed goes unpunished, they say ...

9619 | Mar 24, 2009 06:25am | #164

Sean,
What are you doing in the way of woodwork?
Did you finish up your last project?Also, do you know anyone in this general geographical area who is facile with a Stanley 45? MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

Walnutz | Mar 24, 2009 08:12am | #165

Quite amazing to see the transformation of your forum personality over the last year. Is it intentional?

Samson | Mar 24, 2009 05:00pm | #173

After a couple of detours, I'm back to my cabinet project. All the doors are ready for installation. Here's how the third door came out:

View Image

I'm now apparently overdue to relearn the patience lesson, because the frame and panel for the drawer is beating me about the head with it. Small errors , most derived from proceeding to the next step too quickly, compund to the point where I'm pretty much just going to do another one. Even if you know a process and know where the "must go slow" zones are, it's all too easy to think you can take that one more shaving without a test fit etc.

derekcohen | Mar 24, 2009 05:27pm | #174

Sean

That panel is magnificent!! What wonderful grain - doing justice to your workmanship. Well done!

Regards from Perth

Derek

Samson | Mar 24, 2009 06:20pm | #176

See, I told 'em you were just blessed to recognize great quality! ;-)

Seriously, thanks for the kind words.

rhagenstein | Mar 24, 2009 06:46pm | #178

Derek:

Are you allowed to keep the shooting boards you review? Your bias towards the ramped design clearly proves you are in the pocket of the manufacturer. Time to come clean on the dovetail marking knives and dovetail guide as well.

Seriously, thanks for all of articles. They are informative and well done. In particular, you tease apart the nuances so that those of us on the lower slopes of the learning curve can begin to get an understanding of the finer points of tool design and use.

Thanks,

Randy

rhagenstein | Mar 24, 2009 06:38pm | #177

Interesting you should post your new door here and now. A few days ago I was contemplating this thread with all of the mud being slung around, personal invective, etc. and thought to myself that if your earlier thread represents the best that Knots has to offer, then some of the posts in this thread represent the worst. Thanks for bringing your new (and spectacular) door to this thread and hopefully reminding all of us of the best that Knots has to offer.

Randy

Samson | Mar 24, 2009 06:52pm | #179

Randy,

I'm sincerely sorry if something I've posted in this thread made you feel dismay or what have you. It was not my intention.

I've found this thread rather fun in it's way. We've hashed through the issues of copying hand tools and moving jobs offshore and ethical disclosure for reviewers. We've learned some of the Boss's favorite tools. We've gleaned a bit about the personalities that lurk behind the screen names. We've had some good jokes. I dunno, all in all, I've found it interesting.

I also don't hold grudges against buddies who disagree with me on some issue or another. Complete harmony is not required for me to interact with someone. Indeed, it would be rather boring if it was.

All that said, if anyone I've tweaked or challenged was offended, I hereby tender a heartfelt apology. Please forgive me if I got caught up in the moment and became more argumentative, exasperated, or personal than I should have.

Best,

Sean

Edited 3/24/2009 11:54 am ET by Samson

rhagenstein | Mar 24, 2009 07:07pm | #180

No offense from you implied. I too have gleaned much from the discussions in this thread. That said, some of the behaviour has been less than polite and mutually respectful (again, not pointing at you at all). This is a symptom of the broader societal conundrum of how email (and related blog type communications) have both dramatically improved and dramatically degraded communication between us all. I like to think that posts can be provocative, spirited, full of debate and challenge - without becoming disrespectful and full of eye-poking.

Keep sharing your fine work and provocative postings.

Thanks,

Randy

Samson | Mar 24, 2009 07:13pm | #181

Well, I'm glad it hasn't been all bad.

I have been naughty though. I called poor Steve pedantic, and mocked Milli Vanilli, and ....

well, anway, mea culpa.

rhagenstein | Mar 24, 2009 07:27pm | #182

Now I'm confused - I was interpreting the mocking of Milli Vanilli as good behavior

9619 | Mar 24, 2009 07:45pm | #186

Sean,

"I have been naughty though. I called poor Steve pedantic, and mocked Milli Vanilli, and .... well, anway, mea culpa."

I did notice a new side of you that I have not seen before. Don't worry about it. I was under the impression that all people but you have both some Dr Jekyl and some Mr. Hyde. I was beginning to believe you were all good. Now I believe that you are human. No need to apologize. I was thrilled to see the new you. Keep it up.

If you actually go through the thread and see who got downright nasty, with name calling and nasty statements, and put downs, it is quite interesting. Some thought I was a bit nasty, but if you read my stuff, you won't see any name calling. I did call a spade a spade but without malice. Others really got into it. But then again, if you look at their histories, there are no surprises in this thread, EXCEPT FOR YOU. Welcome to the human race.

My only suggestion to you is: NEVER TAKE OFFENSE. Nothing in woodwork is that important. Health problems, problems with loved ones....... Those are things to get intense about. There isn't a hand tool issue in the universe that is even of low importance in comparison such issues. Stay sane. If I ever get to feeling important, I just read one of Lataxe's messages to me, and I come right down to Earth. No one can say it like Lataxe.

Mel

Have fun.

MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

9619 | Mar 24, 2009 07:31pm | #183

Sean,

I agree with Derek. Nice grain on the panel.

Your experience with continuing a focus on patience is exactly as mine is. I am trying to make my Stanley 45 work. Luckily I have Tony Z's 45 also, so when I come up with a problem on mine, I try his. With a 45, everthing is multivariate. It is coming, but I need to focus on patience in working these things out. Single purpose planes are trivial to diagnose compared to these beasts. But that is part of why I wanted to give the 45 a try -- to understand for myself its advantages and limitations -- the hard way -- by experience. Actually, I would like to find someone with real experience with one. He would be a valuable resource. One thing that becomes obvious instantly is that if you have changes in grain direction, the "no-mouth" aspect of design becomes overwhelming, no matter how sharp the iron. Anyway, it is fun - in the challenging sense.

Concerning Hollows and Rounds. I wanted a set in order to make my own mouldings for carving. I looked at Larry's and asked others, and am VERY impressed. You mentioned that the price is high. That is an interesting observation. You get 18 hand made planes for $2500. Roughly that comes to only $240 per plane. When it comes to planes, I listen to Philip who tells me that good planes take a lot of handwork which costs money. So is Larry's set worth the money? I think of it in two ways. One is that he has sold so many that he cant keep up with the orders. That tells you something. The other thing is that with shipping, there isn't much difference in price between one of Philips planes and Larry's set of 18. Those two things tell me that the set is worth it, definitely. Think of a LN #8, which sells for more than $500 including tax. In comparison, Larry's set seems a bargain again. All analogies break down, but I was just trying to make some "markers" to make a decision as to what to do. My conclusion was that I did not want to wait for a set of Larry's. So I did the obvious and contacted Patrick Leach and Lee Richmond. Lee had none at the time, but he has a MAGNIFICENT SET right now which includes a full set of beading planes - all by the same maker, and they have been together as a set. THIS IS A FIND. I did not have any Valium with me so I didn't ask Lee how much he wants for it. It it not on his website yet. Do you know Lee? If not, you should meet him. His website is called "The Best Things". If you have any trouble getting hold of him, let me know.

Patrick Leach has some half sets but not of the quality I was looking for. He is in Rome right now so you'll have to wait to contact him. I called Ray Pine who told me about a friend of his, who I visited. His set had been made in the early 1800s, and only one of the 18 had ever been used. I lucked out on that one. They cost me $900.

I saw one set on EBay which was made by Nurse and had a set of Nurse beaders included, BUT two of the hollows were missing. I believe the entire set went for $700. If I can be of any help to you in making contacts to get a set, just let me know. If you would like to try mine out, just come on down.

Hope that helps. Good luck with the rest of your chest.

MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

Samson | Mar 24, 2009 07:39pm | #184

Thanks, Mel, for all the good info. I've bought some planes from Lee. He's a great guy and really knows his stuff.

I didn't mean to suggest that Larry's planes aren't priced fairly. It was more a statement about my own personal woodworking budget and priorities. If I had $2500 to spend, I think I would be buying a lathe.

I don't know anyone personally with 45 experience.

RonInOttawa | Mar 24, 2009 07:45pm | #185

"I agree with Derek. Nice grain on the panel."For the edification of the newbies frequenting this illustrious forum, I think you meant to say "figure" rather than "grain". That said, that is one spectacular panel! Just gorgeous!!Regards,Ron

9619 | Mar 24, 2009 09:35pm | #192

Ron,

You don't understand.

A woman has a figure.

Wood has grain.

This was wood. I meant what I said. :-)

MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

BossCrunk | Mar 24, 2009 08:11pm | #189

I own the C&W set of 18 (a 'half set') hollows and rounds and they are worth the money. Especially so for me since I can't succumb to frustration and get a router down off the shelf. There isn't one there.

Most everybody who has trouble using a 45 or 55 has a death grip on the tool and is exerting too much downward pressure. There is an art and a deftness required to maintain side pressure without making the plane skip and dive as you move it forward. That, and proper stock selection the ignorance of which no amount of skill with the tool will overcome. Nobody can tell you exactly how you use it, beyond the basic setup. There is some 'skill in the hand' required that cannot be conveyed. You'll figure it out.The alternative would be a Gene Landon-ish collection of hundreds of dedicated molding planes.

Edited 3/24/2009 1:21 pm ET by BossCrunk

9619 | Mar 24, 2009 09:50pm | #193

Charles,

I understand about the skills involved in using the Stanley 45. I just haven't acquired them yet, but am working on it. If I have some problems (and I will), I know who to contact. I will try to use a sufficient light touch.

Thanks,

MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

SgianDubh | Mar 24, 2009 11:33am | #168

"I wonder why no one else has responded to your post"

Too bloody sensible, lacked bile, insufficiently contrarian, lacked a narrow agenda, not cock-eyed enough, insufficient curmudgeonly qualities, took a broad view, etc... take your pick.

Similar suggestions have been made elsewhere in this thread, but it seemed to me useful to revisit them. Slainte.richardjonesfurniture.com

eddie_the_eagle_1 | Mar 24, 2009 12:10pm | #169

Hi All,Just to let you know one of the possible ramifications of this carry-on.I've been a member here since 2001(?) However, I forgot my password and the system locked out my original ID (eddie the eagle.) While I'm waiting for Taunton's customer service centre to reset it, I've created this ID to allow me to post this.We've all only got so many hours in the day and coming to sites like this is something to do in the idle hours.For me, work's been getting busier and I've had less time to spend on the woodwork sites.I might be wrong, but the impression that I've formed over time is that the Knots forum can at times be impolite/aggressive in its approach. We all have our bad days, but my PERSONAL (in capitals to ensure that it's not misread) opinion is that the general tone and timbre of the place is becoming far more hostile.This is not a personal dig at anyone at all. It's just my general observation and thoughts.We all have to deal with impolite/aggressive people in our daily lives. I'm sure you'll agree that we keep dealings with people like this to a minimum where possible, as, to be honest, it is an unpleasant experience.It's like going to the pub (bar) where the clientele are always looking for an excuse to fight. Unless that's what turns you on, you avoid the bar in future. My question to you all is, do you really want this site to start becoming that sort of place, as it's headed down that path right now.I'm flat out with work but will close off this account and then reactivate my other 'eddie_the_eagle' address later this week when my head's above water again.In the meantime,Please consider.Cheers,eddie(Who's wondering how many others have switched off the channel and said nothing.)Edited 3/24/2009 5:12 am ET by eddie_the_eagle_1 Edit: Can't close off account - can't see how to do so - instead I've turned off message notifications and can't be back for a while.

Edited 3/24/2009 5:15 am ET by eddie_the_eagle_1

BossCrunk | Mar 24, 2009 01:38pm | #171

In that your post calls for full disclosure by Derek about his relationships with tool manufacturers and how he acquires the tools he reviews it clearly makes a ton of sense. Yet Derek continues to be insulted by the whole notion - or at least by extension from his other arguments would appear to be insulted by it.Probably the easiest way to figure all this out would be to simply put the question to Rob Lee of Lee Valley and be done with it.

Edited 3/24/2009 10:25 am ET by BossCrunk

SgianDubh | Mar 25, 2009 01:03am | #207

Boss, perhaps Derek's feathers were/are ruffled, and it may have been the tone of some of the suggestions recommending the idea of disclosing his position that ruffled them, and not the idea itself.

I suspect he will ponder the suggestions and decide if small modifications to his website and tool reviews are appropriate. I'm not convinced that asking Rob Lee about their relationship really helps at this juncture. Slainte.richardjonesfurniture.com

Samson | Mar 24, 2009 04:50pm | #172

Yes, truly, pearls before swine.

SARGEgrinder47 | Mar 24, 2009 08:07pm | #188

I think your suggestion about a dis-claimer as to affiliation was ignored by most because it just makes too much sense and it's just too simple a solution for a tight-knit WW Community as displayed here by the civic minded and diplomatic responders.

As far as copying off-shore.. I will let Rob Lee.. Tom LN and Brian Bogss tend to their own business if indeed copy-rights were infringed upon. That just makes sense to me.

Back to my glue-up... BTW I have no affiliation with Tite-bond as Ed H. has no affiliation to Sham-Whoaaaaa in his excellent review.....

Just passing through while glue dries...

Sarge..

Lataxe | Mar 24, 2009 09:04pm | #190

Sarge,

Calm and good sense, as usual.

I doubt if folk ignored Richard's post. It too is very straightforward and sensible, so what further is their to say?

Lataxe, who has calmed hisself now (I blame too much gym time - stimulates the gland).

SARGEgrinder47 | Mar 24, 2009 11:33pm | #195

I really don't have time nor need to get my shorts in a wad over an issue that belongs in the hands of the parties lawyers if indeed there is a legal patent or copy-right violation. If there wasn't.. it was as dead issue to start with.

As too purchasing one of those planes mentioned knowing the boys over there copied... that is a personal decision based on economics and morals of each individual. Again.. no need for me to get in a hussy as I have a fine line of Anant's that work perfectly well after I did some work on them which is my time invested in lieu of paying for someone else's.

Regards...

Sarge..

Edited 3/24/2009 5:10 pm ET by SARGEgrinder47

9619 | Mar 24, 2009 10:02pm | #194

Sarge,

Do you have any affiliation with Steel City? :-)

By the way, you have made a similar recommendation to that of Richard Jones, Charles, and myself. That tells me that the suggestion is not "far fetched". Interestingly enough, a number of very loud, very emotional folks were not similarly inclined. So I looked at the two lists, and tried to come up with a simple characterization of each of the two groups (in my mind - which itself is an interesting place). Coming up with such over simplifications are fun and frought with error. So lets go with the "fun". Those on the other (Dark) side tend to be people who love to fuss over the details of expensive planes, but also do woodwork. Those on our side (the side that God is on :-) own and love tools, but focus mostly on the woodwork, not the tools.

OK I will stand back and get flamed on that one.

Have fun. Mel

Have fun.

MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

BossCrunk | Mar 24, 2009 11:40pm | #196

Mel, don't forget to wax the fence on the 45.

Edited 3/24/2009 4:40 pm ET by BossCrunk

Samson | Mar 25, 2009 12:02am | #198

Will it take (drilled for) a wooden auxillary fence? I find those improve my 78, 248 (grooving), and router planes etc. They can register more if necessary and hold the wax a bit better - also leave less marks on the face.

BossCrunk | Mar 25, 2009 12:04am | #199

They come with a wood fence.

9619 | Mar 25, 2009 01:03am | #208

Charles,
I don't wax the fence on the 45. I just rub it on my hair.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

Samson | Mar 25, 2009 12:00am | #197

Mel, Mel, Mel.

You have to be more creative than simply calling people poopie-heads. No one is going to bite.

By the way, how would the world be different if Derek did precisely as Richard suggests? Indeed, Richard himself states: "I can't say I've ever perceived that any of Derek's reviews has felt like a hard sell or that he's an uncritical admirer." Have you found anything AT ALL amiss in ANY of Derek's writings? Do tell.

I take it that it just offends your sense of decency, like wearing white after Labor Day or something.

Mel, perhaps you could read for the part of Scarlett, in a play I'm working on (practice this line in the mirror):

<Swoon> I do declare, if Derek were a true gentlemen, he would not make me suffer the weight of my unrelenting suspicions, regardless of whether he has ever given me reason to actually suspect anything. <fanning self>

9619 | Mar 25, 2009 03:10am | #214

Sean,Your message to me was a hoot. It was one of the funniest I have seen on Knots.I don't want to lose you as a person I can discuss woodworking with. Woodwork is my passion. The topic of this thread is merely a distraction. You and I share a passion for taking on continual new challenges in working wood. We have different styles but very similar values in working wood. I really value your ideas on woodworking. As I have told you in the past, you are a more creative designer than I am, and seeing your stuff gives me the impetus to take more chances. You are a good influence on me. I would like to trade some ideas with you and others who may be interested, on the use of hollows and rounds. You seem to be interested, and I am, and there are others who are too. THis is not a highly overworked topic here on Knots. And this is only one of the topics I want to get into. Ray has some great experience in this area. His ideas are not "romantic" but are vary practical. I hope he gets involved. I didn't know that Charles was into H&Rs. I'll bet he has some interesting ideas in this area. THen there is Larry. And the list goes on. I believe such a discussion would be a lot of fun, highly edifying, and a boon to the Knots archives of interesting topics.MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

Samson | Mar 25, 2009 04:25am | #218

"Frankly, Scarlett ....

I jus can't quit you."

To mix moviephors.

lwilliams | Mar 25, 2009 05:54am | #221

Mel,

I'd enjoy writing about making moldings with hollows and rounds. There have been a number of times I've thought about or Don and I have talked about starting a thread on the subject. But we can't, or shouldn't. We have a commercial interest in the topic and have made a conscientious effort to avoid posts that appear commercial. I think that's the spirit of Rule #3 of the House Rules.

If someone asks a direct question we can answer, it's different. In fact; Don has a new DVD that should be released in two weeks and I've already posted the information, with photos, that's the most important part of Don's DVD. I'm sure doing that won't help the sales of that DVD but we jump at every opportunity to share what we know.

I've followed this thread with some interest but had no intention of posting in it. Some here have never forgiven me for questioning the ethics behind reviews when there's a personal and/or financial relationship between the reviewer and the manufacturer of the products. In the publishing world rigid rules about this are common. When Fine Woodworking gives a tool to one of their writers, that writer never keeps the tool. I'm sure Lee Grindinger's post about this after one of his FWW reviews is in the archives and makes this pretty clear. I know other publications like Popular Woodworking are very careful with this as well.

I can't help but reflect on past reactions of participants in this forum when it comes to advertising here. This tread and this one are good examples. A lot of people reacted pretty strongly against advertising in Knots forums. Yet somehow buzz marketing is welcome here. I don't understand the difference. I wonder what would be the reaction if Bob's Rule and hundreds of others suddenly rounded up a bunch of buzz marketers to operate here. How much of it would people be willing to put up with?

One might wonder where Derek would post what I feel are infomercials if he openly disclosed his relationship with Lee Valley. Would he post them in the Classified ad section here and on the other forums he posts them to? Rule 3 of the House Rules seems to limit him to that. I know I can't even post a link to any part of our web site on one of those other forums because of their strict rules about commercial posts yet Derek seems free to post his reviews and even links to his web site there. I don't think that would be allowed if he disclosed his involvement with Lee Valley.

I'm more than a little concerned with the original topic of this thread. It's just too bad this thread that should have been about quality, features, intellectual property, customer service and other issues turned into one about the ethics of just one person. As was pointed out earlier; our planes are really cheap, too cheap, for what they are and I only wish we were getting the amount per plane that was posted. Rather than $240 per plane in the hollow and round set try $136.40 and there's more hand work in each of those planes than in a single $7,000 Holtey. I have to rework the catalog section of our web site this week and that first amount looks pretty good, I may give it a shot. We just may see if $4,320 looks okay for a half set. Even at that, I suspect the price would probably be too low for serious competition.

9619 | Mar 25, 2009 07:53am | #225

Larry,
Thanks for writing. Obviously this has been a topic which has caused some people to get their blood boiling. However, some of the blood boilers will boil their blood for almost anything, and seem to get a kick out of it. Not my style.It was Don's first DVD that really got me going on H&Rs after your tellimg me about it. I will get his second as soon as it comes out. Just as Samson asked Sarge not to let his association with Steel City keep him from letting us know his ideas on some areas, I hope your being part-owner of a company doesn't stop you from sharing your knowledge about hollows and rounds. You didn't initiate that topic here. I did. You merely responded and you were astoundingly helpful. So when I bring up this topic of H&Rs in another thread sometime soon, I hope you jump in with the knowledge and wisdom you have acquired about their use. Thanks,
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

Hastings | Mar 25, 2009 12:06am | #200

If manufacturer A provides a sample of a product to expert B for a published review, and B is invited to keep said product, it follows that the review is a work for hire and not independent, as normally defined.Furthermore, if expert B is invited from time time to partake in manufacturer A's product development process, then B is even less independent.Any review of A's products by B should, by normal standards, include a disclosure of these two rather pertinent facts thereby leaving the reader to draw his own conclusions about the independence of said review.This is not say expert B is not a jolly decent chap and all that, and capable of wonderful feats of mental acuity and compartmentalization rendering all influences moot.Hastings

BossCrunk | Mar 25, 2009 12:09am | #201

Even a bigger problem when B, in your example, is not an expert but would like to be considered one.

Edited 3/24/2009 5:09 pm ET by BossCrunk

joinerswork | Mar 25, 2009 12:41am | #204

Boss,

The man's got a hammer by his name. What more do you want?

Ray

BossCrunk | Mar 25, 2009 12:43am | #205

Oh holy crap... 'nuff said.

SgianDubh | Mar 25, 2009 12:52am | #206

I've got an E that's on fire Ray. Do you have a bucket of water handy to put it out, or maybe a juicy steak to cook, ha, ha? Slainte.richardjonesfurniture.com

joinerswork | Mar 25, 2009 01:08am | #209

Hey man,

When you're hot, you're hot. OTOH, when all you've got is a hammer, every problen looks like a nail.

Ray

Hastings | Mar 25, 2009 02:39am | #212

BC:Isn't an expert someone in a suit with a briefcase more than 50 miles from home?H

BossCrunk | Mar 25, 2009 04:36am | #219

"Hi, my name is Derek." "I represent the Lee Valley Corporation." "Let me tell you about their latest (insert name of tool here) and show you how it might assist you in your woodworking."

Can't see a thing wrong with it.

Maybe Derek is keeping his options open to see how many tool companies he can get wired up before the rain starts to fall on the tool parade.

I used to be the guy wearing the suit so I can tell you that you are without a doubt, correct. And funny.

Edited 3/24/2009 9:40 pm ET by BossCrunk

mwenz | Mar 25, 2009 06:19am | #222

Small quibble here. Derek does not represent LV.

Nor are reviews/articles/inert_fav_word_here asked for, expected or required. Derek is asked to walk through the prototyping phase and provide input. For that he *may* receive the tool in question--most often but not a guarantee. And Derek usually writes about them once he can use them in a project. This method of writing about a widget is vastly different than some pointless tool test. You know, "The 10 Best Widgets: We've Sorted It All Out For You Idiots."

There are others involved in these processes as well. Some use to post and or write articles. Because of the verbal crap two people I know in particular received, neither is very active on the forums. I believe the oft used phrase was they were part of the "payola posse." But, like your and Mel's posts in this thread towards Derek, they could get down right mean-spirited.

Looking through the articles on Derek's web site, I would be hard pressed to not understand the relationship Derek enjoys with LV. He hasn't always made this clear. This is true. But looking at them now, he has made it clear enough for me to understand. And God knows I can be pretty obtuse.

All my best to you and yours.

Mike

9619 | Mar 25, 2009 07:38am | #224

Mike,
I read your message to Charles. Just as you had a small quibble with him, I have a small quibble with you. You said:
"But, like your and Mel's posts in this thread towards Derek, they could get down right mean-spirited."There was no meanness in my intent. With respect to the conversation on the Chinese, you will find that I took a "kumbaya" point of view and asked that we all come together down by the riverside. I also used a good deal of humor including bring up the Miller plane which you responded nicely to. With regard to my suggestion that Derek come very clean on his relationship with Lee Valley, a number of others including Richard Jones, Sarge, Hastings and Charles posted quite, reasoned, even-toned messages fully agreeing with me. Richard, Sarge and Hastings are not given to ill temper. Since they agreed with me, why didn't you call them mean spirited. I think the answer is obvious. They weren't. And neither was I.Let us all get away from this conversation which is not doing any good anymore, and get back to woodwork. Besides you have a large backlog of saws to make, and I have a list of honey-dos from my wife who is away visiting our daughter and grandson. Let us all think of a hootenanney and sing some Peter, Paul and Mary songs and maybe some by the Brothers Four. I am very jealous of your Miller plane. Have fun.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

BossCrunk | Mar 25, 2009 01:07pm | #226

You've proved my point Mike and also the ones Larry made in his post.

Edited 3/25/2009 6:10 am ET by BossCrunk

9619 | Mar 25, 2009 02:53am | #213

Hastings,
Loved your thoughtful and well-reasoned ideas about Derek's reviews,
with one exception. You talked about "Expert A and Expert B". That occurred to me while reading your post. THen I saw Charles had already mentioned it. This correspondence between Charles' ideas and mine is getting scary. Could it be that he and I were twins who were separated at birth? Or even more scary? Could it be that Charles, Adam and I were triplets who were separated at birth? Naw, it couldnt be. Adam and Charles are too young.Well the list of folks who recommend that Derek make clear (on his website) his relationship with Lee Valley is growing in length and in prestige since you joined it. :-) You are a brave man for doing that. Oh well, lately it hasn't been as dangerous to advocate good ideas. Remember the movie "Spartacus"? I can envision a remake of that movie about a modern woodworking drama, and in one of the scenes, thousands of woodworkers react to the question "Which one of you is Hastings, with the statement "I am Hastings." Too bad we can't get Charleton Heston to play the role of you. Have fun. Keep the faith ((the woodworking faith)), and stay sane.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

Walnutz | Mar 25, 2009 04:59am | #220

9619 (MEL)

You know, I remember when you first starting posting here. You were a pretty nice guy, always preaching to the choir about everybody letting everybody else be. You know, have fun.

Why don't you go back and re-read all of your posts in this thread. Only, do it as if you were Derek. How would you like to be him right now?

My guess is that you wouldn't. What has he done to harm you? I don't know if you even care if people respect you around here, but I truly believe you are losing it quickly.

I don't know Derek from boo. I don't care to, either. His reviews are all pretty much directed at the hobbyist woodworker just getting started, who has no clue where to begin, or who to listen to for help. Derek seems to be offering his opinion of these tools, and the immense amount of time it takes to write those reviews. Anyone not smart enough to rely at least a little on their own best judgement deserves to buy a tool or two that they really don't need, until they figure it out. It's called a learning curve.

I'm a professional (starving lately) woodworker with a lot of experience, so I don't rely on someone elses opinion to make tool purchases. I pretty much have everything I need in that department to get the job done.

Take a look in the mirror and see if you really want to come off as the troll that you have become, lately. I mean that in the best way possible, and not as a slam to you. I used to enjoy your input around here. I don't any more.

9619 | Mar 25, 2009 07:00am | #223

Walnutz,
I hope this thread is over very soon. I haven't changed much from the time you referred to. As you saw in my message to Sean (Samson), I really want to get past this difficult thread and back to woodwork. He said that this horse has been beaten, and I agree. Over the years, I have not gotten into conversations on Knots which are difficult. I avoided them. Even if I was "right" in the positions I took here in this thread, it has caused some hard feelings and I am very sorry about that. Life is too short. Let's enjoy what little time we have in this life, and celebrate the woodworking that we all love. I do want you to know that I harbor no hard feelings towards Derek, or towards those few people who disagreed with me in this thread. I come from an Italian background in which folks said what they think, did some loud talking, had some good food and vino, and got on with life. That is exactly what I recommend we all do now. Thank you very much for writing. You have a good heart.
Your old friend,
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

BossCrunk | Mar 25, 2009 05:34pm | #234

This is the only woodworking forum of which I'm aware still having a little bare knuckle showing. There are other forums that are heavily policed, polite, mutual admiration societies (incidentally with very little information to offer and certainly not as much fun). So, Mel's doing fine. Derek's reviews get the reaction they deserve here - a light smattering of applause worthy of a putt sunk by a guy in fifteenth place on Sunday. There are at least two other forums where he serves up his brand of Pablum to a bunch of little birdies with their mouths wide open. Therefore, he has a place to go when his apparently high maintenance ego needs stroking.

Edited 3/25/2009 2:34 pm ET by BossCrunk

9619 | Mar 25, 2009 06:17pm | #236

Charles,
" He (Mel) has a place to go when his ego needs stroking."Do you think I have any ego left? :-)Seriously, my woodworking goals are high, but my skills are just coming along. I am mediocre but I enjoy working on wood. I move from carving to designing and making a piece of furniture, to rebuilding old furniture for my wife and kids, to trying things out just to learn new skills. So many of my projects are little projects, not attempts at masterpieces. I really enjoy seeing what other woodworkers make when they are just having fun and not attempting to replicate one of Patrick Edward's marquetry masterpieces or one of Maloof's chairs or one of Chippendale's flights of fancy. So I going over to the "Long Thread", where I promised Ray and Mr Nutz that I would post some photos of what I have been up to for the last few months. I am not doing this for any ego stroking. You will see that my work in these photos does not deserve any compliments. They are mostly things I have done for my family. My daughter bought a new house and needed some furniture. My wife and daughter found an estate sale and we spent about $700 on a table with four leaves, seven chairs, a hutch, three small Victorian tables, a quilt stand, some old frames and a shadow box, and lots of other stuff. All of this stuff was falling apart, and some had living things in them. Now they have been fixed, parts replaced where necessary, and refinished to be much like they came out of the shop in the early 1900s. I believe they will last my daughter's family and progeny another century or two, and I didn't charge her much ($0) to do the work. Daughter and son in law are very happy with my work ( fun, actually), and my grandson things the furniture tastes very good. He is teething.So if you have a minute to spare and you'd like to see my humble attempts to bring some old furniture back to life, please stop over to the long thread and take a peek. Please do not say anything nice about what I have done. I do not want to damage your reputation, and my battered ego will still find a way to recoup. Have fun. Keep up the curmudgeoning. It's a hard job but someone has to do it. You are right. There is a lot of pap in the woodworking websites. I believe Dr. Spock ruined a few generations of people by encouraging their parents pamper them rather than push them. Now look what we are left with. The world has gone to pot :-)MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

BossCrunk | Mar 25, 2009 07:17pm | #239

Not you- Derek. Read the post again. Slowly.

Edited 3/25/2009 12:29 pm ET by BossCrunk

9619 | Mar 25, 2009 07:37pm | #241

Charles,
Ah, I made a mistake. I made another back in September of 1986. Damn, this may be a trend. MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

BossCrunk | Mar 25, 2009 07:42pm | #242

No big....

GEide | Mar 25, 2009 10:20pm | #243

Hi all,

I'm closing this discussion, it has obviously gotten off track.

GinaFineWoodworking.com

SARGEgrinder47 | Mar 25, 2009 12:10am | #202

"Do you have any affiliation with Steel City"? :-) Mel...

***

The answer is YES.. I do. I did not when I wrote a review of the Steel City 18" BS.. nor the Steel City 8" jointer. I have receipts for both of those showing paying full price from Redmond and Son Machinery that can be posted as physical evidence.

But... since then I was asked to field test their jointer Granite fence when it was introduced several years ago. I said yes and I was given one of the three proto-types that was at the Las Vegas unveiling. I have done no formal review.

I was also ask to come the week before the Atlanta IWF and help assemble 45 machines off the crate to prepare for the Show. The compensation is I would be able to purchase a "scratch and dent" SC 5 HP TS as their cost. I said Yes.. Then I got a phone call and was asked to demonstrate their machines the entire week of the IWF Show. I would work 30 hours the week before assembling and 60 hours during the show.

In lieu of money I asked for the SC 5 HP TS I was going to purchase for $900 to be compensation for working 90 hours. If you subtract $72 out of pocket for parking for 9 days.. $60 in gas for transportation you come up with $768. That means I worked for $8.53 an hour. I felt it to be more than fair to them and I deemed it fair as I enjoyed the experience and meeting hundreds of WW's daily.

But.. I have done no review of the SC 5 HP TS. I did post pictures and make comments but at this point I am affiliated with Steel City as I do some testing of new product and have been asked to work the IWF Show when it rolls around again.

At this point I will not do any on-line reviews of their machines. I did not enter the Box Contest to win a SC TS as I am not on the pay-roll (and never have been) nor have I received anything free with the exception of two Steel City T -shirts. But.... I will and do pop into a thread about Steel City if I see something that needs clarification.. is not true.. or someone ask a question about a SC machine as I have been over them pretty thoroughly. I have been over other manufacturers machines pretty thoroughly for that matter.

So... I will add that if you look in the archives.. you will find that I have said on many more than one occasion. The best review is to compare one machine side by side to another as the machines will tell you what you want to know. They speak for themselves and rather boldly with physical comparison.

The bottom line here for me is I have no intention of getting involved in the mud slinging that has happened here regardless of my opinion. If you shovel and spread manure daily.. you don't seem to be as aware of the "stink" that it creates as those that don't shovel manure notices immediately. So.. I try to avoid shoveling manure.. I will answer all questions I can concerning SC machines.. and I will continue to build the computer desk-hutch on my work-bench at the moment.

A spade is a spade no matter what suit you try to dress it in.

Regards...

Sarge..

Samson | Mar 25, 2009 12:16am | #203

Sarge, I hope your not holding back telling people about the SC stuff because of the self-righteous ethics police. It would indeed be a loss to interested souls if those with the most knowledge about certain tools were hushed by innuendo and holier than thou tutt tutters.

Lataxe | Mar 25, 2009 01:30am | #210

Sean,

Yep, there's an old fashioned witch/commie hunt in full cry. Even Sarge has been brought before the inquisitors! I'm surprised he didn't just bite off their tiny heads and spit them out. But he is a gentleman, unlike the raving loons.

Did you ever see Invasion of the Bodysnatchers? These screaming-pointing fellahs remind me of the pod-grown monsters that take the place of the human originals. Something really has got under their beds and assimilated them into an aggresive alien form. Fetch out the ray guns!

Lataxe, watching the skies.

DonaldCBrown | Mar 25, 2009 02:14am | #211

I am shocked, shocked! at the snarling about a reviewer who does not post a full confession of any contact he has previously had with a manufacturer of the product he is reviewing.Mel and Charles, I will address my question to you because you both seem to view it as a moral crusade and a duty you owe to the rest of us. The question is: Do you actually read any review with a willingness to accept everything that is written as pure revealed truth? Of course you don't! Do you not bring to the consideration your own experiences with similar items and with previous articles from the same source? Of course you do! You are sophisticated, experienced woodworkers who can tell the difference between a nugget and dross.Then who in God's name are you trying to protect? Your mantle of protection must be directed at all the rest of us. But if we need your protection, then what does that say about your view of us? That we are all naive and infantile weaklings?Please elaborate.

SARGEgrinder47 | Mar 25, 2009 03:54am | #217

Yep, there's an old fashioned witch/commie hunt in full cry. Even Sarge has been brought before the inquisitors! I'm surprised he didn't just bite off their tiny heads and spit them out. But he is a gentleman, unlike the raving loons... Lataxe

No reason to bite heads here, Lataxe. I was simply ask a question and I answered it truthfully stating my exact relationship. For any that might question my integrity after I tell the truth.. well... they can just kiss my southern *ss and it wouldn't be a good idea to show up in my drive-way. As Richard Jones so eloquently puts it.. ha.. ha... ha..ha..ha..

Regards...

Sarge..

who has no direct affiliation with Richard Jones Furniture nor his web-site. But I did stay in a Holiday Inn that Richard may or may not have stayed at near the Houston area.

Edited 3/24/2009 8:56 pm ET by SARGEgrinder47

joinerswork | Mar 25, 2009 02:58pm | #227

Now, hold on a darn minute, Lataxe,

"Fetch out the ray guns!"

Getcher own guns. Mine are spoken for.

Ray

9619 | Mar 25, 2009 03:26pm | #228

Ray,
"Now, hold on a darn minute, Lataxe,"Fetch out the ray guns!"Getcher own guns. Mine are spoken for.""Out Ray Geous"!
I am thinking of asking for a "Ray Ban". (Do RayBans still exist?}
I "c RAY ve" some humor. (Where has all the humor gone?) Hmmmmmm. Maybe we need a woodworking theme song? OK, to the tune of Where have all the flowers gone? Actually Lataxe's last few posts have been a hoot. Now he kinda reminds me of the comic, Lenny Bruce, in his later years. Come to think of it, similar things happened to other comics such as George Carlin and Dick Gregory. Before I took the pieces to the table up to my daughter last weekend, I had to make cRAYte for it. I have come to realize that there is almost nothing that can be said without using your name. So when we have the next (actually we haven't had the first one yet) Mid Eastern Woodworker Picnic, maybe the centerpiece should be a "comic contest". We could have a nice wooden hook to pull contestants off the stage. A comic smackdown! What would we call it "Last (Comic) Woodworker Standing"? "Laughing with the Woodworking Stars", "Slivers of humor", "Woodworkers going against the grain", "RAYte" the Comic Woodworkers!Oh well, I hope you don't become "iRAYte" over this horrible attempt at humor. Gotta go. Gotta put up a "RAYling" on the porch steps. Have a gRAYte day. Hope it doesn't RAYn. The skies do look a bit gRAY. First I am going to have a snack, some gRAYpes.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

joinerswork | Mar 25, 2009 04:12pm | #229

Mel,

You are not the first to suggest a Ray ban.

Could it be we are all becoming more curmudgeonly as we age? I commented to the wife only yesterday that I was becoming my old man (who was notably irascible and otherwise ill-humored). She did not, to my mild dismay, choose to dispute my self- assessment. I'm soming to understand, if not agree with, the rantings of Carlin et al. So, I'll give friend Lataxe, as well as you, a pass in the curmudgeon dept, if you will extend me the same generosity. Cstan, Boss and Tauntaun as well as LWilliams have been in my book of approved curmudgeons for years now. Can Philip and derek be far behind? Bob, I expect, will never achieve curmudgeondom; he is too well-spoken, even when wielding his hammer-it has a foam rubber business-end. And, where oh where are the curmudgiennes?

I suppose that we must add to the things that are not discussed in well mannered company- religion and politics- the topics of imported planes and tool reviews (Festool and Sawstop also). It's perhaps a good thing that the Knots forum isn't well mannered company.

Ray, striving to be more Mel low

9619 | Mar 25, 2009 04:27pm | #230

Ray,
I can't see you as a curmudgeon. Indeed, I figured that the reason you haven't taken on apprentices is that you have a difficult time being mean, which is necessary if you have apprentices (isn't it? :-)But I disagree about Bob. He lives in a freezer. How could you live in a climate that cold and not be a curmudgeon. And he has long talked about curmudgeons. He loves em. So his time will come. I am retiring as a curmudgeon, and going back to humor and sawdust. Speaking of that, it is time to get down to the shop. I have taken photos of my latest projects and I will post them to you over on the long thread, if it still exists, later today. I finished that Victorian table and it turned it gRAYt. Also made a bowl big enough for Freddy to sit in. I put him in the bowl and was dragging him around in it. I have a good shot of that too. The bowl is not fully dry yet, but soon. Maybe I'll get a fifty gallon drum of alcohol for soaking the bowl so they will dry faster. Maybe Jack Daniels. Have fun.
The FC (Former Curmudgeon),
Mel
Measure your output in smiles per board foot.

Walnutz | Mar 25, 2009 04:40pm | #231

You wrote " I am retiring as a curmudgeon, and going back to humor and sawdust. Speaking of that, it is time to get down to the shop. "

I hope its true. The entire site will benefit from it. Good to see you taking your meds again, at last. :)

9619 | Mar 25, 2009 05:22pm | #232

Mr. Nutz,
You have saved me from a life of curmudgeonry!
Thanks for straightening me out.
Stop over to the long thread later today, and I'll have some photos of my latest wood projects up.
Have fun.
The SLC (Short Lived Curmudgeon)
Mel
PS are you going to save the curmudgeons who have not gone back to fun stuff, or am I the only one you are saving? If so, I feel special. :-) If you are going to save them all, I can give you a list of which ones will be the most difficult.Measure your output in smiles per board foot.

Walnutz | Mar 25, 2009 05:32pm | #233

You are the only one I felt I could reach.......have a nice day.

SARGEgrinder47 | Mar 25, 2009 03:45am | #216

Sarge, I hope your not holding back telling people about the SC stuff because of the self-righteous ethics police. It would indeed be a loss to interested souls if those with the most knowledge about certain tools were hushed by innuendo and holier than thou tutt tutters".. Samson

Not at all... I did a review on the BS... the weak points were that their roller guide adjustment locks were too small (hard to grasp) thumb screws to lock the roller bearing guides. The blade guard was obstructive in viewing the position of the blade gullet position on the upper bearing.

Steel City put a view window in the blade guide and changed the bearing adjuster thumb screws to acceptable T handle M-6's. They listened to the problems before I became affiliated in an in-direct way. Not much to say about the granite fence on the jointer as that is how I really became affiliated. My name kept popping up at the large Las Vegas Show and I got a call the Monday afterwards. Scott Box ask me to test fence in my shop. It is 5 x 48 which is longer and taller than most jointers and the granite is dead on flat. As icing on the cake.. for some reason I have not seen one speck of rust in around 2 years. There are no chips and the fence can be skewed in a matter of a minute or so. What else can I say? :>)

But.. no more reviews for me as again.. I am affiliated in-directly and don't feel it is in their interest for me to review as too many would view it as biased as what is happening here. There may and may not be justification in that. It depends on the individual who has been charged..

I will be getting the Steel City Variable speed Drill Press to test. It looked good when I used it at IWF but... but... the slowest speed is 500 rpm. Some stated that that is too fast to use large forstner bits. I did a test with a 2 1/4" mortise bit. I cut holes with my DP which goes down to 250 rpm from there to 2250 rpm in both oak and pine. The result was the best HSS forstner speed was in the range of 600 to 700 rpm. So.. I can say that for those that use lager fly cutters.. etc. that would require a very slow speed.... don't get the SC Variable as you can't preform magic and make it go under 500 rpm. That fair enough?

Again.. I answer questions on the machines... I correct erroneous statements they are based on assumption.. I do what is necessary to inform about Steel City's machines. What I don't do is tell you that everybody else's machines are crap... why you shouldn't purchase them.. etc.

A side by side comparison of machines is the best review. The machines speak for themselves. Do the comparison and then and only then... make a decision on what is best for you. I've said that many times before.. I will probably say it many times again. People should be intelligent enough to make a decision without having to rely on a review.

Regards...

Sarge..

9619 | Mar 25, 2009 03:17am | #215

Sarge,
I didn't mean to get you going.
I always look forward to your posts. I agree with Sean (Samson) in the hope that you will not let your work with Steel City keep you from tellling us what you think. I value your opinions. You do real woodwork, and will evaluate the tools in the context of how they work in the actual process of working wood. I can't wait to hear what you think. Hope you enjoy your week uncrating and crating tools. Sounds like you could turn that into a weight-loss fitness video and make big money, as Jane Fonda once did.Son of a gun, I never connected you and Jane Fonda in the same thought before. :-)Have fun.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

Jammersix | Mar 24, 2009 12:08am | #145

I don't usually like reviews.There are inherent problems with almost all reviews.For instance, a review is suspect if:The reviewer was furnished the item free of charge, because then the furnisher, at minimum, knew that the review was taking place, and was able to choose the individual item.The reviewer bought the item and is keeping it, because nobody likes to admit a mistake.The reviewer is being compensated for the review. (Another name for this is "infomercial". Most reviews purchased in this manner are far, far cheaper than an ad, say more, take up more consumer time, hold the consumer's attention for far longer and get to make more points. A real deal for the company!)The reviewer doesn't do whatever it is you do, or use the item in the way you would use it. The balance of a baby jack doesn't matter if you're going to cut the head off and use it for a dive weight.The reviewer doesn't do what you do the way you do it. If you use panel saws for crosscutting, a review of chop saws under the title "Crosscutting" is useless.The reviewer has a bias/trade name preference/religious view/economic view/social view that is different from yours. If the reviewer believes that all steel coming from Korea is suspect, or that all labor performed by orphans in China is a sin before god, and therefore refuses to consider any chisel, handsaw or nail set made in those countries, using materials originating in those countries or is produce by someone who knows somebody in those countries, that will be reflected in his review. Imagine, if you relied on such a review, you could end up owning a tool that contained steel that originated from ore that was once viewed by a man with Muslim relatives from Pakistan who knew a guy who had an ex-wife who was a Mormon from Cuba. Just think on THAT for a moment!The reviewer is a Ford man.That's just a short list. It doesn't even include any technical considerations, nor does it get into technical qualifications for being a reviewer. The only thing I'll say about that is that no reviewer can escape their skill level, nor the bias that originates in it. A pro is a pro, and is about generating money from production, an amateur is an amateur. They will generate different reviews, simply because they see the item from very different points of view, just like hookers and girlfriends/wives.My conclusion is this: there isn't a reviewer out there that can compare one brand of an item to another, nor is there a reviewer out there that can rate any brand for any one practice.The only thing a review can do is this: they can record and state their single experience with one single example of a brand of item on one day. They can state what they like and what they don't like, because that's subjective.Everything else is arm waving, and the review is subject to at least one conflict of interest.In short, as a class, reviews are no substitute for research, and are not usually an acceptable source of information when conducting that research for making a purchase.I'm as guilty as the rest of you; I read reviews, and sometimes I even base decisions on them. But I try to avoid blindly following reviews, because there is no such thing as a review that is 100% accurate.Maybe I should get a job as a reviewer, it's quite a racket."They pay me a salary! In return, I give them......nothing."Don't even get me started about movie reviews.

MattInPA | Mar 23, 2009 10:22pm | #140

And let the record show that I didn't feel betrayed by reading a review that agreed with my experience. I felt betrayed when I found out that the guy was paid by the manufacturer to write a review that happened to agree with my experience.

Matt, of the ability to read and comprehendNo representation without taxation

chgorugbyref | Mar 23, 2009 05:02pm | #118

To All,

Toward Charles' point regarding Derek's work, whether those tool reviews are actually unbiased or just demonstrations seems mostly irrelevant. We read these "tests" in this an every other woodworking publication every month, yet people still buy the magazines. They go out of their way to seem scientific, but have been roundly criticized for their failures in the scientific method. Do those publishers go out and purchase the tools or do they have them sent by manufacturers gratis? Robert Parker, the wine critic, purchases all the wine he rates/reviews, but do we agree with his assessments just because he is "unbiased"? I really liked that 88 point $10 wine, but that $250 98 point monster cult "must have" didn't move me. Is the point behind a review whether is will allow me to be a better woodworker or whether I want to spend my money on that tool?

In the hands of the user, almost any tool will allow someone to produce something. As has been stated many times in this forum it's actually the skill of the user that defines the value of that tool (Sorry Mel, re-couping your investment seems shallow). I doubt Derek's "reviews" actually change whether or not a user can actually produce good work, but he might influence a few to part with some hard earned currency in the direction of one of his business savvy donors. For what it's worth Derek should keep doing what he is doing.

Let's call all "reviews" what they really are: NOISE. To find truth, you have to sift through the noise and that only happens when you stop spending time reading noise out here and go make some noise in your shop/shed/garage.

Back to the original point, if companies steal ideas and copy, only you can decide for yourself if you will spend your woodworking dollars there or with the companies that support your own way of thinking.

By the way that basketball analogy was great but Rugby is a far more civilized sport than this thread has been. I don't suppose Charles and Derek will be heading out after this match for a pint together and to sing a few bawdy songs. LOL.

BossCrunk | Mar 23, 2009 05:11pm | #120

I have no real problem with the gist of what Derek writes, just in what he asserts it to be.

At worst, they are his casual personal musings wanting to be something more serious. At best, infomercials with some useful information - release dates, pricing, etc.

Edited 3/23/2009 10:12 am ET by BossCrunk

Samson | Mar 23, 2009 05:23pm | #121

Ah, we learn that you are a semiotician.

Yes yes, Orwell and others have shown us that semantics is far from trivial. Though, renaming the "Department of War" the "Department of Defense" seems somehow a bit more weighty than whether Derek's tool posts are called "reviews" or "infomercials," in the larger scheme of things.

By the way, Derek, I'm not crazy abou the LV small router plane. The blade stem's cylinderical shape allows the blade to pivot in use some times. A hexagon would have been better, at least for me.

BossCrunk | Mar 23, 2009 06:02pm | #122

Just puttin' it out there. Not as well as Eco, but puttin' it out there.

Derek wants to keep the goody-train chugging. Hell, I don't blame him.

Edited 3/23/2009 11:04 am ET by BossCrunk

derekcohen | Mar 23, 2009 06:32pm | #123

Hi Sean

I agree about the cylindrical shaft of the small router plane. Too many have complained about it. Mine works fine, but it does require firm tensioning.

Several months, perhaps a year ago, I was discussing with Mel the nature of reviews. I started writing reviews as a way of sharing with others my experience of a new plane. These have rarely just been about the plane, as I have tended to include a tutorial on how the plane is used (to the best of my ability and insight at the time).

The idea of writing a description of a plane is plain (!) boring. At the least I compare and contrast one or more alternatives, both to give contrast and to identify whether the review plane has something new/different to offer.

I really do not write that many reviews in the context of all the other articles on my website. They have to interest me. The one I am writing at present has been fermenting and on-off for about 4 months. I do some preparation and writing when I get a chance (it's a good thing that this is not my day job .. heh). The new Veritas/LV Skew Rabbet planes grabbed a lot of attention when it was announced that they were being built (before they were released. I received a prototype at the very early stage - quite incredible. LV have a computer that will take a drawing and create a model in glue. I received a glue plane that was so realistic that I initially thought it was the real deal. This was one of the few prototypes that did not require any re-design.

I think that what has been at the back of everyones mind is the thought that they might be able purchase a "new" Stanley #289, a plane that is nearly unobtainable and that has achieved cult status. So I wanted to compare the LV with the Stanley. It took a while to track one down that was complete. Fortunately the owner was prepared to loan it to me (although it has been for longer than I expected).

The other question is whether the skew blade format is actually better - and where it may be so - than a square blade. So I have included the best metal rabbet plane I know of, the Record #778.

I have included two other skew bladed planes. One is a woodie, an ECE. The other is the Stanley #46, another of the "cult" planes. I just thought that others would find these comparisons interesting as I have.

Now the question is whether to call this a review, a tutorial or what? I choose to call it a review as the LV (and not another plane) is used to demonstrate a few joints - a raised panel, rebates (rabbets), and breadboards.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Samson | Mar 23, 2009 06:53pm | #124

Derek,

It all sounds very interesting to me. I've never touched a 289, though they certainly have intrigued me.

I have so far resisted the LV skew rabbets. My Stanley 78 does fine with the grain, and for the times I have to make cross grain rabbets, I have suceeded with ny large router plane or <shudder> my electric router. I love handtools, but I'm not such a purist that I can justify spending $450 on a pair.

My experience is that a skew is indeed very helpful on cross grain operations. My wood panel raiser has a skew, for example.

Why not call it an article. You could title it something like: "More Than One Way to Skew a Rabbet" with a sub-title of "Test Driving LV's Offering in Light of Similar Planes Past and Present." Don't forget the footnote mentioning the solid glue model you fondled. ;-)

Napie | Mar 24, 2009 12:40am | #146

I for one enjoy your reviews and have used them in some buying decisions, I didn’t call you the sage from Perth for nothing. They don’t inform my total choice but are well written if somewhat leaning toward the LV camp. But then I have not seen too many other brands reviewed by you. Aside from sharpening methods and burnisher material I’d say we agree on most things.

I also have the LV small router plane and experienced the shaft has turned on me but grinding a very small flat on the shaft has eliminated the issue.

Are you going to “review” the new LN tongue and grove plane? I’ve no need of it at all but it sure looks fun. Also any info on the introduction date of the new LV small scraper plane?

As a final note it is not at all uncommon for many manufacturers to “give” their products to reviewers, I don’t see the problem.

flairwoodworks | Mar 24, 2009 04:48am | #160

"I also have the LV small router plane and experienced the shaft has turned on me but grinding a very small flat on the shaft has eliminated the issue."Thanks for the tip. That's one thing that bothers me about the tool.Chris @ http://www.flairwoodwork.spaces.live.com(soon to be http://www.flairwoodworks.com)

- Success is not the key to happiness. Happiness is the key to success. If you love what you are doing, you will be successful. - Albert Schweitzer

BossCrunk | Mar 23, 2009 07:08pm | #126

But, if it's now just 'an issue of semantics' then I think I've proved my point.

Samson | Mar 23, 2009 07:18pm | #127

I personally never disputed your point that Derek likely has biases (like all the rest of us). I don't think he is a shill. I think at worst he might be guilty of following the sage advice of Thumper's Mom:

If you can't say somethin nice, don't say nothin at all.

View Image

No doubt you would consider such things lies of omission. Okay.

Edited 3/23/2009 12:23 pm ET by Samson

BossCrunk | Mar 23, 2009 08:20pm | #129

I think Derek is a paid tool demonstrator.

They pay him in either one of two ways (or perhaps both) - by giving him tools and by facilitating the cultivation of 'expert' status on woodworking boards. It's probably the latter, as Mel has rightly pointed out, that's the real motivation.

Samson | Mar 23, 2009 08:38pm | #131

Yeah, sometimes the product is just that good. Have you seen Derek's video for the tack cloth/finish applicator? You can watch it here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ns4mnmNBk1Y

I think you're jealous cause Derek is teacher's pet. Hard to goad him into meeting you behind the school after class over these damn internets, though, eh?

BossCrunk | Mar 23, 2009 09:33pm | #132

Not really. But it's interesting that you think so.

The Sham Wow guy could learn a few things from Derek.

Edited 3/23/2009 2:40 pm ET by BossCrunk

Samson | Mar 23, 2009 09:39pm | #133

I don't think much about it really. Just goofing around. Truth is I don't understand why you seem so personally offended about Derek's doings one way or another. Who is being hurt, even if your take is the utter objective truth of the matter?

I guess it just goes along with your general dislike of tool obsessiveness versus actual use of whatever tools to make something from wood. i don't see the two as mutually exclusive. If you like making stuff, you like to learn all you can about your media and how to better manipulate it. Interest in tools is a natural collary to an individual's drive to produce good works.

BossCrunk | Mar 23, 2009 09:42pm | #134

Nobody's being hurt and my take is the objective truth. Again, just putting it out there.

I think a more interesting question is why do you care one way or the other? Derek posts these "reviews." What's wrong with putting his objectivity and expertise under a little scrutiny? Seems like it would come with the territory.

There seems to be a lot of interest in WR planes. Why doesn't Derek review one? After his harangue about IP law, would YOU trust what he would have to say about them?

Edited 3/23/2009 2:51 pm ET by BossCrunk

Samson | Mar 23, 2009 09:49pm | #135

Just don't like to see people who I think are acting in good faith and adding value to the world being picked on and disparaged.

Why don't you review something and show us how it's done?

BossCrunk | Mar 23, 2009 09:57pm | #136

That's fine. That's your opinion.

I guess to review one I'd have to go buy one and I already have all I need.

Samson | Mar 23, 2009 10:11pm | #137

Review something you already have. It would be especially informative because you've used it for a while.

What's you favorite chisel and why?

What plane do you reach for most often and why?

What wood molding plane makers do you think tended to offer the best stuff?

Tell us about the moving fillester that has never let you down.

Tell us about the tool you have come to find indispensible and why (like Dunbar loves his shallow sweep gouge).

Whatever interests you. Just tell us a tool bedtime story. I'd like to hear it.

_______________________

As far as Wood River, I'd be surprised if they didn't turn out to be middle of the road quality planes about on par with well adjusted vintage Stanleys (though the reports of bad yokes that won't allow the blade to be advanced under tensions may belie this). I might believe Derek would be looking for stuff to complain about (I would), but that can be valuable too. Do I think he would tell outright lies? Nope.

KiddervilleAcres | Mar 24, 2009 12:41am | #147

Samson,

Well the Boss Man was clippin right along there with ye! Guess he neede a breather, eh?

Does he actually think anyone in here takes him seriously? I mean what actual facts was he putting out there anyway? I musta missed sumpin.

I've always thought he's a Git 'r Done kinda guy, what's he spending so much time in here talkin all this nonsense? Shall I alert the media regarding his pending bedtime story?

Regards,Bob @ Kidderville Acres

A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!

Samson | Mar 24, 2009 01:47am | #152

Definitely. Call the TaunTaun editors!

EdHarrison | Mar 24, 2009 04:06am | #155

Unbiased Review of the "Shamwow":I bought a set of shamwow(s). With my own money. No affiliation with the mfr., etc., etc.,...I greatly anticipated the purchase and did believe that it would solve a great number of my housekeeping and cleaning issues at one fell swoop.They were packaged in a rolled up tube. THe appearance of the packaging gave the impression of: "This is a serious tool. We mean business, here." The little red "As Seen on TV" mark was clearly in evidence. You get two big orange ones and two little blue ones. Eagerly removing the plastic shrink-wrap packaging, I was actually looking for some liquid spills in my kitchen (a frequent occurrence) to test them on. I could hardly wait until I made coffee the next morning because historically, that is a rich environment for spill cleanup opportunities.Fast forward to a month of sporadic usage:
They do work more or less as advertised on TV the first time that you use them.
The problem is that the qualities that allow them to wick up liquids also means that once they get dirty, you never really get them clean again, no matter what. Also they never completely dry out. What you wind up with is a dirty, wet rag somewhere in the kitchen. Suboptimal, vis a vis: a paper towel. That you throw away. That removes the spill and the dirt and then disappears from your life. That decomposes in a landfill. That cleans up the dirt and then eventually, somewhere down the line, turns into dirt itself. Instead of hanging around in the kitchen.If you put a Shamwow in the washing machine, they do get mostly (but not 100%) clean again, but if you forget and put them in the dryer with everything else, they instantly enter the 8th stage of the 11 stages of fabric breakdown entelechy that guys that wear the same underwear for 15 consecutive years are familiar with. The written documentation includes a clear warning about the deleterious effects of the dryer environment. I'm going back to paper towels and industrial strength cleaning sprays as standard kitchen cleanup gear,...... And as far as shop usage,....Call me a luddite but 20 year old t-shirts that have descended in the fabric caste system to become shop rags are all I'll ever need to use as applicators for wipe-on finishes.Do you really need a set of shamwow? Well, as they say, the world needs its Fredo Corleones, too.... Until you get rid of them, that is. Ciao, shamwow.This has been an unbiased review by someone with no known or proven talent for being clean, neat, or non-messy.

Samson | Mar 24, 2009 04:27am | #157

Thanks for the heads up. I'm really just a fan of Vince. Never tried the product.

"You know the Germans make good stuff ..."

"... cause we can't do this all night ..."

Walnutz | Mar 24, 2009 04:39am | #158

Ed,

Thanks for making me laugh!

KiddervilleAcres | Mar 24, 2009 04:49am | #161

Ed,

Well that just about cooks it for me. I'll just keep using old flannel boxer shorts fer rags around the woodshop, especially the ones that are over 15 years old.

Regards,Bob @ Kidderville Acres

A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!

Napie | Mar 24, 2009 12:44am | #148

Outstanding idea. The single most important tool in the shop, hands down, is my always faithful and trustworthy Starrett 12” combination square. Every project, outside of bowl turning starts and seems to end with it. Now do you think there is a story there???

Samson | Mar 24, 2009 01:45am | #151

I bet you could find a way to use it in bowl turning too. ;-)

BossCrunk | Mar 24, 2009 12:52am | #149

What's you favorite chisel and why?

A 1" Marples Blue Chip; seems to sharpen up better than its brethren. Who knows why? I rather enjoy the mystery.

What plane do you reach for most often and why?

Pre-war Stanley No. 5. It's solid. The sole was flat when purchased, everything else clean. I've never touched anything on this plane other than honing the iron. That suits me.

What wood molding plane makers do you think tended to offer the best stuff?

I make all my moldings with a set of C&W hollows and rounds and a Stanley 55. I don't know squat about vintage dedicated molding planes and their makers. I know a whole lot about molding profiles and I wield a pencil reasonably well.

Tell us about the moving fillester that has never let you down.

Stanley 55. It's missing a lot of plating but when I bought it every single iron had a flat and polished back. I'd found an actual user. I've never really been flummoxed by this plane. I know when it will work and when it won't.

Tell us about the tool you have come to find indispensible and why (like Dunbar loves his shallow sweep gouge).

Lie Nielsen scrub plane since I don't own a planer. A heavily cambered jack is not a substitute in my opinion.

Samson | Mar 24, 2009 01:36am | #150

Thanks. I feel like I know you much better now.

I have a 3/8ths user Swan that has the same mysterious abilty to take and keep an edge. Good day at the foundary or something? Stars aligned.

I too love my sw 5. It was my first plane and covered (including the tote and knob) with flat black spray paint when it came to me. Cleaning it up taught me plenty. Still a go too-er.

I'd love a set of hollows and rounds, but it sounds like Larry has quite a backlog? Also, that's got to be steep. Perhaps if I was a pro and made my livelihood from it.

Hmm, as for the 55, I know some guys swear by 'em. I think I read a good article from an old FWW where Mario Rodriguez sings a combination planes praises.

I'm with you on the scrub too. I have a Stanley (happened to get one with rosewood!) and Ron Hock made a blade for me many years ago. Great tool. While I have a little lunchbox, it won't take any really wide boards, and even on narrower boards you have to get one face flat for reference.

Thanks for the post.

BossCrunk | Mar 24, 2009 01:15pm | #170

I bought my C&W hollows and rounds back when Larry had the time to jump right on an order. I guess I was an 'early adopter.' And they cost a good bit less than they do now, but still not cheap.They work great, I highly recommend them and if Larry is tuned in he is welcome to comp me a plane of his choosing any time he feels like it. A hint though: a York pitch coffin smoother would be most helpful to me at the moment.I also keep pestering Mike Wenzloff on this board and on Woodnet to send me a gaggle of saws. I will pen a review that would make Tolstoy proud, shortly after their receipt.I actually don't swear by the 55. It has its limitations and it's an acquired taste. Rolling out of a fully mechanized operation with 5hp shapers and a storeroom full of routers it reintroduced me to proper stock selection for making moldings. Wild grain and the 55 do not mix well. But it won't eat your hand for a mid-morning snack either.

Edited 3/24/2009 9:20 am ET by BossCrunk

flairwoodworks | Mar 24, 2009 04:46am | #159

Tool reviews, like everything else without exception need to be taken with a grain of salt. I think that the only time you'll get an unbiased review is if it is from who is completely green. But then, you would likely end up with a review missing many important details. For example, they probably wouldn't know to look for flatness or how easy a certain part should move, etc.I used to read magazines mostly for their tool reviews. I remember one review where they tested cordless drills and any drill with a battery pack that gave any trouble in removal lost marks. Personally, I would put up with spending an extra 5 seconds changing a battery in favour of a better performing tool. But that's not what the tester thought. As a result, his overall recommendation meant nothing to me. Now I read magazines for techniques.Chris @ http://www.flairwoodwork.spaces.live.com(soon to be http://www.flairwoodworks.com)

- Success is not the key to happiness. Happiness is the key to success. If you love what you are doing, you will be successful. - Albert Schweitzer

9619 | Mar 24, 2009 06:06am | #163

Chris,
"Tool reviews, like everything else without exception need to be taken with a grain of salt. I think that the only time you'll get an unbiased review is if it is from who is completely green."Not true at all. Couldn't be farther from reality. If you want to see real comments on real tools by a real woodworker, read the words of David Savage. You can find them on his website:http://www.finefurnituremaker.com/woodworking_tools.htmWhen I first read this guy's tool comments, I was blown over, and wondered if he is for real. No less a woodworker than Richard Jones told us that David Savage has been turning out great furniture and great furniture makers for a very long time. This guy is the real thing.Reading reviews by a guy who does woodworking for a living is, IMHO, very very interesting and useful. Savage has a great website and he has an interesting newsletter which shows photos of the furniture his students make. He is into modern furniture. Not my style. But I can appreciate great design and great execution in any style. Check it out. He doesn't really do "tool reviews". Rather when he tries a new tool in his work, he comments on how well they work out in his workshop. That approach suits my approach to woodwork since I see tools as mere extentions of my limbs and mind, and nothing more. Savage's comments would be of no use to a tool collector. Please note that Savage's tool comments are a VERY small fraction of his website, which is mostly devoted to woodwork and the teaching of woodwork. I have noticed that folks like Pine, Millard, Jones, etc rarely bring up tools as a topic. I think it is a lot like music. Some folks like to talk about the fine points of different guitars. Others like to make music. Hope you enjoy Savage.
Have fun.
MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

flairwoodworks | Mar 24, 2009 09:13am | #166

Mel,I stand by my statement. It may not have any conflict of interest, but certainly has bias. Not as much as some writing, but it's there all right. Anyone who passes on their beliefs is passing on a bias. For example, he does not like honing guides. He says "Dont waste your time. Buy a decent plane and learn how to use it properly." I believe that learning to tune a plane is an important step in understanding how a plane works. If you buy a Kunz and tune it up, you will learn a whole lot more about how it works than if you buy a LN. I could go on, but I think I've proven my point. By introducing his opinion, he's lost objectivity and introduced a bias.Chris @ http://www.flairwoodwork.spaces.live.com(soon to be http://www.flairwoodworks.com)

- Success is not the key to happiness. Happiness is the key to success. If you love what you are doing, you will be successful. - Albert Schweitzer

BossCrunk | Mar 24, 2009 05:50pm | #175

Tool reviews sponsored by FW have been discussed and generally berated on this board for years (reviewing advertiser's tools, commercial tie-ins, etc). And they are our hosts. Not sure why the surprise at any particular individual's reviews coming under scrutiny given the history of the board. Is there a deference owed to Derek not owed to Taunton?

People have short and selective memories. A trip through the archives pulling out selected posts hammering FW for its own tool reviews would probably provide a lunch of many words for some of the self-righteous posters in this thread.

Edited 3/24/2009 1:14 pm ET by BossCrunk

pcott | Mar 24, 2009 09:24am | #167

Holy cow dude, how did this degenerate into a discussion regarding my intelligence? You don't know me or anything about me, and you decide to denigrate my intelligence just because I disagree with you? That is kind of pathetic. I still find Derek's reviews helpful, despite all of your reasoned arguments to the contrary.

9619 | Mar 22, 2009 05:09pm | #94

Sean,

Thanks for a well thought through response. We do have some differences in opinion. That is what makes life interesting. The most surprising line in your entire message was about my "aligning myself with Charles". I have never thought about aligning myself with Charles. That doesn't mean that that Charles and I cannot agree on something once in a while. Actually, I agree with Charles far more than I disagree with him. I just disagree with the way he expresses himself.

I noticed that he wrote to you, and I read his brief (although long for Charles) message. Son of a gun -- Charles hit the nail right on the head. It would have taken me twelve paragraphs to say what he said so succinctly. Here is his entire message:

"Derek may very well be a 'gentleman enthusiast' but he's also become the internet equivalent of the guys the manufacturers hire to go to shows and demonstrate their tools. His postings are basically tool demonstrations under guise as 'reviews.' This was probably not Derek's intention starting out but that is surely where he has ended up."

Charles characterized Derek perfectly, IMHO, except for his last line. I believe that Derek has planned this for a long time, and he works hard at it.

Sean, I believe you are a die-hard romantic. Luckily there are still a few diehard romantics left in this world. We are better off for them. But on this issue, my take is that you are looking through rose colored glasses.

I feel strongly that Derek should continually make clear that he has a relationship with LV in which he gives feedback on their preprotype planes, and that he is remunerated for doing so by being allowed to keep the planes. Actually, if I were Derek, I would formalize my relationship with Lee Valley, so the situation would be clearer. I don't think that the value of the tools that LV gives Derek adequately repay him for his time. But then again, I don't think Derek is worried about his time. Look at all of the time he spends on all of the woodworking websites. I believe what Derek is looking for in his relationship with LV is increased credibility as an expert in tools and sharpening.

In the real world, if Derek were a judge and a LV case came to court, Derek would HAVE to recuse himself. He is intimately involved with them, and he cannot be taken as being unbiased. At NASA, one of the oft-heard statements at proposal reviews was "The perception of bias is more powerful than bias itself." In spite of this, Derek has said that he remains unbiased in his reviews, and that keeping the planes is only enough to repay him for his time, and not enough to make him biased. I cannot accept this.

Derek is no ordinary Knots denizen. He is everywhere on the woodworking websites, and his persona is identical on all of them. He tried hard to be seen as THE authority on phanes and sharpening. Do you know Deneb from LN? I have met him a few times and really like the guy. He is very very knowledgeable and capable in the area of hand tools. But guess what? I listen to him talk, and I take him as biased toward LN -- highly biased. Nothing wrong there. I doubt anyone would disagree with me on that, and it is fine for him to be biased. He has a relationship with the LN company. He is remunerated by LN for his services.

Mike's relationship with his company is clear. Larry's relationship with his company is clear. Derek's relationship with Lee Valley is a bit more obscured, even though he has a relationship in which he is remunerated for services. That, in my way of thinking is an employment relationship, even if there is no contract.

Derek does not have to satisfy me. But in my opinion, he would do himself and his credibility a lot of good, by stating quite often that he has a relationship with Lee Valley and that people should keep that in mind when reading his writings. Such an admission would not diminish his writing one bit, and would boost his image.

Derek can no longer be considered a private person. He has worked hard to create a public image. He looms large. When he talks, people listen. While I am not aligned with Charles in any way, I agree fully with him on his assessment of Derek's situation.

You have said that I owe Derek an apology. Two others have said the same thing. What I have asked Derek to do is something which is for Derek's own good. His statement that his relationship with LV does not affect his ability to be unbiased in his reviews, is in my opinion, untenable. This is not an attack on Derek. It is advice on doing the right thing. I am sorry that this is causing Derek some unhappiness, and I apologise for not doing it better. Making a personal attack on Derek would be stupid and self defeating. If I were operating in a self-aggrandizing manner here, I would have left this matter alone. I have not called Derek any names. I have not made insinutaions. I have not played any games. I have been straight up and forthright.

It is time for me to discontinue this discussion. Continuing it will do no good. I wish Derek and you and Charles and everyone else the best. I have giant beams in my eyes which I now have to try to cast out. The specs in the eyes of others seem insignificant when compared to the beams in mine.

MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

9619 | Mar 22, 2009 05:01am | #82

Mike,

I knew you had that Miller. Thanks for posting the photo again.

You know I have great respect for you. You are one of the friendliest and most helpful people on KNots. I hope that you will allow me to disagree with you, however.

Why fight the Chinese? Why not co-opt them? I said that in my message to Derek. Why not get them on your team, under the watchful eye of one of your people. I believe you could train me to make fine saws. You just couldn't pay me enough. I believe you and your sons could train Chinese who would be anxious to learn. If you set up the deal correctly with some of your people on site, who said yes or no to each saw manufactured, you could make out very well and the Chinese firm could do well too. We all win. More people will have access to fine saws at a cheaper price.

If you just sign a contract with just any Chinese firm, and never show up to check things out, I believe the same thing will happen as if you set one up in the state of Washington, USA or in Guadalahara or in Naples. You HAVE TO CARRY THROUGH WITH TOUGH but FAIR MANAGEMENT.

Look at the Wood River planes. Not so bad for a first try, are they? Far from perfect, but FAR better than the modern Stanleys and Kunzs, and they are just getting started.

Just think how fast they could progress in a partnership with LN or LV. There are a lot of big US companies doing big business in China and doing very well. These people know how to do business. I am not talking about weenies, but REAL BUSINESSMEN who can play in the real world. Please realize that I can't play in the NBA. Not just anyone can do well in the business world. But one can hire top people with proven records.

Please notice that I have no hard feelings toward anyone. I want you and LN and LV and Larry and Philip to succeed beyond your wildest dreams. I believe there is something in the Bible about having and using talents (coins). Third world countries are a RESOURCE, not something to be feared. Volkswagen makes a lot of its cars in Mexico. Much of what Wal Mart sells comes from the Far East. Real businesses use the resources that are available, and they fight hard to get the edge. Now it not the time to complain about how bad things are, but to take advantage of what is available.

I hope I have said nothing to offend you. Have you read about the top US companies that are making big business inroads into China?

Thanks for the response. I don't mean to start an argument. My push is VERY POSITIVE. We can all be winners, but not by hiding our heads in the sand. God favors the bold. GO FOR IT. CARPE DIEM.

Have fun.

Mel

PS David tells me you sent him your carving tools to try out. Darn. I would have liked to make a bid on that. :-) (( I have all of the carving tools I can use.))Measure your output in smiles per board foot.

mwenz | Mar 22, 2009 05:35am | #84

Hi Mel--of course I am not offended by divergent viewpoints. Mine's the correct one so why should I get warped over words <g>...

See, here's my thing. I would rather help my near-neighbors. The guy who just retired and needs to suppliment his sucky govn't SS payments. He worked really hard for as many years as I have been alive and cannot hardly get by. I would rather hire that kid down the street. Heck, my own kids and my granddaughter.

For that matter, I am keeping certain processes done by hand rather than CNC just because I would rather have more living breathing humans work with me than the cold hard payments certain machinery would take--that cash, btw, would flow overseas.

So while I could manufacture in China or India, and I can see it would help you or another consumer, how exactly does that help the retiree? The kid next door? The two young men who work part time for me in order to make ends meet? My own family?

The short answer is it would only hurt them.

Take care, Mike

9619 | Mar 22, 2009 03:59pm | #92

MIke,

as you pointed out so well, all issues have multiple parameters. I can't argue about helping folks out. That's a good thing. You're a nice guy. I am jealous of your Miller plane. :-)

Have fun.

Mel

Measure your output in smiles per board foot.

mwenz | Mar 22, 2009 05:06pm | #93

The issue of outsourcing or moving manufacturing to other countries than one's own is a tough issue. I am fortunate to be small enough that I do not have to face the problem, at least at this time.

At some point, the practice is detrimental to the well-being of one's own citizens. Hundreds of thousands of jobs have gone away and not replaced in this (the US) country. That is a problem at the macro level. We as a nation have not done well to replace those jobs. That is eggregious.

I first really saw the problem as it related to the large furniture companies, though it began long before. I have a friend who started up a factory in China five years ago. They closed down the two smaller factories here in the US and opened one larger one in a small hamlet out in the seeming middle of nowhere. Their costs have plummeted. Their profits? Up.

I have seen videos and pictures of the conditions the workers apply their trade. Right down to the trenches behind the factory for reliving themselves. Oh, there are basically outhouses the owners had built, but the workers at the factory (it existed as something else) had tradionally used the trenches and continue to do so. There are fairly young children that work there. Members of the extended families who also work there. But everything from the unsafe machinery to "simple" things like working in decent lighting are comparable to 120+ years ago here in the US.

There are many other issues that would seem, well, foreign to us. My point is, this scenario is repeated over and over (the moving jobs out of the US). So I don't see this issue as simply a business making a "wise" move to cut costs in order to "remain competitive." That trite reasoning is like the little boy who declares, "But Jimmy did it" when explaining why he did something wrong. At its most basic, these US companies are exploiting the conditions and or the low cost of doing business in India or China at the cost of at least two generations of people here for relatively short-term profit.

Take care, Mike

9619 | Mar 22, 2009 05:12pm | #95

MIke,

YOu bring up important issues. Making sausage is a dirty business. THings were once similar in the US and in other places where the manufacturing revolution took place much earlier. China will go through this now. I believe it is a bit like a child going through the process of teething. It is necessary but not pleasant.

Everything you said was true.

MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

7Joel | Mar 22, 2009 10:53pm | #104

Mike,Bravo -- you are a national treasure! Can we have a "sawmaker laureate" like the poet laureate? Bless you.

chscholz | Mar 24, 2009 03:03am | #153

Yes, indeed, that would be one part of detailed reply.

I also would point out that certain parts of China develop extremely fast with respect to labor conditions, cost of living, health, the environment, standards of living, etc., whereas other parts are, well, just like you described. In my opinion it is very unlikely that this disparity will go away in the near/far/remote future.

The nice thing about China is that you can see just a about anything you want to see. Obviously it is up to you to weight the facts and draw conclusions as to where China will go in the future and how to best respond to that challenge. Or, quoting Yogy Berra: it's hard to make predictions, especially about the future.

Chris---

Chris Scholz

Dallas/Fort Worth, TX

Galoot-Tools

mwenz | Mar 24, 2009 05:09am | #162

Hi Chris,

Yep, I know that one can find exceptions, variance and the like. It's a pretty huge place with more than a few people. My example is the only one of which I know the people personally.

fwiw, I have seen what I would consider deplorable working conditions in the US too. I think change here (for better and worse) is pretty quick and "universal" in the scheme of things.

I do think there has to be a balance between overseas and US-based manufacturing. I am uncertain that in the near term it would be easy to reintegrate all of the industry that has left the US, and it may not be in our best interest to do so. But we need to either begin to bring jobs back home, find something new for the masses here to productively do, or some mixture of both. We cannot continue the slide to a consumer-based nation.

Take care, Mike

Lataxe | Mar 20, 2009 04:53pm | #23

Mel,

It's one thing to disagree with a bloke on something. I disagree with Derek on this matter of plane manufacture.

It's entirely another thing to make up a thousand defamations of character, especially when you disguise them as closed or leading questions (ones that already contain your prefered answer) or as pretend-speculations about motives that are actually poisonous and spiteful accusations.

Just because you are helpful now and then to one or two folk doesn't give you any kind of liscense for character assassination. But.... I know you won't stop so I suppose I'm wasting my typing effort. I would appeal to your sense of justice and fairness but I don't think you have one. You seem to have thrown it out to make more room for your egregious, self-righteous and highly inflated ego.

Lataxe, who just pressed the ignore Mel button.

Jimurock | Mar 20, 2009 09:29pm | #31

Ah, it's yet another rhetorical technique from someone who hates to lose. Sometimes misidentified as Ancient Mariner Syndrome, this one's more properly the Nagging Wife Set. When your argument can't win on its merits, you repeat it and repeat it and repeat it until you bore the other party into submission. It's been very successful through the ages. The traditional counter-strategy, the gliff on the jaw, doesn't work in cyberspace. I suppose the ignore button is next best.

Cheers, Jim

BossCrunk | Mar 21, 2009 12:48am | #36

You seem to have thrown it out to make more room for your egregious, self-righteous and highly inflated ego.

Oh gracious Lord... pot, meet black kettle.

Edited 3/20/2009 5:49 pm ET by BossCrunk

9619 | Mar 21, 2009 04:59pm | #55

David,

Please show where I did any character assassination or spiteful accusations! I believe I made none at all. However, what you said to me can easily be seen as character assassination.

I am glad that you are a friend of Derek and that you come to his defense, even if in a misguided way. No hard feelings. I always enjoy your messages, even when you are wrong. Indeed with you, right and wrong don't seem to be important. The language is paramount. You are the one person on Knots who writes messages longer than mine and continually accuses me of writing long messages. I enjoy such messages from you.

Have fun.

MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

Samson | Mar 20, 2009 05:12pm | #24

Let's be clear here, as folks seem to quickly generalize in favor of their own arguments. Here is a borg shave:

View Image

Here is LN's Bogg's shave:

View Image

Here is a Borg scraper:

View Image

Here is a Lee Valley scraper:

View Image

Here is a Borg block:

View Image

Here is a LN block:

View Image

I think it apparent that Borg's business is much like that of the designer handbag, designer perfume, DVDs, etc. knock-off copy artists. It is not similar to the competition that took place between Stanley, Sargent, and Miller's Falls, for example. I hope I don't have to spell that out, as I think the analogy is worth a thousand words.

Put yourself in the position of LV or LN. Would you feel this knock-off competition was all's fair? Would you be justified or just self-interested if you felt any outrage? I tend to think you would be justified.

stpatrick | Mar 20, 2009 06:53pm | #26

Sean, an excellent example of the old adage that a picture speaks a thousand words . . . . . . . . . but i suppose only to those whose eyes are looking to see.

Lataxe | Mar 20, 2009 11:55pm | #33

Sean,

There is certainly image-copying and brand-emulation going on there. Is this a terrible crime? It happens in the clothing world, the soft drinks world and a thousand other trades all the time. Indeed, its the norm.

The question is: will customers be fooled into buying one of those Borg items thinking it is an LN or LV? I would guess not, unless they are a dumb customer who has missed the last 75 years of trade and advertising practices.

Do you think LN or LV will lose business because the competition hs copied their style? I suspect they will rather gain business because the shoppers will be stimulated by more advertising images of apparently similar items and then make a choice to get the better one (functionally speaking). Those who aren't so bothered about function may get the cheaper one whereas before they might not have got one at all.

In short, you are assuming that there is a fixed number of customers for these items and that they aren't clever enough to distinguish between them when they have something of a similar look. I don't think either of those assumptions is true.

Lataxe

Samson | Mar 21, 2009 12:24am | #34

David,

I think this goes a bit further than emulation. But I won't conjecture about the myriad facts (most known only to the parties themselves) and legal issues (known generally by intellectual property lawyers and ultimately, for a given case, interpreted and applied by the highest court of appeal) that would be required to sort that out. That's what litigation is for. And yup, I think this is, or at least should be, a "crime."

The fact that anything happens often does not make it "okay." Rape and murder happen often.

Your assertion about customer confusion is a straw man. While confusion is one aspect of intellectual property law, it is not the only aspect. Indeed, patent infringement, for example, has no confusion element at all. But stepping back from the law, and simply being pragmatic for a moment, do you really contend that there will not be some fraction of customers who are attracted to the LN or LV products only to learn that knock-offs are available for significantly less, and hence decide to buy the knock-off? If you were a business owner, and someone knocked your products off in this manner, are you telling me that you would not have any concern about lost sales?

I'm not assuming anything regarding fixed number of customers or their likelihood of confusion. I've lived long enough, however, and am empathetic enough to know what can happen in the wake of rip-offs like this. The innovators lose capital and also determinition to innovate further. The means is taken away by every diverted sale. The will is sapped by the knowledge that after spending the money to develop and innovate a new product (not to mention advertise and build a market of suppliers and customers), a free rider, who has expended none of that effort and has no need to recapture those outlays, will just come along and very literally copy your product and manufacture in a place with drastically different labor rates, etc. such that they can charge far less for the knock-off. It's pirating. It's parasitic. And it is a $h!t way to behave.

Samson

FrankDrackman | Mar 21, 2009 01:20am | #38

"If you were a business owner, and someone knocked your products off in this manner, are you telling me that you would not have any concern about lost sales?"

If it were a concern to me I would take steps to ensure that the barriers of entry to any potential competitors were extremely high. I would also be proactive in protecting my IP.

I don’t begin to claim to know anything about LV’s IP portfolio, but as Wood River and others have shown, there is very limited resources needed to complete with LN. I believe the Wood River products have been shipping for a short time and people are already comparing them to LN. Why is that?

From a very simplest viewpoint I believe that it is hard to feel sorry for LN as they based their business plan on taking designs that were in the Public Domain, making slight modifications, then offering them for sale. Where did they add value to the product?

Being from New England, and having a home in Maine, I am thrilled with the success of LN. Many years ago I asked Tom LN if he was concerned about potential competitors.

The reasoning behind my question was because he said that the delay in manufacturing the #8 was finding a grinder that had the length capability that the #8 required. This surprised me because compared to other industrial products that need to be ground flat the length required was minimal.

His response to my question about competitors was that he would be thrilled because it meant that the market for quality hand tools would have to expand tremendously and he would take his share of the expanded market.

Samson | Mar 21, 2009 01:45am | #39

Yeah, this is one of those things where we aren't gonna convince one another. I'm truly surprised that you and Lataxe and Mel, etc. don't see a difference between making a spokeshave and making a spokeshave the mold for which was taken from throwing another person's product into the plaster.

As for people comparing planes that won't advance the blade with the lever cap locked toa LN, that's just a bad joke.

May all of you who love knock-offs more than supporting true contributors to our hobby, be left with nothing but.

Lataxe | Mar 21, 2009 02:10am | #40

Sean,

In addition to Frank's points I'll make a stab ot two at your counter arguments in favour of LN/LV protection.

It's perhaps rather emotive to compare the copying of a plane's "look" to rape and murder. The latter are highly illegal and carry heavy penalties. I doubt if there is any illegality at all in the emulation of a product "look" - especialy when the product is a very old design well out of copyright; and the "look" is an unavoidable but incidental by-product of that design and the materials used.

What is being knocked off here? It isn't the design or any R&D by LN. There may be a little R&D by LV but it's minimal, despite what they might claim for marketing purposes. The most that could be said to be knocked off is that look. But I repeat - the look of manufactured things has long been copied as "the currenty fashionable image for", as a study of the now strange-looking products of any past era will illuminate.

Virtually all of today's modern products copy each other's style and look. Cars, PCs, phones, clothes, cameras, architecture - you name it, there is a shared fashion in the look of these products. People still differentiate, when they buy, between the individual brands on the basis of quality, function and even on brand-name alone.

****

Now, I realise that copyright (incuding intellectual copyright) is a much more important concept in the USA that in many other parts of the world. In the US, everything is turned into some form of product and therefore some form of property. But this is a relatively modern and Western idea.

I can make both an historical and a logical argument that says that there is no obvious reason (other than the business man's con) for thinking that the end product of probably hundreds of years' (and thousands of peoples') design evolution efforts should all result in only one man or busines reaping all of the rights to use the last generation of that design evolution, along with all the financial benefits.

***

Innovators generally innovate in the face of competition. When owning a monopoly they stagnate and die. Shared ideas and the products from them (including look-a-like products of different quality and price) generate more not less effort to out-compete and out-innovate the rival. As Frank says, the public interest in the competition and increased product variety (price and quality as well as "look") usually generates more sales for everyone, not just the me-too manufacturers.

It may be the case that infringement of copyright concerning products that required a high R&D effort might damage the origintor of an extremely novel product - one where the innovator has to recoup the high R&D cost but the rival doesn't. This is certainly not the situation with these planes - unless you think that LN and LV (unwisely) spent a small fortune on image consultancy concerning their product "look".

Your turn. :-)

Lataxe

Samson | Mar 21, 2009 02:56am | #41

Your tack is to belittle everything: the orginality, the theft, the IP law, and the consequences. I disagree on all grounds.

The originality is significant. First, they would not be worth copying so exactly if these particular designs were not valuable or their details not significant. Second, while shaves and scrapers are old technology, these designs are not. Brian Bogg's worked hard with LN to develop an original shave design. They are not repopping a Stanley 151. Lee likewise developed an original scraper design. It is not a direct copy of something else.

The theft is egregious. Do you really contend that they are not making blatant copies? They are not just making known tools, they are making direct copies of someone else's design of known tools. Would you be proud to be the head of Borg? Would you really consider repopping someone else's stuff to be a respectable contribution to the world. You'd be proud of that, huh?

The IP laws are necessary. I hear you saying over and over that you think the laws are oh so silly. Without them we wouldn't have many life saving drugs, not mention literally hundreds of thousands of other inventions that make our quality of life so high. Over here in the colonies we actually wrote the right into a little document we call the Constitution (Article I Section 8: Congress shall have the power "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.") That little rebel text is full of quite a lot of decent ideas, I think.

The risks and consequences are serious. I've already described my views on this issue.

I'm really tired of this. As I said to Frank: We will not convince each other. In your terms, our memes run too deep. Each to their own.

Edited 3/20/2009 11:10 pm ET by Samson

SteveSchoene | Mar 21, 2009 06:12am | #43

Intellectual property is much more complicated that it is being made to appear here, I think. The operative Constitutional quotation in this context is that laws securing exclusive Right are to be for "limited Times." (Currently "use" patents have a 20 year term and "design" patents run 14 years.) Even if patentable, some of LN early models would have already run out of protection. There is a good public purpose for that limitation. It's the other part of capitalism--competition. (By the way the Constitution is a counter-revolutionary text, overthrowing, by vote, the Confederation that was the direct result of the Revolution.)

Patents do not protect every thing that is a bit different. Improvements on an older design that are obvious can't be protected, and what is obvious isn't what is obvious to an average joe, but obvious to a skilled practicitioner in that industry. If an items is based on "prior art" you can not get protection for bringing it up again. There are undoubtedly thousands of patents, long expired, covering just about any feature of those once widely used tools. Novelty is required, and true novelty is hard to come by. For LN and LV to have anything that can be protected first requres that they in fact have non-obvious novel elements.

By the way, the LV scraper looks rather like the Stanley 282. What is the novel element? There may well be patentable aspects--I'm not prepared to argue that at all, only that determining whether a patent is violated can't be done by casual examination.

I don't know what is novel about the Boggs spokeshave. All I do know is that there are other shaves from long ago with turned wooded handles on a cast body, so that isn't it. (D.R. Barton made one.)

If making WoodRiver and Borg versions of these tools isn't in fact violating patents or enforceable trade dress, then sure making a marketable product for profit is something to be proud off. Making products that are "nearly as good", if in fact they are, at lower cost is an achievement. It's the market that defines "nearly" in this context. Just as not all woodworking is "art", not all manufacturing can be either.

If it's not about protectable intellectual property, then we are talking "taste" or "morality" and everyone is intitled to his own construction. There is no accounting for taste.

Joe Sullivan | Mar 21, 2009 06:19am | #45

Well said, Steve.J

Samson | Mar 21, 2009 07:20am | #47

Get off your high horse. You have no idea what I do for my day job.

In some breaths you say it can't really be known here. In others you seem to try to the case in your mind and find originality lacking. blah freaking blah

Blantant knock-offs are fine with you. Great. Judging by your little crown, I guess Taunton likes 'em too.

Edited 3/21/2009 12:24 am ET by Samson

SteveSchoene | Mar 21, 2009 05:57pm | #62

Taunton has nothing to do with my opinions. I have no insights as to editorial policy, and certainly don't make it. For that matter I haven't actually offered an opinion on either the quality or the lack of rights infringement of the particular products at issue.

The question is blatant knockoff of what? To me, as a casual observer, they seem, if anything, to be blatant knockoffs of 100 year old inventions. And, I am perfectly happy that old ideas should be rejuvenated, and have the obvious improvements made upon them now that the economic situtation allows those to be done. And, I am perfectly happy for items that are not legally protected by patent or copyright to be made, knocked off if you will, by anyone, anywhere, that believes they can do it "better", whether that means prettier, more functional, or for that matter less expensively. That is the essence of competition.

When it comes to commercial property rights, I am perfectly comfortable with accepting what the law defines as protectable or not. I feel no need to attach some additional moral dimension in this commercial sphere.

That's the way economies flourish. Inventors have a short time to profit from their inventions, as Stanley and others did, and then it becomes open season for everyone to make the obvious tweaks and fiddles that makes them incrementally better and/or lowers the price. It's good, and necessary, that rights to innovation should be protected, but it is also right that that protection should be limited, both in time, as the Constitution requires, and in scope, as the law, both black letter and common law also do. It's about the frameworks of capitalism.

But as to these particular products, I can't tell, and neither can anyone else at this juncture, whether there are protectable rights being violated. What are the numbers of the patents that are alleged to be violated? Are those patents themselves valid? To really be able to say that requires extensive research into the patent archives, and other sources of prior art, and to the surrounding case law. I certainly don't have the resources or ability to do that. The only folks who do are parties to the issues. Which manufacturers have filed suit to protect their rights, or at this point, have even threatened legal action? It just seems to me that there is a lot of jumping to conclusions, as if they were obvious or "blatant" when in fact the issues are complex.

Samson | Mar 21, 2009 07:08pm | #65

You are are so pedantic.I am a lawyer. I have been for over 20 years. I've done commercial business litigation in a large law firm, often including various IP issues. I now specialize in competition (antitrust) and consumer protection law. IP issues are, again, endemic in these matters. I am therefore fully aware of the impossibility of litigating this matter on the Knots forum. And I could write a treatise on the law here, but that too would be a waste of time in this context. I'm not at all interested in answering arm-chair lawyer's questions and debating or explaining the details of a complex area of the law.All that said, the there can be no dispute that these are direct copies of existing products. Any person you stopped on the street could tell you that at a glance. And frankly even if there are no patents or trade dress issues, etc. that would prevail at the end of the day (or even more likely: those with standing do not want to spend the huge amount of time and money necessary to pursue international IP litigation where weak foreign IP laws and potentially judgment proof defendants are common), the fact is that directly copying someone else's product in this way in EVERY detail is foul. You don't think so - fine.

SteveSchoene | Mar 21, 2009 08:23pm | #66

But the real point is that the argument has been dressed in intellectural property arguments, essentially legal arguments, when that's not the real issue, as you point out. It's more about "brand loyalty" or even about "buy American." It is a vague moral judgment of "foulness", even when not illegal.

I don't understand the distinction that makes it great for LN to make (improved) copies of Stanley products but not for others. By the same logic, Stanley should be the only one making Bedrock variants.

Besides we know that the items are not exact duplicates in EVERY detail. The adjuster lever is said to be weak, the paint is matt not gloss, etc. The casting on the frog doesn't say Lie Nielsen or Bedrock. Worry about knockoffs that say Rolex or Gucci on them and aim to deceive. That's theft. This is just the market working--no one is confused about what they are buying. Buyers know they are buying a less expensive copy of the Bedrock, not an extremely well crafted copy of the Bedrock. Why Bedrock? Because that brand had the reputation--build by Stanley, not LN -- as being the best of the American plane designs. Why a thicker blade? Because the the first obvious way to reduce chatter. Why a flatter sole, because that's the first thing that every plane user learns can improve performance.

I'm not an attorney, I'm an economist and have been both a college professor and a business (securities research) analyst. And, I don't believe Shakespeare had it right about attorneys.

I'd much rather see the actual comparisons of performance characteristics be done as objectively as possible. Has the yolk been shaped improperly, does the lever, or it's rivet need improvement. Are several hours of fettling needed to bring the new models up to snuff? Or can they be used out of the box, like the LNs.

Samson | Mar 21, 2009 08:45pm | #67

I think all the sudden you have shifted into talking about Wood River planes. This thread has been about Borg knock-offs of three specific items:

http://forums.taunton.com/fw-knots/messages?msg=45993.25

I don't have any issue with competition at all. Take the example of Jet swooping in a making it's own version of a Tormek grinder or makings it's own (many think improved) Bessey K-bodies. They did not just copy the things, they invested and improved.

I suppose you'll say that Borg's improvement is the price. So be it.

These issues are not black and white. Some folks think Wal-Mart is great for small towns because it brings so many products and such low prices. Others see the jobs and local businesses decimated and kind of think price isn't everything.

This may be a legal issue. We on Knots are not in a position to know, unless Rob or Tom want to drop in and post. It's at least a policy or politcal issue, and one can decide for themselves what they think is the right answer on that, as I keep saying.

Tony Z | Mar 21, 2009 02:39pm | #50

I may be wrong, but I think the Boggs design was originally introduced by LV and then later LN took over sales.

T.Z.

derekcohen | Mar 21, 2009 03:28pm | #51

Tony

The Boggs spokeshave was designed by Brian Boggs. In his DVD "Drawknives, Spokeshaves and Travishers: A Chairmaker's Tool Kit", Brian shows the various developments of this spokeshave as it evolved. It was eventually produced by LN from the final version.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Edited 3/21/2009 8:30 am ET by derekcohen

Tony Z | Mar 21, 2009 04:01pm | #52

I agree with you Derek that Boggs is the designer, but I also remember seeing blurbs that these first marketed by LV.

I don't have a Boggs (yet), have many vintage Stanley, Records, LNs, woodies but my favorite are the Prestons in my accumulation (nope I ain't a collector). I had a Kunz chamfer shave that was a piece of crap-poor knock-off of the Stanley 65 (which I have) which was a knock-off of an earlier Preston. For the Kunz I made a new chip breaker, made a A2 blade,and bedded the blade in epoxy (alaa Boggs article). Worked nice at that point, but I was fed up with my stupidity in buying the thing in the first place.

Tony

derekcohen | Mar 21, 2009 04:18pm | #53

Hi Tony

I recall Brian talked about LN making his spokeshave from the final version, so I can't imagine that LV were ever involved.

I do have the Boggs. It is a very nice spokeshave - balanced and beautifully made. And it works well. I wonder if thinks it is now going to be called the Borg Bogg (or is that Bogg Borg)?

Regards from Perth

Derek

flairwoodworks | Mar 23, 2009 06:06am | #111

"I wonder if thinks it is now going to be called the Borg Bogg (or is that Bogg Borg)?"Veritas is coming out with a large (big) spokeshave. What if Boggs follows suit?Chris @ http://www.flairwoodwork.spaces.live.com(soon to be http://www.flairwoodworks.com)

- Success is not the key to happiness. Happiness is the key to success. If you love what you are doing, you will be successful. - Albert Schweitzer

derekcohen | Mar 23, 2009 06:25am | #113

"I wonder if thinks it is now going to be called the Borg Bogg (or is that Bogg Borg)?"

Veritas is coming out with a large (big) spokeshave. What if Boggs follows suit?

Well Chris, then ultimately it could be called the Big Borg Bogg. :)

You get a second one if you can say that fast, without spluttering, while standing on one leg.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Edited 3/22/2009 11:26 pm ET by derekcohen

Lataxe | Mar 22, 2009 02:32pm | #87

Sean,

This thread is certainly bringing out the worst in folk!

Why get all tired and emotional about what is a perfectly legitimate topic to discuss; and some perfectly legitimate exchange of views? You add nothing to your case by getting all angry about someone having a different idea from your own.

Perhaps it's that you've attached issues of morality and ethics to the actions of the copying fellows. Since I can't really agree that these issues do have much to do with morality and ethics (at least, not as I understand them) then I suppose we have to stop our dialogue. I do feel disappointed that this is the situation between us.

Lataxe

Samson | Mar 22, 2009 06:31pm | #96

David,It's like talking about politics at the pub, you have to be in the mood to argue and debate knowing that the person you're debating with is never going to change his mind no matter what you say, and in all likelihood, vice versa. Sometimes the rows are good fun, and sometimes, at least for me, they are just annoying. While folks like to say that disagreements on such things are okay, at base it is a discussion of values, how the world should be, and how we will proceed to get there. There is indeed something at stake.We see the world differently. Our experiences have led us to different conclusions about this issue. I certainly do not take it personally, and hope you do not either.Best,Sean

Lataxe | Mar 22, 2009 10:04pm | #101

Sean,

No, no hard feelings just a bit of frustration at not being able to get you into a discussion. I think you know I value your viewpoint a lot; but also that I'm not inclined to agree with a chap on a topic just because I usually do agree on many other matters.

Even discussion of values can (indeed needs to be) productive. The alternative is sometimes that one party thrusts his values down the throat of another, as we cannot live in isolated camps (or countries) and rub up agin one another . Eventually the "loser" of a dispute, who will harbour great resentment, will reciprocate and we find our own values swept aside by a force-majeur (physical or cutural).

Surely a discussion, which at least engenders mutual understanding, is still valid even if the parties involved agree to differ concerning their respective ambitions and values?

Another outcome of such discussion is often that one or both parties change their mind a little - those good compromises that do not destroy one's values but allow co-existence, trade, friendship and even mutual aid in time of need. Isn't this preferable to uncompromising moral stances and ever-escalating hostilities?

Lataxe

Edit PS I had another look at the pictures you posted. The copy is rather exact in the details with only the tradename left off perhaps. It would be interesting to quiz a represenative of both the manufacturer and the retailer about their reason for adopting such a close look.

It may be just a compliment to LN and LV. It all comes down to the intentions. Do they intend to fool customers? Also, how many customers will/would be fooled? Is there a US organisation that does mystery shopping for such stuff and dscovers the selling tactics, including any misrepresentation of the manufacturer of goods?

Edited 3/22/2009 3:27 pm ET by Lataxe

Samson | Mar 22, 2009 10:29pm | #102

You know at base I think it boils down to the Golden Rule. I'm not religious, but Jesus had a point with doing unto others as you would have them do unto you.

I have other hobbies besides woodworking. One is modeling what are called "garage kits" or resin figure kits. It's a weird little niche hobby for over grown adolescents who dig monsters and comic heros. The hobby is very much a cottage undertaking in that sculpts are typically made from polymer clays that can be hardened at home, molded in silicone, and cast in epoxy resin. It can cost a lot of effort to sculpt (or pay a sculptor) a figure and kit it out. The cancer of that hobby is a thing called recasting. Someone buys a kit and then uses it as a master to "give it a silcone bath" (i.e., create their own molds) and sell the repops for much less as they have no initial outlay. Many great contributors to the garage kit hobby either can't contribute as much (make less kits) or get out altogether because recasting is so prevalent. This is a silly little micro version of what as you say "goes on all the time" and indeed what is going on here. Recasters don't compete by making a better Frankenstein model, or doing so cheaper. They compete by stealing someone else's effort, repopping it, and selling for less only because they have essentially stolen the up front costs. So this experience has likely biased me.

If Borg had decided to make the best shave it could at the price point, I'd have no issue. Instead Japan Woodworker sent someone in China a LN Boggs shave and said make this minus only the LN name. That's not innovative - that's not what healthy competition should look like in my mind.

One of my build-ups:

View Image

BossCrunk | Mar 22, 2009 10:50pm | #103

Samson, you need to write a book on time management.

Samson | Mar 23, 2009 12:32am | #105

The need to make stuff with my hands is like a bodily need in me - no less than eating, sleeping, etc. - so I inevitably get something done once in a while. It might have been better to have a drive to make money or to work out more regularly, or something more useful, but you get what you get.

BossCrunk | Mar 23, 2009 01:52am | #106

So you sculpted that scene and then cast it in resin? Is that how that works?

Edited 3/22/2009 6:52 pm ET by BossCrunk

Samson | Mar 23, 2009 03:05am | #107

On this particular one, a sculptor named Jeff Yagher made the figure, and a producer molded and cast it. Think of this like model airplane kits, but roughly 12" tall figures instead. I built it and painted it. It did come with some resin surroundings, but I wasn't satisfied with them, so I built the furniture and base, then scrounged the mini-glass ware and stuff. Here's a pick of the whole scene:

View Image

I have produced a couple of kits, but none of figures I personally sculpted. I worked with a sculptor named Jim Maddox to make this one (she's in the process of being painted here and incomplete):

View Image

Aftonwood | Mar 23, 2009 05:06am | #109

I've just been catching up on Knots and I discovered this thread - all I can say is Wow! The college basketball playoffs are occurring here in America but they can't hold a candle to this thread as far as spectator sports go. The only trouble is, I'm having trouble keeping track of the score and the other stats. I think we have two knotheads who haved fouled out, three that took themselves out of the game with serious injuries, all of the refs have been cursed at for making questionable calls and there have been a couple of outstanding dunks, but no agreement on which posts those were.Is that about right?? Perhaps this has been more like a mental rugby game, very rough and tumble. Can't wait to see what happens after halftime.Jerry

KiddervilleAcres | Mar 23, 2009 05:50am | #110

Perhaps this has been more like a mental rugby game

Jerry, you give it way too much credit - think WWE <World Woodworkers Entertainment>!

Regards,Bob @ Kidderville Acres

A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!

gofigure57 | Mar 23, 2009 01:50pm | #117

Bob, In keeping with the tone of the thread your wrong. MMA would be more appropriate { mixed mental arts}.

Tom.

flairwoodworks | Mar 23, 2009 06:21am | #112

Good commentary. Who's doing the play-by-play?
Chris @ http://www.flairwoodwork.spaces.live.com(soon to be http://www.flairwoodworks.com)

- Success is not the key to happiness. Happiness is the key to success. If you love what you are doing, you will be successful. - Albert Schweitzer

Lataxe | Mar 23, 2009 12:06pm | #114

Jerry,

This has ben an excellent thread, having performed most of the functions of the best types of discussion.

Many ideas have been revealed, elaborated, dissected and prodded.

Many personalities have been stimulated to reveal something of their true selves, which allows each to better understand all. Even the nasty-men have dropped their masks to reveal their baleful souls.

There is extra value here and there. For example, Samson has provided us with pictures of his scenarios; in one we see Mel changing into his new alter-ego; in another we see Madison trying on her new veneer frock. I confess, this has been the high point for me (the frock not the monster, although both are very well wrought).

What more could anyone want?

Lataxe

KiddervilleAcres | Mar 21, 2009 12:52am | #37

Lataxe,

Yep, and what about the ones who see a way to get LN/LV functionality at a much lower cost? Crows have a habit of cawing when somethin bothers 'em.

Can't wait to read the reviews! That'll stir up the luddites fer shur.

Regards,Bob @ Kidderville Acres

A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!

ctsjr | Mar 21, 2009 05:02pm | #56

LataxeI think the real proof in the pudding will be when a customer has a problem with a Borg plane or shave. What kind of customer support will they receive? Will it even approach that of LV or LN, both of which have excellent customer service. I am stunned that such knockoffs can appear on the market and it be a legitimate enterprise when the U.S.A. is seizing knock off clothing, sunglasses and women's designer purses, every day at the docks. Tom"Notice that at no time do my fingers leave my hand"

smslaw | Mar 21, 2009 09:46pm | #72

I am stunned that such knockoffs can appear on the market and it be a legitimate enterprise when the U.S.A. is seizing knock off clothing, sunglasses and women's designer purses, every day at the docks.

That stuff getting seized is counterfeit. Most clothing, purses, etc. do not hold any sort of patent protection, so anyone can copy them legally. What you can't do is put a "Gucci" label on something unless you have a license from Gucci. Otherwise, you are violating the Gucci trademark.

As to planes, if you make a plane and put a Lie-Nielsen label on it, you are in violation of a trademark. If you just copy it, without the name, and there is no patent covering it, you are generally not in violation of IP laws. The murky area is when LN could argue that there was some sort of likelihood of confusion by a purchaser who though he was buying a LN and ended up with a Borg. As a practical matter, that is unlikely.

As to whether it is moral to copy someone else, who can say.

ctsjr | Mar 22, 2009 12:27am | #76

Good point. I suppose that the fine line here is that these planes do not have the LN or LV name on them. I still think the issue will be settled with customer service. How good that is will determine whether the items will be successful. LN and LV shine here. Tom"Notice that at no time do my fingers leave my hand"

Lataxe | Mar 22, 2009 02:56pm | #90

Tom,

Perhaps there is something in this emotive term "knockoff" that is driving lads into paroxyms of righteous zeal on these matters? But what is a knockoff and why is such a thing evil?

I'd always understood a knockoff to be an attempt to make an inferior article look absolutely identical to what is being copied, to the extent that a customer pays for the knockoff thinking he is getting the original. This means that the knockoff must either be actually identical or seem identical enough to get past the sales-event.

So, knockoffs generally look identical in every detail, including brand names and trade marks. They often come in identical packaging. They are near-impossible to tell apart from the original - until you use them and discover that, below the surface, the materials and construction are sub-standard.

In such cases, the knockoff has affected both the sales and the reputation of the original manufacturer. The customer has been diddled. A matter of ethics here then.

These Borg things don't seem to meet these criteria for being "knockoff". Rather they are copying the look of existing fine tools. They are not pretending to be those fine tools. Or are you suggesting that the Borg retailer and the manufacturer is attempting to pass them off as such? And that customers have been fooled?

***

Nor is it easy to agree that the latest iteration of a design having a very, very long history is somehow unique to the fellow who added a bit of gleam or improved performance via better brass, steel or polish.

The Brian Boggs spokeshave is quoted as a "designed by Mr Boggs" item. I think "designed" is too big a word. He tweaked and slightly modified the existing design to improve performance - a creditworthy thing to do and it justifies the higher price for the item; but it doesn't make that design his.

The same can be said, I think, of the LV and LN items - with only a very few LV exceptions, which they have presumably patented successfully and can therefore defend.

****

As to after-sales service onthese Borg items - you are speculating and don't know what it will be like. It may well be a lesser service than that of LV or LN, which is very good indeed. Perhaps this is part of the reason why the Borg items are a lot cheaper? In all events, as a customer you can differentiate between the two and make your choice.

***

What of value is being stolen by these Borg lookalikes? I have yet to understand all this talk of ethics and morality in such marketing. Surely the process is as old as the world and the absolute norm in capitalist enterprises of every kind? It's well outside patents, copyright law and so forth. If it isn't, where can I read about LN or LV successfully suing the Borg for making planes that try to pass themselves off as those of Mr Nielsen or Mr Lee?

Lataxe

PS For myself, I'll continue to buy LV as my experiences with them tell me they are of very high quality, functionality and value.

Frank Vucolo | Mar 22, 2009 06:41pm | #97

I am stunned that such knockoffs can appear on the market and it be a legitimate enterprise when the U.S.A. is seizing knock off clothing, sunglasses and women's designer purses, every day at the docks.

One important distinction that cannot be overlooked is that the clothing, sunglasses, purses, etc. being confiscated try to represent themselves as the original. That is, they use the label, monogram, logo, name, etc. of the original manufacturer or designer. The tools we are seeing come to market do not have LN or Veritas markings on them.

I think if you were to extend your analogy to clothing, purses, sunglasses that are similar to the designer brands, but do not try to use their logo, label, etc., you would find a different story. Look-alikes are being sold all over the place by reputable retailers.

I'm not a lawyer and I don't know copyright, or IP law. I can only apply common sense to evaluate the current situation.

WR and Borg are not representing their products as LN or LV, they carry their own brand. The similaraties seem no more extreme to me than do the similaraties between some of the old models LN and LV used to design their products.

The only real argument so far is that these planes look an awful lot like LV and LN. With the exception of a couple of posts from folks who it seems post only to create controversy, no one is saying that these planes are as good as the ones they are trying to copy.

I think no one understands this better than LV who, it seems, has been trying lately to come up with some unique designs that may be more 'protectable' moving forward (They racecar block planes and the new fangled dovetail saw.)

These products are here because there is a huge gap in the market between low value planes and high end planes. WR and Borg are exploiting that opportunity and claiming this market segment. Stanley is right behind them as I understand it. When Stanley hits the market, will there be an argument that Stanley is copying the style of the planes that LN and LV stole from Stanley?

9619 | Mar 21, 2009 05:06pm | #57

Sean,

I saw your points before you said them. I understand where you are coming from. As I have said, I do not know anyone in woodworking with your high degree of integrity.

Life is not always fair, especially in sports and in business. People who are in business for the long run (and here I am not speaking of General Motors or Ford) have to know how to deal with competition, as Toyota and Honda does.

I remember when Ford came out with a model and advertised it as looking just like a Mercedes. It flopped. It did not perform as a Mercedes.

If The Borg and Wood River do not raise the quality of their planes, they will never overcome LV and LN. Copying the outward appearances is not good enough, and people will figure that out. I have heard that Wood River is already working on improvements. Let's see what happens.

If I were at Wood River, I would not have made the designs look the same. I would however, try like heck to beat LN and LV in quality and price.

MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

chscholz | Mar 21, 2009 08:53pm | #68

Many (most?) companies in China choose a low-risk approach where the main competitive advantage is price. Many Chinese companies have the capability to be highly innovative, but todays organizational structure and financing models favors a low-risk model.

There is no doubt that this will change eventually; in fact, I believe that the current economic downturn will accelerate this change.---

Chris Scholz

Dallas/Fort Worth, TX

Galoot-Tools

9619 | Mar 21, 2009 10:39pm | #73

Chris,

All of my information on doing business with companies in China is different than yours. My information is that they will conform to what they have to. If you just ask them to do something, it probably wont be done. If you put it in the contract, and if you have your person there doing the final inspections, and if payment is based on passing the inspections, the quality will be there. If you slack off and take your quality control people away, then what you get is what you get.

Here in the US we say, "Caveat Emptor" = Buyer Beware. THis seems to be exactly what happend in China. We are all people. China is a bit more like our old Wild West here in the colonies. I see excellent quality tools coming in from China. The best examples are the vices -- all sorts of vices. Of course, there are nothing more than heavy metal with simple screws, but they do them very nicely, and the cost is MUCH less than those from the US and other developed countries. Drill bits from CHina are very cheap, and I see no difference in how long they last. I could go on, but no need. The certainly don't make cars like the Japanese. Indeed not all of the Japanese car companies turn out equal quality.

I meet a lot of people who don't want anything made by the Chinese. But my experience at Woodcraft is that the Chinese stuff sells like crazy compared to the higher cost tools from other countries. BUT when I go to a place like Harbor Freight, I see tools from China that are absolutely terrible and cheap. I am not advocating anything like that.

Simply put, if someone is gutsy and smart enought to make tools cheaper and just as good as the well known brands, then more power to them. The US has been built on competition and I love it. Best I can tell, trade is becoming global, and it is getting harder and harder to tell where a corporation is "from". I think that the number of foreign parts in a Chevy and the number of foreign parts in a Toyota are about the same, and both are made in the US. So when we start talking about which company made something, it gets pretty philosophical with the BIG companies.

Think about Boeing and their airplanes. That is very complex.

The older I get, the more I think of myself as a citizen of the world. (although I pay taxes here in the good ol US of A. :-)

Enjoyed the exchange. Thanks for writing.

MelMeasure your output in smiles per board foot.

Joe Sullivan | Mar 21, 2009 11:37pm | #75

Friends:This thread is disgusting. There is plenty of room for differences of opinion, but no place for the kind of outright nastiness that has been dripping from many posts. If there has ever been an argument in favor of forum police, this is it.Cheers!J

ButchE | Mar 22, 2009 08:12pm | #100

thanks for posting those pics, as it gave the proper comparison of the two. I've read nearly 60 posts on this matter,many were wrote with passion, others with intellect. this is my own opinion, and is not given to cause nor promote dissention. I see that one maker is origonal, the other a copy. this practice has been going on for decades, and forced the need of Copyrights. I understand that need, and why they must be enforced. however, having a copyright to protect investments;ie, R&D, is one thing... using the Copyright to protect cornering the market, and thereby continue overcharging for a product just because the law protects you, is another. I personalydon't own any of LV or LN products, due to price.period. my income level doesn't afford those products, regardless of their individual quality... same reason I don't drive a Rolls Royce..or even a Jaguar for that matter. would I buy the less expensive? I have no other choice if I decide that I need that particular product. would I care about the Copyright laws? no. that's what the lawyers are for, to dis-conyinue those products that break the law. As for the labor aspect, foreign vs. american, we kept our mouths shut when the auto industry, the appliance industry, the woodworking power tool industry, and about every other industry out there went to foreign labor/manufacturing.it's a little late to worry about closing the barn doors... the cows have already gotten out. I have my opinion on how to re-establish those industries here at home again, but it would not be Politically Correct.

stpatrick | Mar 20, 2009 06:50pm | #25

mel, mel, mel . . . . haven't we been through this before? do we all have to start bookmarking your repetitive and agenda laden questions, as well as the answers that are responsive but you choose to ignore?

Couldn't a case be made that you are a shill for woodcraft? how many times do we hear from you about you and the company? seems like you are a biased cheerleader for them. if you don't like someone else's reviews or product evaluations, do your own; then post it conspicuously so we can all take pot shots at it, you, your lineage, morals or lack thereof, ethics or lack thereof, integrity or lack thereof, ####-envy, etc. Of course, we will posit them in serious "questions" . . . .