Reviewed DD Sports
Aug 15, 2008 11:47 PM
9949 Views
(Updated Aug 16, 2008 12:00 AM)
Why is this coming out freaky? On the review panel it looks ok.
DD Sports Olympic coverage is rubbish. Far too frequently live
coverage of events is interrupted by
studio talking heads. This
evening their studio linkman introduced some Colonel as an expert in
athletics.
Maybe h...Read more
Commented on Python's review
Aug 27, 2006 05:35 PM
Don’t get caught by these GQ fraudsters. Often, what they say is stupid (it has to be because they are selling others a fatally flawed business plan, which is not their real plan), but they are very far from being stupid. On the contrary, they are skillful emotional manipulators. They do the inspira...tional talk bit, but only for the purpose of making you feel like a miserable little worm, should you not rush to buy into their get-rich-quick nonsense. They create no new wealth in the world. They are, however, experts in redistributing some of the wealth that already exists from the downliners to the upliners - that is, from you to them. Your loss will be their gain. Now, I consider that a rather good definition of exploitation in anyone’s currency.Read More
Commented on Python's review
Aug 27, 2006 05:31 PM
Don’t get caught by these GQ fraudsters. Often, what they say is stupid (it has to be because they are selling others a fatally flawed business plan, which is not their real plan), but they are very far from being stupid. On the contrary, they are skillful emotional manipulators. They do the inspira...tional talk bit, but only for the purpose of making you feel like a miserable little worm, should you not rush to buy into their get-rich-quick nonsense. They create no new wealth in the world. They are, however, experts in redistributing some of the wealth that already exists from the downliners to the upliners - that is, from you to them. Your loss will be their gain. Now, I consider that a rather good definition of exploitation in anyone’s currency.Read More
Commented on Python's review
Aug 27, 2006 05:22 PM
In his peon of praise for JR Mayer, Managing Director of the Mayer Mint and GQ’s Head of Product Development, Peacer (Sep 24, 2005) informs us that this unmissable, simple bachelor with the tall profile “works like a dog”. My, my, how true.
Finally, GQ plugs the concept of ‘numismatic coins’. Thi...s it applies to any medals it puts on the market in such a way as to suggest that they are really special – so special indeed that the prices they can command will only appreciate. This term is rather strange. Numismatics is the study of coins and medals. There can be no such entities; therefore, as numismatic coins, just as there can be no non-numismatic coins. Likewise, there are no medallion coins. There are coins and there are medals. The two are distinct. The former have legal tender. The latter do not. This is not rocket science. Any proper mint director in the world knows this. Any “numismatics expert” knows too. Just ask JR Mayer. Ah! Maybe it would be better to ask someone else instead.
The confusion of these two perfectly straightforward concepts is a measure of just how much GQ needs people to abandon logic, evidence and reasoning, before it can peddle its laughable business plan scam.
As has been pointed out by others, these GQ coins are in fact medals. So, they are minted in small numbers. Big deal. They are vastly overpriced gold counters, without a jot of artistic merit. No one in the world outside the slimy GQ bubble wants them. I don’t suppose anyone ever will.
Read More
Commented on Python's review
Aug 27, 2006 05:21 PM
It is not at all hard to see why this is so. To put it bluntly the GQ pieces from Mayer’s Mint have poorly engraved, dreary and unimaginative designs. Medals are a high relief medium. Mayer’s coins are all low relief. They resemble mass produced coin-like pieces rather than proper medals, miniature ...works of art in metal, created by serious, named sculptors.
The awful Sai Baba and Pope John Paul II pieces are the medallic equivalents of paintings by numbers. The Princess Diana issues are worse. They don’t even carry a passable likeness. The Mayer Mint web site states that an “award-winning designer” designed them. Really. Who? What award? The company, that has the gall to pride itself on the artistic designs and legendary skills of its craftspeople, does not provide this vital, yet basic information. Curious? Maybe not. Only real artists sign their work. In fact, all Mayer Mint products of recent years are anonymous. They are also dreadful.
As if to prove my point, the banner of the Mayer Mint web site contains a (poor) drawing of a coin. One of its own products, one might reasonably suppose. No chance. It’s a masterpiece - a Greek coin of Syracuse, designed and signed by Kimon 2400 years ago.
Don’t take my word for any of this. If you want to see quality high-relief medal design by named and noted artists, go to www.artmedal.net and follow some of the links. You will not find anything from the Mayer Mint.
Two of GQ’s and Mayer Mint’s more recent products have been the “Dome of the Rock” and the “Kaabah” numismatic coins (sic.). How smart! How sensitive! So, they are as ignorant of Islam as they are of numismatics. Or perhaps they think that Muslims in their droves will abandon their prohibition of figural decoration in order to get their hands on these priceless bits of tat, from one of the world’s oldest and most prestigious… blah, blah. I dare say that for nearly all Muslims these “coins” are not nearly rare enough.
Read More
Commented on Python's review
Aug 25, 2006 08:26 PM
Python has been doing a brilliant job tearing into the GQ scam. I want to approach the same from more of a numismatic viewpoint.
GQ web pages and groupies generally only mention their ‘product’ in passing. When they do, however, they repeatedly tell the same story, with only minor variations. Ac...cording to this story, the future value of GQ’s numismatic coins is guaranteed by their rarity and the fact that they are produced by the Mayer Mint’ the “oldest mint in the world”, which “has produced some of the finest coins in the world”, thanks to the “artistic designs and legendary skills of its Mint Masters. … (and) advanced production processes.”
All of which is untrue. Mayer’s Mint was founded in 1871. The British Royal Mint is over 1000 years old. The Birmingham Mint (UK), founded in 1794, is the world’s oldest private mint. The largest private mint in the world is the Franklin Mint (USA) and the Pobjoy Mint (UK) is the largest in Europe.
What about the claims as to superb quality and innovative production facilities? Consider the Pobjoy Mint, to take just one example. It has produced commemorative, circulating and pattern coins and medallions for over 30 different governments. The Pobjoy Mint has won ten international Coin of the Year awards of the World Mint Directors’ Conference, including that for best coin. Its director has likewise received two honours from the American Numismatic Association, one “for outstanding contributions to numismatics.” Further, it issued the world’s first hologram coin in 1996, and the world’s first titanium coin in 1999. A pretty good (and verifiable) testimony to the Pobjoy Mint’s excellence in all departments, I happen to think.
Mayer’s Mint, despite all its self-hype, claims no such awards, honours, or firsts – neither for design excellence, nor for technical innovation. Why? Maybe it’s because it has none.
ContinueRead More
