• Why not take a moment to introduce yourself to our members?

kylen

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
John,

That's my point. What difference would there be in a MAC certified achilles vs a non-certified achilles (other than price)? These fish, like yellow tangs, currently aren't cyanide caught. Same with all the non-cyanide target fish coming from PI.

Another issue is that one would have to assume that in the time frames given that those quantities of MAC certified fish would be available :wink: .
 

Frank Lallo

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Geez John,
Your numbers are worst then mine.....100% doesn't seem to me like those folks are doing a very good job. Mite they be one of the 1 of the 9 hurrendous store's as opposed to the 1 excellent,.\

Frankie
 

John_Brandt

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
kylen":3pr8n3nn said:
John,

That's my point. What difference would there be in a MAC certified achilles vs a non-certified achilles (other than price)? These fish, like yellow tangs, currently aren't cyanide caught. Same with all the non-cyanide target fish coming from PI.

Another issue is that one would have to assume that in the time frames given that those quantities of MAC certified fish would be available :wink: .

The study assumes that a MAC Certified Achille's tang would have a 1% (or less) mortality. So that dead Achille's tang was a total loss, whereas a MAC Certified Achille's tang would have been sold.

There are more complications to the study. For example, costs-of-doing-business are factored into the cost of fish. That Achille's tang that died cost the store $24.00 wholesale. But it was calculated as a loss of $26.18 with total costs calculated.

It was a complex study done by an accomplished MBA completely based on past performance and future projections. As others have said before, retailers often have no true idea of their real losses (with cost-of-doing-business factored in) until an accountant sits down with their highly-detailed raw data.
 

John_Brandt

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Frank Lallo":36um84s7 said:
Geez John,
Your numbers are worst then mine.....100% doesn't seem to me like those folks are doing a very good job. Mite they be one of the 1 of the 9 hurrendous store's as opposed to the 1 excellent,.\

Frankie

Wrongo Frankie!

This store has nothing like an average 60% DOA/DAA that your survey suggested was an average. This store also happens to be East Coast.
 

Frank Lallo

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Fish there was no study.
Then there was.
Then there was 1 store.
Then there were 4 stores.
Now we have only 1 store that actually particapated.
Then we have 28 fish delivered and they were all dead in a week 100%.
Then I am told I am wrong about the numbers that he himself posted.

Talk about credibility, You have balls the size of grape fruits my friend.
 

Frank Lallo

Experienced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Just as a note....

You posted 2 species, both of which are reguarded as fairly hardy. These two species according to you have a mortality of well over 50% and you haven't even posted the not so hardy. My point being here John is that we can argue over numbers from here until hell freez'es over Any number can be torn-up and dismantled to justify any means you so desire. It gets us no where, I don't dout for one minute that you as I am are looking to improve the industry & the hobby. Working together as a GROUP is what is going to make the difference. As long as we the concearned hobbyist fight amongest our selv'es the less the industry has to worry about. Don't you see this !.

Frankie


P.S....From this point on I will say nothing unless it is constructive & not disruptive....I hope we can all do this and get back to what we all want in the first place...Seeing the industry IMPROVED.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
This store also happens to be East Coast.

Hehe he, aren't they all? Well, from the Mississippi over? Why aren't there any MAC retailers on the west coast yet?
 

Kalkbreath

Advanced Reefer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Frank Lallo":2df4ff5i said:
Just as a note....

You posted 2 species, both of which are reguarded as fairly hardy. These two species according to you have a mortality of well over 50% and you haven't even posted the not so hardy. My point being here John is that we can argue over numbers from here until hell freez'es over Any number can be torn-up and dismantled to justify any means you so desire. It gets us no where, I don't dout for one minute that you as I am are looking to improve the industry & the hobby. Working together as a GROUP is what is going to make the difference. As long as we the concearned hobbyist fight amongest our selv'es the less the industry has to worry about. Don't you see this !.

Frankie


P.S....From this point on I will say nothing unless it is constructive & not disruptive....I hope we can all do this and get back to what we all want in the first place...Seeing the industry IMPROVED.
Why dont you want to explore the truth further? Too much to grasp? Stop attempting to make the hobby out to be much more of a issue then it is ..........to make any results reform might bring seem greater.....{look we have gone from 60% DOA to 6% without lifting a net}............................................Chicken plants/farms have a greater DOA then this hobby YOU want to ban wings? Ps. the 1% MAC dream is silly ..........the next 99 Achilles would need to come in perfect to remain an average of 1% ..........and they dont.......not even yellow tangs............so once again we have lots of fluff and little reality.......
 

Sponsor Reefs

We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.

Click here to sponsor $10:


Top