(01-21-2010 1:06 AM)Diane999 Wrote:  I just want to say that I wasn't offended by Wildflower's posts.  I just thought he was very mislead and misguided, but to a degree I didn't want to take on.

You know it is one thing to have a heated discussion and quite another to go off as a white knight when you don't have the facts.  But that happens a lot on the internets and it is just futile to try to combat it.

Diane

You are of course right, BUT, the direction he was mislead in, and the heated discussion he initiated was one that I was not willing to continue.

And yes, as an Admin I did speak unilaterally, but I was not speaking on behalf of the forum but as myself!  If the other Admins decide to boot me for having done so, I will turn the forum over to them and bow down, or get my ass kicked out! 

And, if that what were to happen, and if they'd permit me to continue on as a member that's all I will be, but I happen to think that they will back me on each of the statements I've made.

I don't know, maybe I ought to hire a lobbiest group? 

Politics?

oh, meh....

Diane

(01-20-2010 3:06 PM)WildFlower Wrote:  

 

Off course we don't, but that doesn't stop the conspiracy theorists deciding that Androtics are corrupt and after everyones money. I used the price of a 30ml bottle because it was claimed that the MX range is AD's "milking cow", and backed up by XXX saying it would cost us at least $90 for a 30ml bottle of an MX mix (his argument being - I think - that 30ml bottle of consumer products cost less than that. I don't think he relaises that the consumer products are usually 15mcg per spray where as the MX's are often much higher in concentration.), The 5ml at 50mcg further proves my point.

It's reasons like these I'm not buying into the whole Androtics bitterness. A link to a forum (which discusses Androtics with quite some venom) is removed from a post. duh? (links where never allowed anyway, it's hardly blacklisting) Then they have the cheek to tell us that some MX's are sold at a loss, but the reality is they are making a massive profit from us. 

 

 

If you have read this thread full you would have seen a comment about MXs never getting released. AD will say "let's test forever and always make a loss".

They must be really generous to provide 50mcg/spray for you to test compared to 15mcg in their main line while making a loss. I thought you are supposed to start with a small dose then work your way up?

AD manufactures their own pheromones thus their Instant line products are more costly than Love-scent's(Love Scent) considering Love Scent is reselling other company's products taking into consideration their occasional 25% discount.

OK, here's the numbers for MX292, straight from Jasmin!  But, they don't jive with the original strengths, and and at these figures they aren't anywhere near as effective as the original MX292!!!!!:

None - 5 mcg/spray
TAF - 5 mcg/spray
P79 - 10 mcg/spray
P83 - 10 mcg/spray
P86 - 10 mcg/spray
P102 - 10 mcg/spray

Go ahead wildfower, mix yourself up a ton of it, and give it a shot. I got these strtaight from Jasmin, before I was on her most wanted list, and I got ingredient lists for MX148- MX152 as well, but they don't jive either.

Wow, kudos Mark. I wonder if this is the reason why some users have mentioned that MX353 isn't as effective as MX292? Not sure, because luckily I still have some original MX292 bottles and I have yet to test MX353. I'll definitely keep a closer eye for differences after reading this. Crazy to finally see it on paper though, well in type that is.

(01-21-2010 2:22 AM)mark-in-dallas Wrote:  

OK, here's the numbers for MX292, straight from Jasmin!  But, they don't jive with the original strengths, and and at these figures they aren't anywhere near as effective as the original MX292!!!!!:

None - 5 mcg/spray
TAF - 5 mcg/spray
P79 - 10 mcg/spray
P83 - 10 mcg/spray
P86 - 10 mcg/spray
P102 - 10 mcg/spray

Go ahead wildfower, mix yourself up a ton of it, and give it a shot. I got these strtaight from Jasmin, before I was on her most wanted list, and I got ingredient lists for MX148- MX152 as well, but they don't jive either.

(01-21-2010 3:31 AM)mikotorocks714 Wrote:  Wow, kudos Mark. I wonder if this is the reason why some users have mentioned that MX353 isn't as effective as MX292? Not sure, because luckily I still have some original MX292 bottles and I have yet to test MX353.

Thanks Miko, but actually the later iterations of MX292 aren't as effective as MX292 was when it first came out, at least it hasn't been for me and a number of other experienced phero users.  And because of that and for another reason that I can't share, I don't believe that the ingredient breakdown Jasmin gave me and that I listed above are the original mix concentrations.

Some might argue that since it is an experimental and pherotalk is a research forum, that they can change compositions at will, but my arguement is that while they are certainly free to do so, if they really cared about research and development they would change the MX numbers when doing so, or at least require members to post batch numbers in their reports, so they could actually track compositions and reports. 

That they do neither leads me to believe that the testing and research claim is just a marketing ploy, or at least that's what it has become, and that testing and research don't mean anything to them, at least not anymore.

Quote:If all you have to contribute here is negativity about our forum and our members, then maybe you should just go back to your little fantasy world at pherotalk. You are more than happy to believe everything that they told you without question, and seem to want to challenge anything negative our members have to say, so maybe this isn't the place for you.

I joined here because I received a letter about the Ax mix. I have no negativity what so ever and think this forum has a lot of potential. I tried to start a constructive post, but only Renny replied. It was only when I posted in this thread that people wanted to talk. I said I didn't want to start an argument and that I would block out all the androtics negativity.

Quote:I guess them buying the rights to your mix for what, $1,200 has either blinded you toward them, or bought you off! Although I'm guessing that you've probably got a couple of those $1,000 gift certificates too. It's funny how little money it takes to BUY some peoples ethics and morality!

I wasn't paid a penny (dime?) for my two mixes, nor would I want or expect to be either. It was Androtics who approached me about releasing them, not the other way round. I was happy to oblige - I don't feel any ownership of a few formulas that I could certainly not have created on my own.

Quote:Diane, thank you for confirming why Wildflowers" only logical explanation" statement was biased, incorrect and unwarranted. Gegogi, and everyone else he offended, care to put in your 2 cents?

I still can't see why Michael, Jasmin or Steve would logically want to upset Diane, yourself or anyone else. And again I'm completely oblivious to any slandering of past members, or the motives behind doing said slandering.

Quote:And AD only has two operating modes when they are questioned... either throw gift certificates your way; or circle the wagons and slander, slander, slander.

This is the point I was trying to make earlier, they don't owe us any answers. Androtics, however, strike me as being a very accommodating company in that respect.

Quote:I should have mentioned this earlier, but Wildflower take this as an informal warning: it's fine to state your opinions here and dispute what other members say, BUT, it's not ok to call thier statements bullshit and claim they don't know what they are talking about. Most of them have been around a LOT longer than you have! And as far as I'm conerned you have a lot of nerve to question them.

When I said "bullshit", I was referring directly to the posts in this thread which where juvenile, bitch-fest's about Catlord or claims that when Michael says such a thing is sold at a loss he's actually lying to everyone and raking in money.

Quote:I just want to say that I wasn't offended by Wildflower's posts. I just thought he was very mislead and misguided, but to a degree I didn't want to take on.

How can I not be mislead, when it seems it's kept secret exactly what it is that AD has done that is shady? When I question any dislike for AD I'm made out to be naive and told to "go back to fantasy land", yet I'm not allowed to know your collective side of the story of what actually happened.

Quote:AD manufactures their own pheromones thus their Instant line products are more costly than Love-scent's(Love Scent) considering Love Scent is reselling other company's products taking into consideration their occasional 25% discount.

Do they? I got the impression that they bought the individual molecules pre-synthesized from another laboratory in powder form (something Michael said about having to pay huge upfront sums for them). And they made the composites in their own laboratory. Love Scent certainly aren't cheaper than Androtics whatever way you look at it.

Quote:None - 5 mcg/spray TAF - 5 mcg/spray P79 - 10 mcg/spray P83 - 10 mcg/spray P86 - 10 mcg/spray P102 - 10 mcg/spray

wow, I'm very surprised there is no Androsterone or Beta Androstenol in there. I'll have to add p102 to my next order. Thank you - genuinely - for sharing that. I had batch 3 of Mx292 and later batches (batch 8, 13 and later) seem to actually work a bit better for me.

Interesting Mark, brings me back to when MX292 first came out and many were reporting that they stopped getting great hits compared to past batches. Then that's when users started posting batch numbers just to keep track. Anyone remember that? I do remember not getting great hits with one bottle of MX292 version 1.0 batch 4. However, I never really thought that it could actually be the bottle itself since I knew I could trust Androtics and figured that it was probably just me. So I'm not sure, as mentioned I still have some MX292 so I'll keep track.

As far as the whole possible hush hush about possible changes in mixes, well, that's scary if it's true. I won't say who told me this (because it came from Androtics,) but I was once told that IJ actually never contained copulins. I never cared to question this person even though there was plenty of posts (from Tisha for example when she was mod) stating that IJ did in fact have cops in them. So reading that statement was puzzling, but as mentioned I just shrugged it off as per the good guy in me who doesn't like to doubt people you figure you could trust.    

(01-21-2010 8:00 AM)mark-in-dallas Wrote:  

Thanks Miko, but actually the later iterations of MX292 aren't as effective as MX292 was when it first came out, at least it hasn't been for me and a number of other experienced phero users.  And because of that and for another reason that I can't share, I don't believe that the ingredient breakdown Jasmin gave me and that I listed above are the original mix concentrations.

Some might argue that since it is an experimental and pherotalk is a research forum, that they can change compositions at will, but my arguement is that while they are certainly free to do so, if they really cared about research and development they would change the MX numbers when doing so, or at least require members to post batch numbers in their reports, so they could actually track compositions and reports. 

That they do neither leads me to believe that the testing and research claim is just a marketing ploy, or at least that's what it has become, and that testing and research don't mean anything to them, at least not anymore.

The Blind supporters of AD reminds me of the apple fan boys. lol..

(01-21-2010 2:43 PM)mikotorocks714 Wrote:  
As far as the whole possible hush hush about possible changes in mixes, well, that's scary if it's true. I won't say who told me this (because it came from Androtics,) but I was once told that IJ actually never contained copulins. I never cared to question this person even though there was plenty of posts (from Tisha for example when she was mod) stating that IJ did in fact have cops in them. So reading that statement was puzzling, but as mentioned I just shrugged it off as per the good guy in me who doesn't like to doubt people you figure you could trust.    

I can tell you that the first bottle of Instant Jerk I got (as a free gift) definitely had a faint odor of copulins.  Subsequent bottles didn't.