Chemical Guy... New thread w/o bashing

Status
Not open for further replies.
Burlyq said:
For the record

I asked you many questions in my PM to you Stang and made no aqusations to you, one question I asked was did you work for them, also asked if you were a friend to Steve, or fishing buddy or more. I thought it was more appropiate to use PM because it seams you fixated on me or something. I would wish that some of the people who PM'd me about these products to speak out at least a little bit. The whole reason for this forum is detail product discusion, it is appropiate to talk about the silimarities of products is it not?
Click to expand...









Still at it huh?

Stang,

They aren't unproven accusations, like I said now 5 people have said they are the same. Some of the other people have hinted in the forum and have emailed me stating they are the same, but don't want to face he Poorboy Zealot crowd's rath, lol. If you think that one message from PB's owner was credible that's on you. I asked him to clarify and answer the question with a "yes" or a "no". That is what I needed instead of the PR message I felt I got. DUDE, ***, Do you work for the guy or what????? What is your deal, you like spending money you don't need to? Seriously, is this guy your brother, lover, friend, fishing buddy??? Be honest, it looks to me like you are so far up that guys *** you can taste what he had for dinner.
Click to expand...



I'll let others decide the intent of your PM to me. For some reason I didn't get a warm fuzzy feeling when I read it.:nono





SilverLexus and TW85 HHI, I'm in total agreement with you and I just wish we could get back to discussing products without the need to put another company down. I have no problem with CG product as I have never even used it and I appreciate feedback about the product from members here.
 
Blkstang,



You are in good company. I also got accused of being a PB Zealot. If just defending Steve from baseless charges makes me that then so be it.



Note that I never once said anything bad about CG product.
 
Can we just go back to talking about the products and while comparing them to other products just avoid the one that causes so much trouble?
 
Kraig said:
Can we just go back to talking about the products and while comparing them to other products just avoid the one that causes so much trouble?
Click to expand...





That is not possible until one particularly troublesome member is banned from the forum. He seems to have it out for Steve (Poorboy's) for some reason. I would love to discuss CG without other brands being brought up as I think they have a couple of interesting products.



Edit:



Just received this PM from BurlyQ. I am tired of his **** and really hope the moderators take action.



Dude,

You are dead wrong, the products are the same exact thing it's a fact. If you are a true pro and you want to maximize your profits you will find out for yourself. If you are a zealot and servile flatterer you will keep acting like a 12 year old in the forum. A sign of a good man is one that can admit when he's wrong and move on. I have admitted when I was wrong in the forum before, but this time I am right, 100%. Order some for yourself and find out. Then decide if you are going to continue to perpetrate a lie or be an honest person.

BQ
Click to expand...
 
That is not possible until one particularly troublesome member is banned from the forum. He seems to have it out for Steve (Poorboy's) for some reason. I would love to discuss CG without other brands being brought up as I think they have a couple of interesting products.
Click to expand...



Well said Greg. :)
 
Kraig said:
Can we just go back to talking about the products and while comparing them to other products just avoid the one that causes so much trouble?
Click to expand...



I agree except for to avoid a particular brand, as I have no problem someone voicing their opinion that brand X works as good or believes that it even works better than brand Y. It's the unsubstantiated accussations that X and Y are the same without proof that needs to go. Like I said before, let CG stand on it's own. It appears to be one of many decent products out there.:xyxthumbs
 
SilverLexus said:
Blkstang,



You are in good company. I also got accused of being a PB Zealot. If just defending Steve from baseless charges makes me that then so be it.



Note that I never once said anything bad about CG product.
Click to expand...



Baseless charges? You flamed another Autopian by calling him ridiculous just for having a negative opinion about the PB polishes.



Posted by SilverLexus on 5/28/05:

"Good job Todd. This is complete bullhockey.



Do you realize you are slamming one of the best SMRs out there?



You look ridiculous."



And quite honestly, I don't think the implication that PB is repackaged CG's product is all that baseless. And even if it is repackaged, so what? Anyone with any inside knowledge in this industry knows that this is a common practice. And to be even more honest, I couldn't care less whether it is or not because I don't use any of PB's products because I'm not too impressed with them...repackaged or "independently designed".
 
TW85 HHI said:
Yes, but not when a respected company is being attacked in the process. Poorboy's has had continuous attacks by members in the past month.
Click to expand...

Comparing the obvious similarities is not an attack. You folks seam to make a mess of the thread instead of dealing with it in the PM. If I do get banned it will be because I told the truth, and I'm OK with that. And thanks Intermenzo. TW85, read your PM, I didn't call you anything, I said "if" you keep acting a certain way than yes you appear to be a sycophant.
 
Intermezzo said:
Baseless charges? You flamed another Autopian by calling him ridiculous just for having a negative opinion about the PB polishes
Click to expand...



It was not an opinion. It was flatout false information.



BurlyQ,



How am I to know you are telling the truth? You have not posted any facts to support your beliefs. The truth could be that the SSRs DO come from Chemical Guy's but that is not the issue. The issue is you "telling the truth" without providing evidence.
 
On that note, I'd love to see all the ZainoZealot comments fly if I were to take this response:



"Why is that? I've tried over a dozen polishes and SSR2.5 is the best overall polish in my expansive collection of detailing supplies."



and change it to:



"Why is that? I've tried over a dozen sealants and Z-2 Pro is the best overall product in my expansive collection of detailing supplies."
 
TW85 HHI said:
It was not an opinion. It was flatout false information.
Click to expand...



So he deserved to be called ridiculous?



BTW, he wasn't all that wrong. PB's SSR's do have some fillers. No matter how filler free you may think a compound or polish may be, just by its very nature and chemical composition, it is impossible not to have at least some fillers in a polish or compound.
 
Intermezzo said:
So he deserved to be called ridiculous?



BTW, he wasn't all that wrong. PB's SSR's do have some fillers. No matter how filler free you may think a compound or polish may be, just by its very nature and chemical composition, it is impossible not to have at least some fillers in a polish or compound.
Click to expand...



Do I deserve to be called a servile flatterer and zealot because I will not take BurlyQ's posts as gospel? How about being labeled as someone perpetuating a lie? It isn't denial, but rather being irritated that no evidence has been provided. A reputation is at stake. I honestly do not care if Poorboy's buys products from Chemical Guys. I will continue to support Steve.



No one denied that the SSRs have SOME fillers, but the original post stated the SSRs ONLY filled swirls.



BradE,



It isn't necessarily this thread, but several others. They are attacks in that it has been implied that Steve is a liar and that he is misleading customers. Buying products from another company and selling them as your own is not necessarily misleading. Telling us the products will do something that they cannot is misleading.
 
Intermezzo said:
On that note, I'd love to see all the ZainoZealot comments fly if I were to take this response:



"Why is that? I've tried over a dozen polishes and SSR2.5 is the best overall polish in my expansive collection of detailing supplies."



and change it to:



"Why is that? I've tried over a dozen sealants and Z-2 Pro is the best overall product in my expansive collection of detailing supplies."
Click to expand...



That would be perfectly in your right and I have no problem with that. I can't dispute your opinion on performance of a product, but only counter with my own opinion if it differs. That's a reasonable discussion in my book. Just don't tell me Zaino is made by Meguiars unless you know first hand.:LOLOL
 
TW85 HHI said:
Do I deserve to be called a servile flatterer and zealot because I will not take BurlyQ's posts as gospel? How about being labeled as someone perpetuating a lie? It isn't denial, but rather being irritated that no evidence has been provided. A reputation is at stake. I honestly do not care if Poorboy's buys products from Chemical Guys. I will continue to support Steve.



No one denied that the SSRs have SOME fillers, but the original post stated the SSRs ONLY filled swirls.
Click to expand...



If someone called you a servile flatterer and zealot or labeled you something you took offense to, then you should just report it to a Mod. And to answer your question...no, of course not. I've never read anything you've posted that would warrant such a thing and I have no problem at all with you. I was addressing SilverLexus' post. The issue is not whether or not the original poster was wrong or right about the filler. The issue is the way he was treated. Just because he was wrong about the product, did he deserved to be flamed by SilverLex? Of course not. I'm just not too saavy on some people martyrizing themselves while they too flame others for posting incorrect or negative info on products they like.
 
"Baseless charges? You flamed another Autopian by calling him ridiculous just for having a negative opinion about the PB polishes."



Actually I PMed Quamen an apology since that thread was locked and then sent an email to Jason regarding it. Quamen did question the effectiveness of the SSR product which is fairly breathtaking given the quality of the product.



"Comparing the obvious similarities is not an attack."



It most definitely is an attack if you imply PB is just rebranding chemicals and not creating their own products in terms of formula which you did Burlyq.



What is your problem with Poorboys? and why do you have to attack them in a thread about CG?
 
BTW, he wasn't all that wrong.
Click to expand...



Yes he was wrong. He said the polishes did not work or contain abrasives. That is factually incorrect. Here are Quamen's exact words:



I know many people say they love SSR swirl removers, but i dont understand why. They have many fillers in the swirl remover and just hide the defect. I dont use it anymore, but try it yourself. After you apply it and you think the swirls are gone, just wash that area and the same pattern of swirls will be right there.
Click to expand...



Just because he was wrong about the product, did he deserved to be flamed by SilverLex?
Click to expand...



I think he deserved to be called on it which is exactly what mtodde and I did. I should not have said he looked ridiculous but I later apologized for that...but he should have been more careful with his accusation by backing it up with photos or at least more of an argument.



It's clear that most knowledgeable people on this board know Poorboys SSR has abrasives that remove swirls.



Quamen did not say the product was not any good in his opinion...he accused it of not having abrasives at all. That's unfair to Steve and his team.
 
I think this post needs to get back on track. Can we agree not to make accussations regarding Brand X being the same as Brand Y and agree there is no real proof to that effect? If we can get past that hurdle, then we can discuss CG products or any other products like responsible adults, which is what this site is designed for. I think we do a diservice to the Autopian community otherwise. You in Burlyq? :waxing:
 
SilverLexus said:
"Comparing the obvious similarities is not an attack."



It most definitely is an attack if you imply PB is just rebranding chemicals and not creating their own products in terms of formula which you did Burlyq.



What is your problem with Poorboys? and why do you have to attack them in a thread about CG?
Click to expand...



Repackaging chemicals in the detailing industry is COMMON, pointing that out isn't an attack. Your jumping all over those that believe PoorBoys might be repackaging products claiming they have no proof, but by your own admission you have no proof the contrary either.



Suggesting the products aren't similar isn't really accurate either, there are reports from people who have used both products that they can't tell the difference between them. If you can't accept the fact it's possible Poorboys might be repackaged ChemicalGuys that's your problem, but don't go around claiming they aren't when you have no proof either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top