Introducing Best Chessmen Ever Stage 3

IpswichMatt
ifekali wrote:
IpswichMatt wrote:
Is this set better than the “best chessmen ever” stages 1 and 2?
 

Better? Is there anybody claiming this one is "better" than Stage 1 & 2 sets? A voice in your head?

Why should it be better?  It needs not to be better. It is not better.

It is simply different, more detailed, refined. And harder to produce. Hence the higher price and a next level name tag.

If so, are not the customers who bought these earlier stages going to be disappointed?

Even if your complaint were somehow sound, one could simply respond thusly: Does Apple ever stop evolving their iPhones? Should they stop this malpractice the day after *you* buy one?

After all, they thought they were buying the “best chessmen ever”

And they were. It sayz so right on the box.

 perhaps these should be rebranded “the Best (Up Until The Current Time) Chessmen” or BUUTCT Chessmen - for short - 

You do realize you sound silly, right?

 in order to allow for future improvements to an already near perfect set?

Improvements? Where did you hear a mention of that? That voice again?

BCE Stage 1 & 2 can be improved, yes. We are working on that as we speak. But when improved, they will still remain BCE Stage 1 & Stage 2 sets. Can you dig this?

This particular chess set design is simply one of many. We offer Stage 1, Stage 2, and now Stage 3. These are names of our products. Have you heard of Porsche 911, Boxter,  Cayenne maybe? It the same principle. Different products with different prices for different customers with different tastes. Yes, wallets too.

I am unable to explain this in simpler terms to this particular posters. Users of these fora, please excuse my wasting your time.

-Izmet Fekali

 

Hi Izmet

My point was that they are all called the "best ever", but if they are all different they cannot all be the "best ever".

The rest of my comment was not meant to be taken seriously - I expected people to either be amused or to ignore it. 

Of course,  since you're making these sets I can understand that you would take exception to my comment - so I apologise for any offence given and I have removed my original comment.

KnightsForkCafe
IpswichMatt wrote:
ifekali wrote:
IpswichMatt wrote:
Is this set better than the “best chessmen ever” stages 1 and 2?
 

Better? Is there anybody claiming this one is "better" than Stage 1 & 2 sets? A voice in your head?

Why should it be better?  It needs not to be better. It is not better.

It is simply different, more detailed, refined. And harder to produce. Hence the higher price and a next level name tag.

If so, are not the customers who bought these earlier stages going to be disappointed?

Even if your complaint were somehow sound, one could simply respond thusly: Does Apple ever stop evolving their iPhones? Should they stop this malpractice the day after *you* buy one?

After all, they thought they were buying the “best chessmen ever”

And they were. It sayz so right on the box.

 perhaps these should be rebranded “the Best (Up Until The Current Time) Chessmen” or BUUTCT Chessmen - for short - 

You do realize you sound silly, right?

 in order to allow for future improvements to an already near perfect set?

Improvements? Where did you hear a mention of that? That voice again?

BCE Stage 1 & 2 can be improved, yes. We are working on that as we speak. But when improved, they will still remain BCE Stage 1 & Stage 2 sets. Can you dig this?

This particular chess set design is simply one of many. We offer Stage 1, Stage 2, and now Stage 3. These are names of our products. Have you heard of Porsche 911, Boxter,  Cayenne maybe? It the same principle. Different products with different prices for different customers with different tastes. Yes, wallets too.

I am unable to explain this in simpler terms to this particular posters. Users of these fora, please excuse my wasting your time.

-Izmet Fekali

 

Hi Izmet

My point was that they are all called the "best ever", but if they are all different they cannot all be the "best ever".

The rest of my comment was not meant to be taken seriously - I expected people to either be amused or to ignore it. 

Of course,  since you're making these sets I can understand that you would take exception to my comment - so I apologise for any offence given and I have removed my original comment.

I think that BCE is a series of design and not meant to be taken as best chessmen ever. The term itself is subjective. What I think is the best chessmen ever might not be the best chessmen ever for someone else. I look at it as a series name.

ifekali
IpswichMatt wrote:

 

My point was that they are all called the "best ever", but if they are all different they cannot all be the "best ever".

OK, but by this logic one could also complain that only one of the 32 chessmen can be best, no?

Of course,  since you're making these sets I can understand that you would take exception to my comment - so I apologise for any offence given and I have removed my original comment.

Your humorous intent was not obvious to me. People making people laugh should and must be celebrated. Therefore I apologize for my snappy retort.

-Izmet Fekali

 

IpswichMatt
Yeah, not surprised my humorous intent wasn’t apparent, what I wrote wasn’t very funny.
I shouldn’t post when I’ve been drinking.