RichMastery and Property Tutors

[Orkibi]

Its one of those optical illusions that make us think they are the same,

It is not that complicated Keithw it is just that they are both Black and Gold

[Keithw]

No its more than that- I seem to remember the Teachers logo on a banner on PT, being pretty similar to the Tutors, but it could just be my brain
Thats why i asked for the teachers logo to be posted.
Its clearly not similar in this



Actually that one looks more like yours !!!, or yours looks like theirs !!

and your company is called Property .,.....
You must be the same people !!!!!!!!

Then again, My avatar looks like yours !
Oh no- I must be You !
Which makes me THEM !!!!!

[Bob Kane]

I've uploaded a RM logo which seems pretty similar to Property Tutors.

Maybe a kind moderator could copy it into this thread? (will this work?)

http://www.propertytalk.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=77&pictureid=625

[Bluekiwi]

Hey hey hey..... he's still got 4 more years to be right

Dream-stealer

Cheers
Spaceman

Hey could still be right like Olly always is, just out by 5 years

[Perry]

Sharpie

You're getting very close to the wind, here. The PT Forums
have posting Rules, regarding "negative comments" being made.
Posts also need to be accurate and not libellous.

You told another Moderator that you would put your real name
to your posts, after they were removed because you had not
signed off with your real name. Accordingly, some posts were
returned to public view. You did not then do as you said you
would and the posts were removed from view, yet again.

Can you substantiate your assertion about Sean Wood being
associated with Blue Peak? Wasn't Blue peak a Phil Jones and
Steve Goodey run/owned/operated/fronted outfit?

These Forums have proven a blessing for many, by warning
folks about dodgy practices and practitioners. But posts which
contain such information - when negative - (often) do need
to be accurate and signed off with your real name.

Perry
Moderator

[Dean@Massiveaction]

Perry agree that Sharpie has some "issues" but Blue Peak was Sean Woods that is definitely true. I was at the launch.

[Keithw]

To be honest I am getting tired of Sharpies incoherent posts.
If there is a message behind all the ranting & raving, I am interested in hearing it, as would many others, but the posts to date simply seem to be hate posts with no explanation of the story or motivation.
It is clear that he sees RM & Phil Jones as unscrupulous & anyone associated with them at any time must also be tarred with the same brush.

For the simple minded like myself, I would like to see a simple explanation of the background and the consequences, so that others can be protected in the future.

What I can't be bothered with is the assumption that every person who has at any time had any association with RM or any subsequent entities is corrupt simply because of that association.
Even from the posts I have seen, it is obvious that different parties have disagreed with the actions of RM or of some of its members, & so split off to run their own businesses.
eg I concur with Dean, Sean Woods seemed to have an active part in Blue Peak, but I do not know about the ownership or relationship.
Does that make him corrupt or unscrupulous ?

It is the actions of the people that demonstrate their trustworthyness, & not necessarily their associations.

What I want hear about is the actions of these people, not "dont trust this person because they used to deal with RM or Whoever".
Statements like "Phil Jones has a lot to answer for" is just a waste of time IMHO, as it gives no reason why and assumes that the training of one person is implemented with exactly the same methods, motives & morality by the student.
It gives no credit to the morals or motives of the student.

The same with looking up the registrant of a domain name, its almost irrelevant.
In a large Corp, the IT manager will often be the registrant, but that does not make them the owner, or even adminstrator of the business.

Lay out the whole picture in black & white, complete with reasonings so that anyone can make their own decision:
eg
RM took x $ for a training course & delivered basic training in Y.
Z person promised x $ in sales but delivered 0
N person, who has associations with J person, now runs a training course for x $ consisting of nothing more than xyz
P person took a commision on abc for a deal that was never completed

or whatever !!!!

[halfempty]

RM was the only show in town for so long that at some point everyone was connected to them or associated in some way.

Even the now president of APIA drank the coolaid at some point.

[PeterEmpowerEd]

Sean Wood = Blue Peak

Can you substantiate your assertion about Sean Wood being associated with Blue Peak? Wasn't Blue peak a Phil Jones and Steve Goodey run/owned/operated/fronted outfit?

Perry, try this:


... which also rather neatly displays Sean Wood's modus operandi ... a 'mentor' sharing 'the most exciting property deals' — if I may suggest that without offence.

NZ is a small place and the property investment education sector here is even smaller where there's only a handful of players -so its not unusual for the same people to be working for the same service providers over time - liken it to professional sport where the players swap teams or franchises regularly - ending up playing against the team they played for the previous season.

As a sometime observer of the scene which Donna euphemistically refers to as the 'property investment education sector' I have formed some opinions about the various 'players' who pop up now and then, swapping partners with similar regularity to characters in Desperate Housewives.

For me, the main distinctions are simple:
(1) Do the 'players' have a track record of selling property or investments to their 'students'? and
(2) Have they clipped the ticket, or gained reward for doing so ... or even re-sold their OWN property/developments down the 'student' pipeline -- as Sean Wood, Steve Goodey, Dean Letfus and other 'players' have done to my direct knowledge?

It doesn't matter to me how well or poorly the 'investment' has performed. e.g. Saffron, The Docks, Due Pensione, Sponge Bay etc. The conflict of interest is apparent.

My rule of thumb: Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck ... IS a duck. Whether the names or logos closely resemble each other or not seems a small detail.

I hope my comments won't be taken by anonymous commenters and sockpuppets as evidence of a nasty personal vendetta or 'competitor-bashing'. That’s so tiresome.

Speaking of sockpuppets, halfempty's suggestion (half-serious, surely?) that "RM was the only show in town for so long that at some point everyone was connected to them or associated in some way" is plainly, palpably incorrect. But then she was probably joking.

Speaking for myself, I've come to read a past business association with Richmastery as an indicator of personal character and judgement. A negative indicator, I'm sorry to say — but that's just my personal opinion.

Good on you frankcastle for having the sense to do some due diligence.

Peter Aranyi

[cube]

As a sometime observer of the scene which Donna euphemistically refers to as the 'property investment education sector'

I think a more honest statement would be 'As a provider of services in the scene that .....'

[PeterEmpowerEd]

I think a more honest statement would be 'As a provider of services in the scene that .....'

'More honest' Quentin? More honest? Thanks for your contribution.

You, of course, may reach your own conclusions and express them as you like. I won't accuse you of dishonesty.

I guess my point of view (my honest opinion) is that part of this discussion isn't about the real 'property investment education sector' but what I think of as the 'Let's dress up our property sales business as an education provider' sector.

Richmastery's main game wasn't property education, in my opinion.

There was considerable information to support that conclusion displayed in the "massive" Richmastery discussion thread that you, as a Moderator, explained was censored from PropertyTalk: "withdrawn after things became too heated".

What would a 'more honest statement' about that look like, Quentin?

-P

[HermanZ]

For me, the main distinctions are simple:
(1) Do the 'players' have a track record of selling property or investments to their 'students'? and
(2) Have they clipped the ticket, or gained reward for doing so ... or even re-sold their OWN property/developments down the 'student' pipeline -- as Sean Wood, Steve Goodey, Dean Letfus and other 'players' have done to my direct knowledge?

It doesn't matter to me how well or poorly the 'investment' has performed. e.g. Saffron, The Docks, Due Pensione, Sponge Bay etc. The conflict of interest is apparent.

My rule of thumb: Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck ... IS a duck. Whether the names or logos closely resemble each other or not seems a small detail.

Peter Aranyi

Peter,
I used to get annoyed with your railing against certain individuals here.
But I have changed my mind (yes it took a time to see the light),
you are right, I was wrong.

In my opinion, your opinion (on conflicted Ducks) is right.

Cheers
HermanZ

[PeterEmpowerEd]

Peter,
... I have changed my mind (yes it took a time to see the light),
you are right, I was wrong.
In my opinion, your opinion (on conflicted Ducks) is right.

Thanks for your supportive comments Herman. That's very gracious of you. - P

[frankcastle]

keep it coming guys!

[halfempty]

keep it coming guys!

Lol yeah but keep what coming?

The RM bash (don't we have a thread for that?)

Property Tutors clients don't seem to be coming out of the woodwork to support them, or to claim them to be useless I suppose?

So what good is any comment from anyone else? apart from just being commentary?