• Login:
Welcome, Register Here
follow PropertyTalk on facebook follow PropertyTalk on twitter Newsletter follow PropertyTalk on LinkedIn follow PropertyTalk on facebook
Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 107
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    10,313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    This is my last post in this thread as you can see I am not handling Peters comments very well. Having poured my blood , sweat and tears into this site for 4-5 years its hard not to be protective.
    You can rise above it Marc - you have the intelligence to do so, you just need the will.

    I still don't believe that there is a right or wrong answer here. Opinions are just that. Pete has voiced one, others have done so also including you so it may be best to leave it at that.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    10,313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterEmpowerEd View Post
    This is incorrect to the best of my knowledge.
    Perhaps you could provide evidence of this claim or correct your posts?
    This is as bad as my kids fighting! Stick with the thread - does PT sending (accepting) email ads for RM affect its integrity or independance and imply endorsemen? Should PT censor these ads? Should PT censor anything or let the PT'ers decide for themselves?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    110

    Default

    This is one of those situations where there is no right or wrong answer, only beliefs.

    My impression of RM is that they are bud light with a champagne price tag. They are a marketing company that will sell anything and use the premise of being ďeducatorsĒ to turn promotional expenses into income generation exercises. In addition to using their ďeducationĒ to up-sell, they encourage people to buy property rather than let them make informed choices that are in their best interests.

    Many people on this site can see how RM operate and hold them accountable. However despite the apparently obvious nature of their system, not everyone can see how RM operates. Then there are the other more cunning operators, really wolfsí in sheepís clothing, who sneak under the radar of the vast majority.

    When I was President of the Auckland PIA, many people and organisations wanted to associate themselves with APIA, both on a paid for and gratuitous basis. I thought we had a duty to disassociate from organisations of low moral character or those that simply wanted to use the organisation to promote themselves for free. So in this regard I can definitely see where Peter is coming from.

    Decisions on who to associate APIA with were made by consensus. Although I believe this is the right course of action, APIA (and myself personally) were criticised by some and accused of having a vested interest. So I believe that Marc and Donna are in a no-win situation here. Whatever they choose to do they are going to be criticised. And trust me, as someone who has consistently said ďnoĒ to Phil Jonesí overtures, he makes your life very unpleasant if you do not do what he wants.

    This industry attracts a disproportionate number of sharks and unfortunately a lot of the time they look like friendly dolphins. Sometimes good people do not realise that they are actually helping these sharks to continue their charade and continue with their feeding frenzy. Deciding on who has real moral character and not just proclaimed moral character is not always easy. Some people are extremely shrewd and manipulative.

    Donna and Marc are wonderful people and we should all be very grateful that they have established this outstanding resource for us to share ideas, learn and grow. PT is here for our benefit but it takes a lot more money to provide it for us than most people probably realise.

    I donít like some of the advertising I see on PT and I would rather PT wasnít associated with these companies. However PT has many costs that they need to cover and if we are to continue receiving the wonderful benefits it provides, there needs to be an appropriate funding model.

    Perhaps if there was an abundance of advertisers then PT could pick and choose who they accept. They are good people with good judgement and I believe they would make good decisions the majority of the time. Can we help them to achieve this? Do you know of a company that would benefit from advertising on PT? Call them and let them know about the opportunity.

    If we want to eliminate the potential difficulties of choosing who is an appropriate advertiser, perhaps we could all make regular donations to help keep PT going. Remember that it is for our benefit.
    Andrew King,
    Too many tenants in your property? Hire a sleepout and increase the rent
    Andrew King Property Management Services - NZ Property Investors' Federation

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    auckland New Zealand
    Posts
    5,236

    Default

    Outstanding comments Andrew!!

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Whangarei
    Posts
    5,867

    Default

    I think Andrew has summed it up rather well. When I was involved in running our local PIA, anything that RM head office sent through was binned as a matter of course. I didn't and still don't like the way they operate. Sure, our members can get involved with them in other ways but as long as I was sending out the newsletters, it wasn't going to be from me.

    However, the commercial realities of running PT are far removed from the easy moral high ground of a non-profit association. Not every web site I build is for a business I believe in whole-heartedly. I've only once refused to work for someone and that was a guy who wanted to set up a directory for prostitutes and then act as their "booking agents" (pimps) - you have to draw the line somewhere!

    Disclaimer: This was prior to there being a local RM franchise. I can't comment on them as I've never had any contact with them.
    Last edited by drelly; 29-04-2009 at 10:02 PM.

  6. #26

    Default

    Having read these comments I do feel there is a large point being missed here.

    Love RM hate RM it really does not matter as that not the question being raised.

    PT has a database that has opted in to have marketing information sent to them.

    In my mind there is two side to this.

    1 The list that PT sends information to is a permission list you have given PT permission to send this information to you, because you to some degree trust PT with the information you have given them.

    If you no longer trust them then withhold the permission by unsubscribing.

    2 The second issue seems to me to be does PT Promote, support and agree with everything RM does by allowing them to advertise.
    Well this is just silly.

    Does a magazine agree with all it's advertisers or a newspaper?

    PT is paying the bills so that we can all have this broadcaster medium, pulpit, soap box, marketing tool,sand pit whatever you want to call it.

    For my money Marc and Donna would be doing us all a dis service by moderating the marketing that is sent out.


    Steve
    Steven Goodey - CEO PropertyTutors Wellington

    www.propertytutors.com

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    10,313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevegoodey View Post
    Having read these comments I do feel there is a large point being missed here.

    Love RM hate RM it really does not matter as that not the question being raised.

    PT has a database that has opted in to have marketing information sent to them.

    In my mind there is two side to this.

    1 The list that PT sends information to is a permission list you have given PT permission to send this information to you, because you to some degree trust PT with the information you have given them.

    If you no longer trust them then withhold the permission by unsubscribing.

    2 The second issue seems to me to be does PT Promote, support and agree with everything RM does by allowing them to advertise.
    Well this is just silly.

    Does a magazine agree with all it's advertisers or a newspaper?

    PT is paying the bills so that we can all have this broadcaster medium, pulpit, soap box, marketing tool,sand pit whatever you want to call it.

    For my money Marc and Donna would be doing us all a dis service by moderating the marketing that is sent out.

    Steve
    That is about the sum of it. I for one believe I have the ability filter this information and appreciate being given the opportunity to ignore what I wish.

    It is good to see that be are back onto some good robust debate.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    892

    Default

    Perhaps it would be a good idea for the email to make it very clear (by a note at the top I suppose) that the content is advertising material and not moderated or endorsed by PT in anyway? That seems a painless solution to some of the concerns.

    I do not subscribe to the email so have no idea whether it already says as much. Apologies if it does.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    253

    Default Freedom of Speech

    Serious issue people have with freedom of speech
    Largest property educator in New Zealand pays for advertising, and advertising is made, is no problem, is how business works, many here do not understand business and advertising that is why they are confused, maybe they do a course or seminar to learn.
    But digression, company is allowed freedom of speech under consititution to take away their right to have freedom of speech giving people good informations about helpful topical things is to break the law.
    Those that wish to take away freedom of speech are not patriotic or understanding of business, maybe they say instead "rights are to be allowed and I shall not try to take them away, apologies"
    Good on propertytalk for understanding what business and freedoms of speech is.
    Boos to those that do not.

  10. #30

    Default

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts, everyone.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevegoodey View Post
    Does a magazine agree with all it's advertisers or a newspaper? .... For my money Marc and Donna would be doing us all a dis service by moderating the marketing that is sent out.
    Actually, in contrast to Steve's vision of an untrammelled laissez faire advertising policy, newspapers DO vet and moderate their advertisers and advertising.

    I know this from a strange discussion I had at a book launch once when the proprietor of a 'gentlemen's club' sought my advice (!) on his plan to establish a publication to advertise 'adult entertainment' operations such as his because, he said, the NZ Herald WONT run their ads. This left such, um, establishments at the mercy of The Sunday News and Truth (as I recall) -- who, according to him, charged like wounded bulls and gave him poor customer service. Who knew?

    And behind the scenes, Newspapers have questioned and negotiated hyperbole out of ads, judging by these extracts from vaguely relevant Advertising Standards Authority decisions...
    The New Zealand Herald takes all care to ensure that advertisements meet the New Zealand Herald terms and conditions of advertising, New Zealand legislation and ASA Advertising Codes of Practice. Therefore, at the time of its original booking instruction, close to 12 months ago, the NZH account manager for Richmastery asked the client to substantiate their claim, which he did verbally.
    The New Zealand Herald accepted this advertisement in good faith and now awaits the decision of the board in relation to this advertisement.”
    Attached, for your information, is a copy of a letter received from the Newspaper Advertising Bureau (NAB), after consultation with the Newspapers Publishers Association, and the legal opinion the Newspapers Publishers Association received from their solicitors, Belly Gully.(sic)
    The letter required clarification of three points.
    We [Richmastery] responded to points one and two with the extracts explaining these points contained in this submission.
    The NAB letter records: “We are now comfortable with points one and two above following the reassurance and the detail you have shared with us”.
    In Point 3 the letter recommended we replace the word “massive” and “use another word such as good, excellent, serious or similar” as they believe this would be “more acceptable in this type of advertising”.
    “In respect to the above complaint, I am writing to you to represent the views of the NZ Herald in this matter.
    Whilst we at the NZ Herald take very seriously the responsibility to ensure that any advertisement being placed meets the necessary criteria in terms of the Advertising Standards that are set, we are of the view that the Advertisement in question contained a factual account of what the seminar was going to cover and that it did not set out to act in a misleading or deceptive manner to any potential consumer.
    While the Advertisement did make mention of creating personal wealth, it did so by inference to how easy it is to make a million dollars without stating or inferring that this in anyway a guarantee that those attending the seminar would.
    In fact, the seminar from what we understand was an insight into how two highly successful entrepreneurs had made personal wealth from property investment and were going to share their insights for an attendance price of $69.95. [emphasis added]
    Yes, Dave....
    Quote Originally Posted by drelly View Post
    ... you have to draw the line somewhere!
    Last edited by PeterEmpowerEd; 29-04-2009 at 05:01 PM. Reason: Just to say "Belly Gully" was in the original!


 

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Who is Propertytalk.com?
    By Marc in forum About PropertyTalk.com
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 16-06-2016, 11:47 AM
  2. Rate of return do you base it on purchase price or current price ?
    By Retired and bored in forum Property Investment (NZ)
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 12-01-2016, 10:09 PM
  3. Replies: 34
    Last Post: 14-06-2011, 03:58 PM
  4. $370,000 list price becomes $290,000 sale price (Mt Roskill, Auckland)
    By Letterman in forum Property Investment (NZ)
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-05-2008, 05:34 PM
  5. Propertytalk Mention
    By LondonKiwi in forum Property Investment (NZ)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-07-2007, 01:29 PM
  6. PropertyTalk.co.nz... PropertyTalk.com - what's going on?
    By donna in forum Property Investment (NZ)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 15-07-2005, 08:15 PM
  7. Propertytalk Sponsors
    By donna in forum General (NZ)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 21-02-2005, 11:25 AM
  8. What is Propertytalk.co.nz about?
    By Marc in forum Welcome Newbies!
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 14-04-2004, 12:24 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •