Visit our Popular Forums

**Ex-Calif** · 31-07-2009, 09:29

The problem with flip-flopping is that the interest group you originally alienated becomes your ally and the group that was your ally becomes alienated.

Regardless of what the owner really thinks about issue, the right business decision for West Marine was to keep its big mouth shut...

**David M** · 31-07-2009, 10:02

Agreed, becoming political reduces your customer base regardless of which side of the issue you take.

Sandero · 31-07-2009, 10:11

When I read the line that the USA is the greatest country in the world, I know that the author has his head up his butt. This alone is a condescending and dismissive remark and serves no purpose other than hollow patriotism.

I approached West Marine with the idea to have a recycle program for marine gear. They weren't interested. All they want to do, like appliance and auto makers is populate the world with the products.

**David M** · 31-07-2009, 10:20

West Marine already loses money.

West Marine, Inc. - Google Finance

I would imagine they are in a "reduce the cash burn" mode and probably cannot afford to take on projects that would cause them to lose even more money. They are a business and owe it to the owners (the shareholders) to eventually provide them with a return on their money. I am not saying they should not be unethical in any way. It should though be their first priority to get back in the black and then think about taking on things where they lose money.

captmick39 · 31-07-2009, 11:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimM

Ok, Gord & Bill: I take your points. If a guys stands on a soapbox at Hyde Park, even though he might recite a perfectly reasonably message, he is going to be taken for an idiot and do his message more harm than good. No one is really hurt if he gets one more email he does not want, and no one here seems terribly concerned about the health of Westmarine (I suppose we have all done enough already for that cause), but the messenger may undercut his message. That would be a shame. (And I agree that Westmarine and Patagonia do not share a lot of customers, except that both have too much to spend.) But Randy is clearly a businessman too. He was once a good one and is doubtless still a rich one. Maybe he does not really care if the value of his stake in his company is cut in half. Violating conventional business sense may have a serious decision. Maybe he feels that some of the email's audience will take away a different message: that he thinks the problem is serious enough to break the rules - that the state of the ocean is less like, say, piracy (relatively familiar if annoying) and more like a huge meteor heading directly (if slowly) toward the earth. I get a lot of email I do not want; I was not delighted to get his either. But it did impress me.

Jim, It (the original email) "Impressed" a lot of folks, on both sides of the equation of a terribly controversial issue, without (all or even remotely close to all) the supporting facts. "Figures Lie & Liars Figure" my Dad still says.
As Gord points out, WM (& BOATUS's MEMBERSHIP LIST) email information is NOT supposed to be privy to OUTSIDERS, nor even "insiders"(including COMPANY PRESIDENTS/CEO's) for either personal gain/agenda dessemination.
While I beleive boatUS is TOTALLY Appropriate WHEN THEY email me requesting that I contact legislators and ask them to vote No or YES on a specific issue (that can benefit Boats AND THE WATERS/OCEANS), they ARE a political organization, w/a lobbying arm specifically for that purpose, of which many of us contribute tons of money to. Email from them? No problemo in my book. Email didn't COME from them, yet MY Email addy (& MILLIONS OF OTHERS) was accessed by WM due to their obvious access to BOATUS's email addy records (as I'm not a "WM "Subscriber", nor have I ever been). That was (1) thorn in my side. Also considering inevitable summary once that camel (gov.org) gets his nose in the tents (of OUR BOATS, and HOW they ARE POWERED), yes, sailors will rank low on the totem pole...initially.

Jim, are YOU willing to give up Your investment(s), for nothing (for that's what they'd be worth) and allow the gov.org to either dictate WHEN and WHERE you can go on the waters, or most likely in the end, voluntarily "authorize" them to remove Your RIGHT completely, for the "greater good" of the oceans?

That's the perplexing question those of us who know federal income tax started at 1%, SSI started at 1%, all schooling used to be private, SSI #'s <--Were REQUIRED BY LAW to ONLY be USED for determining SSI Benefits(rather than as an additional form of Identification), Passports(& drivers licenses) NEVER had "barcodes" in them former 3 years ago, & so it goes. That camel now seeks to take over the tent. Some of us history students are getting out "electric cattle prods/stun guns" to try and retake our humble abode as it stinks like a camel. Some sit on the sidelines (& cheer...or not) & some advocate the camel running EVERYTHING. They know not what they ask for (imho only).

Randy Repass's letter, like a "clockwork orange" was upside down to all that some of us hold dear (like a RIGHT to access to the water, along with a RESPONSIBILITY to pollute less and when possible not at all).

IF HE WANTS to donate every penny he's worth to his wife's activism organization, that's HIS Business and I'd say "have fun, it's YOUR money". However when he takes the rolls of a political activism organization (FIGHTING FOR OUR RIGHTS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THAT Position he took) and comes uninvited in to the houses of millions where now he is obviously NOT WELCOME to preach a position that WE believe is far from Settled science, today, we get a little irate. The fact that he did so as the CEO of a company which stands to profit or FAIL based on his poorly chosen position, will in the end probably have created catastrophic losses for those share holders. By the time the dust settles, regardless of his tenure, he may be forced to step down. Having a wife heading an organization OPPOSED to folks using the waterways seems a conflict to me? I'm not a stock holder, so it's not up to me.

The fact that the (apparently badly needed damage control) "Apology" was penned by ANOTHER also didn't go unnoticed. I don't care if You want to BUY an email list & spam me until tomorrow night constantly; invited guests in my inbox are DIFFERENT. IF he'd put out his letter in their stores nationwide @ checkouts, I think the firestorm would have been just as loud, just as quick, yet FAR LESS WIDESPREAD.

It, in the end, was the equivilant of a GUN DEALER (rather than a mere owner) CAMPAIGNING, IN HIS STORE, for the re-election of Charles Schumer, infamous firearm hater. Best analogy I can think of. A lot of us went "huh"?.....UgottabeFreakinKiddinME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!
(a WHOLE lot of us).

I care about our oceans & don't want acidification, dead reefs, or a dead planet...only an IDIOT would assert such nonsense. Until we can PROVE what's causing the acidification (& quantify beyond those esteemed scientists who've determined it's because of a currently brighter, hotter sun...which we have nada influence over), we need to re-use, recycle, and not be PIGS on the water whether dumping oil/caustics, running over manatees or whales, or just plain being STUPID. I believe all the aforementioned not only environmentally "friendly/green"....also simply:
COMMON SENSE.
Sad commentary is that it's not so "common" any longer.
Randy demonstrated poor judgment. I'll cast no further stones, as I am as far from perfect as Human Beings get...although I do have a grasp on that factoid.

-Mick

**Hud3** · 31-07-2009, 12:55

Mick,

Don't you think you've just about beat this one to death? Really?

David_Old_Jersey · 31-07-2009, 13:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christian Van H

I aint afraid of no goat!

In these parts those be fightin' words

It's almost as if some folks aren't grateful that some of us actually do something about the "Global Sunrise Issue". every day.

If it was solely up to me I would miss out a day of Goat Sacrifice just to learn y'all

Christian Van H · 31-07-2009, 15:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

In these parts those be fightin' words

GET IN MAH BELLY!!! GOATS...the other, other, other white meat...

Christian Van H · 31-07-2009, 15:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hud3

Mick,

Don't you think you've just about beat this one to death? Really?

There's one thing I've got to say for Mick; He REALLY, REALLY believes in his beliefs,

and is sincerely trying to help us understand. At first I thought he was just tryin' to wind us up, but he's the real deal. Hey, I'm a tree-hugger, and I'm really easy to piss off, but I must admit Mick has brought up a couple of points worth thinking about lately. OK, ENOUGH ABOUT THE DAMN EMAIL!!! If ya want to talk about Randy Repass, lets talk about that boat he built with all the evil empires money! Pretty sweet, huh? I love PILOTHOUSES!

See here: http://www.48north.com/jun_2004/convergence.htm

captmick39 · 31-07-2009, 17:11

Doesn't lQQK like THAT 1 burns "10 gal. an hour";
That actually makes me feel a bit better.
A sailor at heart rather than stinkpotter goes long way in this 1's book.

Christian, truth be known, a "tree hugger" too, short of 'em visiting me in my living room I say live & let live.
Recently clearing a lot in my other home(adjacent)town, limbs were seriously out over the dock(s)& going to interfere w/rig of inbound "baby".
Had our zoning official swing by(as there IS a Tree Ord.)& he was the 1 to say "why don't You just CUT ALL THESE DOWN...as none are on the protected list?"
Stunned, said:
"just wanted to lose the limbs over the dock & air space above same...we like the shade, wind protection, etc."
"Do what You want, but I'd cut 'em down."
This from the guy who's supposed to be protecting them?
He might be right, I like 'em; they'll be limbed & stay.

Christian, actually helped w/a little input regarding when oaks, cypress, historic pines meet their end w/a chain saw, folks need to plant 3 for every 1 cut. Folks can make a big difference by simply getting a solar HW heater.

IF Every SFR home did so in the nation (usually w/lots of utility & gov.org incentives) we could pull 28 coal fired plants of the grid...tomorrow. NTM, folks electric bills would drop 24-31%. Imagine all that electricity being WASTED to keep water hot when You don't need it?

Just these 2 little ditty's above cut co2 emissions drastically. Trees? Sure; thousands of MegaWatt's nationwide? Now we're TALKING!