|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..6..9..12..15..17~18~19~20~21~22~23 [Next] | ||||||||||
kissdadookie Inner circle 4275 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 21, 2021, Roberto W wrote: So, context matters right? Look at ad copies for when an item is noted as being a utility device. It’s virtually always worded that way in an effort to make it appear that the item is far more versatile than a single purpose for a very specific situation that a gimmick usually has the connotations of. Let’s pretend for a moment that the gimmick is a switching device. It’s not a utility device because it helps you achieve a multitude of things for a multitude of scenarios. Calling it a gimmick would actually diminish the perceived possibilities of the gimmick. So arguing that this should not have been called a gimmick is a bit ridiculous especially when considering what has typically been labeled as being a utility device. By definition (as to how the phrase has been typically used in the area of magic product marketing), calling something a gimmick is a more conservative label for a item than calling it a utility device. So trying to argue that this should not have been called a gimmick actually works against the argument that the marketing was deceptive since calling the wallet a gimmick is actually a very conservative labeling for the wallet. |
|||||||||
Morganjj Regular user 168 Posts |
How many days did it take after the first complaint that the advertising was unclear for them to update the copy to be super clear?
They also gave refunds where people were unhappy. How many days since then has the argument continued here? What is it you want from them Pegasus? Anyone who felt deceived has their money back if they want it. The copy and discourse are incredibly clear as to what you get. What else? |
|||||||||
kissdadookie Inner circle 4275 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 20, 2021, gtx magic wrote: I’m not quite sure what you had spent all the practice time on for the switch. I can tell immediately in your review that you had skipped the first and foremost thing that Christian points out in the tutorial that you need to practice and get comfortable with. That one thing is the palm needed. You don’t have it in the right position at all. There is no need to clip the card so high up. This has nothing to do with how big your hands are or how thick your fingers are, you are simply clipping the card way to high up. You should try clipping it much lower. You’ve also completely ignored the bit where Christian shows you how to hold and open the tabled card. You’re basically doing the whole thing mostly wrong and essentially did not follow the instructions. I think this has less to do with the move being hard and more that you actually need to rewatch the tutorial more carefully and actually follow the instructions. Like I get it, reading If A Octopus Can Palm Cards and trying to do those moves, it may be impossible (they are actually very hard moves for the most part, but it being in text usually is not as helpful as having a very detailed video instructions) but the instructions that comes with Switch One is actually very detailed (in regards to the teachings for the move itself, routine ideas, etc. are not very comprehensive with the provided tutorial but this is made up for with all the supplemental material in the private FB group) and the actual move isn’t that hard, you’ve just apparently missed all the details. You’re obviously very nervous doing the move as well for which I don’t understand why you even bothered to demo the move since you can’t do the move yet. Please go back and actually spend time watching the tutorial and following along closely this time. |
|||||||||
Roberto W Inner circle 1249 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 21, 2021, kissdadookie wrote: Again, you’re missing the point. I’m simply making reference to what people thought and will think if they don’t read this thread and simply watch the demo. It looks like all dealers have this wording now in their selling description (which not sure if this was the original wording of got changed because of the controversy). I’m just saying it’s what the majority of people thought. As I said whether it’s wrong or was wrong that people thought/assumed the gimmick aided the switch and was not a holder, is controversial but can see why people assumed the gimmick was part of the switch (not looking at the wording description explaining) to help it - because it looks that clean and we are so used to seeing similar effects that clean but you need a gimmick to assist it. “ At the core of "Switch One", there is a special gimmick that truly allows you to retrieve any card. However, if you want to opt for the easier handling (as shown in the trailer), you'll find that a singular (yes, just one) moment of equivoque in the beginning helps create the best results. As you'll learn both though, you can decide for yourself! You'll also learn Christian's truly amazing switch where objects invisibly melt into one another. This imperceptible switch allows you to switch a card right under the noses of your spectators. They can be burning your hands and won't suspect a thing. Despite how impossible it might look, Switch One is actually super easy to use. With a little practice, anyone can master it and will then truly have a miracle-maker on their hands” If all this description was in the original ad then I have to agree people would have fully know what they would be getting before ordering. But I would like to have seen the previous ad copy wording if this now wording was not the original ad description. |
|||||||||
kissdadookie Inner circle 4275 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 22, 2021, Roberto W wrote: My point really is that other than literally stating what the gimmick is, there is very little difference if it was called a gimmick or device or utility device. People whom have assumed that it was something that does the switch for them would have thought that was the case regardless of what the wallet was referred to as. In fact, if they said that it was a wallet, I believe that people would STILL have just assumed that the wallet held some sort of contraption that did the switch for them. The copy you quoted there, I believe that it is the updated copy. I think they updated the copy after a day or something. Somebody else posted a link from the way back machine that showed the original copy, I'm not sure how long that original copy stayed up before they made some edits. |
|||||||||
Roberto W Inner circle 1249 Posts |
Have to disagree on the definition of a wallet being described as a gimmick. If the current ad copy that was that back then even at pre sale etc, you would not of had half the people buy it which then would not have resulted in so many giving a negative review and some saying they felt ‘mislead’. The current ad copy states exactly what you get so it literally causes no confusion to the gimmick being the wallet and you learning the switch which is slight of hand.
The reason for so many negative reviews and a lot that are for sale now is due to the assumption that people got a gimmick that assisted the switch (not a gimmick to hold index cards). In the trailer and the original ad copy stated you got a invisible gimmick. Due to the switch being that clean and ‘invisible’ is why people thought the invisible gimmick was related to you being able to do the switch assisting it to be that clean. VI and dealers must have felt in some way the ad copy was either confusing, a bit misleading etc or they would not have needed to change the ad description and simply left it as it was. |
|||||||||
kissdadookie Inner circle 4275 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 22, 2021, Roberto W wrote: You've completely missed my point. If the copy stated that the device/gimmick was a WALLET but did not state that it is a in**x, people would have made the same assumption. It being a wallet or being called a device or a gimmick is inconsequential in this scenario. The fact of the matter was that it apparently was necessary to spell out to people that the switch itself is purely a move in no uncertain terms. What the physical item you receive was referred to as, let that be wallet, device, or gimmick would not have made a difference if it wasn't spelled out for them that the switch itself was a pure sleight of hand technique. I made the same assumption as everybody else until I watched Faulkner's video review where it was very obviously implied that you got a in**x and then the switch was a different component of the release and it sounded like it was a move to learn, I throw that out there to point out that I initially thought it was some sort of switching device as well like many others but that even after figuring out it was a move, I still bought it because I saw the value in the move (the end product actually provided me more than I had anticipated as a whole package as well, for me). |
|||||||||
Roberto W Inner circle 1249 Posts |
Exactly, you like me assumed the gimmick was something that aided the switch to look that clean. Don’t forget not everyone is on the Café, not everyone follows review channels which then often as with Steve, Anthony etc, gives more in an insight what you get as with any trick.
So a lot simply buy based on video trailer and ad copy description hence why there are so many misleading sales tactics purposely used sans mind one of them. The point is, if it was clarified exactly what you get (as it now states in the updated ad copy) then 99% of people would not have given a negative review or felt in some way they were mis led. This is not opinion but fact of what people have said and comments made. Like I said if VI and dealers didn’t think the trailer and original ad copy was in a way misleading or causing wrong assumptions/confusion to the point of it becoming an issue, they wouldn’t have needed to amend anything. |
|||||||||
videoman Inner circle 6732 Posts |
Not sure what all the back and forth is about. I don’t believe VI intentionally tried to mislead anyone, but in order to create buzz about Switch One I think the way they worded the original email blast (although unintentional) could easily give the impression that the included gimmick was for the switch and not the retrieval of the card. And once you have a certain idea in your head of what something is it can be difficult to change someone’s mind. I believe that’s what happened here and a certain percentage of people who quickly ordered it may mistakenly thought it was a switching gimmick of some kind.
But not a big deal because I’m sure those that got the wrong impression were able to get refunds. But as has been stated previously, I’m also sure a large number of them were quite happy to learn that the switch did NOT require a gimmick. The text below is from one of the original emails prior to the release. This was immediately under a gif which repeatedly showed the switch. I think this certainly gives the impression that the Switch One gimmick pertains to the switch itself. Upon further investigation you can determine that that may not be the case, but it was even still a bit unclear IMO because they initially chose not to mention an index as being part of the “system”, and with so many gimmicked switch boxes and other switch devices such as Alibi being released in recent years it is not far-fetched to to think that some people are going to automatically assume that Switch One is some kind of switching device. Text from email >>>What you get: In the box, you get the incredible “Switch One” gimmick. It's beautifully made and designed to be carried with you everywhere. Christian teaches you multiple handlings, including the incredible trick with the stopwatch that you can see in the full performance. You'll also learn how you can adapt “Switch One” to almost any effect: to reveal star signs, names, hot drinks... nearly anything you can think of.<<< I haven’t noticed a huge amount of them for sale. Seems to be about the same amount as most new releases. The reason most are being sold IMO is because they want to learn the switch and adapt it to a effect they already do and don’t need the index, so they sell it on. Another reason it would have probably been wise to sell the switch as a download (and even as a very expensive download) while selling the index separately or as part of a combo “Pro” package for those wanting the complete system. Personally, the thing I found most disappointing was the fact that to get the most out of the effect, it really requires you to be seated or wearing a jacket of some sort. Someone mentioned that we should all look nice and wear jackets but that kind of implies you are performing professionally, which most here are not. And many like myself live in warm weather climates where I virtually never wear a coat or jacket. So I would choose to discard the supplied index (even though it looks great and I love it being disguised as a wallet) and use my own index. Although I may be able to come up with a reason to bring the wallet into play as part of my existing routine, but I think I’d prefer to just keep it simple as it already is. |
|||||||||
kissdadookie Inner circle 4275 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 22, 2021, videoman wrote: There's other ways to retrieve from the wallet. Such as if you were doing the stop watch effect, you can pull the envelope with the prediction out of the wallet whilst stealing the needed card. This can be done with very generous angles. Remember, the heat never leaves the tabled card so ringing in the wallet in this fashion is going to be a non-issue. |
|||||||||
Joaquin Veteran user 328 Posts |
This is a trick that requires a move and an utility tool/gimmick like any other the tricks . I do not see where is the misleading or bad advertisement from VI.
The trick does work one way or another and it looks pretty good once you have it down. The indx is fine and better than many others. The concept was based on Cosmo’ Solano as they mentioned it at the bottom of their AD. For me Q from Cosmo is one of best indx with 48 outs and you can wear in front pocket jeans. Now if you have $250 to invest in Q go for it. But if not then the index from Switch one will do just fine. A little more restrictions but again it will do the trick So you learn a move that can be used for many other effects and a goo quality indx that can also be used for many other effects. This is a win win situation so it is worth the price |
|||||||||
Roberto W Inner circle 1249 Posts |
The point is I think people need to remember back in the beginning when all we had was the original trailer and the original ad copy (that has now been changed to be more descriptive in what you actually get). Personally I can see why people thought the ‘invisible gimmick’ was something that assisted the 2 cards being switched - because of how clean and invisible the switch looks. Which I think 99% of people thought the gimmick was enabling this. Forget the comments of “but in Blackpool” etc etc. Yes if people were privileged enough to have seen it at Blackpool and word got around it was incredible slight of hand etc, yes you then were in the know.
But you have to base this on if someone watched the trailer read the original ad copy and then what they thought. Which is why I think 99% thought the gimmick was not the holder. We’ve gone past the definition and interpretation they should the holder be called a gimmick yea and no. But it comes back to in the beginning before word got out it was slight of hand and the holder is a gimmick etc, the high majority of people assumed and thought the invisible gimmick was to assist the actual switch. So wether that’s because people wrongly assumed or wether due to the wording made people assume wrongly because of the wording or both. But point is the wording in the ad copy got changed because of this and if VI/dealers felt this was not an issue, they would not have changed the wording so people now know exactly what they are getting. |
|||||||||
pegasus Eternal Order United Kingdom 10537 Posts |
5 stars to VI for their damage limitation abilities.
|
|||||||||
gtx magic Special user United Kingdom England 954 Posts |
David Penn gives a glowing review of Switch one by Christian Grace on the Wizard Magic Review 15-9-21
Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence.
|
|||||||||
pegasus Eternal Order United Kingdom 10537 Posts |
Well he would because he knew exactly what he was getting. Jeez. Lol.
|
|||||||||
dyoung Special user 898 Posts |
So is the gist of all of this, that every product now has to state exactly what you receive and how it works?
|
|||||||||
David Numen Inner circle 2070 Posts |
Isn't it extremely ironic that magicians - people who love fooling people - seem to hate being fooled themselves? Especially when it's their own stupidity and lack of thought that's responsible for the fooling?
WHAT DID PEOPLE THINK THEY WERE GETTING? A MAGICAL CARD THAT COULD CHANGE TO ANY CARD? Seriously...even if the card was some kind of fantastic gimmick that could do an invisible s@@@ch then there would STILL have to be some kind of i@@@x to house all the possibilities, no? It's beyond belief that anyone would think otherwise. |
|||||||||
kissdadookie Inner circle 4275 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 24, 2021, David Numen wrote: It would also be an inferior method to do a switch for this application. Perhaps a p**l type device but that really would still be incredibly inferior as you now have this extra element of handling and complexity that comes from having to retrieve from a in**x and now have to deal with a p**l that of course would have more restrictive clothing requirements than what you have with this. Angles would most certainly be worse as well due to the nature of a p**l. People who were expecting a device that does the switching for them essentially just wanted something with as close to zero effort as possible. These people also don't really understand what the better method is or routining because if one was to put any thought into all the aspects of this routine, one would soon realize how incredibly inferior and limiting this would be if the switch was to be done by a device rather than sleight of hand. Let's put it this way, there's a ton of torn and restored gimmicks out on the market throughout the years, yet nothing looks and feels as good to the audience and is as fooling as Hollingworth's and then later Lovick's versions. Same applies here (except the sleight involved is FAR easier). Lastly, the issue of pocket space. I'm sorry but this type of routine would have had ALWAYS taken up an entire pocket if not two. You need to be able to retrieve at least half a deck full of cards, laws of physics dictates that this would take up substantial pocket space. Period. QC took up an entire pocket for the half set up and you could not move that thing around unless you duck out for a few seconds (you can freely move the Switch One gimmick around in the open since when closed, it is basically just a wallet). There are other in**x systems like Christopher Taylors but that's going to be pretty thick if we are going to be using playing cards and trying to perform this routine. It's a none issue really, the issue with pocket space, as no matter how you slice and dice it, this type of routine would require a chunk of pocket space. The other systems however lack the ability to freely move the gimmick around out in the open like this one though. It's actually a very large benefit. |
|||||||||
Kaliix Inner circle Connecticut 1984 Posts |
Yes for the love of God, the original ad copy was vague. A small number of people might have been mislead, but it has since been changed and anyone affected has been offered recompense. Can we move on now?
I'd much rather discuss the mention by David Penn that this move is a game-changer and will be considered a foundational sleight everyone serious magician should know. Strong words from a knowledgeable magician. Quote: On Sep 24, 2021, Roberto W wrote:
The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge.
~Daniel J. Boorstin |
|||||||||
Roberto W Inner circle 1249 Posts |
If it was a small number of people the ad copy would not have been changed. Regardless why and how this has gone, it had to be that much of an issue for the ad copy to official be changed. If VI/dealers genuinely felt there was nothing wrong in the original ad copy it would have been left as it was.
Like said above it could have been a number of factors that contributed to the majority feeling the way they did. Let’s be honest here, changing a ad copy as much as it was does not happen all the time and only exceptions. This was obviously an exception for a reason. I’m just saying I can see why and how people felt when they received it thinking/assuming there was a gimmick that aided the switch. BUT is that their fault for assuming the ‘invisible gimmick’ was something that assisted the switch maybe maybe not. This could go on forever but it’s been changed now so people fully know and are aware. Hopefully people are finding the switch easy to master with a bit of practice to make it look as good Christian because no one can deny it looks incredible fair play. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Latest and Greatest? » » Switch ONE trailer live now, Christian Grace (142 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..6..9..12..15..17~18~19~20~21~22~23 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.12 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |