Open letter to Censored

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't "jump" on LoL's post. I like what she writes for the most part. I do not like being lectured on a topic I'm knowledgable in by someone that is not, or has not proven that they are. Maybe LoL knows more about poker than i give her credit for, but until she shows that the post I responded to will remain an annoyance to me as it provides little cognative thought and lots of repeating what sounds like a marketing pamphlet.

If I'm a tool it's not for that post.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps your problem is that you assumed her post was written FOR you, when it was likely not. Perhaps your problem is you don't realize that you're not the center of the universe. One thing I am fairly certain of: you will respond to this post within 5 minutes with some lame one line response that disagrees with it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Looks like you were wrong on both accounts, as this post will certainly stretch two lines on all but the widest of monitors. Her post was written for people critiquing the 2+2 business, which were by and large people familiar with the 2+2 business and the industry in which it operates. To that extent it was written for "me", the figurative "me", of course, as I agree that I am not massive enough for the universe to revolve around.

I'm not sure why this all makes me a tool. I don't dislike LoL and as far as I know, though with no degree of certainty, she does not dislike me. Maybe she does of course, Elaine does and she said they often have similar opinions. Ed used to not dislike me, but I can't imagine my opinions of or interaction with his wife have done much for the evanpinion much in the Miller household. Either way, I don't see what of that encouraged you to dislike me on behalf of her.

It's too bad, I suppose, but as it stands there is likely little I could do short of recanting what I feel was a reasonable response to an unreasonable post. Oh well, please don't tell too many people that I'm a tool. I'm kind of a big deal around here.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hi Dids:

Very few people believe this, but our goal has never been to maximize profits, at least in the short term. We have always felt that if we can produce superior products, then the profits would take care of themselves, and that this is probably the way we would make the most in the long run anyway. Fortunately, we've had the expertise to attract the best authors and pull this off.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason,

My first company was a startup with the same philosophy. In the end, our clients and employees would have been much happier if our goal was explicitly to make the most money.

Dave

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe we should have a 2+2 screening of Wall Street in Vegas?

[LittleOldLady]

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't "jump" on LoL's post. I like what she writes for the most part. I do not like being lectured on a topic I'm knowledgable in by someone that is not, or has not proven that they are. Maybe LoL knows more about poker than i give her credit for, but until she shows that the post I responded to will remain an annoyance to me as it provides little cognative thought and lots of repeating what sounds like a marketing pamphlet.

If I'm a tool it's not for that post.

[/ QUOTE ]

I basically know zip about poker (although I have read a number of poker books). But we are not discussing poker; we are discussing the 2p2 publishing business and website about which I do know more than the average 2p2er. I do know that TT knows about publishing and Nolanfan about pr, but I am not aware, Evan, of what your background is.

BTW I do know about writing and editing. I taught tech writing and editing for 30 years and have made my living in that field in the past. I have also authored/edited a fair number of articles and books myself. I used to teach about printing, paper, type selection, book design, binding, etc., to tech writing and editing students, so I know something about the manufacturing end of the publishing business. I do NOT know how to run a publishing company and website like 2p2, but along with Edward I am learning. In fact, he and I were in Borders Saturday and looked at some competing publications and analyzed the business decisions that went into them--and the places where those business decisions went astray. So I am learning.

Perhaps, Evan, you do know know more than I do, but I haven't seen your credentials--other than that you are a member of the target audience as I am not. I am, however, sure that I know more about the inner workings specific to 2p2 than you do, even though, of course, I am not privy to all the details.

[Evan]

I have no problem with the way 2+2 binds their books, selects their type or what type of paper they use. I don't know anything about any of that. I do remember a few people saying that the pages of their SSH books ordered via this website from ConJelCo smelled like pot; that's probably not a great business decision but I guess it's worth taking a risk sometimes? I don't know.

I also obviously know little to nothing about the inner workings of 2+2. I know that [censored] is NOT king of oot, but not much else.

I do know a lot about the external decisions 2+2 makes. I've seen them first hand for >2 years on a daily basis. Lots of smart people, much smarter than myself, share the opinion that 2+2 has made some questionable decisions, at best, in running their business. Like you said though, they've done well and must be doing the right thing--a slippery slope, as I've cautioned, but one you seem undoubtedly comfortable on, so I'll leave you be. I have no credentials, just common sense and my reputation here as someone that routinely knows what they're talking about when they insist that they do.

[El Diablo]

LoL,

Simply put, Mason has done a terrific job at building a publishing company and is very successful at that. On the other hand, as a business, twoplustwo.com is at a miniscule fraction of its potential and as a profit center, is pretty poorly run. I don't care to get into that, but you are welcome to have Ed forward you any of my emails to him regarding opportunities twoplustwo.com is missing. However, as a marketing vehicle for the publishing company, it seems just great. Mason has chosen not to focus on monetizing this website and instead focusing on publishing great books. That's his decision and I for one have no problem with it.

In a business sense, Mason actually reminds me of someone I know, David Allen. David is incredibly successful, creator of one of the most successful productivity methodologies in the world. However, David Allen has passed up on countless opportunities to increase his wealth by an order of magnitude because he would have to be much more flexible in his advice to people. As long as he can make enough money to be happy, David is not going to change his philosophy in even the slightest way, even if that means passing up a ton of $$$.

In terms of qualifications to judge these things, LoL, I am friends with a number of tech publishers who are significantly larger than 2+2 and have been involved as friend, investor, or advisor to many content/community-oriented websites that have sold or are worth 10s to 100s of millions of dollars.

[Vehn]

[ QUOTE ]
the profits would take care of themselves

[/ QUOTE ]

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
On the topic of the magazine and things 2p2 has done poorly, they turned down an artcile submitted by Schneids because it was too strategy-heavy. Retarded--tarded once, then tarded all over again--Retarded.

[/ QUOTE ]

Evan way to spread misinformation. It was turned down for being too NON strategy based (ie there was little about poker in it, at all).

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
On the topic of the magazine and things 2p2 has done poorly, they turned down an artcile submitted by Schneids because it was too strategy-heavy. Retarded--tarded once, then tarded all over again--Retarded.

[/ QUOTE ]

Evan way to spread misinformation. It was turned down for being too NON strategy based (ie there was little about poker in it, at all).

[/ QUOTE ]
Haha, oops. Definitely not what I was told though, I'm 100% sure I was told it was too strategy-heavy. May have been a Jewey rumor though.

[LittleOldLady]

[ QUOTE ]
I have no problem with the way 2+2 binds their books, selects their type or what type of paper they use. I don't know anything about any of that. I do remember a few people saying that the pages of their SSH books ordered via this website from ConJelCo smelled like pot; that's probably not a great business decision but I guess it's worth taking a risk sometimes? I don't know.

I also obviously know little to nothing about the inner workings of 2+2. I know that [censored] is NOT king of oot, but not much else.

I do know a lot about the external decisions 2+2 makes. I've seen them first hand for >2 years on a daily basis. Lots of smart people, much smarter than myself, share the opinion that 2+2 has made some questionable decisions, at best, in running their business. Like you said though, they've done well and must be doing the right thing--a slippery slope, as I've cautioned, but one you seem undoubtedly comfortable on, so I'll leave you be. I have no credentials, just common sense and my reputation here as someone that routinely knows what they're talking about when they insist that they do.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you go back and read what I wrote, I said 2p2 must be doing SOMETHING right. That is not the same thing as saying they are "doing the right thing." There is always room for improvement, and 2p2 is working on improvement. And what looks like it might be an improvement does not always turn out to be so on further inspection.

Mason and 2p2 have been in the poker book game a long time. In the last few years the nature of that game has changed radically--and in 2p2's favor. The changed circumstances call for changes in 2p2, and Mason has been cautiously making them. For example, he has successfully brought in new authors, heralded like Dan Harrington and unheralded like Edward. He is also giving other new voices (like Dave, Sunny, and Matt) a chance to be heard, pairing them with experienced authors like Ray Zee and Edward. He has not rushed to sign up tv and internet "stars" like Scott Fischman (who has demonstrated on this site that he cannot construe a single coherent sentence) just on the basis of their "fame." YMMV, but I think those are good business decisions.

A different owner, perhaps a younger one, might respond to the changed circumstances more aggressively. But those of us who are old enough to remember the dot.com fiasco saw a lot of young hotshots go splat. Aesop thought the tortoise had a point, and so do I, but then I am not a young and aggressive hotshot....

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
He has not rushed to sign up tv and internet "stars" like Scott Fischman (who has demonstrated on this site that he cannot construe a single coherent sentence) just on the basis of their "fame." YMMV, but I think those are good business decisions.

[/ QUOTE ]
I do too. Obviously he has not done everything, or even nearly everything, wrong. My point is simply that there's a lot more he could do to build this business and that could work toward his goal of helping poker (I don't remember the exact wording).

[ QUOTE ]
those of us who are old enough to remember the dot.com fiasco

[/ QUOTE ]
Not sure if this is directed at me, hope it either isn't or is a joke.