Everybody a breeder ?

[Tom Hill]

This would be nice if a consumers mind actually worked like that but in most cases it doesn't. Consumers don't need to know how an internal combustion engine works to purchase a car nor do they need to know how the inner workings of their computer or the programs that run them work to purchase a computer. They rely on marketing and reputation of the company. Consumers want a reliable product that does what it says its going to do, the inner workings or how it was created is inconsequential.

Seed is seed, not car engines, not computers. And drug cannabis seed conventionally bred will never ever be as reliable as what folk are attempting to compare it to. It will never work that way, now folks can blame breeders all they want for that fact, but that only makes them ignorant, it doesn't somehow magically make it the breeders fault.

 

[Weird]

Cough cough horse shit! You're telling me these guys whining about "why isn't every seed awesome" and all that bs, with zero understanding of how impossible that is, have any validity at all to their argument? They do not, no way no fucking how.

Yes I do believe there is validity in the argument.

Even if you use the best science, best genes, best environment and disclose the methodology, pedigree and environmental conditions and how they work together it still may not set the right customer expectation.

Use pip313's experience with DJ's stock, no matter of due diligence his expectation was not set correctly and this he is not happy. DJ generates revenue from providing a service not the other way around. Part of his value to the consumer is to set the right expectation. You can not logically remove this factor from existence nor can you fix it completely by offering education to the customer.

A customer can read all the science you offer and still set the wrong expectation.

This is why I mentioned ego, not because I am calling you an egotist but that because of your nature as a high level professional breeder the perception that role created is so ingrained you cant see it from a simple consumer prospective

I say this as my opinion so please its not an offense, you are simply too focused on being professional breeder to be a custy, and remember my client base are PHd professionals and they have the same difficulty

A good doctor doesn't just treat you but tells you how is helping you without you needing to be a doctor and yes they have to become expert at medicine and customer relations. There are industries based on this paradigm, it is not a defect of your making but a byproduct of being so successful in your profession.

I hope this helps because I am not trying to anger or frustrate you and if the breeding communality that does discuss this doesn't come to terms with this dynamic they will be left behind when those who do exploit it.

This is how the hacks get business, they exploit customer expectations

Im on your side on this one although it may feel I am not.

 

[canned abyss1]

Actually I think seed can be more reliable than other products, for instance if you have a GM 3.4L you can pretty much bet its going to give you problems, and we all know how reliable windows software has been.

 

[canned abyss1]

Also Tom I am curious what is your criteria for what you consider reliable?

 

[Weird]

Seed is seed, not car engines, not computers. And drug cannabis seed conventionally bred will never ever be as reliable as what folk are attempting to compare it to. It will never work that way, now folks can blame breeders all they want for that fact, but that only makes them ignorant, it doesn't somehow magically make it the breeders fault.

In a legal climate expect someone who never grew to say I want to grow today and want to buy seeds without anything more than a glance at the package.

Not everyone buying seeds is a seasoned grower and I don't believe I have ever attacked the value of breeders or tried to fault them at all and I am sorry if it feels that way.

It becomes a simple matter of problem (expectations) and solution (setting them) and how you do it will not be the same every customer every time.

 

[Tom Hill]

Re above weird (man, turbo) with a modicum of understanding of the science, Pip would have realized that while the stock he was messing with may have scored low marks regarding mean phenotypic values, it scores through the roof re mean genotypic values. boohoo but why can't it be like a car, or a tomato, because it simply doesn't work that way that's why. I am trying to provide folk here with that understanding, but really, the best way to gain it is by picking up a book or two, learn the science, and learn a little about how the science pertains to the plant they are working with. I am just trying to be as honest as I can about this shit, it has nothing to do with chest pounding or any of that, but when folk are so far off as to say some of the things they are saying, and try to pass it off as reality or the way things should be, well I have some things to say about all that and no, it will not always be polite.

 

[Infinitesimal]

Use pip313's experience with DJ's stock, no matter of due diligence his expectation was not set correctly and this he is not happy. DJ generates revenue from providing a service not the other way around. Part of his value to the consumer is to set the right expectation. You can not logically remove this factor from existence nor can you fix it completely by offering education to the customer.

A customer can read all the science you offer and still set the wrong expectation.

This is why I mentioned ego, not because I am calling you an egotist but that because of your nature as a high level professional breeder the perception that role created is so ingrained you cant see it from a simple consumer prospective

I say this as my opinion so please its not an offense, you are simply too focused on being professional breeder to be a custy, and remember my client base are PHd professionals and they have the same difficulty

A good doctor doesn't just treat you but tells you how is helping you without you needing to be a doctor and yes they have to become expert at medicine and customer relations. There are industries based on this paradigm, it is not a defect of your making but a byproduct of being so successful in your profession.

I hope this helps because I am not trying to anger or frustrate you and if the breeding communality that does discuss this doesn't come to terms with this dynamic they will be left behind when those who do exploit it.

This is how the hacks get business, they exploit customer expectations

Im on your side on this one although it may feel I am not.

In a legal climate expect someone who never grew to say I want to grow today and want to buy seeds without anything more than a glance at the package.

Not everyone buying seeds is a seasoned grower and I don't believe I have ever attacked the value of breeders or tried to fault them at all and I am sorry if it feels that way.

It becomes a simple matter of problem (expectations) and solution (setting them) and how you do it will not be the same every customer every time.

I don't get it... are you saying...

breeders need to lower the expectations of the customers?

or do the customers need to have more realistic expectations?

or the breeders shouldn't build any expectations and just let the pretty packaging sell beans?

see I think am pretty with it on most of the more simple breeding tactics... but you confuse me man

 

[YosemiteSam]

Seed is seed, not car engines, not computers. And drug cannabis seed conventionally bred will never ever be as reliable as what folk are attempting to compare it to. It will never work that way, now folks can blame breeders all they want for that fact, but that only makes them ignorant, it doesn't somehow magically make it the breeders fault.

When you deal with cars, computers, drills, whatever state of the art today is apply the Toyota Production system and then use 6 sigma on top of that. It is relatively easy to get any single process down to a 2 x 2...so statistically you are dealing with 4 variables and it is easy to figure out exactly what you have to control.

Seeds...that ain't ever gonna happen. If you think it is you are never going to be happy with any seed purchase. It is the pure statistics of the thing.

But still, in general, why wouldn't you pick a breeder that uses state of the art processes? You improve your chances significantly with that one simple choice.

And those one in a billion shots in the dark, well make some friends and hope you can get a clone.

 

[GMT]

You all know that the supply of seeds, isn't a closed shop don't ya? If anyone believes they are capable of doing a better job than the current seed sellers, there is nothing but the law to stop you giving it a go. Though I do think that all releases should be pre-tested rather than going into the untested list.

 

[Weird]

I don't get it... are you saying...

breeders need to lower the expectations of the customers?

or do the customers need to have more realistic expectations?

or the breeders shouldn't build any expectations and just let the pretty packaging sell beans?

see I think am pretty with it on most of the more simple breeding tactics... but you confuse me man

im a saying for breeders to market successfully they need to set customer expectations from a customers perspective. Everyone is too polarized because they are on one side of the proverbial fence or the other.

I am on neither so my perception is not biased in the same way.

 

[Infinitesimal]

ok well, I am on that wavelength, like I alluded to earlier...

the breeders should only market the strains average quality expressions (mean value) in the strain descriptions then also mention in a sub description what the top 5% (1/20) individuals expressions are like but that they are hard to find.

so then the customer knows both what they should be able to expect and what they can hope/search to find

 

[Weird]

marketing success is not reliant on breeding technique which is what causes this issue in the first place. Good breeder bad marketing gets worse results than a bad breeder with good marketing. IMHO changing the name or refining the definition of the word breeder is not going to get the desired results.

 

[Weird]

ok well, I am on that wavelength, like I alluded to earlier...

the breeders should only market the strains average quality expressions (mean value) in the strain descriptions then also mention in a sub description what the top 5% (1/20) individuals expressions are like but that they are hard to find.

so then the customer knows both what they should be able to expect and what they can hope/search to find

Proof of performance lie in the ability of the breeder to deliver on a promise. Same stance I have had the whole thread, that is why the Tom Hill BRAND is so powerful in marketing while his science is so important in BREEDING

 

[stickshift]

ok well, I am on that wavelength, like I alluded to earlier...

the breeders should only market the strains average quality expressions (mean value) in the strain descriptions then also mention in a sub description what the top 5% (1/20) individuals expressions are like but that they are hard to find.

so then the customer knows both what they should be able to expect and what they can hope/search to find

Well TH did that and then people used it to throw shit his way.....

 

[Tom Hill]

^^^ word, still do lol.

And I also just think it's probably easier to try to educate the customer in threads like this than try to spank all the shyster breeders out there into a more honest living. Weird would be a tough case in that regard too, after all, his 1 on 1's are every bit as good as anything being put out where a more scientific method was applied.

 

[GreenintheThumb]

im a saying for breeders to market successfully they need to set customer expectations from a customers perspective. Everyone is too polarized because they are on one side of the proverbial fence or the other.

I am on neither so my perception is not biased in the same way.

Your perception is biased on your experiences. Your perception is biased towards marketing.

Breeders market with pedigree hype. Girl Scout Cookies gets hyped up online. Then thousands of people want a bean from this line because they can't get the cut where ever they are at. The issue is, they haven't grown the cut they don't really know what it's like. The seeds are a polyhybrid segregating mess. They find a plant they like to smoke. They are then pleased and happy with the breeder. However, the breeder did a horrible job of getting the GSC traits into the seedline that they sold. It doesn't end up mattering because the people who purchased it are mostly ignorant to what those traits are and they are simply happy finding a plant they like to consume.

The market is sold on pedigree hype, not quality of releases.

 

[pip313]

Did I grow them out? Well I sure didn't waste them. They had a chance to out grow the deformities as I was told they could have. But no I got growth so slow it couldnt have been justified, hermies, and plants that couldnt even germinate. I usually get 9 or the full 10 to germ when I do seeds.

Im not a real picky guy my main strain is a late flower hermie I just work around / deal with it but when many plants consistantly underperform with major deformaties somethings wrong.

 

[Weird]

Well TH did that and then people used it to throw shit his way.....

Because if it IS to be used as an exact measure it has to be scaled to all scenarios and as in the DJ example it doesn't work out in all REAL LIFE scenarios.

It was never an attack on Tom's logic it was to turn what he was saying into something the consumer could digest and scale to every breeder in every circumstance.

Tom set the bar for excellence no one has a right to try to take that away, but fine weeds, both grown smoke, sometimes take a refined grower and smoker to appreciate.

Some of Tom's genius is simply above people because they are too "green" to be able to know and too "new" to be able to educate regardless of the value and validity.

Marketing is like breeding, there are so many variables that it takes some expertise and experiences to really understand it and it is not any way my desire to piss off old cali heads. Im just trying to share what I know so they will still be here later on

you will never see me dissuade someone from supporting any of the people who try to feed their families by selling seed, even the said hacks, not because the real breeders don't deserve it more, but because the bigger the market the more fruit on the tree for everyone to pick.

30 years of IT market expansion and contraction coupled with my 20 plus years of growing clandestinely has given me very unique insight and value.

There is one point I am especially passionate about is that people try their hand at breeding. NOT FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES, but because the special relationship created when you do. This is why I also do not want to see the science dissuade people from doing it, but I was not trying to promote 'hack' breeding.

You cali heads told the world don't believe the man, free the seed grow the weed, and I did and you were right. Don't let the pressures of legality keep us from making it a reality. In truth it would simply increase the demand for seed with proper pedigree because anyone can make s1 or f1 but not everyone can make breeding stock for hobby breeders looking to make healthy crosses to design their own personalized medicines and recreational head stash.

 

[HidingInTheHaze]

Aside from some of the big med states most growers elsewhere that aren't into the internet canna scene don't have a clue.

I know quite a few growers IRL that don't do the internet thing and they either source whats available in clones or they just get on the attitude breeze thru and buy based on a name they like or buy the first kush they see. Seed website descriptions are about as far as most go to research perspective purchases and maybe high times.

It's only the most die hard weed nerds that care about this kind of stuff.

 

[GreenintheThumb]

Dj's great at selecting moms. Turns out that isn't the whole picture. Most of the keepers I've found in his pool have been hybrids of his work. Like Tom said. His stuff is genotypically strong but phenotypically weak. He set himself up for fail because he had so many 1:1 matings of small populations. Prob way back when he was forced to make selections of 40 plants in mobile homes. He accidentally fixed his families for many negative traits and now they can't get the leaf crinkle mutations, intersex, and lack of vigor issues out of his pure lines.

Saying all of that his stuff is a goldmine with outcrossing to unrelated populations.

That's my experience and I greatly respect the guy. But he could have done better. Shoulda cracked the book