Apeks tungsten question?

[pants!]

Right but that's not what I meant. I don't understand the whole "limited edition" gear thing. Paying an absurd amount of money for an extra "something" that does nothing to increase the performance of a regulator is a waste.

Why do you think the LDS is trying to get rid of the Pearl? Because nobody wants it and they're probably just trying to get their cost back. And if a LDS has a Pearl in stock I'm pretty sure they just might have some other high performance regs in stock on which a store credit could be used.

Some people like their stuff to look good. Some people buy Bics, some people buy Mont Blancs. Some people wear Dexters, some people wear Peals. Some people buy Timex, some people buy Rolex.

If someone wants to spend some more of their money to get a finer, more rare, or prettier object than everyone else has, who are you to judge them?

 

[mstudley]

Some people like their stuff to look good. Some people buy Bics, some people buy Mont Blancs. Some people wear Dexters, some people wear Peals. Some people buy Timex, some people buy Rolex.

Yup, however in all of those cases the more expensive/attractive item actually performs better or is at least designed to.

If someone wants to spend some more of their money to get a finer, more rare, or prettier object than everyone else has, who are you to judge them?

I could care less. Just stating my opinion... just like you do on virtually every one of my posts recently...

 

[pants!]

Yup, however in all of those cases the more expensive/attractive item actually performs better or is at least designed to.

I disagree entrely! $900 shoes are no more comfortable than $80 ones, and that $25,000 Rolex keeps time no better and is far less functional than a $25 Ironman. And I assure you that the reason a woman buys $499 jeans is *not* because they somehow "perform better."

Looking good and being fashionable are more important, or as important, to some people as functionality. To deny this is madness!

 

[pants!]

I could care less. Just stating my opinion... just like you do on virtually every one of my posts recently...

Well, if I may say so without derailing this thread too badly, I have no problem defending people you head to the internet to blast for "wasting their money" or "taking way too much gear" :11ztongue

 

[mstudley]

I disagree entrely! $900 shoes are no more comfortable than $80 ones, and that $25,000 Rolex keeps time no better and is far less functional than a $25 Ironman. And I assure you that the reason a woman buys $499 jeans is *not* because they somehow "perform better."

Looking good and being fashionable are more important, or as important, to some people as functionality. To deny this is madness!

Right, and none of the things mentioned so far can be considered life support equipment.

There are exceptions for everything... sometimes you get what you pay for... sometimes you pay a bunch of cash for nothing. $400 jeans, $25K watches and $$$ regulators that offer nothing extra except some artwork are a waste.

 

[pants!]

Right, and none of the things mentioned so far can be considered life support equipment.

There are exceptions for everything... sometimes you get what you pay for... sometimes you pay a bunch of cash for nothing. $400 jeans, $25K watches and $$$ regulators that offer nothing extra except some artwork are a waste.

I understand that you feel that way. I was trying to say that these things are important to some people and are therefore not a waste. That's all

 

[mstudley]

Well, if I may say so without derailing this thread too badly, I have no problem defending people you head to the internet to blast for "wasting their money" or "taking way too much gear" :11ztongue

OK, this is my last post on this thread because we are derailing it.

My "too much gear" post was not a "blast", it was a question. If you interpret it that way, that's your problem.

If I can help save someone money by making them think about something from a different perspective, how is that a "blast"?

 

[Spoon]

I understand that you feel that way. I was trying to say that these things are important to some people and are therefore not a waste. That's all

i agree with you 100%. some people are just willing to pay a premium for added cosmetics. just becasue it doesnt add performance doesnt mean its a waste. i personally would shell out extra for something limited even though it doesnt add any extra performance.

 

[Spoon]

OK, this is my last post on this thread because we are derailing it.

My "too much gear" post was not a "blast", it was a question. If you interpret it that way, that's your problem.

If I can help save someone money by making them think about something from a different perspective, how is that a "blast"?

im the type of guy who likes paying extra for cosmetics. it makes me feel good i like having limited edition gear. why? cause i like being one of a kind. i dont wanna have a reg, teeshirt or even a car that most people have. if i can pay extra for something bling-bling and limited i would. wether it be a black pearl, or a ordinary car with custom paint...im that kind of guy and im sure a whole lot more are too.

i was considering getting 2ds4's or 2 atx100's 1st stage or even a black pearl. at this point i really dont know. il just save my credits at the store for another day. im in no hurry since i decided not to sell my poseidon xtreme anymore

 

[aquaoren]

If it has to be an Apeks, then get yourself a pair of DS4/ATX50 and put the rest of the store credit toward a canister light. You'll be happier in the long run.