Best Price EVER on this speaker classic!

[ivwshane]

Please don't flame me but how would these compare to logitec z640's? I know ones two channel and the other is 5.1 but I really haven't been using mine in 5.1. Really I just want to know how the sound compares. I'm not unhappy with the 640's (especially for the price) but I want to know how big a difference I would actually hear.

 

[ciba]

He is the admin of the site that is the only supplier of the speakers that newegg now sells. This means that he will directly benifit from any sales made. He is not the boxer at his company's plant so this is not an issue of an intel employee recomending a Dell computer. Making outragous claims to analyze how you see the problem is not helpful.

Admin != ownership. If he does own the company I'm open to someone pointing that out.

The claim isn't so outrageous. Both are employees of the company. Both third parties (Dell or NewEgg) would indirectly benefit the employee by making a sale. In both cases, the benefit is realized up the supply chain. I don't see how you can argue otherwise unless you know the poster in question is the owner of the company, which hasn't been established. The next question should be "how much ownership constitutes a conflict of interest?" Surely owning one share of dell wouldn't, but owning 95% of a company would. Where is the line drawn?

I agree with you that the spirit of the rule might not have been followed. If admins think so, a lock and a new rule/clarification are certainly in order. My point remains, he didn't break the rule in place now and it is unreasonable to call for a ban when no offense happened.

Anyways, I don't mean any of this as a flame, but moreso as a friendly discussion of the gray area in the "Hot Deals" rules.

 

[konakona]

Originally posted by: ivwshane
Please don't flame me but how would these compare to logitec z640's? I know ones two channel and the other is 5.1 but I really haven't been using mine in 5.1. Really I just want to know how the sound compares. I'm not unhappy with the 640's (especially for the price) but I want to know how big a difference I would actually hear.

this is as good as computer speakers get. actually swan has more expensive line up too, but thats like 800ish... i never got to hear the Edriols, but other than that when it comes to music

Swan m200 > Sirocco Crossfire = Midiland S2 4100 > Gigaworks > Klipsch > everything else, just about.

thats based my limited personal experience and reading reviews like the ones posted on 3dsoundsurge.

 

[welst10]

Check out Swan's $68,000 ultra high-end Swan 2.2 speakers. OMG

Here

 

[littlebitstrouds]

Originally posted by: ciba

He is the admin of the site that is the only supplier of the speakers that newegg now sells. This means that he will directly benifit from any sales made. He is not the boxer at his company's plant so this is not an issue of an intel employee recomending a Dell computer. Making outragous claims to analyze how you see the problem is not helpful.

Admin != ownership. If he does own the company I'm open to someone pointing that out.

The claim isn't so outrageous. Both are employees of the company. Both third parties (Dell or NewEgg) would indirectly benefit the employee by making a sale. In both cases, the benefit is realized up the supply chain. I don't see how you can argue otherwise unless you know the poster in question is the owner of the company, which hasn't been established. The next question should be "how much ownership constitutes a conflict of interest?" Surely owning one share of dell wouldn't, but owning 95% of a company would. Where is the line drawn?.

A: This constitutes that he is in fact a part owner.

B: Intel has 20,000 or more employees alot differant that the probably 30-40 that work for Auto Insider

C: the 5% 95% arguement is easy... you draw the line at 0%. It's that easy, that's the arguement.

 

[OCedHrt]

Just had to say something..if we draw the line at 0%..then someone who works for steel manufacturing can't post hot deals about pc cases 😉 And people who work at a power plant can't post deals about anything that runs off electricity...And blue-collar works can't post any deal at all because the sales-taxes will be benefiting their "employer." This list can go on forever 😛 *inno*

Glad to see its still on page 1! 😀

 

[Jeraden]

Enough arguing about the poster. More discussions about these speakers. Anyone else have any opinions? One half of me really wants to order them. The other half can't justify spending $170 for 2 computer speakers.

 

[konakona]

i am really ordering these once i get enough funds in my bank account. if you were ever in the market for computer speakers these are the ones to get (especially at this price)

 

[Jeraden]

If your sound card had a separate output for rear speakers, you could still hook up a couple other speakers for the rears if you were really interested in a pseudo-5.1 system right?

Well, I caved in and ordered a pair regardless. woot!

 

[orgasmicNYC]

Ordered a set. Most of you are pathetic arguing over whether he should get banned or not for posting a hot deal. You forget one thing you have no authority so why don't you just shut the f*ck up. You have a problem with the speakers let us know you got a problem with the OP than report it to the moderators and move on. Damn babies.

 

[konakona]

Originally posted by: orgasmicNYC
Ordered a set. Most of you are pathetic arguing over whether he should get banned or not for posting a hot deal. You forget one thing you have no authority so why don't you just shut the f*ck up. You have a problem with the speakers let us know you got a problem with the OP than report it to the moderators and move on. Damn babies.

 

[littlebitstrouds]

Last reply

I love how when people get in a friendly arguement in a topic people like to stand back and b*tch about how much they are being babies. It's a healthy arguement. Part of the usefulness of forums are for arguements.

Don't flame healthy arguements. That's stupid.

 

[littlebitstrouds]

Originally posted by: orgasmicNYC
Ordered a set. Most of you are pathetic arguing over whether he should get banned or not for posting a hot deal. You forget one thing you have no authority so why don't you just shut the f*ck up. You have a problem with the speakers let us know you got a problem with the OP than report it to the moderators and move on. Damn babies.

And this is probably the dumbest thing I have ever herd

 

[manno]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Gibzilla
Low fi is low fi any way you put it.

Hifi is f*cking dangerous and it's literally on another plane of existance.

Let's not go there. At the same time let's not pretend anything sub $200 is remotely hifi or "good sounding" to hifi people.

i like to crap in threads too!

HAHAHAHA

 

[welst10]

Originally posted by: orgasmicNYC
Ordered a set. Most of you are pathetic arguing over whether he should get banned or not for posting a hot deal. You forget one thing you have no authority so why don't you just shut the f*ck up. You have a problem with the speakers let us know you got a problem with the OP than report it to the moderators and move on. Damn babies.

Seconded.

 

[ciba]

A: This constitutes that he is in fact a part owner.

This link just lists him as a contact. A corporate resolution or article outlining who founded the company would suffice to show he was an owner, but being a contact does not mean he owns the company.

B: Intel has 20,000 or more employees alot differant that the probably 30-40 that work for Auto Insider

Your following point invalidates this argument. If you draw the line at zero, any employee with stock options/profit sharing should be ineligible to post. Where would you draw the line at which a conflict of interest occurs then? 100 employees? 623 1/2?

C: the 5% 95% arguement is easy... you draw the line at 0%. It's that easy, that's the arguement.

Fair enough, but OCedHRt summed up my point on this. Most of our hot deals posters would be ineligible to post if you went all the way up the supply chain.

I also agree, a little debate is healthy as long as it remains civil.

 

[littlebitstrouds]

Originally posted by: ciba

A: This constitutes that he is in fact a part owner.

This link just lists him as a contact. A corporate resolution or article outlining who founded the company would suffice to show he was an owner, but being a contact does not mean he owns the company.

B: Intel has 20,000 or more employees alot differant that the probably 30-40 that work for Auto Insider

Your following point invalidates this argument. If you draw the line at zero, any employee with stock options/profit sharing should be ineligible to post. Where would you draw the line at which a conflict of interest occurs then? 100 employees? 623 1/2?

C: the 5% 95% arguement is easy... you draw the line at 0%. It's that easy, that's the arguement.

Fair enough, but OCedHRt summed up my point on this. Most of our hot deals posters would be ineligible to post if you went all the way up the supply chain.

I also agree, a little debate is healthy as long as it remains civil.

I've proven that he probably does... simply stating that it's not difinitive isn't good enough. You can try proving he probably doesn't, which you havent'.

It does not negate my arguement on my B arguement. It simply furthurs it. It's obvious that this guy would benifit from any sales in a large scale. Some one from intel would benifit in extremely smaller scale.

Jumping to the share owners arguement is just a plain old uneducated and an obvious jump to conclusions. I could say then as an American I should never recomend any American product to any oversees person as it would stimulate our economy thus making us richer. Don't be obserd in an arguement. It ruins your credibility.

Bottom line this guy would benifit DIRECTLY by ANY sales of these speakers.

 

[konakona]

wow you guys really must be proud of yourselves, you really had to go out of your way to dig up his information just so you can ban him? pffft... some people have too much time on their hands, thats what it is. if he did post something illicit this thread woulda been already locked a long time ago, and thats what mods are for anyway; quit try to teach mods how to judge the validity of a thread. what part of this destructive lynching do you find 'healthy'?

a hot deal is a hot deal is a hot deal. if you dont like it, get out of the thread.

 

[huesmann]

littlebitstrouds how about you go and dig up a deal hotter than this one?

 

[welst10]

littlebitstrouds = mod wannabe

 

[carpenter]

Some people shouldn't be allowed to go up stairs without adult supervision. 🙂

 

[Apex]

Wow, nice price for these.

 

[Jaxidian]

Originally posted by: welst10
littlebitstrouds = mod wannabe

This is a good price on these! Hot deal in my opinion.

Thanks OP! I came here for hot deals and you gave me one.

 

[Cat]

Originally posted by: littlebitstrouds
I've proven that he probably does... simply stating that it's not difinitive isn't good enough. You can try p

No you haven't, the link merely shows him as a sales contact. Proven and probably don't belong in the same sentence. 🙂

 

[Zontor]

I haven't gone through this thread with a fine toothed comb (the 'A' and 'B' grade 21 inch monitors) but shouldn't littlebitstrouds be upset about this too?



My 2 cents....