--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, a_non_moose_ff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Denial is a wonderful thing.
I thought it was a river in Egypt... > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, a_non_moose_ff <no_reply@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, a_non_moose_ff <no_reply@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <sparaig@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure, in fact the TMO bought large quantities of books at > > the > > > > right > > > > > > time to > > > > > > > get them on the best seller lists, which then created a > > > > momentum. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not directly, as far as I know. The best-seller lists > > > > > > monitor "institution sales," so to get around that I > > suggested to > > > > Carla > > > > > > Linton and she passed on to Chopra who said it was the best > > idea > > > > he had > > > > > > ever heard, to do a well-organized, piece-meal buying > > campaign, > > > > where > > > > > > Chopra supporters would by a handful of books from each store > > and > > > > then > > > > > > resell to their friends at exactly the same cost that they > > paid. > > > > > > > > > > > > This idea was disseminated unoficially throughout the TMO and > > > > > > individual supporters of Chopra and there were well > > organized, > > > > non- > > > > > > institutional mass-purchases of Chopra's books as they came > > out. > > > > This > > > > > > kept the purchases off the institutional-buy radar but had > > the > > > > same > > > > > > effect. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So a devious means to pull the wool over peoples eyes was used > > to > > > > > promote a technique that promotes "Truth" and "Enlightenment". > > > > > > > > IT wasn't devious. > > > > > > Yes it was. If not, why not send a letter to the best seller list > > > compilers and state what you were doing. You your self said you were > > > trying to fly under their radar. The "method" was to make it appear > > > something was happening that was not. True of so much TMO. And > > > politics / governement / PR / advertising. > > > > Why should they? It was an attempt to prime-the-pump by getting > > people who were already going to be buying his book to buy his book > > sooner. The people weren'ttold to buy lotsof copies and then shop for > > buyers, but to contact their friends and offer to buy the book for > > them. It was a way of concentrating the sales that were already going > > to take place into a shorter period of time. > > > > > > > > > > > > The books were resold to friends. I made it clear, > > > > and the letter did also, that the books would be purchased FOR > > people > > > > that would be buying the book anyway. We just bought it for them > > in > > > > very short period of time, as opposed to the trickle-effect that > > > > casual buyers would have had on his week-over-week sales in the > > > > initial period when it was released. > > > > > > But you would have resisted a letter sent to the best seller list > > > compilers. Why? You were trying to deceive them. > > > > I wasn't in charge ofthat. If you want to send such a letter now, > > describing what I and many others did, feel free and get back to us > > with how they respond. Please make clear that we were buying books > > for friends who had said that they already were planning on buying > > the book. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One amongst many such devious and deceptive ploys. > > > > > > > > Not that devious and certainly not illegal, > > > > > > no not illegal, > > > > > > > > > > unethical or immoral. > > > > > > That's debateable. > > > > Only in your eyes. Feel free to chat with the owners of bookstores or > > with the compilers of the best-seller lists over the issue. I know > > that bookstore owners don't care either way since a saleis a sale, > > and I'm pretty sure that the scenario I presented, where the purchase > > was already planned, would satisfy the book-sales list people as well. > > > > > > > > As I said, > > > > > So a devious means to pull the wool over peoples eyes was used > > to > > > > > promote a technique that promotes "Truth" and "Enlightenment". > > > > > > Its an ends justify the means saga. We can be dishonest so we can > > > promote Truth. > > > > Its not dishonest. It was a concerted effort to concentrate buying > > power of peoplewho were already planning on buyingthe book. > > > > > > > > > And > > > > how is it deceptive to buy a book or three for friends who were > > > > already going to buy the book? The only effect that my strategy > > had > > > > was on *timing* of book sales. > > > > > > Yup. To deceive the best seller list book compilers. Who in turn, > > > innocently deceived their readers - that all these sales were > > > individuals rushing out to buy the book. > > > > > > > They were sales to people who WERE plannning on buying the book. > > > > > > > > We got all the fans to make their > > > > purchases inthe first week or so, rather than inthe first month > > or > > > > three. > > > > > > And thats not deceptive? Why not inform the list compilers of your > > > stragegy and let them decide whether to include the sales -- if you > > > had no intention to decieve? > > > > > > > Why don'tyou contact them for us and tell us what they say? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there much doubt why it didn't work out? > > > > > > > > > > > > But it did work out and quite well, on the levelof book sales at > > > > least. > > > > > > My reference was to the TMO, World Plan, etc. When "ends justify the > > > means" is employed, when deception and misleading spins are used to > > > promote Truth, its bound to fail. > > > > Paranoid when you were with the TMO, and paranoid now that you are no > > longer withit, I'm guessing... > > > > > > > > >Chopra's booksales were quite brisk for a completely unknown > > > > author during that time, and put him squarely in the sights of > > > > publishers as an up-and-coming writer. > > > > > > And looking back on it, in YOUR view, that was a good thing. Chopra > > > became an established "media darling"? > > > > > > > It was the stated intent of the TMO to create Chopra's image. That > > Chopra took the image and did his own thing with it was his choice. I > > resent him for it, that's how these things work. > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
