Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 00:19:03 11/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 19, 2000 at 19:45:01, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On November 19, 2000 at 18:42:35, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>These turbo-kits were great indeed and I still have a few somewhere >>perhaps lying under some dust in the attic. But I don't understand >>your remark on Hegener & Glaser. The Lang-Schroder-Morsch policy you >>describe is true but that did not mean they provided a turbo-kit >>for me for each WCCM. I had no complaints. > >why should H+G provide a turbo kit for you ? >their interest is/was in selling EXPENSIVE dedicated chess computers >such as Amsterdam/Dallas/Roma...68000/68020/68030. Read again: H+G ALWAYS provided me with the BEST hardware possible on a World Championship investing many german marks because I always got the latest and fastest Bsteh machine. And believe me H+G had to pay big money for that. >Rebel/MM4/MM5/Polgar etc. etc. > >costed only 498,- or 598,- or 798,- DM. >you were in charge for the middle-class machines. >Frans was for the 198,- / 298,- DM / 398,- machines. So what? >with the Richard Lang machines, they were able to sell 1999,- and even more. > >this was the upper-class / high-end-class. > >With bringing MM4/5 or Polgar with a Turbo-Kit from >the middle-class into upper-class , schaetzle and bsteh ruined the whole >concept they (H+G) developed to get the most out of the market. > >cause the 1600,- DM or was it 1900,- don't remember anymore ?! >have to be paid for the turbo-kit, and only 498,- for the MM4-machine. >this way the big amount of money was transferred to another company >than H+G. No. The market for the turbo-kit was just too small. >In the moment the turbo-kit was on top, ssdf "decided" to throw them >out of the list. > >>I don't know why SSDF decided the remove the Turbo-Kits from the >>list, > >no. > >>I am sure Mr. Hegener liked it for the reason you describe > >?!?!? > >Mr. Hegener liked to get 1600-1900 DM less money per unit ? >aha, interesting. now we know why H+G got bancrott. > > >>but that doesn't mean he was involved in that. Saying such a thing >>without evidence would be slander. >> >>Ed > >of course. >and do you know WHY nobody knows why the ssdf did it ? >Because they had an interest not to explain their behaviour in a better >way than they did in those years. > >slander again. right. Yes slander. >but nobody needs evidence when it is obvious whose INTERESTS have to be >made real. > >tell me your interests and i tell you why you do what you do. > >i can tell you e.g. why christian liebert published the thuringen tournament >where gambit-tiger ran on a 500 Mhz machine !! >it's obvious. because deep-fritz and junior participated on fast machines, >the tournament was important for christian, since he works for computerschach >and spiele and computerschach and spiele is owned by mr. frederic friedel. > >tell me your interests and i tell you why you do what you do. Thuringen is no CSS tournament it never was. Ed >one does not need to be nostradamus. its enough to count 1+1 together. > >junior wins in thueringen, df participated too, both on fast machines, >while the biggest concurrent in a 7 round swiss tournament is: >as we all know: GAMBIT-TIGER not Rebel-Tiger, runs on a 500 Mhz machine >and plays strange book moves. > >and the result is: junior wins and CSS has its big article. > >next thing that will happen: > >junior and df will be sold in the christmas business. > >they need champions, wins, trophys. > >fair competition ? never heard of this . > >i remember when they tested CSTal in thuringen, on cyrix cpu's. > >and you even get the right answer: if you want to win >next time, send fast hardware to thuringen, dear companies. > >aha ! > >if one sends fast hardware to somebody , the results get better ! > >very good method.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.