Uncompromising war on metallic modernism under the dictatorship of The Corroseum.
https://www.thecorroseum.org/forum/
I do.eatmetalgreg wrote:who says that?Avenger wrote:The difference is that OPM/Doomed Planet were respectable labels. Eat metal is not.OmenOfSteel wrote:I would be interested to hear how John/OPM or Rob/DOOMED PLANET see this who are both registered here. They were among the first to do limited edition vinyl releases, and they never broke their word even though some/most of their releases sold well and quickly.
You are completely ignoring the facts here. Fact, the LP was marketed as "limited edition". This means that it is STRICTLY limited. If greg had plans to repress this then he shouldn't have labeled the release as such. This is a direct lie that would classify as fraud. I could really care less if this devalues the "first pressing" now or not. The point is that greg lied.Dodens Grav wrote:Is this supposed to be an insult?Avenger wrote:Go buy the second pressing.Dodens Grav wrote:Get over it.
Somebody whining because an LP being repressed makes their copy of the album less cool and special is the single gayest thing I've ever read on the internet.
Nowhere in this statement does it mention that this is the only press that will ever be made. Does he fail to mention this, most likely as a sales tactic to increase the sense of urgency a buyer feels to buy his release? Yeah, a lot of labels do that. Is it the nicest thing in the world to do? No, but it's sure as hell not fraud. Only a child could possibly think that, let alone be bothered by this whole 'sordid' affair. God forbid a metal record label does the right thing by repressing a release after it sells out relatively quickly.UNLEASHED..........THIS FRIDAY !!!!!! 525 LIMITED COPIES!!!!!!
FIRST 250 GREEN VINYL + 2 POSTERS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NEXT 275 COPIES BLACK VINYL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ORDER NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOT MANY COPIES LEFT!!!!!!!!!
Weird, the word 'limited' isn't even mentioned here at all. In fact, the word 'limited' appears in the entire thread only one time, and its context had nothing to do with the LP in question.To be released on 20 of September 2010.
This is confirmed 100%.
on EAT METAL RECORDS.
this will be a print of 500 copies (150 green coloured lp- 350 black)
It will be gatefold version.
The 150 copies will also include a giant poster and a patch.
These will be only available from our website, only 2 copies per person-sorry no wholesale for these 150.
Are you blind? When this LP was first released almost every distro that carried it had it labeled as "limited edition" and I’m sure that all of them didn’t just make that shit up they had to have been told that by someone. I suppose that by your logic "only a child could possibly think" otherwise. Whether or not this is a big deal is totally subjective and that’s what we are arguing here. It's not irrelevant unless you don't give a shit about lying bastards.Dodens Grav wrote:The point is that it's NOT a big deal, and seriously, get over it. It's a better thing in the long run that it was reprinted. That means that more people get to obtain a copy. Also, limited does not mean strictly limited. I am looking at the Eat Metal Records website. Here is what it says, verbatim, on the post from January 19th:
Nowhere in this statement does it mention that this is the only press that will ever be made. Does he fail to mention this, most likely as a sales tactic to increase the sense of urgency a buyer feels to buy his release? Yeah, a lot of labels do that. Is it the nicest thing in the world to do? No, but it's sure as hell not fraud. Only a child could possibly think that, let alone be bothered by this whole 'sordid' affair. God forbid a metal record label does the right thing by repressing a release after it sells out relatively quickly.UNLEASHED..........THIS FRIDAY !!!!!! 525 LIMITED COPIES!!!!!!
FIRST 250 GREEN VINYL + 2 POSTERS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NEXT 275 COPIES BLACK VINYL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ORDER NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOT MANY COPIES LEFT!!!!!!!!!
As an added bonus, here is Greg's first post from the first press thread:
Weird, the word 'limited' isn't even mentioned here at all. In fact, the word 'limited' appears in the entire thread only one time, and its context had nothing to do with the LP in question.To be released on 20 of September 2010.
This is confirmed 100%.
on EAT METAL RECORDS.
this will be a print of 500 copies (150 green coloured lp- 350 black)
It will be gatefold version.
The 150 copies will also include a giant poster and a patch.
These will be only available from our website, only 2 copies per person-sorry no wholesale for these 150.
Again, get over it. It's NOT a big deal. This is something that is extremely unimportant and irrelevant. In fact the overall outcome is better than what you would prefer, since the net result allows more people to get the record. Obviously you have a lot of issues with Eat Metal Records, but this being one of them is pretty stupid.
This actually has nothing to do with my opinion on the matter. I've never liked eat metal records from the start because of all the stories I have heard about greg taking forever to ship items after being harassed for several weeks about the transaction. I've also seen and heard about how he's made several different ebay accounts after receiving many negative feedback ratings for the same reasons. Also the issue I had with him was for CD's that weren't even released by his own personal label. The only reason they were purchased was because I thought I would give the guy the benefit of the doubt, as I do not like to base my opinion solely on the experience of other people for the most part. Plus the fact that at the price I originally paid they were a bargain. That aside, I'm not going to get into any more details about the issue because the problem was made public on this forum back a year ago and all the details are still there for anyone who is interested to read by searching for the thread.Trigger wrote:And I still think you are under the influence of your issue with Greg.There is a first press and a repress,anyone can tell the difference one from the other,so there is no problem,more people (those really interested) will get the music and those who are not acting fraudulent and bought several spare copies for charity reasons and to support the label will just sell theses copies for a little bit less money.Rest assured that (most of) those who bought one copy bought it for the music and care less about the value the record gets in the future.And the argument is about the value it WILL get and IF it gets any,which makes it even more absurd.Greg did not release another rare record and stop thinking that everyone's buying an LP for the fucking value it will get,it is not an investment,there's some music going on also.
Eat Metal Records is not responsible for the way that other distros market his release.Avenger wrote:Are you blind? When this LP was first released almost every distro that carried it had it labeled as "limited edition" and I’m sure that all of them didn’t just make that shit up they had to have been told that by someone. I suppose that by your logic "only a child could possibly think" otherwise. Whether or not this is a big deal is totally subjective and that’s what we are arguing here. It's not irrelevant unless you don't give a shit about lying bastards.
Regarding more copies being pressed so that more people can have a copy, yes, I actually agree with you IF the first pressing was not labeled as "limited edition". Also by this logic of yours I suppose bootlegs and replicas do not matter. As long as more people get copies, right?
You say that you are not biased, and then in the next sentence you demonstrate your bias. It is abundantly obvious that your response to this particular issue is indeed fueled by deeper issues that you hold against Eat Metal Records, and if these issues did not exist, your reaction would assuredly be different, or at the very least, tempered. You can not claim to be free from bias while simultaneously saying that you do not like Greg, then referring to the object that you're 'not biased' against as a 'lying bastard' with a 'shady label' and referencing the specific issue at hand as "just one more bullshit tactic to add to the long list of crap that he's pulled over the years". The last statement shows perfectly clearly that your response is embedded in a deeper region than you attempt to imply. Your argument stems from a point of bias, and there is really no point in denying that.Avenger wrote:This actually has nothing to do with my opinion on the matter. I've never liked eat metal records from the start because of all the stories I have heard about greg taking forever to ship items after being harassed for several weeks about the transaction. I've also seen and heard about how he's made several different ebay accounts after receiving many negative feedback ratings for the same reasons. Also the issue I had with him was for CD's that weren't even released by his own personal label. The only reason they were purchased was because I thought I would give the guy the benefit of the doubt, as I do not like to base my opinion solely on the experience of other people for the most part. Plus the fact that at the price I originally paid they were a bargain. That aside, I'm not going to get into any more details about the issue because the problem was made public on this forum back a year ago and all the details are still there for anyone who is interested to read by searching for the thread.
The fact that you are implying that I am biased is simply not true. Greg runs a shady label and this is just one more bullshit tactic to add to the long list of crap that he has pulled over the years. I honestly do not care about the value of these LP's. Hell, I don't even collect vinyl. I am arguing the point that this is morally wrong. From a collector standpoint if you read that a release is "limited edition" that means that it’s the one and only press run but alas with eat metal records this is a lie. End of story.
In Robs posts I don't see any comment on the re-press thing itself.Trigger wrote:Rob has already quoted on that,so don't bother asking.You ask the opinion of a fan/collector and another one from a collector/dealer,what do you expect to get?But using the word "fraud" is quite harsh,don't you see?You should consider other things as more of a fraud in the record selling business but you probably avoid doing so for obvious reasons.Also,you don't call it a "fraud" when other labels-(buddies?) act in a similar fashion or even when the product offered is of questionable quality.If your question is whether Greg did it for collectors,then the answer is no,this release wasn't intended for collectors and the fact that not 5000 copies were made needs no explanation why.You take a risk when collecting records,that's what all collectors say till the LP is officially registered a collectible one,sometimes the risk is not coming through.
Oh, come on nowDodens Grav wrote: Also, limited does not mean strictly limited.
I know, this guy always makes me feel like Kirk whenever he's logically bested by Spock.OmenOfSteel wrote:Oh, come on nowDodens Grav wrote: Also, limited does not mean strictly limited.
Was there something in my explanation that you didn't understand? A "limited edition" of a pressing doesn't mean that there will only ever be one pressing. It means that that pressing was limited. In the early days of the Barbarian Wrath label when business was better, Black Goat has some of his (handnumbered to 666 copies) limited released sell out quickly, in response to which he would release another pressing that was not numbered (although in reality he would print 1000 copies). This is just one of countless examples (another being the High Roller Records label that I already brought up) of labels releasing multiple pressings of 'limited edition' releases. Pagan Altar continually represses their albums as they sell out, printing 500 at a time, because they're never confident that the next 500 will sell out, so they don't press more than that.OmenOfSteel wrote:Oh, come on nowDodens Grav wrote: Also, limited does not mean strictly limited.
Besides, this release wasnt limited "by chance". It was made and marketed as "handnumbered limited edition" to get as many collectors to buy it as possible.
I would have much more right to raise hell about my originals being devalued with the upcoming Excruciate and Purtenance represses, but you know what? I don't give a shit. It needed to be done, they were too limited in the first place. I do think he maybe shouldn't use such strong marketing (most of his releases sell themselves by now), but I'm not in a huff about my record stocks taking a nose-dive. These are new releases, people. Meant to be purchased and enjoyed, not hoarded for business purposes.Dodens Grav wrote:what The Crypt Records does, which is to claim something like "Strictly limited to a one-time only pressing of 500 hand-numbered copies"
Use your head. Of all the distros that were selling the LP there is ONE common denominator: they were all purchased from greg. Ten different distros didn't all make up the same bullshit trying to claim the record was "limited edition" when they really weren't. You are also making a poor argument comparing eat metal records to other record companies. I don’t give a shit if other companies are doing it as well. One wrong, two wrongs or ten wrongs do not make a right. The record was marked as “limited edition” and HAND NUMBERED. It was hand numbered showing how many pressings were to be made. If it had an unlimited print run then it should not have been hand numbered to begin with. Sure the record sold well, I understand that but then greg should have either pressed more copies to begin with numbering them higher or accepted the fact that because he made a claim that the record was “limited edition” held true to that and ended it there.Dodens Grav wrote:Eat Metal Records is not responsible for the way that other distros market his release.Avenger wrote:Are you blind? When this LP was first released almost every distro that carried it had it labeled as "limited edition" and I’m sure that all of them didn’t just make that shit up they had to have been told that by someone. I suppose that by your logic "only a child could possibly think" otherwise. Whether or not this is a big deal is totally subjective and that’s what we are arguing here. It's not irrelevant unless you don't give a shit about lying bastards.
Regarding more copies being pressed so that more people can have a copy, yes, I actually agree with you IF the first pressing was not labeled as "limited edition". Also by this logic of yours I suppose bootlegs and replicas do not matter. As long as more people get copies, right?
I need to explain something here to you about what "limited" actually means, in this sense with regard to record pressing. Every pressing of a record ever made, unless it is explicitly unlimited, is a limited edition. For example, High Roller Records has pressed 3 or 4 limited pressings already by now of the debut Portrait album. HRR also did not ever explicitly say that there will be multiple pressings. The thing is, it is not necessarily determinable right away whether or not multiple pressings are warranted. After all, if it was so obvious that one could move 1000 copies of an item in short order, then one would press 1000, not 500 and then 500 again when the first 500 sell out. The band must also give permission to the label for additional pressings as well, and sometimes this only happens after a first press is already shown to being selling well or, indeed, has already sold out. Selling music is a business, after all. To act as though mentioning (briefly, I might add) that a pressing of a record is limited to XXX amount of copies while failing to mention that the record will be pressed again (and we can't know whether or not this was already planned before the first press was sold out anyway) is somehow borderline criminal is insane. It is quite clear that your issue stems much further than just this matter, but I will address that further down.
Also, a number of times you attempt to thwart my argument by using 'my' logic against me. Yet instead of actually using my logic, you make assumptions about my argument by filling in blanks about things that I never stated. You attempt to insinuate that merely obtaining a copy of a record, whether it is official or bootleg, is the endgame. I never said anything about bootlegs because it was never part of this discussion, so claiming it as part of 'my' logic is dishonest on your part.
You say that you are not biased, and then in the next sentence you demonstrate your bias. It is abundantly obvious that your response to this particular issue is indeed fueled by deeper issues that you hold against Eat Metal Records, and if these issues did not exist, your reaction would assuredly be different, or at the very least, tempered. You can not claim to be free from bias while simultaneously saying that you do not like Greg, then referring to the object that you're 'not biased' against as a 'lying bastard' with a 'shady label' and referencing the specific issue at hand as "just one more bullshit tactic to add to the long list of crap that he's pulled over the years". The last statement shows perfectly clearly that your response is embedded in a deeper region than you attempt to imply. Your argument stems from a point of bias, and there is really no point in denying that.Avenger wrote:This actually has nothing to do with my opinion on the matter. I've never liked eat metal records from the start because of all the stories I have heard about greg taking forever to ship items after being harassed for several weeks about the transaction. I've also seen and heard about how he's made several different ebay accounts after receiving many negative feedback ratings for the same reasons. Also the issue I had with him was for CD's that weren't even released by his own personal label. The only reason they were purchased was because I thought I would give the guy the benefit of the doubt, as I do not like to base my opinion solely on the experience of other people for the most part. Plus the fact that at the price I originally paid they were a bargain. That aside, I'm not going to get into any more details about the issue because the problem was made public on this forum back a year ago and all the details are still there for anyone who is interested to read by searching for the thread.
The fact that you are implying that I am biased is simply not true. Greg runs a shady label and this is just one more bullshit tactic to add to the long list of crap that he has pulled over the years. I honestly do not care about the value of these LP's. Hell, I don't even collect vinyl. I am arguing the point that this is morally wrong. From a collector standpoint if you read that a release is "limited edition" that means that it’s the one and only press run but alas with eat metal records this is a lie. End of story.
To cite this as a moral issue does not even make sense. To begin with, you erroneously claim that "limited edition" is synonymous with "one and only edition", which is far from the truth. As I've already explained, every pressing of a record that is not explicitly unlimited is, by definition, a limited pressing, and thus is free to be marketed as such. It is one thing to say that a pressing is limited to XXX amount of copies. It is an entirely separate matter to say that a record is limited to one pressing (from a given label). Nowhere at any point was it mentioned that no further pressing of this record would be made; therefore, Eat Metal Records did absolutely nothing wrong, and to cite it as a moral issue is not even in the ballpark of reasonability. It is not a lie to say that a pressing is limited to a certain amount of copies and then to press another edition. That a collector inaccurately assumes that "limited edition" means "one and only edition" is the fault of the collector. If Greg had done what The Crypt Records does, which is to claim something like "Strictly limited to a one-time only pressing of 500 hand-numbered copies", then we would be having an entirely different conversation, but your entire argument rests on a misunderstanding of a term and is thus not an argument against anything in reality.
Always wondered this myself.Avenger wrote:what the hell is the point of hand marking them to begin with?
Nitpicking.Dodens Grav wrote:Was there something in my explanation that you didn't understand? A "limited edition" of a pressing doesn't mean that there will only ever be one pressing. It means that that pressing was limited. In the early days of the Barbarian Wrath label when business was better, Black Goat has some of his (handnumbered to 666 copies) limited released sell out quickly, in response to which he would release another pressing that was not numbered (although in reality he would print 1000 copies). This is just one of countless examples (another being the High Roller Records label that I already brought up) of labels releasing multiple pressings of 'limited edition' releases. Pagan Altar continually represses their albums as they sell out, printing 500 at a time, because they're never confident that the next 500 will sell out, so they don't press more than that.OmenOfSteel wrote:Oh, come on nowDodens Grav wrote: Also, limited does not mean strictly limited.
Besides, this release wasnt limited "by chance". It was made and marketed as "handnumbered limited edition" to get as many collectors to buy it as possible.
Unless Greg said "THIS IS THE ONLY EAT METAL RECORDS PRESSING OF DEFENDER OF THE CROWN THAT WILL EVER EXIST EVER, BUY NOW OR REGRET FOREVEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEER!!!!111", then he did nothing wrong, and people need to 1) understand that they misunderstand the usage of the word 'limited' and 2) just get over it.