From: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org (chakram-refugees-digest) To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: chakram-refugees-digest V4 #82 Reply-To: chakram-refugees@smoe.org Sender: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk chakram-refugees-digest Tuesday, March 23 2004 Volume 04 : Number 082 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [chakram-refugees] The Seasons [was: Ratings] [cr ] Re: [chakram-refugees] The Seasons [was: Ratings] [cr ] Re: [chakram-refugees] Forgiving Xena [cr ] Re: [chakram-refugees] Eye of the Beholder [cr ] RE: [chakram-refugees] "Double Dare"! ["Xena Torres" ] [chakram-refugees] Eye of the Beholder [Lilli Sprintz Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] The Seasons [was: Ratings] On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:18, Jackie M. Young wrote: > > 'Exploitative' is _definitely_ a matter of personal judgement, I think. > > I didn't feel it was more so later in the series. Some of the plot > > lines were more melodramatic, yes, that's something that's almost forced > > on the producers of a long-running series. > > > > But more exploitative? More so than Xena shacking up with Iolaus and > > the Herc in the trilogy, for example? > > --Sure, I thought the Gab-having-a-demon-baby plot was manipulative and > exploitative. > > And the X-fighting-all-the-gods-in-the-world-even-those-not-from-her-land > exploitative. Interesting, but exploitative. Well, what I said - demonstrably 'exploitative' is one of those things that is a matter of personal opinion, since I don't agree with you. :) You can call anything 'exploitative' if you have a mind to. Re fighting the gods, that was one of the themes of Hercules and Xena from day one. There's even a special CGI shot of Xena confronting Poseidon in the XWP titles. If that theme is 'exploitative' then so were both series, right through. > > > Granted, a fight scene like in The Way (at the end) doesn't quite > > > compare in goriness with what we saw earlier. But something like the > > > fight with the harpies in Mortal Beloved is similar. And frankly, I > > > can do without the gore and just go for the action. ;P > > > > Doesn't it? I found the fight in The Way more shocking than any > > previous fight. Xena actually getting bits cut off, made me feel almost > > queasy. The fight with the harpies in Mortal Beloved isn't in the same > > class. > > --I meant it in the opposite way, so misstated it. The Way end fight was > way more gory than the Mortal Beloved fight, obviously, but what I meant > was that I felt all that gore wasn't necessary to the plot. > > Hence, more "exploitation". ;P Define 'exploitation'. And then tell me why Is There a Doctor in the House wasn't exploitative. I found the fight in 'The Way' shocking - though not 'gory' as such, which is to say, they didn't dwell on the blood. It was shocking because Xena got her arms cut off (and that did make me cringe). But they showed that very briefly. Quite unlike those 'splatter' movies that seem to want to show every sickening detail in close-up slow-motion. So in that respect, I'd say The Way definitely _wasn't_ 'exploitative'. > > > I don't get that feeling from S3 on.....;( > > > > Maybe just because it wasn't new? > > > > > > ADITL was a case in point - full of sarcastic comments, bickering and > > backstabbing. I can just imagine the reaction if that had aired for the > > first time in S4/S5. > > --Yeah, those actions or mannerisms weren't new in S3, so they weren't > *delivered* by the actors as new or fresh. If it were just a matter of > "not being new", I'd get bored watching S1/S2 eps, which I don't. > > You forget that ADITL was *delivered* with all the spunkiness and > freshness of S2. Actors have to _believe_ in the currency of their > character (i.e., be "in the moment") in order to deliver it that way to > the audience. > > ADITL was delivered with a certain naivety still evident in the X/G > relationship. I don't believe LL or ROC could've done ADITL with the > same attitude in their "later years".......but that's JMO. ;) Ah. Naive sarcasm. And a 'first' for your collection, at that. Yep, that works. cr ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 19:03:29 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] The Seasons [was: Ratings] On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:37, Jackie M. Young wrote: > On Sat, 20 Mar 2004, cr wrote: > > On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 20:25, Jackie M. Young wrote: > > > The first interracial locked-lips kiss in Mortal Beloved (ST:TOS > > > doesn't count because the critics had Shatner and Nichols turn away > > > from the camera)?? > > > > So what? That didn't even register with me. Was that supposed to be a > > big deal or something? It just seemed perfectly ordinary to me. (I was talking about Xena and Marcus not registering, of course, not Shatner et al who I know nothing of.) > --The Shatner/Nichols kiss is widely documented in ST circles as TV > history-making because it caused so much controversy in the > still-paranoid, race-conscious US. But, the producers admitted to > "fudging" it a bit because they turned away from the camera and the kiss > was closed-mouth (as most kisses were in the '60s). Ah, Trek stuff. Doesn't register on my radar. ;) Trek circles might document that but is that just fannish overstatement? Does everyone else agree? (I don't know the answer). > Since XWP went far beyond that, I believe it was also "history-making". Well, I really wouldn't know about that. To decide, one would really have to consider the full range of TV / movie history, of which I will cheerfully admit I'm fairly ignorant. > > And what's this busines with 'first this' and 'first that'. Kinda > > irrelevant, IMO. You could claim ITADITH as the 'first season-ender' > > but so what? Rather than the 'first' of something, I'd rather watch > > the 'best' example of whatever-it-is. > > --To many people, setting a record or thinking first of an idea is > important. If it's not important to you, then bully for you. > > But I think that's why so many of us were drawn to XWP in the first > place. It was the first of its kind and was ground-breaking in its ideas > and execution (on TV). That's important to me, and probably to others. Impressive and interesting and well-executed is more important to me than whether it's the 'first'. Being first to do something does give a series or an episode the advantage of novelty, so all things being equal, it should 'win' in any comparison. But if things aren't equal, e.g. the second-comer is noticeably better, then 'first' doesn't count for much with me. > So when a particular ep is the "first-of", I take note of that. ;P But it needs to be something notable that it's first of. > > > The first black Helen in Beware Greeks, and the first bamboo "horse", > > > replete with soldiers inside, that I've ever seen?? > > > > Is Galyn Gorg 'black'? That never registered with me either. I do > > rather like her as Helen, btw. And I quite like the ep. But it's > > still only in the 'quite like' category, not in the 'don't miss'. > > Anyway, so far as 'black' characters go, IMO the prize has to go to Gina > > (who is unmistakeably 'black') as Cleo in King of Assassins. > > --To a US audience, I believe Galyn Gorg would be considered black. And > to cast a black person in an historical role like that would be, umm, > "historical", IMO. > > I love GTorres to death, but her role in Cleo in Assassins was too short > to make an impression, IMO. Huh? I think she had *more* screentime in KoA than Galyn Gorg did in BGBG. It certainly wasn't too short to make an impression on me > > As for the ladder fight, that's one of those that turns me off due to its > > physical impossibility. It started out promisingly, but you just > > cannot balance on a ladder like that. If you move further from the > > pivot, it not > > --Well, we all have our pet areas, Thel, and obviously engineering is > yours. It's not mine, and this _is_ an action/fantasy show, so I just > accepted that as part of the "fantasy". Yeah, fine, and I know TPTB used to repeat it ad nauseam in every 'clip' show they could, but it falls flat with me. This is one of those personal things. I happily accept Xena and Alti *flying* in their Sin Trade fight, which of course is 'more' impossible (or would be if degrees of impossibility existed :) than the ladder fight. For that one, I accept the 'fantasy' element. > OTOH, if we talk about misrepresentation of certain races on TV, then I'll > start to object (as you well know). ;) So, it all depends on our > particular viewpoint....... > > > Hmmm. I like those episode arcs. But I also like good single eps. > > Not sure what you mean by 'punchline' though. But anyway, there were > > just as many good endings in later seasons as in S1/S2. > > --The earlier eps had a definite "ending" or moral. The later arc eps > were more of just a "continution" of the journey. Oh, I *hate* morals. One of the reasons I like XWP is that it almost always avoided trying to shove a 'moral' down our throats. > I tend to like my eps to be neater and more tied up at the end. Helps me > sleep at night. ;) > > --Jackie Well that's your choice. Not mine. I like mine a little rougher. (Having said which, I *do* like an ep to have a proper conclusion, even if it leaves several nasty looose ends dangling for future attention. I can't abide those few series that leave major plot threads un-finished and you know they're not going to come back to them next week. OTOH, if it's part one of a two-parter, then of course I don't mind how many loose ends are dangling). XWP always satisfied me in that regard. cr ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 20:05:47 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Forgiving Xena On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 14:53, Cheryl Ande wrote: (snip for bandwidth) > We forgive because that is how we participate in the story of Xena. We > become vested in Xena's fate. We can act the part of pardoner and we can > absolve Xena. We participate in a very personal level in the story and > that is why we are so attracted to this story. We feel in an odd way that > Xena needs our understanding and forgiveness. Thanks Cheryl. That's part of what I was trying to say. > As for peopel being more helpful to beautiful people that less attractive > people. I actually don't buy that. I don't really care how many > experiments people do. There many viables in why and when people will help > people in trouble. It has been shown that when people are in a crowd they > are less likely to render assistance to someone than when they are alone. > The looks of a person may indicated whether some one helps another but > visual signals have many meanings which interpret in many ways. > > CherylA I think it depends on circumstances. Good looks are an attention-getter only. Sure, if a gorgeous-looking girl was to stop me on the street and ask for directions, she would instantly get my full attention. While a plain-looking one would get my attention if I wasn't otherwise busy. That's a matter of first impressions and a few moments of my time, and looks admittedly could make a difference in that situation. OTOH, consider for example, a case where I'd been chatting to someone for five minutes - let's say, in the observation car of the 'Overlander' on its way to Wellington (as I was, a month ago). I had conversations with several strangers there. Now, if anyone had asked me, I would (for example) have gone and got a map and explained the geography of New Zealand to them at whatever length they wished, and (this is the point) my willingness to do so would have been in proportion to how interesting they were to talk to and how interested they appeared to be in the information, not their looks. cr ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 20:10:39 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Eye of the Beholder On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:06, Jackie M. Young wrote: > On Sat, 20 Mar 2004, cr wrote: > > On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 21:03, Jackie M. Young wrote: > > > Without much deviance, strangers invariably were helpful to the > > > good-looking pair, but uncaring or unhelpful towards the ugly- or > > > plain-looking pair. People would go out of their way to give > > > directions, or help pick up lost papers or lend money, etc. to the > > > beautiful people, but totally ignore the ugly ones. > > > > Yes, but we're not talking about a stranger, we're talking about a > > character we 'know'. > > --Ah, but you're begging the question, Thel. ;P Do we forgive her because > she's beautiful and attractive in the first place, or do we forgive her > because we like her upstanding character qualities (which we only learn > about _very slowly_ over the course of many eps)? I am *not* begging the question. We forgive her because we know her, and her character, IMO. How people react to strangers is irrelevant to this. > And just *why* are we attracted to her to begin with? Part of it, > inexorably, would be her physical appearance. Oh, most certainly. But having got to know her, for whatever reason, and decided she's a good guy, we are then willing to forgive her. Or at least, I am. > A good example of this was in a ST:TOS ep, in which Chris Pike, the > original Enterprise captain, was hijacked to a planet of illusionists by > Spock. > > Normally, Chris Pike is a fairly handsome guy. But it turns out that long > ago, after he was Enterprise captain, he got into a catastrophic accident > that left him paralyzed and disfigured. Spock was bringing him back to > this planet so he could retain his "illusion" of beauty (and to get it on > with a female on that planet in a similar predicament). > > During that ep (Menagerie), I kept thinking to myself that I felt sorry > for Chris and that I couldn't stand to see him all disfigured. I doubt > that I could've gone through *6 seasons* of seeing him in that shape, much > less being the star of the show! Yet we were shown in flashbacks what an > upstanding guy he was, etc., etc. Wouldn't know, don't watch ST, all the characters are cardboard cutouts (IMO :) > Would we have put up with a disfigured or ugly Xena, regardles of how > heroic or talented or insightful she was, for *6 seasons*?? I highly > doubt it. Speak for yourself. I don't know, it's never been tried. > > > --Per above, I'd disagree. A *large* part of Xena's attraction is that > > > LL's stunningly beautiful. And strong, and brave, and has the coolest > > > fight moves. But (and I hate to admit to going on looks alone) I think > > > it would be hard to make a case for her being as popular as she is if > > > she were plain-looking or ugly. > > > > Well, LL is not always stunningly beautiful. It depends a lot on > > camera angle and even hairstyle. (IMO). As Lyla, in the Herc eps, > > she looked good enough to eat. She also looked pretty good as Xena - > > even though she was a villain much of the time. But in early Xena (IMO) > > they often made her look rather plain. > > --Again, Thel, you pick at nits and miss the point. ;P (BTW, I actually > liked her more in the S1/S2 eps, because they put much less make-up on > her, so she looked more "natural". In the later seasons, she _obviously_ > was made up.) Excuse me - miss *what* point? Quote: "A *large* part of Xena's attraction is that LL's stunningly beautiful". Exactly what part of that did I 'miss'? I repeat what I said - LL's usually (not always) good-looking, but only occasionally (IMO) does she appear 'stunningly beautiful'. > LL is, basically, stunningly beautiful, regardless if she's wearing a > cloth sack or Kali demon make-up. I don't believe the producers would've > cast her to begin with if she weren't attractive (one of whom is currently > her husband, so that kinda *clinches the theory*, eh?!). There's a huge difference between 'attractive' and 'stunningly beautiful'. And your statement that she's always beautiful even in demon makeup is nonsense, IMO. It just ain't so. Are you suggesting that Rob only married LL because of her looks? Or if not, what 'theory' does it 'clinch'? > How do you separate out her innate beauty from her character's > attractiveness?? Are you talking about the difference between LL and Xena, or about the difference between Xena's looks and her character? > > IMO, Xena's fascination was due at least as much to LL's acting ability > > as to her looks, maybe more. > > --Although I highly respect LL's skills, I don't believe she was that > great of an actress at that time to be cast only based on her skills, IMO. > A good example of this would be to watch her acting in the HTLJ Trilogy. > Very rough. Yet it was good enough to get her a series. But only because > 5 others weren't available. I didn't think it was rough. And besides, if she is as stunningly beautiful as you claim, and actresses are selected on that basis (as you imply), howcome she was only No 7 on the list for possible Xenas? > > But anyway, coming back to the original question - I'm sure that, having > > accepted Xena as our 'hero', we'd be prepared to forgive her almost > > anything - even looking ugly ;) > > --Do you *really* believe that, Thel?!? Could you *honestly* put up with > a hero looking like X did in Sickness and Hell for *6 seasons*?!? > > Methinks thou doth protest too much.....;=P No, methinks *you* do. Please stop trotting out these snide debating catch-phrases ("begging the question" "missing the point" "protest too much") or at least save them for occasions when they're accurate. I did not say that we'd be prepared to have Xena looking ugly full time for six whole seasons. However (and IMO), Xena frequently looks less than good-looking. Any actor who plays an 'action hero' under stress is going to look non-beautiful on frequent occasions. As her expressions change, and camera angles do, often Xena looks - well, less than flattering. I could give many instances but since I don't think instantaneous expressions are really relevant, and it would read like an attack on Lucy, I won't do it. cr ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:22:18 -0800 From: "Xena Torres" Subject: RE: [chakram-refugees] "Double Dare"! Anyone know when this film will be available to the masses? (ie: not a film festival) BATTLE ON XENA! Xena Torres: Warrior Writer http://www.geocities.com/bitchofrome "And most importantly, I've learned that the heart can betray, but the sword never lies." - Eve "Heart of Darkness" >From: Sarah Anne Packard >To: chakram-refugees@smoe.org >Subject: [chakram-refugees] "Double Dare"! >Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:02:40 -0500 (EST) > > I just saw the documentary "Double Dare" (at the Ann Arbor Film Festival >here in Michigan), and I have to recommend it highly to everyone >here...not only because it's a fabulous film about a subject that doesn't >get a lot of attention (stuntwomen!), but because it has TONS of Xena >stuff. :) You see, it's about 2 stuntwomen in particular - Zoe Bell >(Lucy's double from Xena) and Jeannie Epper (Lynda Carter's double for >Wonder Woman)...and it follows the two over a couple of years of work and >life. Anyway, they show LOTS of Zoe working on the set of Xena, Lucy does >some commentary and stuff! I even recognized specific eps they were >filming (including "A Friend In Need"), heh heh. :) And, they follow Zoe >as she goes to the big Xena con in Pasadena, 2001! They even show many, >many fans (people in the audience of the screening were kinda giggling at >the whole convention part, seeing the fans in costume and all; meanwhile I >was turning to my sister and pointing to people and saying, "I know him! I >know her! And her too!" Lol...all the convention regulars) and Zoe >interacting with fans, giving autographs and everything. Plus, Zoe >apparently was at one point going to be Vicky Pratt's double on "Mutant >X", so they show her going to Vicky's house and interacting with Vicky and >T.J. Scott! (She didn't get the job though. :( ) Anyway, Zoe comes off as >a real doll, I wish I coulda gone to that con (I almost did!) and met her! >Sharon, if you're reading this - please consider getting Zoe for another >Burbank con please?! :) Zoe's career is really taking off too, and the >film captures that - it shows her auditioning for and then landing the job >of Uma Thurman's double for the Quentin Tarantino flick "Kill Bill"! > >Does anyone know what she (Zoe) is up to now?? > > > -Sarah, aka the abbagirl- > > >P.S. This was the first time this film has been screened here in Michigan; >I think it's mainly doing festivals and stuff right now, it probably has >been released some places though...y'all must go see it!! :) >========================================================= >This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. >To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with >"unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. >Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. >========================================================= _________________________________________________________________ http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 13:11:33 -0500 (GMT-05:00) From: cande@sunlink.net Subject: [chakram-refugees] Xena DVD Season 2 at Overstock http://www.overstock.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi?PAGE=PROFRAME&PROD_ID=483862 Season 2 DVD is available at Overstock for around $42 with shipping of $1.40. These should include the commentaries I would imagine. There is a limited quanity available. CherylA ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:09:42 -0500 From: "mirrordrum" Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] "Double Dare"! i want to see the movie, myself i do!!!! i wonder if it will ever be released. thanks for the hedzup, though sarah. it was you wasn't it that posted about seeing it?--i have a mind like a sieve. i'll be looking for it. md - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 12:14 AM Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] "Double Dare"! > In a message dated 3/21/2004 12:04:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, > abbagirl@cyberspace.org writes: > > > Sharon, if you're reading this - please consider getting Zoe for another > > Burbank con please?! :) Zoe's career is really taking off too, and the > > film captures that > > Heck, I'd love to have something about Zoe in the newsletter. Maybe there > was an interview a long time ago, but an updated one would be nice. > > -- Ife > ========================================================= > This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with > "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. > Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. > ========================================================= ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:47:11 -0600 From: Lilli Sprintz Subject: [chakram-refugees] Eye of the Beholder Jackie Young said, "Although I highly respect LL's skills, I don't believe she was that great of an actress at that time to be cast only based on her skills, IMO. A good example of this would be to watch her acting in the HTLJ Trilogy. Very rough. Yet it was good enough to get her a series. But only because 5 others weren't available. yes, and i agree, though i've never said it publically in this very biased crowd, that Lucy Lawless has not always been that great of an actress. despite that, however, she exuded a kind of power i had not seen often before in ANY woman actress over the years. that's notwithastanding the power that so many women have on the screen and in real life, and that they are often interfered with in acting, etc. from showing that power. Lawless did. I don't know what it was. I hadn't seen her in any movie or anywhere else before I saw her make that entrance in the Hercules episode "Warrior Princess." And she showed it. Despite physical beauty, which women are also hurt around, the expectations that if they ARE beautiful that they deserve such and such. that's not the point. the point is that...Lucy Lawless knows something. we saw it. there are other women, and men, who have struck me that way in other scenarios. The first time i heard (before i even SAW) Maya Angelou, she was speaking from a church in Minneapolis (early 1990's) over the radio in a public education/arts series, and there was something so magnetic about what she was saying and HOW she was saying it that i knew i wanted to see her, and found my way over to that church and got there in time to see the rest of her speech. she was indeed one of the most powerful human beings i had ever seen or heard. Maybe, oh maybe, the universe (when you mention the 5 others who weren't available) was indeed conspiring, because we humans were indeed ready and willing to see a woman that powerful on the screen. L ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:51:13 -0800 From: "Creation (Sharon Delaney)" Subject: [chakram-refugees] OT xena mail order catalogues vs browsing the websites I'm curious. We've been having a debate in the office about whether or not catalogues drive web sales. Some of us think that people find a new item in a catalogue and then order it online. Others think most people nowadays just browse web sites looking for new goodies. Lots of mail order companies are no longer sending out catalogues. They're assuming their customers will browse their web sites looking for new merchandise. Being a devout catalogue reader in bed at night and having no way to bring my computer into bed with me, to the lunch table, on the bus I miss getting catalogues and I don't think I shop as much from some of those places. Any opinions? Sharon ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 21:02:48 -0500 (EST) From: cjlnh@webtv.net (Cheryl LaScola) Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] OT xena mail order catalogues vs browsing the websites Here are my 2 cents..... I believe female shoppers want it both ways....catalogs delivered to their door for bedtime reading, as you point out, kind of taking the place of window shopping... browsing if you will. When it comes time to actually "shop" a few factors come into play. 1st- Proximity to store Is there a store nearby where I can try on the item (if clothing). This may not be as important if non-clothing purchase is being made. 2nd- Urgency I need a present for someone, I better order it on line to save time. 3rd- Security While some fear on line buying, it is still a better option than telephone ordering from a catalog (you have a confirmation # and are able to track your transaction easily) Our company website is visited primarily by female consumers (both young and older) and they are looking to BUY. However, not all products are offered on the site, so we have a where to buy section for our stores. We consciously chose to go web site over catalog because it is the future AND less costly than running a catlog business. My business happens to be in the world of apparel, shoes and gear so a catalog would be pricey to support. At the end of the day, most women enjoy browsing catalogs and it is fair to say that a catalog will act as a catalyst to purchase. While the internet is becoming a bigger share of purchasing power, there are still many who prefer to buy the old fashioned way (especially with the over 30 age group). Hope this is of value to you Sharon. Cheryl L ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 19:17:24 -0700 From: "abqbeach" Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] OT xena mail order catalogues vs browsing the websites > I'm curious. We've been having a debate in the office about whether or not > catalogues drive web sales. Some of us think that people find a new item > in a catalogue and then order it online. Others think most people nowadays > just browse web sites looking for new goodies. Lots of mail order > companies are no longer sending out catalogues. They're assuming their > customers will browse their web sites looking for new merchandise. Being a > devout catalogue reader in bed at night and having no way to bring my > computer into bed with me, to the lunch table, on the bus I miss > getting catalogues and I don't think I shop as much from some of those > places. Any opinions? > Sharon Hey Sharon. This happens to be a professional area of specialty for me :-) First, paper catalogs drive web sales. There is no question about it. There might be a public perception that some companies are no longer producing paper catalogs, but you will find very few that have successfully done so (and I can't name one off the top of my head). Back in the internet hype days, there was an assumption that we would be able to go web only, but what multi-channel retailers have found is that the catalog customer who also buys on the web (and the retail store if available) is much more likely to be a repeat buyer and buy with more frequency. Actually, the opposite of what you suggest has become true. Companies that used to be online pure plays are sending out mail order catalogs (buy.com, babystyle, etc.). In my business (200+ page niche catalog), we can track the drop of a catalog and the web sales spike that results. Lots of people like that paper catalog to peruse, just like you do :-) But they like the convenience and speed of online ordering. We most definitely send catalogs to web shoppers and know that it pays. There are probably other reasons if you are receiving fewer catalogs in the mail. If you don't buy from a particular company, you eventually no longer get the catalog, which means you no longer are on the rental lists to get catalogs sent to customers with buying behavior like yours. I'd say list rental has been pulled back as well, but for other reasons. I would be happy to put together some links to online articles and resources for you on this topic if you would like. If Creation is thinking of dropping the catalog, marketing wisdom says don't do it! You may have to figure out how to track sales sources online, or there are some really hideous statistical equations to do it for you. (Oooh - I just love to talk shop AND relate it to Xena :-) angie in NM http://xenawp.org ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 23:18:36 -0500 (EST) From: Sarah Anne Packard Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] "Double Dare"! Yep, it was me. :) Anyway, it might have a website somewhere or something...it's by a female filmmaker from San Francisco, I think her name was Jennifer Micheli but I'm not sure... -Sarah- On Mon, 22 Mar 2004, mirrordrum wrote: > i want to see the movie, myself i do!!!! i wonder if it will ever be > released. thanks for the hedzup, though sarah. it was you wasn't it that > posted about seeing it?--i have a mind like a sieve. i'll be looking for it. > > md > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 12:14 AM > Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] "Double Dare"! > > > > In a message dated 3/21/2004 12:04:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, > > abbagirl@cyberspace.org writes: > > > > > Sharon, if you're reading this - please consider getting Zoe for another > > > Burbank con please?! :) Zoe's career is really taking off too, and the > > > film captures that > > > > Heck, I'd love to have something about Zoe in the newsletter. Maybe there > > was an interview a long time ago, but an updated one would be nice. > > > > -- Ife > > ========================================================= > > This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. > > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with > > "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. > > Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. > > ========================================================= > ========================================================= > This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with > "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. > Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. > ========================================================= ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ End of chakram-refugees-digest V4 #82 *************************************