Bribing US To Transfer Our Caches To A Competing Site

[+6NoisyHikers]

 

This argument is also amusing, since GC is known only for the highest caliber of hides!

 

When I used the word lousy, maybe what I should have said was common, uninteresting, cookie-cutter, bland, uninventive, run-of-the-mill...

[+B+L]

It's the tactics I don't like. They are cheesy and beneath the Garmin brand in my opinion.

Other than fanboyism,

 

Wow. I would never have thought anyone would call me a fanboy. My teeth must be getting dull.

if you are a fanboy, you'd be the last one to know about it But i wasn't singling you out anyway.

 

Well, except there is this:

 

So we asked current Groundspeak Premium Members to share why they value Premium Memberships. True, we promised them a Groundspeak Lackey Coin in exchange for their help, but we think that the comments show how Premium features make caching even more enjoyable!

 

I am a Premium Member because I want to contribute to this activity/website that has had such a positive effect on my life and the price of premium membership is a very small expense every year compared to the years of wonderful experiences and memories I have and the many great friends I have made all over the country and the world.

 

-Snoogans

Was it cheesy to "bribe" people in exchange for a testimonial? I'd say no, not unless they called it an unsolicited testimonial.

 

Groundspeak used to bundle a free month of premium membership with some GPS models (maybe they still do), but I neither recall anyone thinking it was cheesy or underhanded of them to do so, nor do I remember anyone calling it an act of desperation.

 

BTW, why is it OK for this site to be negative towards everyone else, but it's apparently a problem for you if other sites turn negative towards Groundspeak?

[fendmar]

Freaky huh? That magnetic on the McD's dumpster bollard would be worth exactly the same as View Carre, or Necropolis, or Stingray City, in a deal like that.

 

A cache is a cache is a cache.

 

Am I misunderstanding your posts, because these two seem diametrically opposed?

[+Snoogans]

It's the tactics I don't like. They are cheesy and beneath the Garmin brand in my opinion.

Other than fanboyism,

 

Wow. I would never have thought anyone would call me a fanboy. My teeth must be getting dull.

if you are a fanboy, you'd be the last one to know about it But i wasn't singling you out anyway.

 

Well, except there is this:

 

So we asked current Groundspeak Premium Members to share why they value Premium Memberships. True, we promised them a Groundspeak Lackey Coin in exchange for their help, but we think that the comments show how Premium features make caching even more enjoyable!

 

I am a Premium Member because I want to contribute to this activity/website that has had such a positive effect on my life and the price of premium membership is a very small expense every year compared to the years of wonderful experiences and memories I have and the many great friends I have made all over the country and the world.

 

-Snoogans

Was it cheesy to "bribe" people in exchange for a testimonial? I'd say no, not unless they called it an unsolicited testimonial.

 

Groundspeak used to bundle a free month of premium membership with some GPS models (maybe they still do), but I neither recall anyone thinking it was cheesy or underhanded of them to do so, nor do I remember anyone calling it an act of desperation.

 

BTW, why is it OK for this site to be negative towards everyone else, but it's apparently a problem for you if other sites turn negative towards Groundspeak?

 

Okayyy ya got me. I just get the mental image of me wearing a skin tight green tank top and a banana hammock with Signal's face plastered on the seat when I hear the term "fanboy."

 

Some of you that know me just pictured that mind fork and for that I'm truly sorry.

 

Now, what about that coin promotion attempted to take something away from another listing site?

 

Secondly, to use your own words how is this site negative towards everyone else?

[fendmar]

 

This argument is also amusing, since GC is known only for the highest caliber of hides!

 

When I used the word lousy, maybe what I should have said was common, uninteresting, cookie-cutter, bland, uninventive, run-of-the-mill...

Use whatever words you like. A rose by any other name would still smell like the dumpster behind McD's.

[+Snoogans]

 

This argument is also amusing, since GC is known only for the highest caliber of hides!

 

When I used the word lousy, maybe what I should have said was common, uninteresting, cookie-cutter, bland, uninventive, run-of-the-mill...

Use whatever words you like. A rose by any other name would still smell like the dumpster behind McD's.

 

But, but, but.... I like the smell of french frys.

 

Okay now you're amusing me. A cache is just a choice and no competing site has ever gotten away from the basic hide and seek lowest common denominator that exists here.

[fendmar]

 

This argument is also amusing, since GC is known only for the highest caliber of hides!

 

When I used the word lousy, maybe what I should have said was common, uninteresting, cookie-cutter, bland, uninventive, run-of-the-mill...

Use whatever words you like. A rose by any other name would still smell like the dumpster behind McD's.

 

But, but, but.... I like the smell of french frys.

 

Okay now you're amusing me. A cache is just a choice and no competing site has ever gotten away from the basic hide and seek lowest common denominator that exists here.

Exactly! Which is why offering incentives to hiders is not going to cause an explosion of "lousy" caches, we already have plenty without any incentives at all!!!

[+Ohiosiouxfan]

Looking at the other site's May 30th blog entry, they state, "We have seen a recent increase in celebrities catching the Opencaching bug. From world class athletes to the internet's most notorious gossip columnist more and more people are giving this adventure a try and getting hooked."

 

They link to Perez Hilton's Twitter pic finding a geocache. If you look at the cache logbook Perez is holding, it has a big Geocaching.com sticker on the front cover. It looks like he's actually caught the Geocaching.com bug! https://twitter.com/PerezHilton/status/207205772625580032/photo/1/large

 

Marketing Failure 101.

[+Snoogans]

Freaky huh? That magnetic on the McD's dumpster bollard would be worth exactly the same as View Carre, or Necropolis, or Stingray City, in a deal like that.

 

A cache is a cache is a cache.

 

Am I misunderstanding your posts, because these two seem diametrically opposed?

 

Not in my mind.

 

I can divest myself of my own personal aesthetics to defend that McD's dumpster bollard as a choice.

 

It's not one I would go outta my way for, but I would log it if I was right there and had time. The three caches I mentioned by name are caches ANYONE would go outta their way to get because they are among the best geocaching has to offer.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Snoogans

[+Snoogans]

 

This argument is also amusing, since GC is known only for the highest caliber of hides!

 

When I used the word lousy, maybe what I should have said was common, uninteresting, cookie-cutter, bland, uninventive, run-of-the-mill...

Use whatever words you like. A rose by any other name would still smell like the dumpster behind McD's.

 

But, but, but.... I like the smell of french frys.

 

Okay now you're amusing me. A cache is just a choice and no competing site has ever gotten away from the basic hide and seek lowest common denominator that exists here.

Exactly! Which is why offering incentives to hiders is not going to cause an explosion of "lousy" caches, we already have plenty without any incentives at all!!!

 

I'm thinking more of the throw down and walk away types of caches that were known to be hidden when breeder caches were still around and you had to hide a cache to be able to log a find on the breeder. Not to be confused with my ODS seed caches of course.

[fendmar]

 

This argument is also amusing, since GC is known only for the highest caliber of hides!

 

When I used the word lousy, maybe what I should have said was common, uninteresting, cookie-cutter, bland, uninventive, run-of-the-mill...

Use whatever words you like. A rose by any other name would still smell like the dumpster behind McD's.

 

But, but, but.... I like the smell of french frys.

 

Okay now you're amusing me. A cache is just a choice and no competing site has ever gotten away from the basic hide and seek lowest common denominator that exists here.

Exactly! Which is why offering incentives to hiders is not going to cause an explosion of "lousy" caches, we already have plenty without any incentives at all!!!

 

I'm thinking more of the throw down and walk away types of caches that were known to be hidden when breeder caches were still around and you had to hide a cache to be able to log a find on the breeder. Not to be confused with my ODS seed caches of course.

I like my ODS cache, allthough the project seems to be abandoned! (Ahem! Sent ODSPrime a friend request to follow the project years ago and never heard anything back.) The common thread idea is pretty cool. When I saw the one based around the solar system in Dallas I wanted to contact the owner to see if it would be okay for me to do a Kuiper Belt cache in our area. Regardless, I feel that the person who is going to hide a lousy cache will put in the same effort whatever the circumstance.

 

One more point on incentives causing an explosion in "lousy" caches. What difference would it make to those who feel that way since the explosion would be on that other site which no one uses anyway?! That situation could only help GC!

[Mr.Yuck]

 

I almost jumped ship to TC in late 2004. A few of my friends did and a few more in 2005. I played for both teams, but when TC turned negaive towards GC and for a few other reasons, I bailed. NC never went anywhere and was populated by GC rejects last time I bothered to look which was several years ago. The original OC failed to launch in the U.S. for the most part, but got some play across the pond. This new OC has failed to impress me starting with the confusing name having been around in the opening moments of the original OC. I checked in on the new OC like twice and once was to start a thread warning them not to become a GC hater society because there is just no sense in it and there were a couple negative threads up on their forum at the time.

 

 

The other North American OC was publicly launched at least one month before Garmin even bought the domain name (WHOIS look-ups I've seen only give you the month of September, 2010, and not the day), and a full three months before Garmin's site went online. I absolutely DO remember your warning thread, but I can't recall the any hata threads then, or ever. There is no Groundspeak hating whatsoever in the other OC forum. The Garmin forum? Well lets just they are rather notorious for Frog hating, along with just about every notorious banned member from Geocaching.com showing up over there.

 

P.S. Nothing would be funnier right now than to see Snoogs change his forum title to "Groundspeak Fanboy".

[+B+L]

 

BTW, why is it OK for this site to be negative towards everyone else, but it's apparently a problem for you if other sites turn negative towards Groundspeak?

Now, what about that coin promotion attempted to take something away from another listing site?

 

Secondly, to use your own words how is this site negative towards everyone else?

If you view promotions as a zero sum game, then I guess you could say they were attempting to take something away.

 

When I say site, I mean it loosely, as in the forums, the facebook and twitter feeds of certain high profile individuals, comments made my moderators, etc, etc. There has been a lot of negativity directed at that other site, as well as the other would be competitors, but that does not seem to bother you like it did when the other sites turned negative.

 

Having said that, the biggest mistake that other site made was allowing it to become a haven for people who've been eighty-sixed from geocaching.com, as well as the union hall for the Axe Grinders, Shoulder Chippers, Sock Puppeteers and Malcontents, Local 01000111010000110100001001010101010011010100111101010101010101000000110100001010.

[4wheelin_fool]

Could a mod please transfer all of my forum posts to the Opencaching site so I can get a free Justin Bieber dogtag?

 

Thanks.

[+B+L]

P.S. Nothing would be funnier right now than to see Snoogs change his forum title to "Groundspeak Fanboy".

Too late. His amateur status was revoked when he received compensation from the frog.

[+The A-Team]

Okayyy ya got me. I just get the mental image of me wearing a skin tight green tank top and a banana hammock with Signal's face plastered on the seat when I hear the term "fanboy."

That was a mental image I didn't need.

 

Anyway, I don't foresee that other site lasting much longer. I live on Vancouver Island, BC, Canada. There are several thousand Geocaching.com caches on the island. I just counted, and there are 41 caches listed on OC. Of those 41, 39 of them are crosslisted. Therefore, there are a grand total of 2 exclusive OC caches on the island. 2!

Like someone mentioned earlier, this most recent campaign smacks of desperation, so maybe this is a last ditch attempt to drum up caches and maybe someone at Garmin will finally realize they've missed the boat and OC isn't going to survive.

[AZcachemeister]

If you could be so easily lured by a lousy pathtag, then go for it!

Create 5 disposable Groundspeak listings.

'Transfer' them.

Get your stupid/pointless pathtag.

Don't look back.

 

P.S. If you bite on this offer, I know a guy in Nigeria you need to talk to.

[cezanne]

mmm...you are already spending your spare time maintaining caches that are used to earn money by others.

 

In the case of Groundspeak my personal limit is not reached. They offer the infrastructure of the site and this is not for free.

 

The scenario of someone selling the database with contents to another company on the basis of the number of provided caches is beyond my limit. What I tried to stress is that it is still the cache hiders who play the most central role in geocaching. Without them no geocaching site can exist at all.

One can buy e.g. address databases as people will not move on purpose to a new address just to make the database not usable any longer. With geocaches the naive approach does not work.

 

Cezanne

Edited June 2, 2012 by cezanne

[+Lil Devil]

They link to Perez Hilton's Twitter pic finding a geocache. If you look at the cache logbook Perez is holding, it has a big Geocaching.com sticker on the front cover. It looks like he's actually caught the Geocaching.com bug!

https://twitter.com/PerezHilton/status/207205772625580032/photo/1/large

 

Marketing Failure 101.

Even funnier, if you click on the world class athletes link in their blog, then click the photo to open it, then click the photo again to enlarge it, then examine the FXIF data, you'll find the coords to this cache. Checking the same coords on the opencaching site shows the cache is NOT listed there

 

Edit to add, their athlete has found 146 caches on geocaching.com. I can't find a matching account over there

Edited June 2, 2012 by Lil Devil

[+GeoBain]

I'm certainly not willing to spend my spare time for maintaining caches that are used to earn money by others. My caches are my property.

You do realize that is exactly what you are doing when you list caches here?

[+GeoBain]

Think about it. Who is going to make a commitment to maintain 5 caches for a pathtag?

 

Anyone who thinks this isn't going to be more of the same is kidding themselves. TC touted itself a a quality listing service and it was more of the same. Caching is what it is and anyone thinking that the OC team is gonna pull their wagon in a better direction is sadly mistaken unless they buy the GC database, poll the community, and then give it what it really wants. Fat chance.

 

I guess I just disagree with the term underhanded since we own our individual cache data and can do with it as we please.

 

Now if you want to call it ill conceived or even a bit reckless, I would agree with you for the reasons you just listed.

 

I`ll also say that as much as I dislike the controlling, monopolistic behavior over here, I stay here because this is where all my friends and 99% of the caches are. Kind of like my like/dislike relationship with Facebook.

 

Edit... still getting used to typing on tablet

Edited June 2, 2012 by GeoBain

[+GeoBain]

My big problem with them is the cross-listing.

 

I don't have a problem with cross-listing. The caches belong to the hiders. The database should open to all since it is compiled from all. Then we could have several sites competing on features.

 

The main reason I'm not that bothered by groundspeek's tight grip on our data is the fact that they have made a commitment to offering the data in a basic format for free forever.

[+GeoBain]

Now, what about that coin promotion attempted to take something away from another listing site?

 

What are they attempting to take away? I was under the impression they were attempting to get you to create something unique for them or share something you already created for another listing service. At least that seems to be their MO since they started.

 

Secondly, to use your own words how is this site negative towards everyone else?

 

Are you serious? Heck, they're negative towards a lot of their paying customers!

[+GeoBain]

 

This argument is also amusing, since GC is known only for the highest caliber of hides!

 

When I used the word lousy, maybe what I should have said was common, uninteresting, cookie-cutter, bland, uninventive, run-of-the-mill...

Use whatever words you like. A rose by any other name would still smell like the dumpster behind McD's.

 

But, but, but.... I like the smell of french frys.

 

Okay now you're amusing me. A cache is just a choice and no competing site has ever gotten away from the basic hide and seek lowest common denominator that exists here.

Exactly! Which is why offering incentives to hiders is not going to cause an explosion of "lousy" caches, we already have plenty without any incentives at all!!!

 

I tend to agree with Snoogs on this one. You think it's bad now? I shudder to think what itwould be like if they offered incentives for hiding caches.

[cezanne]

I'm certainly not willing to spend my spare time for maintaining caches that are used to earn money by others. My caches are my property.

You do realize that is exactly what you are doing when you list caches here?

 

I do not view it that way as I have explained above.

 

If Groundspeak, for example, changed their policy and would not any longer make the caches that are not PM only available to everyone

I'd change my view. The same would apply if Groundspeak decided to sell the database to a GPS manufacturer, outdoor company etc

for whom geocaching is just a business and not an activity they are interested into themselves at least to some extent.

 

Cezanne

[+jellis]

For two minutes I was thinking: "Hmm... it might be a nice idea for GS to offer thank you gifts to people who have placed a certain number of caches." But then my common sense kicked in and told me that would be terrible. How many people would just chuck down whatever type of container in whatever type of place just so they could get some froggie swag?

 

If a competing site wants to increase their hide numbers that way, I think they are going to gain a reputation in the long term for listing lousy caches.

This argument is also amusing, since GC is known only for the highest caliber of hides!

LOL!

 

Caching is hide and seek.

 

A cache is a cache is a cache.

 

It's personal aesthetics that cause the heartburn.

Maybe praise them for actually following the guidelines. Oh, that always changes so you can't do that either. I think well place favorite points helps. Oh wait can't do that either. Boy am I digging myself a hole here.

[+Don_J]

Did they actually say TRANSFER (as in move to ours and delete theirs)? or was the deal to cross link listings? That would be a big difference!

It didn't take me long to find a blog post with the deal, and it says "every five caches you hide or transfer". They don't say anything about removing them from this site, but it seems implied to me.

 

Also, later in that blog post, they give a brief primer on geocaching. It says "The minimum that you need is a Garmin GPS unit..."

 

Shameful.

 

I don't get it. The local bank wants to give me $50 to transfer my account. Dish and Direct TV wants to give me half price for a year and free HBO if I drop my cable and go to them. I get three promotions in the mail a week from ATT. The documentation to iTunes says all I need is an iDevice, (works fine for my RCA MP3 device).

 

It's called marketing, but for some reason, when Garmin does it, they are villains? Trust me, I have no love lost for the "other place". Just trying to keep things in perspective. They are a company. They have a product. They are trying to get people to use their product. Offering gifts or other incentives to your competitor's dissatisfied customers is the oldest trick in the book.

 

Hell, the state of Texas does it to get businesses to move out of California.

[+The A-Team]

Did they actually say TRANSFER (as in move to ours and delete theirs)? or was the deal to cross link listings? That would be a big difference!

It didn't take me long to find a blog post with the deal, and it says "every five caches you hide or transfer". They don't say anything about removing them from this site, but it seems implied to me.

 

Also, later in that blog post, they give a brief primer on geocaching. It says "The minimum that you need is a Garmin GPS unit..."

 

Shameful.

 

I don't get it. The local bank wants to give me $50 to transfer my account. Dish and Direct TV wants to give me half price for a year and free HBO if I drop my cable and go to them. I get three promotions in the mail a week from ATT. The documentation to iTunes says all I need is an iDevice, (works fine for my RCA MP3 device).

 

It's called marketing, but for some reason, when Garmin does it, they are villains? Trust me, I have no love lost for the "other place". Just trying to keep things in perspective. They are a company. They have a product. They are trying to get people to use their product. Offering gifts or other incentives to your competitor's dissatisfied customers is the oldest trick in the book.

 

Hell, the state of Texas does it to get businesses to move out of California.

My "shameful" comment was more towards the outright lie that a Garmin GPS is required. See my suggested re-wording in a previous post.

[+JL_HSTRE]

I was bothered by Opencaching offering a combo deal on the Etrex 10 that came with a cache container. The ad basically encouraged people to start hiding as soon as they started finding.

[+CanadianRockies]

I'm certainly not willing to spend my spare time for maintaining caches that are used to earn money by others [in ways I find objectionable]. My caches are my property.

You do realize that is exactly what you are doing when you list caches here?

 

I do not view it that way as I have explained above.

 

If Groundspeak, for example, changed their policy and would not any longer make the caches that are not PM only available to everyone

I'd change my view. The same would apply if Groundspeak decided to sell the database to a GPS manufacturer, outdoor company etc

for whom geocaching is just a business and not an activity they are interested into themselves at least to some extent.

I've expanded your original quotation so its meaning now matches your view.

 

What I think others were pointing out to you is that Groundspeak uses your caches to earn money. They might do so in ways you're comfortable with, but they do earn money from listing your caches (e.g., website advertisements).

[+Don_J]

...

Also, later in that blog post, they give a brief primer on geocaching. It says "The minimum that you need is a Garmin GPS unit..."

 

Shameful.

 

Shameful?

 

They, presumably, are setting this up, paying for it etc... yes? Why not advertise? I'm sure people are smart enough to realise that other GPS units are available (I'd argue, of course, that the minimum you need is a device which can access the website; I rarely use any form of GPS unit...)

 

Heck, I get advertising here all the time. Nothing wrong with that either.

 

Because its a lie? You don't need a Garmin GPS to geocache. I'm sure there are plenty of wannabe geocachers that don't realize yet that it isn't just a Garmin thing.

 

Meh - semantics though pretty much innit? It's their site, they'll push their products. I prefer the other way of wording it, sure, but I reckon most people are smart enough to figure out there are more GPS units than that. Some of them might even realise they don't even need a dedicated GPS unit, you never know.

It is deceptive. Perhaps the term "deceptive marketing" is a bit redundant, but I still don't like it, no matter who it comes from. I reject it, and I rebel against it. And I will call it out, given the opportunity.

 

Your basing this on half a sentence quoted in this forum. I would like to see the entire paragraph so that I can put it into context. If their concept of Geocaching is to have their customers hook up their Garmin GPS to their computer, download a cache from the site and then go look for it, then the customer would need a Garmin GPS.

[+Don_J]

We're a funny lot. We complain for endless hours about LPCs, guardrail micros, magnetic trash can caches, but when a competing site offers to take them off our hands, we complain about that.

 

I think that some of us just like to complain.

(Note that "complain" was not the first word to come to mind).

[+Snoogans]

Going over notes....

 

We have a cache listing services that is mostly just duplicated GC.com crosslistings. Prove that it's not at this point if you disagree.

 

We have name dropping coming from that cache listing service that appears to be false or at least partly false. Unless cheesy crosslisted caches and the d-list celebs that find them are cool in your perception.

 

We have incentive to "prove our awesomeness" as a hider in the form of a pathtag, but it's just as awesome to crosslist caches. On what planet?

 

None of this makes me like my 60csx any less but it certainly puts a slant in my thinking about Garmin. Why? Because Garmin must think I'm stupid if I will be happy finding mostly crosslisted caches. What's the point? At least Terracaching strongly discouraged crosslisting (except for events) in hopes of creating a unique and viable database. I enjoyed using TC to explore the spaces between the GC.com 528 foot rule within reason. I has hoping OC would fill the space that TC lost, but why would I want to be part of what I listed above? The folks that Garmin put in place to develope OC have done a crappy job and hurt Garmin's good name in what appears to be an attempt to steal what it can't create on its own. I don't know about you, but that is miles beneath the brand name I once respected.

 

If I was a Garmin executive reading this thread, my fact checkers and I would be allll over it on Monday morning. There would be a meeting somewhere in the middle of the week and damage control an image repair would begin shortly after.

 

Garmin owes this community an apology in my opinion. They have crapped upon the table where they eat. Bad, bad joo joo.

[fendmar]

...

Also, later in that blog post, they give a brief primer on geocaching. It says "The minimum that you need is a Garmin GPS unit..."

 

Shameful.

 

Shameful?

 

They, presumably, are setting this up, paying for it etc... yes? Why not advertise? I'm sure people are smart enough to realise that other GPS units are available (I'd argue, of course, that the minimum you need is a device which can access the website; I rarely use any form of GPS unit...)

 

Heck, I get advertising here all the time. Nothing wrong with that either.

 

Because its a lie? You don't need a Garmin GPS to geocache. I'm sure there are plenty of wannabe geocachers that don't realize yet that it isn't just a Garmin thing.

 

Meh - semantics though pretty much innit? It's their site, they'll push their products. I prefer the other way of wording it, sure, but I reckon most people are smart enough to figure out there are more GPS units than that. Some of them might even realise they don't even need a dedicated GPS unit, you never know.

It is deceptive. Perhaps the term "deceptive marketing" is a bit redundant, but I still don't like it, no matter who it comes from. I reject it, and I rebel against it. And I will call it out, given the opportunity.

 

Your basing this on half a sentence quoted in this forum. I would like to see the entire paragraph so that I can put it into context. If their concept of Geocaching is to have their customers hook up their Garmin GPS to their computer, download a cache from the site and then go look for it, then the customer would need a Garmin GPS.

For those on the shameful, deceptive, self promotion tangent I would like to refer you to the learning tab on the home page of GC.com. I should clarify I personally don't feel that either site should feel badly (Do websites have feelings?!) about highlighting their products on their site and that neither of them has done anything to be ashamed of with regards to self promotion or deceit in this context in my opinion. All's fair in love and war!!!

Edited June 2, 2012 by fendmar

[+Snoogans]

Think about it. Who is going to make a commitment to maintain 5 caches for a pathtag?

 

Anyone who thinks this isn't going to be more of the same is kidding themselves. TC touted itself a a quality listing service and it was more of the same. Caching is what it is and anyone thinking that the OC team is gonna pull their wagon in a better direction is sadly mistaken unless they buy the GC database, poll the community, and then give it what it really wants. Fat chance.

 

I guess I just disagree with the term underhanded since we own our individual cache data and can do with it as we please.

 

Now if you want to call it ill conceived or even a bit reckless, I would agree with you for the reasons you just listed.

 

I`ll also say that as much as I dislike the controlling, monopolistic behavior over here, I stay here because this is where all my friends and 99% of the caches are. Kind of like my like/dislike relationship with Facebook.

 

Edit... still getting used to typing on tablet

 

I will concede to "ill conceived or even a bit reckless." It seems my blood is even greener than I gave myself credit for.

 

I have abandoned the other geocaching sites where I played, but mostly due to lack of time in fiddling with other accounts. Much the same reason I never gave Waymarking much of a go, but the rejects and the ax grinders helped me decide to head out the door on the other listing services.

 

GS/GC.com is more or less a monopoly true, but there have been no viable alternatives and probably never will in this niche.

 

It took 10 years to get to a million active caches and just a couple more to nearly make another million. Do the math and tell me how long it will take for there to be any real competition with a unique database? China could conscript 5 million of its people and get the job done in a week, but what are the odds of that happening?

 

Garmin could have carved itself a teensy piece of the pie in 15 to 20 years if it had gone about it the right way. TC started off great but its rating system was terribly flawed and easily manipulated for personal gain in their game which caused bad feelings. That and the rejects and ax grinders took a site that was probably worth 100K at its peak and made it virtually worthless. It probably sold for a months worth of beer money. I heard it wasn't much.

 

I have invested 9+ years of quality time here. That means something to me. My friends are here and my personal GC.com approval rating is at 93%. I suspect mine is a bit higher than yours, but I don't take myself or this activity so seriously as to become righteously indignant over the state of the tupperware union.

 

I have drunk of the green coolaid and eaten from Jeremy's own hand (@GW5 for reals) and been outed for accepting the frog's lackey gold. (geocoin) Sooner or later I will probably take the frog's mark (trackable tattoo) and be doomed to user friendly geocaching abundance for all eternity.

 

Edited June 2, 2012 by Snoogans

[+Don_J]

...

Also, later in that blog post, they give a brief primer on geocaching. It says "The minimum that you need is a Garmin GPS unit..."

 

Shameful.

 

Shameful?

 

They, presumably, are setting this up, paying for it etc... yes? Why not advertise? I'm sure people are smart enough to realise that other GPS units are available (I'd argue, of course, that the minimum you need is a device which can access the website; I rarely use any form of GPS unit...)

 

Heck, I get advertising here all the time. Nothing wrong with that either.

 

Because its a lie? You don't need a Garmin GPS to geocache. I'm sure there are plenty of wannabe geocachers that don't realize yet that it isn't just a Garmin thing.

 

Meh - semantics though pretty much innit? It's their site, they'll push their products. I prefer the other way of wording it, sure, but I reckon most people are smart enough to figure out there are more GPS units than that. Some of them might even realise they don't even need a dedicated GPS unit, you never know.

It is deceptive. Perhaps the term "deceptive marketing" is a bit redundant, but I still don't like it, no matter who it comes from. I reject it, and I rebel against it. And I will call it out, given the opportunity.

 

Your basing this on half a sentence quoted in this forum. I would like to see the entire paragraph so that I can put it into context. If their concept of Geocaching is to have their customers hook up their Garmin GPS to their computer, download a cache from the site and then go look for it, then the customer would need a Garmin GPS.

For those on the shameful, deceptive, self promotion tangent I would like to refer you to the learning tab on the home page of GC.com. I should clarify I personally don't feel that either site should feel badly (Do websites have feelings?!) about highlighting their products on their site and that neither of them has done anything to be ashamed of with regards to self promotion or deceit in this context in my opinion. All's fair in love and war!!!

 

From Geocaching 101 on Groundspeak's site:

 

"What do I need to go geocaching?

The only necessities are a GPS device or a GPS-enabled mobile phone so that you can navigate to the cache, and a Geocaching.com Membership."

 

So, both sites have misleading propaganda designed to have us use their products. Oh, the horror!

 

The thing is, I would fully expect the rejects over on their boards to be sniping at such things. I always figured that we were above that kind of nonsense. When I read a blog such as the one that has caused all this controversy, I get a mental image of Chief Wiggums, "Move along folks, nothing to see here".

[+Scubasonic]

So, I got the email yesterday that a competing cache listing service was giving those metal p-word tags for every 5 hides. I pretty much ignored it until I saw fb today.

 

They actually say transfer your caches to their site as well as hide to get credit.

 

Is it just me or is that a bit of dirty dealing?

 

I get that site wanting to build up their database, but bribing folks to transfer caches is a bit cheesy don'tcha think?

 

Competition is a good thing but I guess dirty dealing is all that site has up its sleeve. Perhaps my next GPS will be a Magellan.

 

My blood doesn't bleed green. I just think that approach is beneath the company behind that site.

 

What do you folks think?

 

I think I'll give 'em my Terracaches to get the free tag.

 

Signed up for that site but after taking a look at it, was not interested at all.

Edited June 3, 2012 by Scubasonic

[+Volvo Man]

I remember this site back in the day, and I also remember ignoring it as it was kinda empty.

 

I just checked a few caches in my local area, and the obvious cross listings even have the same ID code!(Except change GC for OX), now that's Brazen.

[knowschad]

We're a funny lot. We complain for endless hours about LPCs, guardrail micros, magnetic trash can caches, but when a competing site offers to take them off our hands, we complain about that.

 

I think that some of us just like to complain.

(Note that "complain" was not the first word to come to mind).

They're not offering to take a thing off our hands. They are asking for a double listing of what's already out there. The word "transfer" doesn't fool me one bit. They will take cross-postings, or even other cacher's hides.

[Mr.Yuck]

Man, for the second time in this thread, I'll mention how I'm shocked how much support Garmin is getting. How soon we forget. We forget that they cluelessly launched a website that didn't even have the basic functionality of Navicache, which was last updated in 2003. How they cluelessly took on the "Opencaching" name, which was already being used on 12 different all-volunteer opencaching nodes world-wide since 2005. How they had absolutely, positively no review process whatsover, and just came up with the "peer reviewer" system on the fly, after mass, worldwide outrage? I could go on, but I don't need to.

 

I will say one thing. They don't ban the use of the P-word over there. And they even give them away.

[+popokiiti]

We could always list caches, or rather non-caches , that would get the Forest Defenders seeking something that isn't there on that site......

[+Don_J]

Man, for the second time in this thread, I'll mention how I'm shocked how much support Garmin is getting. How soon we forget. We forget that they cluelessly launched a website that didn't even have the basic functionality of Navicache, which was last updated in 2003. How they cluelessly took on the "Opencaching" name, which was already being used on 12 different all-volunteer opencaching nodes world-wide since 2005. How they had absolutely, positively no review process whatsover, and just came up with the "peer reviewer" system on the fly, after mass, worldwide outrage? I could go on, but I don't need to.

 

I will say one thing. They don't ban the use of the P-word over there. And they even give them away.

 

Gee, I sure hope you don't believe that I am supporting them. I just think some of the stuff I've been reading in an attempt to make them villains is silly. Especially since it is not anything that most other companies do to market their products. The points that you list should seal the deal for just about everyone. I just took a look around that site again. In Los Angeles County, where there are probably about 8,000 active Geocaching.com caches, there are probably 250 caches. Of those, I could only find about five that were not cross listed from here. Three of those five, the owners joined their site first and then cross listed their caches here because they probably gave up and wanted someone to actually find them. The most disturbing thing I found is the disclaimer that you have to click through to download a GPX file of a cache, "I understand that this data has not been reviewed by Garmin..."

 

As far as their current marketing strategy. Much ado about nothing.

[+TerraViators]

As a Pepsi drinker, I'm sure glad they didn't give up after that other cola maker made their mark.

[+Volvo Man]

As a Pepsi drinker, I'm sure glad they didn't give up after that other cola maker made their mark.

 

To be honest, I don't think they really had much competition to worry about from "Go Cola"

[Mr.Yuck]

Man, for the second time in this thread, I'll mention how I'm shocked how much support Garmin is getting. How soon we forget. We forget that they cluelessly launched a website that didn't even have the basic functionality of Navicache, which was last updated in 2003. How they cluelessly took on the "Opencaching" name, which was already being used on 12 different all-volunteer opencaching nodes world-wide since 2005. How they had absolutely, positively no review process whatsover, and just came up with the "peer reviewer" system on the fly, after mass, worldwide outrage? I could go on, but I don't need to.

 

I will say one thing. They don't ban the use of the P-word over there. And they even give them away.

 

Gee, I sure hope you don't believe that I am supporting them. I just think some of the stuff I've been reading in an attempt to make them villains is silly. Especially since it is not anything that most other companies do to market their products. The points that you list should seal the deal for just about everyone. I just took a look around that site again. In Los Angeles County, where there are probably about 8,000 active Geocaching.com caches, there are probably 250 caches. Of those, I could only find about five that were not cross listed from here. Three of those five, the owners joined their site first and then cross listed their caches here because they probably gave up and wanted someone to actually find them. The most disturbing thing I found is the disclaimer that you have to click through to download a GPX file of a cache, "I understand that this data has not been reviewed by Garmin..."

 

As far as their current marketing strategy. Much ado about nothing.

 

Oh no, I didn't think that. I didn't quote anyone. This is, best I can remember, the THIRD TIME Opencaching.com has run a "get stuff for listing caches on our site" promotion, and there was indeed outrage the first two times.

 

I'm a huge user and supporter of the other Opencaching. Seeing as this promotion went over so well for Garmin, heck, we should try it ourselves.

[+briansnat]

Last I looked they had like 1,700 some unique caches. The rest were cross listed from here. They offer nothing but a poor mirror of this site with inferior functionality, so no wonder they need to bribe people to list caches there. This is actually not their first promotion to encourage people to list there.

 

A few people around here cross listed their caches there. The only logs on them are from people who found the cache originally on GC.com. When OX opened for business l listed two unique caches there out of curiosity. Neither has a single find logged since they were placed over a year ago. I see some people wearing OX T-shirts at local events, largely because they gave a few boxes of them to the president of the local geocaching organization and he gives them away. He still has tons left but few takers even for a free shirt. And even those people wearing the OX shirts still do their geocaching here.

 

Opencaching has turned into little more than a playground for people who have been banned from here because they can't play nice and crybabies angry that we wouldn't publish their cache buried on school grounds next to a RR track.

 

As low as offering bribes for cross listing caches there is, I find it even more pathetic that they come to GC.Com listed events to try to drum up support for their site.

Edited June 3, 2012 by briansnat

[Mr.Yuck]

For two minutes I was thinking: "Hmm... it might be a nice idea for GS to offer thank you gifts to people who have placed a certain number of caches." But then my common sense kicked in and told me that would be terrible. How many people would just chuck down whatever type of container in whatever type of place just so they could get some froggie swag?

 

If a competing site wants to increase their hide numbers that way, I think they are going to gain a reputation in the long term for listing lousy caches.

This argument is also amusing, since GC is known only for the highest caliber of hides!

 

Funny how this is stated so matter of factly, and accepted as fact in this thread. But bring up that there are too many lame micros on this website in a lame micro thread, and you're like a mean, cold-hearted member of the radical vocal minority.

 

There have been a few people out there who have downloaded the entire Opencaching.com cache database, and crunched numbers; how many caches there are, how many are unique, etc. Where are these people? I'd like to see the current numbers.

[+ChileHead]

There have been a few people out there who have downloaded the entire Opencaching.com cache database, and crunched numbers; how many caches there are, how many are unique, etc. Where are these people? I'd like to see the current numbers.

 

The success of a site is not measured by the number of caches listed on it. I could go make a bunch of PQs, poach the caches as my own, and have a site up and running within a month with 100,000 caches on it. Woo-hoo! Does 100,000 listings mean I have a successful site?

 

No, of course not. You have to measure by the amount it's actually getting used to find and log caches. Otherwise it's pretty much like a carbonite for your cache listings.

[+Sol seaker]

Did they actually say TRANSFER (as in move to ours and delete theirs)? or was the deal to cross link listings? That would be a big difference!

It didn't take me long to find a blog post with the deal, and it says "every five caches you hide or transfer". They don't say anything about removing them from this site, but it seems implied to me.

 

Also, later in that blog post, they give a brief primer on geocaching. It says "The minimum that you need is a Garmin GPS unit..."

 

Shameful.

 

Hey, at least they are advocating the use of a real GPS unit. They could have said all you need is a "smartphone".

And to show you how brain dead OC is they offer a smartphone app.

 

Not really. Smart phones lead to GPS purchases.

People begin with a smart phone when they would not have made the GPS investment to start, then they get involved with the game and realize its limitations. Then they buy a GPS. It's a natural progression that they are smart to realize.

[+Sol seaker]

Last I looked they had like 1,700 some unique caches. The rest were cross listed from here. They offer nothing but a poor mirror of this site with inferior functionality, so no wonder they need to bribe people to list caches there. This is actually not their first promotion to encourage people to list there.

 

A few people around here cross listed their caches there. The only logs on them are from people who found the cache originally on GC.com. When OX opened for business l listed two unique caches there out of curiosity. Neither has a single find logged since they were placed over a year ago. I see some people wearing OX T-shirts at local events, largely because they gave a few boxes of them to the president of the local geocaching organization and he gives them away. He still has tons left but few takers even for a free shirt. And even those people wearing the OX shirts still do their geocaching here.

 

Opencaching has turned into little more than a playground for people who have been banned from here because they can't play nice and crybabies angry that we wouldn't publish their cache buried on school grounds next to a RR track.

 

As low as offering bribes for cross listing caches there is, I find it even more pathetic that they come to GC.Com listed events to try to drum up support for their site.

 

Yes, that site is mainly filled with cachers who couldn't deal with minimal guidelines, like don't put caches on private property, and cachers banned from here.

The forums I saw over there were awful. Imagine a forum full of cachers banned from forums here, with no moderation there. Ugh. They were at each others throats.

 

I agree asking people to transfer their caches is sleezy. Just shows they're getting desperate I guess.