A new boat for a fiver

[ditchcrawler]

5 minutes ago, M_JG said:

 Sometimes it pays to be careful when using such terminology, even on the internet.

I thought the same in the post about George Ward and what some people have suggested should happen to him.

[Quattrodave]

10 minutes ago, MtB said:

A firm with supposedly a two year order book offers a boat in a raffle.

 

I would assume its not Oakums that are raffling the boat.  One of the other big raffle companies BOTB (best of the best) often raffle Audi's, BMW's, Merc's & Porsche's... I doubt the car companies have any idea or even care....

Edited April 27, 2023 by Quattrodave

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

I thought the same in the post about George Ward and what some people have suggested should happen to him.

 

Indeed, but I won't name names as it's after 10pm and @TheBiscuits will suggest I'm attacking the perpetrator yet again.

[Andyaero]

6 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

 

^^^ This ^^^ is the bit that troubles me.

 

It simply doesn't add up. A firm with supposedly a two year order book offers a boat in a raffle. Why? How can they build it in time with their claimed two year order book?

 

Or do we know it is a contact that fell though and the boat is already built and sitting about unsold? 

 

Andyaero seems to know a lot about it. Maybe he can fill in the blanks for us dinosaurs...

 

 

Everything I know is gleamed from perusing online, little more.

I've booked a build slot in Jan next year, tho not with Oakums. They were a contender but in the end I just felt they were a little mechanical, just pushing out "product" rather than craft. They have expanded into new premises off the back of their Crick success no doubt, I believe they have the facility to build 4 - 6 boats at a time. Also, they didn't make a good first impression with me customer service wise.

They appear to be using youtubers, as "influencers" if you will......the Kardashians of the cut? Its just using the tools of the younger market, it will undoubtedly work for them.

Nice boats but not for me, but certainly not scammers.

 

10 minutes ago, Quattrodave said:

 

I would assume its not Oakums that are raffling the boat.  One of the other big raffle companies BOTB (best of the best) often raffle Audi's, BMW's, Merc's & Porsche's... I doubt the car companies have any idea or even care....

They're using the Raffall platform to administer the competion, but they're promoting it on their own Facebook page so Oakums are certainly aware.

[Quattrodave]

22 minutes ago, Andyaero said:

They're using the Raffall platform to administer the competion, but they're promoting it on their own Facebook page so Oakums are certainly aware.

 

Fair comment, I didn't know that...

[Tony Brooks]

14 hours ago, Andyaero said:

No offence .....

but.......

the condescending attitude shown on here by many towards modern "You Tube" and social media marketing methods probably says more about the ill informed demographic than the legality of said schemes.

To continually allege that there is something scammy/illegal about both the raffle operator and the boat builder is at best only potentially libellous, a conclusion reached merely because they are using practices outside of the "traditional".

Both are legitimate businesses.

Given their high profile on all social media forums and trade shows, I doubt OAKUMS would be entering into the PR debacle that running such a scam would become.

The canals will still be flowing and populated in a hundred years time, there'll be different folks using them, the times they are a changing.

 

So, in some way or another, "paying" someone to influence others on social media is now a legitimate business practice. It is a bit like the "review" farm producing hundreds of positive reviews to order, or asking for reviews from customers, but then rejecting any that are critical of their conduct/product.

 

The fact that the social media platforms seem totally free to promote such practices and the sale of illegal products without fear of any penalty, in my view, makes your jibe about an ill-informed demographic rather blinkered. The fact that successive governments have totally failed to ensure such platforms operate in an ethical manner and react with urgency when unethical or illegal activities are pointed out to them means prudent people treat them with suspicion.

 

Before casting aspersions about people with an awful lot of life experience, who can remember when most transaction ordinary people took part in were broadly honest and ethical, you need to look at what social media is doing to society and trust. The fact many of us suspected a scam simply illustrates how trust has been destroyed by social media and online buying.

 

Offering an expensive "prize" without at the same time making it as clear as the offer that the prize may not be delivered is not moral or ethical, in other words it is dishonest and can be justly described as a scam or worse.

 

[Andyaero]

I'm no fan of social media (although forums such as these are just that) and don't partake in any of it, but I am aware of it and acknowledge it for what it is and it ain't going away.

Harking back to a bygone era when we could leave the back door unlocked and everyone was straight up and honest, although it's not my recollection of my 55 years, is pointless. The world is where it is and certainly social media is by and large unpleasant and devious but its a tool most businesses now use, you just have to DYOR and make yourself aware of the scams, which incidentally, I don't believe this is.

[magnetman]

It is a very important point.

 

I've seen adverts on youtube for a torch which is described as being able to burn through things.

 

Obviously it can't do this. Everyone knows it can't do this* but the principle of eroding trust which @Tony Brooks has outlined above is an incredibly serious challenge which a reasonable society needs to deal with.

 

Its not just about the torch which can't burn through your clothes it is a far deeper and more significant ill we are looking at.

 

The internet is changing people really fast. Look out or Bad Things will happen.

 

*At least I hope so.

 

 

[IanD]

1 hour ago, Andyaero said:

I'm no fan of social media (although forums such as these are just that) and don't partake in any of it, but I am aware of it and acknowledge it for what it is and it ain't going away.

Harking back to a bygone era when we could leave the back door unlocked and everyone was straight up and honest, although it's not my recollection of my 55 years, is pointless. The world is where it is and certainly social media is by and large unpleasant and devious but its a tool most businesses now use, you just have to DYOR and make yourself aware of the scams, which incidentally, I don't believe this is.

Social media is just a tool like any other, including the internet -- you can use it sensibly or stupidly, there's lots of cr*p out there, some of it dodgy, but it can be really useful. Like the internet the pros and cons are the same -- anyone can put anything out there, and there are few checks on material and too many adverts (which of course largely pay for what you see...) -- but also little suppression or censorship, and it's democratic in the sense that anyone can do it (unless you're blocked away in China or Russia).

 

In my experience, those who poo-pooh it and/or look down their noses at it are those who don't use it or believe everything they read about how terrible it is -- which some of it is, but not all. It's a bit like people poo-poohing the ridiculous idea of going on holiday (or even worse, living on...) a cramped seven-foot wide sewer tube in England, but who have never actually tried it...

 

Don't forget that CWDF is social media, so if you disapprove of that you shouldn't be commenting on here either, should you? 😉

Edited April 28, 2023 by IanD

[Tony Brooks]

14 minutes ago, IanD said:

Social media is just a tool like any other, including the internet -- you can use it sensibly or stupidly, there's lots of cr*p out there, some of it dodgy, but it can be really useful. Like the internet the pros and cons are the same -- anyone can put anything out there, and there are few checks on material and too many adverts (which of course largely pay for what you see...) -- but also little suppression or censorship, and it's democratic in the sense that anyone can do it (unless you're blocked away in China or Russia).

 

In my experience, those who poo-pooh it and/or look down their noses at it are those who don't use it or believe everything they read about how terrible it is -- which some of it is, but not all. It's a bit like people poo-poohing the ridiculous idea of going on holiday (or even worse, living on...) a cramped seven-foot wide sewer tube in England, but who have never actually tried it...

 

Don't forget that CWDF is social media, so if you disapprove of that you shouldn't be commenting on here either, should you? 😉

 

Yes it is social media, but anyone can look up the history of posters to see how others view their advice/answer AND it is properly moderated (in the main) so if existing members report span or a scam it is taken down. More to the point, as far as I know, no one receives any sort of "payment" for their posts apart from the greenies, so there is less chance of them being "bought" as it seems many Influencers are. It seems totally different from the wild west of the newer platforms.

 

Many of the modern platforms refuse to allow you to check the past history of contributors unless you are a member, how often have we seen links here to twitter, only to find you can't read the discussion unless you are a member.

 

Here, anyone can contact the mods or Invasion to get posts they do not like looked at, but try the same with other platforms if you are not a member. They ignore members if the news is anything to go by and make it extremely difficult for non-members to complain, let alone get them to do something about it.

 

I don't think the comparison stands up, it is an apples and oranges comparison. This and even Thunderboat is more like a community trying to work for the common good, not a commercial operation totally focused on maximising profits, in fact some of our members pay to help others, rather than be paid for attracting others to the platform.

1 hour ago, Andyaero said:

I'm no fan of social media (although forums such as these are just that) and don't partake in any of it, but I am aware of it and acknowledge it for what it is and it ain't going away.

Harking back to a bygone era when we could leave the back door unlocked and everyone was straight up and honest, although it's not my recollection of my 55 years, is pointless. The world is where it is and certainly social media is by and large unpleasant and devious but its a tool most businesses now use, you just have to DYOR and make yourself aware of the scams, which incidentally, I don't believe this is.

 

You may not, but the wary here obviously feel it has the feel and look of a potential scam. Both views are probably valid based on individuals' experience.

[MtB]

5 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

You may not, but the wary here obviously feel it has the feel and look of a potential scam. Both views are probably valid based on individuals' experience.

 

 

It's interesting, having now had a good look at both the Oakhams website and the Rafall website.

 

Oakhams:

The striking thing here is the dissonance between the obvious quality of their boat fit-outs and the dismal, sketchy content on their website. Hardly any detailed technical information at all, just a few really nice photos. 

 

Raffall:

Looks a very well-thought-out (American) site. I'd say it is perfectly legit and they are very up-front about their charges and what happens if a raffler member fails to deliver the raffle prize they've listed. Their charges are high but you know what you are getting when you buy a raffle 'ticket'.

 

Conclusion:

Both businesses look fully legitimate but I have doubts about the ethics of Oakhams listing a boat. They appear to have nothing to lose if the raffle fails to sell enough tickets - they appear free to simply decide not to supply the boat. Oakhams however get to create a big social media stir publicising their raffle in the first place and will probably generate a number of decent sales leads as a side effect.

 

Raffal pay out 50% of the ticket sales takings to the winner. (Or 75% perhaps - I saw both figures mentioned), so if sales fall short of funding the boat and Oakhams decided to renege on the raffle, the winner still gets a payout of some sort. but if that happens then those who bought a ticket for a fiver don't get their money back. The losing raffle ticket buyers are the ones who get cheated out of  their money if it turns out the boat never gets supplied, as they'll have bought their ticket(s) under false pretenses. 

 

 

 

[Tony Brooks]

32 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

 

It's interesting, having now had a good look at both the Oakhams website and the Rafall website.

 

Oakhams:

The striking thing here is the dissonance between the obvious quality of their boat fit-outs and the dismal, sketchy content on their website. Hardly any detailed technical information at all, just a few really nice photos. 

 

Raffall:

Looks a very well-thought-out (American) site. I'd say it is perfectly legit and they are very up-front about their charges and what happens if a raffler member fails to deliver the raffle prize they've listed. Their charges are high but you know what you are getting when you buy a raffle 'ticket'.

 

Conclusion:

Both businesses look fully legitimate but I have doubts about the ethics of Oakhams listing a boat. They appear to have nothing to lose if the raffle fails to sell enough tickets - they appear free to simply decide not to supply the boat. Oakhams however get to create a big social media stir publicising their raffle in the first place and will probably generate a number of decent sales leads as a side effect.

 

Raffal pay out 50% of the ticket sales takings to the winner. (Or 75% perhaps - I saw both figures mentioned), so if sales fall short of funding the boat and Oakhams decided to renege on the raffle, the winner still gets a payout of some sort. but if that happens then those who bought a ticket for a fiver don't get their money back. The losing raffle ticket buyers are the ones who get cheated out of  their money if it turns out the boat never gets supplied, as they'll have bought their ticket(s) under false pretenses.

 

And that is exactly why what happens if the prize is not awarded should have equal prominence to the prize on all the official and unofficial publicity. Then no one can claim they did not know about the "get out" clauses, so no false pretences. I do not mean little characters so beloved by the 90% of....... like this product, only to find the % referred to a fraction of a percent of relevant population if you can even read the characters.

[magnetman]

Deceptive marketing has been going on for ages. I don't understand why it is tolerated. 

 

Once upon a time a bloke decided to miniaturise industrial cyclonic dust separation systems into a vacuum cleaner format. Good idea but hardly an invention. 

 

Adverts appeared saying it "won't lose suction". Obviously everyone knows that it actually will lose suction as the filter blocks up and the spring in the pressure relief valve weakens but never mind lots of products get sold. 

 

Why is this deception allowed? Surely there are laws about this sort of thing.

 

 

 

[Andyaero]

It'd be commercial suicide for them just to say, "sorry didn't sell enough tickets" after what will be a lot of publicity around this. I just can't see them doing that. Maybe I'm the naive one.

They'll be at Crick with a shiney new boat, pushing this for all their worth no doubt.

 

1376 tickets sold so far.......

Edited April 28, 2023 by Andyaero

[Tony Brooks]

Just now, magnetman said:

Deceptive marketing has been going on for ages. I don't understand why it is tolerated. 

 

Once upon a time a bloke decided to miniaturise industrial cyclonic dust separation systems into a vacuum cleaner format. Good idea but hardly an invention. 

 

Adverts appeared saying it "won't lose suction". Obviously everyone knows that it actually will lose suction as the filter blocks up and the spring in the pressure relief valve weakens but never mind lots of products get sold. 

 

Why is this deception allowed? Surely there are laws about this sort of thing.

 

It is because stopping ripping the public off is not a priority for any government, and for many it seems something to be applauded.  It is also because funding for Consumer protection has been cut and cut, plus the ASA seems to be staffed by unpractical idiots who are seem in the pocket f the advertisers (a bit like OFWAT and the EA seem to be in the pocket of the sewerage companies).

 

ripping people off = easy profit, so it must be a good thing.

[MtB]

8 minutes ago, Andyaero said:

It'd be commercial suicide for them just to say, "sorry didn't sell enough tickets" after what will be a lot of publicity around this. I just can't see them doing that. Maybe I'm the naive one.

They'll be at Crick with a shiney new boat, pushing this for all their worth no doubt.

 

1376 tickets sold so far.......

 

They need to sell about 45,000 tickets to break even. 

 

 

[magnetman]

Not if they let the boat go at cost. 

I still think there will be nobody winning the boat but I am a dyed in the wool skeptic. 

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, Andyaero said:

It'd be commercial suicide for them just to say, "sorry didn't sell enough tickets"

 

 

Which is exactly what happend into the two raffles I bought into.

 

Every week we'd get an email saying how many tickets had been sold, and chasing us up to get friends and familes involved and for every "x" tickts we sold we would get 'some' free rickets ourselves.

 

Both times on the day of the draw we got an email saying that not enough tickets had been sold so the house would not be won but X% of the income from the sales would be deducted for admin coats and the balance paid to the charity.

Presumably, the intention was that the £3m purchase price of the house would be taken from the ticket sales, then the organisers took their % and the remainder went to the Charity.

Without having to buy the house, (probably) both the organisers and the charity did far better than they would have done had the raffle actually been drawn.

 

 

This is them and their current house raffle

Win a house in Cornwall | £4,500,000 Million House | Omaze UK

 

 

 

 

[MtB]

Certainly looks feasible given there are 99 days still to run.

 

Hard to tell when the raffle started though. If its already been running for three months then 1,376 tickets looks grim. If it only started yesterday then it looks really promising.

 

[magnetman]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

 we would get 'some' free rickets ourselves.

 

 

 

Their generosity knows no bounds. Free health problems. How great is that. 

[MtB]

1 minute ago, magnetman said:

 

Their generosity knows no bounds. Free health problems. How great is that. 

 

Reminds me of when Benson and Hedges were offering a free heart bypass operation with every 100,000 cigarettes you bought. 

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, magnetman said:

 

Their generosity knows no bounds. Free health problems. How great is that. 

 

No problem, just need to 'get out more' and let the sunlight stimulate the Vitamin D production.

Dam - its raining again !!!

[Andyaero]

14 minutes ago, MtB said:

Certainly looks feasible given there are 99 days still to run.

 

Hard to tell when the raffle started though. If its already been running for three months then 1,376 tickets looks grim. If it only started yesterday then it looks really promising.

 

Started 2 days ago, I'm guessing they expect the bulk of entrants to come at Crick, at their probable summer open day and weekly after their enthusiastic youtubers' video drops.

[MtB]

48 minutes ago, Andyaero said:

Started 2 days ago, I'm guessing they expect the bulk of entrants to come at Crick, at their probable summer open day and weekly after their enthusiastic youtubers' video drops.

 

 

Ah yes, good plan especially if they have a boat there. Flog a ticket or five to everyone tramping through it. Several thousand sales there, I bet! 

 

 

 

 

[StephenA]

So assuming they sell enough tickets and someone wins in August when will they get the boat given the books are full for two years.....  "Congratulations you've won a boat... come back in 2 years"