for having spent 97 bucks to find out about this, I will let you refer me to any future thing you do that we want that we happen to one day run into. it is as if you did a test for the FT and should get something back for it. :)MM

NYC1, how many miles have you earned from all of these GC things anyway?

where ever you got the ways and means, I am sure you are grateful to that person or forum. That many? Thought so. Good, Then shut it.

AND GO RED SOX! You know the rest but I aint so mean to have to say it.
;)MM

This thread shows very well why, if you have something that is working for you, you should not post details about it unless you want to kill it. It may not always be an instant death but its life will be shortened. Also, why is everybody getting on Kirt Christensen’s case for plagiarizing Marathon Man when Marathon Man’s posts and website are just the plagiarizing of various Fat Wallet and Flyer Talk posts. Of course Marathon Man has used a few more words.

This is short, but [b]Marathon Man[/b] you need to know…
 

My 2 cents:

I feel bad that fellow frequent flyers have bought this course and think it would be a nice gesture of Kirk to return some of that $ 97 since he never intended to advertise this system on here in the first place.

However, I do not believe that charging for content on the Internet is wrong. Just because something is available somewhere else for free does not mean one may not take this information spend thousands of $$'s marketing it (= letting people not aware of this know about the opportunities out there) and earning a living doing it.

About 4 years ago I spend $ 100 to join some Air Courier Association. I never traveled as an Air Courier and I could have probably found the same information about Air Couriers by just using Google.

However, most things on the Internet are not FREE and these people spend a lot of money marketing to me that Frequent Flyer Programs and Air Couriers exist. Even though I spend $ 100 for something that would have been available for free the information helped me to get interested in the topic, do my research and eventually find FlyerTalk.

Why do people actually pay for porn on the internet?? For the same reason that some people pay $ 97 to a crappy looking website about Free Miles!

The lesson may be. Only pay for content on things you know nothing about if you are to lazy to do the research.

I just want to give Kirt Christensen some credit here.

Kirt Christensen did send me a prompt reply to my email - promising an immediate full refund and personally addressing my criticisms.

I find it very good of him to:
1) Immediatly honor his satisfaction guarantee - no bogus like some businesses.
2) Respond here on FT giving his side of things.



I also want to say I cannot agree with all the criticisms of MM. While there are things he could have done differently, I don't find it unethical to publish information available in the public domain and sell it. Please note that most of the information availble in any book you read is available somewhere in the public domain for free. The author should have a unique way of presenting information in an area where they have extensive knowledge organised in a user freindly manner. The purpose of buying a book may be to save time and effort - not because you couldn't find out somewhere on the internet for free.

There are many sides to the issue of sharing information about deals (as we are doing eveyday on FT) including the shortening of a deal's lifespan and I don't want to get into a long debate about this.

However, I urge those who are labelling this unethical to take a close look at what they determine to be unethical.
- Is it unethical to charge a large sum of money of money for information people already know?
- Is it unethical to charge a large sum of money for information people do not know (organised in a unique helpful manner) but could aquire elsewhere if they spent time (they don't want to spend) searching?
- Is it unethical to charge a small sum of money for information people do not know (organised in a unique helpful manner) but could aquire elsewhere if they spent time (they don't want to spend) searching?


Provided every customer feels they are receiving a bargain for what they paid I don't think selling information (available in the public domain) is unethical. Provided people are being helped - consolidating information available in many different places, organising it better, communicating more effectively what others said, adding personal advice, saving others time, etc is a valuable service people are willing to pay for.

Please don't misunderstand me - I am NOT saying the above was the case here. I am saying selling information is not itself unethical.

Does anyone own the information we gather as a community on FT? I think not. We are each free to share the information with others - in our own words and giving credit where it is due. If we take time organize this information into a resource others want to pay for, does it logically follow we are acting unethically?

FlyerTalk is a Community!
 

From its conception FlyerTalk is a community. We give by way of content, advice and information and we take by reading others posts. I call this fair play.

Some information we are gaining here are very valuably but within a grey area and more likely to be killed, if not used wisely. “It may not always be an instant death but its life will be shortened”, as ned wrote in post # 48. And this is the contrary what members of our community want!

In short: FlyerTalk should be an environment that encourages information sharing and enjoyment. Do you really think that such incidents will strengthen our community?

wondering how one becomes a moderator anyway?
 

I don't feel guilty about anything here, Patron. I don't have anything to hide in my world either. Why should I? I may feel bad that someone had to spend money on something they already knew, but why do you pay a contractor to paint your house if you really can do that yourself? Think about it! It's been said in other ways already in this thread.

And why does the mere fact I tend to explain things in long format automatically make me seem instantly guilty of anything? Why would that thinking apply to anyone? that is very weird.

My website describes a process which many who have endured the HUGE thread of gift cards have been grateful for. IT's FREE FOR YOU TO ACCESS TOO! It will remain as such.

I suspect Kirt was trying to make a different or maybe even better version of that information and sell it. Maybe it was worse, I dunno. How he markets it is up to him. Good for him. Take a piece of the pie, man!

My main goal is miles. I figure that in terms of any money on this scheme, mine will just come to me, as it did in the case of Kirt. I did not look for Kirt, he came to me. Similarly, the site I made is just sitting there. It has nothing on it except GC info right now and it's there for the taking. It describes how to do the scheme in a way that works rather nicely. It can be used for free, as I said earlier, and you may learn a thing or two about the way I think if you read it. Suggesting that people be friendly or patient with bankers or pre-filling out that postal form when buying more than $3,000 worth of money orders... things like that. Niceties (unlike many of the blasts in this thread) I had to scan that postal form by the way. No biggie, but how much would you pay your graphic designer to make the PDF? Just curious.)

So I guess the ING bank referral idea is my only crime here. Yep, I am guilty of suggesting that people use that bank in their gift card world and this is outlined on my site. But I'll tell ya what, if YOU wish me to refer you to ING, I will NOT do so. Kindly go get your own. I don't want your $10 referral money. I want it only from people who remain grateful and do not point fingers or cast blame because they are worried ONE person can actually bring down an entire deal. No, my ING referrals are reserved for those who wish to take on the task of helping others over helping themselves. I believe I have done this in 99.9% of my entire FT existence. I plan to continue being me.

Like any web URL, that site cost me money to own but I require nothing for people to visit it. I shall not either. So those referrals is how I "made money on the fellow community members" as you suggest in a sort of ill form above. Yet these fellow community members have collectively made more on me and my info in the end! Guess what: I am happy with that and we have all earned many many miles because of it. Seems to me the pie we take from here has no boundaries so we can continue until it ends on its own. No kirt or MM is going to be the terminator here.

I made my miles because the original poster showed the FT this GC gig! Many here started out using that post and some used my info. Most did not though, I think. That poster put the post, 'Earn miles by buying gift cards? Did FT miss this?' on this forum and it started going from there.

Wow, aren't WE glad that happened? Gee, we should all give money to the Wall Street Journal for showing us the gig, right? ...and we should give something to the original poster for posting it! Or maybe not. Just let it flow as it does and we all get what we get or spend what we spend. Be glad someone like kirt or MM found a way to make his money, don't be mad at it! Hey, I'm glad the WSJ reporter probably got paid to write his story and I'm glad banks are updating their policies to make systems more seemless or workable and that credit cards have rewards but happen to cost money to own.

We all know the GC gig is complex and things to know about it often require posts with more than 4 lines of text. My site became a useful tool that someone lik eKirt saw as valuable and that's because the site happens to more clearly explain the GC process in a one-stop-shop format rather than in a long thread full of tiny posts. Gee, I guess I should be really sorry I made it easier for all the new members out there who are now flying for free. (Oh, and I do say in my site that I got much of the info from places like FT, so I doubt I did anything bad there either.)

Personally, I find making miles or money off "the system" a lot more Ft-able and likeable than making it off of individuals, but to each his own, I guess. But the if gift card scheme is so complex then it does require a long ramp up process to learn. Therefore, to his credit, I suspect that's partly why Kirt felt he could charge $97 for his version of it. The GC knowledge has inherent value from the get go, and I gather he read thru those long thread in FT as well and found posts containing words like these:

"can anyone give me the details in a clearer or shorter way than having to read this entire thread?"

or

"can anyone outline the steps to make it easier for a newbie to understand?..."

Posts like these are interwoven throughout 3 ongoing threads (this one being the 4th) on the GC subject. I did a site, it got picked up by whomever, and yeah, it got picked up by Kirt too. As I said, I hardly even thought about that til first reading this thread yesterday morning before going to the beach! I really didnt think it was that important and to be completely honest with ya, I didnt think Kirt could pull off the selling of this stuff anyway!

Geesh! If a finger pointing session is what a moterator thinks is good, then we are all in trouble! I think that is detracting us all from the goal, which is to get miles from our ongoing, widely known gift card purchases and other elaborate shcemes like ebay/AA, etc. Would warning anyone about Kirt's site have helped? I don't think that's my place since that is too much like stomping on the competition. That's not what I'm about and I didnt ever see him as competition anyway. I think the feild should be open to anyone who can try it.

I get the feeling that you think I owe you or someone something here. Wrong! Although I will never ask anyone in here, you personally could always help pay for the cost of my owning a URL, hosting a page or taking extra time out to write up the GC thing in a way that has helped many. If you wish to contribute, just send a check as a sort of peace offering and pipe down. In return, I will pay FT to be in here as will everybody else. But the content will need to remain in lawyer land. We dont want this do we? No.

My point is this: Those who are too upset about this stuff and this thread should just get over it. Go get your 5,000 or 10,000 miles a month, get some of your own ING referrals and have fun, ok? Get creative in new ideas, not by blasting the ones that already exist. Maybe you too will have someone willing to give you a few bucks for them. Oh, but don't share anything on how you managed to do it... That might ruin it for "everybody..."

:) :rolleyes:

can we go back ot earning MYLEZ now?

:) :) MM

chargebacks are your friend :)

once again, longer than 4 lines, totally skipped it all -

This is short, so you will read it.
While it may not be important to you to read every long discussion, FYI all of the best deals ever (I know about) presented on FT were longer than 4 lines.

If you actually follow this rule, you will really miss out! ;)

Yes. But does this mean that information we learn here cannot be used elsewhere?

For example, say I become an expert on a subject, from reading 50 books on the subject and much personal experience. I then decide to write a book on the subject. I will use information I once learned from the books I read but have now internalized from reading it multiple places and using the information myself. As I write from memory and experience I won't give credit to the original authors for each piece I might have learned from them - one reason being I won't remember what I learned from who. I will however use quotes specifically from certain authors on the subject - giving them credit. I will also give credit to the source whenever I am using information I remember I got from that source - especially when information is specific to that source.

Much of what we talk about on FT is also discussed elsewhere. I also read other travel sources - so if I can't remember where I first read about something I have been doing for a long time - why not share it?

If I grew up in a fishing community and later decided to write a book on fishing, there would be nothing wrong with that. Is there some unspoken rule that one must not share FT community information with others? If others don't have time to read FT but wanted to know what we do, would it be wrong to write a book conveying much of the knowledge possessed here in a much easier to use format - saving the audience time? Isn't FT all about sharing? What if people don't have the time to read through the long threads to keep up with everything in the long FT format - why not share with them to? And if someone were to invest hundreds of hours reaching an audience that doesn't have time for FT why is it wrong for them to recieve compensation for their time?

We should give credit to FT where it is due - but FT did not come up with the Charter One deal. Someone learned about the deal from another community and brought it here. Was that wrong of them? I think not!

Can we share information we garner from other communities on FT - but are forbidden from sharing FT information elsewhere?

I know of many who came to FT through other avenues of information sharing. I first heard about FT from an eBay miles related transaction. I think it can certainly benefit FT and strengthen our community to bring in new members.

(Anyone writing such a book using information they remember verses copy from FT should still give FT general credit - expanding our community).

First of all, I didn't intend that this issue becomes some kind of vendetta. I stepped in after I read Marathon Man’s off topic replay (Post # 39) to this statement:
Saying that we should agree to disagree on that issue, wanaflyforless:
From what I read – including posts #39 & 53 , I got the impression that Marathon Man fits in a group of community members with this characteristics:

• Their first goal is to make money for themselves (have a look at his frequent requests for referrals).
• They try to keep this as a secret as long as they can.
• After they get caught, they step in with a lengthy off topic explanation basically defending their action.

This thread would more likely not exist, if Marathon Man had announced his licensing deal with an online venture about the CharterOne scheme well in advance. If fellow FlyerTalker became aware that the offer is for something they already knew about, had saved them USD 97,--.

But I find a lot of things in this world aren't done the way I would do them and I'm perfectly OK with that.

Patron, I think you're off the mark on MM. You could be right, but my take on this is totally different than yours.

Paid $85 last week to an electrician to fix a switch. Me, "you charge 85 dollars to turn a screw?" Electrician says "$1.00 to turn the screw, $84 for knowing which screw to turn."

[QUOTE=PatronIf fellow FlyerTalker became aware that the offer is for something they already knew about, had saved them USD 97,--.

\QUOTE]

Absolutely a non-issue.

EVERYTHING I sell comes with money back guarantees...

(Quick marketing lesson: Always have a guarantee, if you don't sales will suffer. If you're nervous about offering one, why? 99% of people are honest, and will only take you up on it for legit reason...)

The GetFreeAirMiles course is no exception, geesh, it's pretty obviously stated on the website:

"My 'Love-it-or-Leave-it', 90 Days — Yes, That's an Entire THREE MONTHS! — or Else Get Your Full Purchase Price of My Book Back, 100% Guarantee!"

I begin to lose patience with posters like d00t.

If you didn't like the course, all you have to do is send an email letting me know why, and the refund will be posted within 24 hours.

(I've been at a seminar in Chicago this weekend since Thursday, so I'm a little behind, but I take customer service VERY seriously... If you email, you'll get a response...)

Best of luck to you all...

Kirt Christensen

MM:

You took the time to write the material on the gift cards and put it on your website for free use to the public (as did I). Doesn't it bother you that someone else essentially copied your work (with grammar and all) and is now selling it to people without paying you for your work, or even crediting you for it? Or am I mistaken here and he actually did pay you for your effort, as he says, but you don't mention?

Either way, does it bother you that people are paying someone else for the words you wrote and the organization of this information you created and intended to be free to the public? Does it bother you that he has added no information, insight, or even word organization of your work and is now selling almost exactly what you intend the public to have for free? It would sure bother me if anyone were to do that from my effort. It would make me furious.

I actually had one guy ask to to something very similar with my website. He wanted to start a similar one in Europe, and asked if he could just translate my stuff into German and put it on his site. I said no, but encouraged him to write his own information, using the links on my site to track down offers if he liked, but checking them out himself, and writing his own description and advice on them. I also encouraged him to indeed create a European site describing miles offers, with emphasis on those of European airlines, which I follow only sporadically. I told him I would be very interested in exchanging ideas, as I do with a few other website authors. But I expect him to do his own organizing and writing and his own due diligence on checking out the offers before he puts them on his website.