Comments on: and now we see as through a glass, clarkly http://wakefielddoctrine.com/2009/10/27/the-wakefield-doctrine-and-now-we-see-as-through-a-glass-clarkly/ (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) Sat, 04 Feb 2012 00:39:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Clark http://wakefielddoctrine.com/2009/10/27/the-wakefield-doctrine-and-now-we-see-as-through-a-glass-clarkly/#comment-98 Clark Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:43:55 +0000 http://wakefielddoctrine.com/?p=715#comment-98 (If I may continue with my Brian Epstein hat) <strong><em>From the Roger; Thought I'd get this out before the Clark does. " Sizzle sells the steak". I want to attribute that quote to Alex, a guy that Clark and I worked for in sales a couple of millenium ago. A major Scott, Alex made a mechanical science of selling ice ( or whatever)to eskimos ( or whoever). A lot of freakin' eskimos bought a lot of ice, or hats, or steak. It was actually time-share, and Alex wrote the pitch that was used in presentation. If you did it his way, you sold shit and made money, and got to keep your job. If not, then you didn't last long. I didn't get too far with it. Clark did much better. But Alex was fucking unbelievable. Alex would have an eskimo in a cowboy hat buying a side of beef on ice to take with him on vacation in Newport, and all happy about it, too. Oh yeah...the point. Point is, you can't just throw something out there without some sizzle, or you'll end up with a truckful of whatever at day's end. You have to set up for the close, or there won't be one. Cowboy needs a hat, but secretly still wants one that looks cool with all his other cowboy shit. That would be...too much cowboy, not enough hat...</em></strong> (If I may continue with my Brian Epstein hat)

From the Roger;
Thought I’d get this out before the Clark does.
” Sizzle sells the steak”.
I want to attribute that quote to Alex, a guy that Clark and I worked for in sales a couple of millenium ago. A major Scott, Alex made a mechanical science of selling ice ( or whatever)to eskimos ( or whoever). A lot of freakin’ eskimos bought a lot of ice, or hats, or steak. It was actually time-share, and Alex wrote the pitch that was used in presentation. If you did it his way, you sold shit and made money, and got to keep your job. If not, then you didn’t last long. I didn’t get too far with it. Clark did much better. But Alex was fucking unbelievable. Alex would have an eskimo in a cowboy hat buying a side of beef on ice to take with him on vacation in Newport, and all happy about it, too.
Oh yeah…the point. Point is, you can’t just throw something out there without some sizzle, or you’ll end up with a truckful of whatever at day’s end. You have to set up for the close, or there won’t be one. Cowboy needs a hat, but secretly still wants one that looks cool with all his other cowboy shit. That would be…too much cowboy, not enough hat…

]]> By: clarkscottroger http://wakefielddoctrine.com/2009/10/27/the-wakefield-doctrine-and-now-we-see-as-through-a-glass-clarkly/#comment-97 clarkscottroger Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:41:31 +0000 http://wakefielddoctrine.com/?p=715#comment-97 Glenn said October 28, 2009 at 12:58 pm e Thanks for responding. I don’t get the “Mr. Wayne” reference. I’m a country boy. I don’t get out much. There, there. Don't worry... Glenn said
October 28, 2009 at 12:58 pm e
Thanks for responding. I don’t get the “Mr. Wayne” reference. I’m a country boy. I don’t get out much.

There, there.
Don’t worry…

]]> By: clarkscottroger http://wakefielddoctrine.com/2009/10/27/the-wakefield-doctrine-and-now-we-see-as-through-a-glass-clarkly/#comment-96 clarkscottroger Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:34:01 +0000 http://wakefielddoctrine.com/?p=715#comment-96 Hey Glenn, Thanks for the Comment. Only drawback to you <em>'all action/all steak'</em> guys is you don't <strong>think</strong>. Your Comment is buried at the bottom of the Reply section on Page 9 (Discussion). Where you put it because that is where you ended up on this visit, probably a bookmark thing. No body is going to see it. (Get one of the people in your frame of reference who is capable of a little more than <em>act-stop-act </em>and get them to tell you how to place the Comment here, at the end of the current Post, where most people will look.) (BTW with <em><strong>rogers</strong></em>, I sometimes do the edit/move the Comment for them (See the last couple of Posts). But as you so clearly and decisively make the point : "<em>Not enough scotts contributing. Rogers and clarks get all caught up in “writin’ fancy” so people will like them. How sad! Scotts usually start writing with an important ingredient that clarks and rogers apparently consider optional—A FUCKING POINT"</em> Only draw back, nobody to read it. But then again, you know what they say, 'a scott alone in a room, isn't'.) Hey Glenn,

Thanks for the Comment. Only drawback to you ‘all action/all steak’ guys is you don’t think.

Your Comment is buried at the bottom of the Reply section on Page 9 (Discussion). Where you put it because that is where you ended up on this visit, probably a bookmark thing.

No body is going to see it.

(Get one of the people in your frame of reference who is capable of a little more than act-stop-act and get them to tell you how to place the Comment here, at the end of the current Post, where most people will look.)

(BTW with rogers, I sometimes do the edit/move the Comment for them (See the last couple of Posts). But as you so clearly and decisively make the point :
“Not enough scotts contributing. Rogers and clarks get all caught up in “writin’ fancy” so people will like them. How sad! Scotts usually start writing with an important ingredient that clarks and rogers apparently consider optional—A FUCKING POINT”
Only draw back, nobody to read it. But then again, you know what they say,
‘a scott alone in a room, isn’t’.)

]]>