• Hi Guest - Sign up now for Secret Santa 2024!
    Click here to sign up!
  • Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
    Click here to visit! here...

iPass Jazz Pass & Vine

I could continue to post these in the Lobby but I think all the guys who will appreciate it are already here :laugh: . Again, searching for tunes to add to my compilation CD I found THIS ..... very cool indeed!


:cool:
 
Everything arrived safe and sound!! I'm going to mull over a few more swaps and post them to get an Amen.

Should leave tomorrow boyz!!

Quadio
 
Here goes nuttin!!!:

T: 1. Arturo Fuente Opus X Fuente Fuente, P: #35 Arturo Fuente Anejo #49
T: 5. Ashton Heritage Puro Sol Corona Gorda, P: #36 Ashton VSG Robusto
T: 7. Diamond Crown Maximus Pyramid No. 3, P: #37 Graycliff Professionale Toro (PGX)
T: 9. La Flor Dominicana Double Ligero Lancero, P: #38 Arturo Fuente Don Carlos Doble Robusto
T: 34. Monte No. 2, JUN 06, P: #39 San Cristóbal de La Habana Churchill (El Morro)

I think the DC Max is a questionable swap, but the PGX is the highest value stick I have. If that is a shady put, let me know and I can pull it. I really want to try a DC Max, but I don't want to screw anyone either.

Let me know. Can I get an Amen?!?!

Music will be:

Louis Armstrong - What a Wonderful World (Suprise, surprise!!!)
John Coltrane - A Love Supreme (including a live disc)

edited to remove "la Punta" from SCLH put
 
I see you all lookin'!!! Please give me the okay to fire, or slap my hand. If I get some input, I can have it ready to fly in tomorrows mail!!
 
Yeah, those look fine. The Fuente Fuente and the Anejo are exactly the same msrp and the Graycliff is only about 25 cents short on the DCM, so I don't see a problem there.
 
Gonz said:
Yeah, those look fine. The Fuente Fuente and the Anejo are exactly the same msrp and the Graycliff is only about 25 cents short on the DCM, so I don't see a problem there.
Click to expand...
Andy,

You're just too good!

Wilkey
 
I was having a tough time guessing what the average price was. The San Cristobal is a bit higher than the #2 so I think the pass did okay.
 
Satchmo said:
I was having a tough time guessing what the average price was. The San Cristobal is a bit higher than the #2 so I think the pass did okay.
Click to expand...


I may be interpreting the above statement incorrectly, but it made me think of an opinion on puts and takes that I've seen before and have an issue with. We all know the standard rules for passes, quality for quality etc., but I've seen several times where people think it's ok to put a lower value cigar for a higher one because one of their other put/takes was lopsided the other way around. What I'm trying to say is every put and take I think is supposed to be able to stand on it's own. It should't be acceptable just because one outdid themselves on another. Another way of saying this is that you cannot add the cumulative value of all your puts vs. all your takes and use that as a measuring stick. Again, I'm not sure this is what the above statement was trying to say, but to me it's a disturbing trend that I've seen in passes and I'm not sure it's right.

Just my Tuesday morning thought, carry on.
 
Gonz said:
Satchmo said:
I was having a tough time guessing what the average price was. The San Cristobal is a bit higher than the #2 so I think the pass did okay.
Click to expand...


I may be interpreting the above statement incorrectly, but it made me think of an opinion on puts and takes that I've seen before and have an issue with. We all know the standard rules for passes, quality for quality etc., but I've seen several times where people think it's ok to put a lower value cigar for a higher one because one of their other put/takes was lopsided the other way around. What I'm trying to say is every put and take I think is supposed to be able to stand on it's own. It should't be acceptable just because one outdid themselves on another. Another way of saying this is that you cannot add the cumulative value of all your puts vs. all your takes and use that as a measuring stick. Again, I'm not sure this is what the above statement was trying to say, but to me it's a disturbing trend that I've seen in passes and I'm not sure it's right.

Just my Tuesday morning thought, carry on.
Click to expand...


That why the pass rule are stated as;

5. Put & Takes (P/T's) should be: a) value for value, b) rarity for rarity, c) NC for NC, d) Premium for Premium and e) ISOM for ISOM.


This rule has evolved over the course of hosting a few passes and hopefully is quite clear of what "this" pass host expects ;) . There's another pass I'm in where the host has said it would be acceptable for the particpants to put multiple cigars to match the value of a single cigar that a participant really wants. But I do see what your talking about Gonz, and thanks for the reminder.


:cool:
 
I guess it did sound that way. Basically, I was not real sure on the Graycliff for the DC swap. I checked around on prices and they came up pretty equal. This is my first pass, and I did not want to short change the group. I guess I was feeling bad about the Graycliff being $.25 short of the DC. While most swaps were probably spot on value for value, this was a touch short.

I was not trying to pass a lesser stick and make up for it in another. Notice that comment was made after everything was okayed.

One thing that I did not see mentioned was this case with the DC and PGX. Technically, the Graycliff is of lesser value ($.25 or $1). Is the equal trade rule allow for a close value trade as this? Or should a passer not make a swap such as I did? I guess I figured if there was no blatent price discrepancy, there would be no issue, AND the trades are subject to the people in the pass. Sometimes the price of cigar is hard to determine. Many sticks have MSRP, but are readily available for less than that.

The pass should leave on my lunch hour today!! My CD burner crapped out, so no Armstrong CD. I did ge Coltrane done. I also added a King B to the pass that I found. No swap, just an extra. NorCal, you can add that to the bottom of the list.

Quade
 
OK guys, I want to keep this moving as much as anyone else. These P / T's are assuming that Satchmo's are all good.. I sent this to NCCL and he stated that they look good but wanted to see what the general census was.


Take #10. Arturo Fuente Hemingway Classic Maduro - Put #40. Diamond Crown Maximus #5
Take #17. Joya de Nicaragua Antano 1970 Belicoso - Put #41. Don Pepin Black Label Robusto
Take #26. Opus X Dbl Corona - Put #42. Graycliff Expresso Robusto
Take #27. Casa Fuente Belicoso Fino - Put #43 DCM from TAA 2006
Take #38. Arturo Fuente Don Carlos Double Robusto - Put #44. Perdomo Estate Seleccion Vintage 1991 Aristocrata
 
Andy,

I think that as a philosophical matter, your analysis makes sense. But then we are not operating in the realm of the ideal. As a practical matter, although the objective may be to aim for equality of PUT and TAKE pricing, the reality is that exact matching of MSRP (for cigars which have a published and agreed upon suggested price) is burdensome. Furthermore, if the expectation is that PUTs should be no less than the value of the corresponding TAKE, then this, by definition, supports a violation of that same-for-same ideal. "Equal" is not the same as "not less than." In other words, the practical reality results in a paradox.

As I see it, the only way to break this paradox in the realm of the practical is to allow a small band of "approximately equal" for each P/T combination such that the net overall P/T value exchange is zero. So for example, we might say that MSRP match should be within $0.25 and that the overall net value exchange should be zero. By this guideline, a permissible set of P/Ts might look like this:

T1: $5.00, P1: $5.25
T2: $7.75, P2: $7.50
T3: $10.00, P3: $10.25
T4: $6:00, P4: 5.75
Net: $0.00

Now, we could say this is picky but in my opinion, it is one way of handling a situation that allows for modest, inexact matching of individual pairs while preserving the ideal of "same for same." In this case, we recognize practical considerations and provide a means for players to deal with inexact matches in a way that is sanctioned and in the spirit of the pass.

I would leave it to the pass organizer to define what "approximately equal" means in the context of his pass.

What do you think?

Wilkey
 
I agree with that, and personally find myself torn when it comes down to the "expectation" that puts always exceed the value of the take. If this was the case, then an argument could be made that folks only organize and run a pass to get back a bunch of nicer, more valuable cigars than they started with. Now we all know that's not the case. I think perhaps the way I see it is in extreme conditions. I wouldn't set a particular number on it, since a 50 cent difference means alot more with a $4 cigar than it does with a $20 cigar. But I see no problem when a put falls just short of the take. I think my issue is when someone grossly puts an undervalued cigar for another, and then justifies it by saying that one of their puts was worth way more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top