Power Meters?

On 4/29/2021 2:35 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 10:05:41 AM UTC-7, wrote:
Op donderdag 29 april 2021 om 18:02:23 UTC+2 schreef :
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 8:40:22 AM UTC-7, Mark cleary wrote:
What do you think of this power meter. I don't want pedal one until they come out with Shimano cleat model and I don't want a hub based. What if any does the group use?4IIII PRECISION PRO SHIMANO ULTEGRA R8000 DUAL-SIDED CRANKSET
Deacon Mark
Since I'm not racing it doesn't interest me in the least whether I know exactly how much power I'm generating or not. My Garmin calculates the amount of Calories I'm expending by assuming that there is no wind. So 1.2 calories per second of actual riding time is about 200 watts of power output. If you have a head or tail wind you can adjust your output per second during that time though circular courses generally have the same up an down adjustments so that the Garmin is fairly accurate. The Garmin program tells you the actual moving time so that you can calculate calories per second. Of course, this only counts on flat ground and full out efforts, most of the time you are riding well below your peak and so the readings are inaccurate as hell. But why do you need to know how much power you are generating?
Tom it isn't about you this time. Why do you need to know the power you are generating? As a reference for your trainings intensity. You are not into that? OK, don't use them. Simple.

Lou, this is about Mark Cleary, who is a Christian pastor and hardly anyone that would be interested in training up to professional standards.


That can go different ways for different people.
Karol Wojtyla had a respectable racing career.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:48:03 -0700 (PDT), Lou Holtman
wrote:

...what moron invented Calories when he means kilocalories?

There are a variety of people whom you can blame. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie#History
The solution would have been to use Joules instead, but that involved
dividing by 4.2, which was probably deemed too difficult for those
involved. "One calorie is defined as exactly 4.184 J, and one
Calorie (kilocalorie) is 4184 J." At least they tried:
"Use of the calorie was officially deprecated by the ninth General
Conference on Weights and Measures, in 1948"

Rather than implement the obvious solution of eliminating the Kcal,
efforts to fix the problem were centered around juggling the spelling.
https://www.nature.com/articles/121058d0 (1928)

Off topic drivel: If you are entertained by really strange and
confusing units of measure, I recommend the system of radiation
measurement.


--
Jeff Liebermann
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 8:40:22 AM UTC-7, Mark cleary wrote:
What do you think of this power meter. I don't want pedal one until they come out with Shimano cleat model and I don't want a hub based. What if any does the group use?4IIII PRECISION PRO SHIMANO ULTEGRA R8000 DUAL-SIDED CRANKSET
Deacon Mark

Buy a Stages. Its the best. https://store.stagescycling.com/ You can get a single-sided arm pretty cheap and decide whether it is worth the investment, and if it's not, then sell it. I'm personally not interested in power data, but a lot of my friends love to ponder their data. I'm also way behind the technology -- having just purchased my first GPS cyclo-computer, a Stages Dash which I really like.

Full disclosu Stages has operations here in Portland, and they used to employ my son, so I'm very partial. I still think they have the best low-cost option.

-- Jay Beattie.

Op donderdag 29 april 2021 om 22:38:05 UTC+2 schreef Mark cleary:
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 2:43:46 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 10:26:23 AM UTC-7, Mark J. wrote:
On 4/29/2021 10:05 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op donderdag 29 april 2021 om 18:02:23 UTC+2 schreef :
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 8:40:22 AM UTC-7, Mark cleary wrote:
What do you think of this power meter. I don't want pedal one until they come out with Shimano cleat model and I don't want a hub based. What if any does the group use?4IIII PRECISION PRO SHIMANO ULTEGRA R8000 DUAL-SIDED CRANKSET
Deacon Mark
Since I'm not racing it doesn't interest me in the least whether I know exactly how much power I'm generating or not. My Garmin calculates the amount of Calories I'm expending by assuming that there is no wind. So 1.2 calories per second of actual riding time is about 200 watts of power output. If you have a head or tail wind you can adjust your output per second during that time though circular courses generally have the same up an down adjustments so that the Garmin is fairly accurate. The Garmin program tells you the actual moving time so that you can calculate calories per second. Of course, this only counts on flat ground and full out efforts, most of the time you are riding well below your peak and so the readings are inaccurate as hell. But why do you need to know how much power you are generating?


Tom it isn't about you this time. Why do you need to know the power you are generating? As a reference for your trainings intensity. You are not into that? OK, don't use them. Simple.

Lou

Also, Tom, "1.2 calories per second of actual riding time" comes to
4,320 calories per hour. That's enough for most cyclists to cover 100
miles; nobody - and I do mean nobody - is doing that many *kilo*calories
[or big-C Calories] for an hour, while 200W for a full hour is quite
plausible for many - maybe even me. If you meant actual *calories*
[small-C calories], so 4.32 big-C Calories, then I can do that in one
minute, and I'm nobody special.

Working it another way, 1.2 kilocalories per sec at 25% metabolic
efficiency (a plausible number), is close enough to 1.2 *kilo* Watts.
Plausible for strong sprinters, but not for a full hour. 1.2 calories
per sec comes to 1.2 *Watts*. Nobody's that weak.

Working it a third way, 200 Watts is 200 Joules/sec, close enough to 200
small-c calories per sec at 25% efficiency, or 0.2 big-C Calories per
second.

Finally, no, the Garmin Calorie estimate is *not* fairly accurate, in
general. I used it for years, then I got a HRM. My Calorie estimates
changed dramatically. Then I got a power meter. Another dramatic
Calorie estimate change.

Mark "There are wrong answers in math" J.
Mark, while indeed when we say "calorie" we usually mean Kilocalorie, in this case it was really calorie. 200 watts is about 10 mph or perhaps a little more over normal rolling terrain. Maybe around 14 mph on flat terrain with no wind. I just finished a 22 mile ride at an average of 13.5 mph into a 10-15 mph headwind and then the downwind stretches were 18-22 mph. And I most definitely am not strong anymore.

Despite comments from you and Lou, I STILL don't see the need for any non-pro to want nor have a power meter. Of what use would it be knowing how many calories you burned if you aren't counting your calorie intake? And THAT is 100 times harder than reading a power meter. How many calories do you suppose my French fried potatoes were last night? What about the codfish to go along with it?
I find Garmin Connect to under count calories a bit. I have a Garmin 910xc that I use a tri watch I use for cycling and running. My resting HR is 40 and has been most my years as a lifelong runner and cyclist. At 59 I am supposed to have a max heart rate of 161 or about that. Most guys my age easily get to that HR on runs and cycling. Myself I have hit 161 once in the past year on a huge climb up a ski resort. I have hit 157 running an all out 400 meters or so. I rarely get past 140 and at 140 I feel like I am working hard.

Yesterday I road 64 miles in 3:31 averaged 18.1 mph no stops. My heart rate was 117 and Garmin said I burned up 1433 calories. I think I really burned up more maybe closer to 1800-1900. Today I went out and road 50 miles at 17.4 mph no stops and about same amount of climbing I live in the flatlands. Garmin said I burned up 1233. I think it was really about 1500. The key is today I was really tired and beat and had to push it to even get the speed I average. I managed to do it but yesterday was easy compared to today., yet I went farther and fast but same HR. I think a power meter would clear things up.

My heart rate running is higher and that makes sense it is more work. Cycling takes longer and has a different effect on my body. Seems a long ride will take more out of me than decent pace 7-8 mile run. I do have high blood pressure and take meds but it is not a beta blocker it is an angiotesion II receptor so that should not effect performace at least too much. I have take meds since I was a teenager for high blood pressure to so that is different.

Actually I am not a pastor I am a deacon in the Roman Catholic Church we cannot be pastors not priest......although i am see about going back to seminary....
Deacon Mark


Mark, looking at your average speed my estimate would be around 600 kcal/hr.. For that 3.5 hr ride that would be 2000-2100 kcal. The day before yesterdays recovery ride I rode 60.11 km in 1:56:29 hr, average 166 W, work 1163 kJ so I burned 1105 kcal (25% efficiency.

Lou

Op donderdag 29 april 2021 om 23:35:31 UTC+2 schreef jbeattie:
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 8:40:22 AM UTC-7, Mark cleary wrote:
What do you think of this power meter. I don't want pedal one until they come out with Shimano cleat model and I don't want a hub based. What if any does the group use?4IIII PRECISION PRO SHIMANO ULTEGRA R8000 DUAL-SIDED CRANKSET
Deacon Mark
Buy a Stages. Its the best. https://store.stagescycling.com/ You can get a single-sided arm pretty cheap and decide whether it is worth the investment, and if it's not, then sell it. I'm personally not interested in power data, but a lot of my friends love to ponder their data. I'm also way behind the technology -- having just purchased my first GPS cyclo-computer, a Stages Dash which I really like.

Full disclosu Stages has operations here in Portland, and they used to employ my son, so I'm very partial. I still think they have the best low-cost option.

-- Jay Beattie.

If you already have the Dash why not buy the left crank when you can get it cheap?

Lou

On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 1:48:06 PM UTC-7, wrote:
Op donderdag 29 april 2021 om 21:43:46 UTC+2 schreef :
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 10:26:23 AM UTC-7, Mark J. wrote:
On 4/29/2021 10:05 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op donderdag 29 april 2021 om 18:02:23 UTC+2 schreef :
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 8:40:22 AM UTC-7, Mark cleary wrote:
What do you think of this power meter. I don't want pedal one until they come out with Shimano cleat model and I don't want a hub based. What if any does the group use?4IIII PRECISION PRO SHIMANO ULTEGRA R8000 DUAL-SIDED CRANKSET
Deacon Mark
Since I'm not racing it doesn't interest me in the least whether I know exactly how much power I'm generating or not. My Garmin calculates the amount of Calories I'm expending by assuming that there is no wind. So 1.2 calories per second of actual riding time is about 200 watts of power output. If you have a head or tail wind you can adjust your output per second during that time though circular courses generally have the same up an down adjustments so that the Garmin is fairly accurate. The Garmin program tells you the actual moving time so that you can calculate calories per second. Of course, this only counts on flat ground and full out efforts, most of the time you are riding well below your peak and so the readings are inaccurate as hell. But why do you need to know how much power you are generating?


Tom it isn't about you this time. Why do you need to know the power you are generating? As a reference for your trainings intensity. You are not into that? OK, don't use them. Simple.

Lou

Also, Tom, "1.2 calories per second of actual riding time" comes to
4,320 calories per hour. That's enough for most cyclists to cover 100
miles; nobody - and I do mean nobody - is doing that many *kilo*calories
[or big-C Calories] for an hour, while 200W for a full hour is quite
plausible for many - maybe even me. If you meant actual *calories*
[small-C calories], so 4.32 big-C Calories, then I can do that in one
minute, and I'm nobody special.

Working it another way, 1.2 kilocalories per sec at 25% metabolic
efficiency (a plausible number), is close enough to 1.2 *kilo* Watts.
Plausible for strong sprinters, but not for a full hour. 1.2 calories
per sec comes to 1.2 *Watts*. Nobody's that weak.

Working it a third way, 200 Watts is 200 Joules/sec, close enough to 200
small-c calories per sec at 25% efficiency, or 0.2 big-C Calories per
second.

Finally, no, the Garmin Calorie estimate is *not* fairly accurate, in
general. I used it for years, then I got a HRM. My Calorie estimates
changed dramatically. Then I got a power meter. Another dramatic
Calorie estimate change.

Mark "There are wrong answers in math" J.
Mark, while indeed when we say "calorie" we usually mean Kilocalorie, in this case it was really calorie. 200 watts is about 10 mph or perhaps a little more over normal rolling terrain. Maybe around 14 mph on flat terrain with no wind. I just finished a 22 mile ride at an average of 13.5 mph into a 10-15 mph headwind and then the downwind stretches were 18-22 mph. And I most definitely am not strong anymore.
200W for 14 mph on flat terrain with no wind? I don't know where you get these numbers but I did a recovery ride yesterday on flat terrain (all we got here), little wind with an average speed of 23.1 km/hr (14.4 mph) with an average power of 93W measured at the cranks on a bike with the aerodynamics of an elephant.
Remember that when I got that concussion it screwed up my memory. Thinking about it, yes, 14-15 mph is only about 95 watts.

Just going up to a doctors appointment a little while ago I got lost so I always have to have where I'm going on Maps. This may be funny to some people but not when it is you.

When you get a power meter OF COURSE your expenditure of energy goes up because the calculation of the Garmin assumes either zero wind or a circular course so that it all averages out. Usually when you use a power meter you are impressing yourself on hard climbs, big sprints or attempted TT's. If you try the power meters and Garmin under general conditions you're not going to find a very significant difference. It isn't as if this is something that should be of interest to people that aren't in training for racing. Unless you have a lot of free money and like to impress yourself.

Op vrijdag 30 april 2021 om 00:52:56 UTC+2 schreef :
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 1:48:06 PM UTC-7, wrote:
Op donderdag 29 april 2021 om 21:43:46 UTC+2 schreef :
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 10:26:23 AM UTC-7, Mark J. wrote:
On 4/29/2021 10:05 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op donderdag 29 april 2021 om 18:02:23 UTC+2 schreef :
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 8:40:22 AM UTC-7, Mark cleary wrote:
What do you think of this power meter. I don't want pedal one until they come out with Shimano cleat model and I don't want a hub based. What if any does the group use?4IIII PRECISION PRO SHIMANO ULTEGRA R8000 DUAL-SIDED CRANKSET
Deacon Mark
Since I'm not racing it doesn't interest me in the least whether I know exactly how much power I'm generating or not. My Garmin calculates the amount of Calories I'm expending by assuming that there is no wind. So 1.2 calories per second of actual riding time is about 200 watts of power output. If you have a head or tail wind you can adjust your output per second during that time though circular courses generally have the same up an down adjustments so that the Garmin is fairly accurate. The Garmin program tells you the actual moving time so that you can calculate calories per second. Of course, this only counts on flat ground and full out efforts, most of the time you are riding well below your peak and so the readings are inaccurate as hell. But why do you need to know how much power you are generating?


Tom it isn't about you this time. Why do you need to know the power you are generating? As a reference for your trainings intensity. You are not into that? OK, don't use them. Simple.

Lou

Also, Tom, "1.2 calories per second of actual riding time" comes to
4,320 calories per hour. That's enough for most cyclists to cover 100
miles; nobody - and I do mean nobody - is doing that many *kilo*calories
[or big-C Calories] for an hour, while 200W for a full hour is quite
plausible for many - maybe even me. If you meant actual *calories*
[small-C calories], so 4.32 big-C Calories, then I can do that in one
minute, and I'm nobody special.

Working it another way, 1.2 kilocalories per sec at 25% metabolic
efficiency (a plausible number), is close enough to 1.2 *kilo* Watts.
Plausible for strong sprinters, but not for a full hour. 1.2 calories
per sec comes to 1.2 *Watts*. Nobody's that weak.

Working it a third way, 200 Watts is 200 Joules/sec, close enough to 200
small-c calories per sec at 25% efficiency, or 0.2 big-C Calories per
second.

Finally, no, the Garmin Calorie estimate is *not* fairly accurate, in
general. I used it for years, then I got a HRM. My Calorie estimates
changed dramatically. Then I got a power meter. Another dramatic
Calorie estimate change.

Mark "There are wrong answers in math" J.
Mark, while indeed when we say "calorie" we usually mean Kilocalorie, in this case it was really calorie. 200 watts is about 10 mph or perhaps a little more over normal rolling terrain. Maybe around 14 mph on flat terrain with no wind. I just finished a 22 mile ride at an average of 13.5 mph into a 10-15 mph headwind and then the downwind stretches were 18-22 mph. And I most definitely am not strong anymore.
200W for 14 mph on flat terrain with no wind? I don't know where you get these numbers but I did a recovery ride yesterday on flat terrain (all we got here), little wind with an average speed of 23.1 km/hr (14.4 mph) with an average power of 93W measured at the cranks on a bike with the aerodynamics of an elephant.
Remember that when I got that concussion it screwed up my memory. Thinking about it, yes, 14-15 mph is only about 95 watts.

Just going up to a doctors appointment a little while ago I got lost so I always have to have where I'm going on Maps. This may be funny to some people but not when it is you.

When you get a power meter OF COURSE your expenditure of energy goes up because the calculation of the Garmin assumes either zero wind or a circular course so that it all averages out. Usually when you use a power meter you are impressing yourself on hard climbs, big sprints or attempted TT's. If you try the power meters and Garmin under general conditions you're not going to find a very significant difference. It isn't as if this is something that should be of interest to people that aren't in training for racing. Unless you have a lot of free money and like to impress yourself.


I really don't understand your need to impose your opinion on something you don't care about and come up with ridiculous figures and embarrass yourself.

Lou

On Friday, April 30, 2021 at 12:34:09 AM UTC-7, wrote:
Op vrijdag 30 april 2021 om 00:52:56 UTC+2 schreef :
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 1:48:06 PM UTC-7, wrote:
Op donderdag 29 april 2021 om 21:43:46 UTC+2 schreef :
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 10:26:23 AM UTC-7, Mark J. wrote:
On 4/29/2021 10:05 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op donderdag 29 april 2021 om 18:02:23 UTC+2 schreef :
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 8:40:22 AM UTC-7, Mark cleary wrote:
What do you think of this power meter. I don't want pedal one until they come out with Shimano cleat model and I don't want a hub based. What if any does the group use?4IIII PRECISION PRO SHIMANO ULTEGRA R8000 DUAL-SIDED CRANKSET
Deacon Mark
Since I'm not racing it doesn't interest me in the least whether I know exactly how much power I'm generating or not. My Garmin calculates the amount of Calories I'm expending by assuming that there is no wind. So 1.2 calories per second of actual riding time is about 200 watts of power output. If you have a head or tail wind you can adjust your output per second during that time though circular courses generally have the same up an down adjustments so that the Garmin is fairly accurate. The Garmin program tells you the actual moving time so that you can calculate calories per second. Of course, this only counts on flat ground and full out efforts, most of the time you are riding well below your peak and so the readings are inaccurate as hell. But why do you need to know how much power you are generating?


Tom it isn't about you this time. Why do you need to know the power you are generating? As a reference for your trainings intensity. You are not into that? OK, don't use them. Simple.

Lou

Also, Tom, "1.2 calories per second of actual riding time" comes to
4,320 calories per hour. That's enough for most cyclists to cover 100
miles; nobody - and I do mean nobody - is doing that many *kilo*calories
[or big-C Calories] for an hour, while 200W for a full hour is quite
plausible for many - maybe even me. If you meant actual *calories*
[small-C calories], so 4.32 big-C Calories, then I can do that in one
minute, and I'm nobody special.

Working it another way, 1.2 kilocalories per sec at 25% metabolic
efficiency (a plausible number), is close enough to 1.2 *kilo* Watts.
Plausible for strong sprinters, but not for a full hour. 1.2 calories
per sec comes to 1.2 *Watts*. Nobody's that weak.

Working it a third way, 200 Watts is 200 Joules/sec, close enough to 200
small-c calories per sec at 25% efficiency, or 0.2 big-C Calories per
second.

Finally, no, the Garmin Calorie estimate is *not* fairly accurate, in
general. I used it for years, then I got a HRM. My Calorie estimates
changed dramatically. Then I got a power meter. Another dramatic
Calorie estimate change.

Mark "There are wrong answers in math" J.
Mark, while indeed when we say "calorie" we usually mean Kilocalorie, in this case it was really calorie. 200 watts is about 10 mph or perhaps a little more over normal rolling terrain. Maybe around 14 mph on flat terrain with no wind. I just finished a 22 mile ride at an average of 13.5 mph into a 10-15 mph headwind and then the downwind stretches were 18-22 mph. And I most definitely am not strong anymore.
200W for 14 mph on flat terrain with no wind? I don't know where you get these numbers but I did a recovery ride yesterday on flat terrain (all we got here), little wind with an average speed of 23.1 km/hr (14.4 mph) with an average power of 93W measured at the cranks on a bike with the aerodynamics of an elephant.
Remember that when I got that concussion it screwed up my memory. Thinking about it, yes, 14-15 mph is only about 95 watts.

Just going up to a doctors appointment a little while ago I got lost so I always have to have where I'm going on Maps. This may be funny to some people but not when it is you.

When you get a power meter OF COURSE your expenditure of energy goes up because the calculation of the Garmin assumes either zero wind or a circular course so that it all averages out. Usually when you use a power meter you are impressing yourself on hard climbs, big sprints or attempted TT's. If you try the power meters and Garmin under general conditions you're not going to find a very significant difference. It isn't as if this is something that should be of interest to people that aren't in training for racing. Unless you have a lot of free money and like to impress yourself.
I really don't understand your need to impose your opinion on something you don't care about and come up with ridiculous figures and embarrass yourself.

I would say that urging anyone to pay for things that at best mean little to nothing is rather foolish on anyone's part unless you're a shill for a manufacturer.

On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 2:47:46 PM UTC-7, wrote:
Op donderdag 29 april 2021 om 23:35:31 UTC+2 schreef jbeattie:
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 8:40:22 AM UTC-7, Mark cleary wrote:
What do you think of this power meter. I don't want pedal one until they come out with Shimano cleat model and I don't want a hub based. What if any does the group use?4IIII PRECISION PRO SHIMANO ULTEGRA R8000 DUAL-SIDED CRANKSET
Deacon Mark
Buy a Stages. Its the best. https://store.stagescycling.com/ You can get a single-sided arm pretty cheap and decide whether it is worth the investment, and if it's not, then sell it. I'm personally not interested in power data, but a lot of my friends love to ponder their data. I'm also way behind the technology -- having just purchased my first GPS cyclo-computer, a Stages Dash which I really like.

Full disclosu Stages has operations here in Portland, and they used to employ my son, so I'm very partial. I still think they have the best low-cost option.

-- Jay Beattie.
If you already have the Dash why not buy the left crank when you can get it cheap?

Lou

My son asked me the same question, and I kind of relented -- agreeing to buy his Ultegra crank arm cheap if he upgrades to a Dura Ace double sided -- which he may do when he builds a new road racing bike (he sold-off his old Tarmac as part of a down-sizing and spends more time mountain biking now). Like I said, knowing my power is not a big deal for me.

-- Jay Beattie.

On Friday, April 30, 2021 at 8:03:35 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 2:47:46 PM UTC-7, wrote:
Op donderdag 29 april 2021 om 23:35:31 UTC+2 schreef jbeattie:
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 8:40:22 AM UTC-7, Mark cleary wrote:
What do you think of this power meter. I don't want pedal one until they come out with Shimano cleat model and I don't want a hub based. What if any does the group use?4IIII PRECISION PRO SHIMANO ULTEGRA R8000 DUAL-SIDED CRANKSET
Deacon Mark
Buy a Stages. Its the best. https://store.stagescycling.com/ You can get a single-sided arm pretty cheap and decide whether it is worth the investment, and if it's not, then sell it. I'm personally not interested in power data, but a lot of my friends love to ponder their data. I'm also way behind the technology -- having just purchased my first GPS cyclo-computer, a Stages Dash which I really like.

Full disclosu Stages has operations here in Portland, and they used to employ my son, so I'm very partial. I still think they have the best low-cost option.

-- Jay Beattie.
If you already have the Dash why not buy the left crank when you can get it cheap?

Lou
My son asked me the same question, and I kind of relented -- agreeing to buy his Ultegra crank arm cheap if he upgrades to a Dura Ace double sided -- which he may do when he builds a new road racing bike (he sold-off his old Tarmac as part of a down-sizing and spends more time mountain biking now).. Like I said, knowing my power is not a big deal for me.

Of course you and I are rather beyond the age of worrying about out power output. And that is how it should be. But the real problem is the media like GCN and the like are busy propagandizing people that this is something they MUST KNOW. Well, I wouldn't complain if it was $25. But we're talking $500 and up. And that is a lot of money for almost no return. And people should be aware of that. The Deacon is probably hardly in an economic position to buy something that is sort of for bragging rights.