Could you reproduce the bit where I was gloating please?
You confessed recently that you are a fanatic - well I am not.
I didn't think I'd need to raise this but I told the estate agent of their
error and their response was one of dis-interest.
I would have to challenge Phill in saying that most people *would* be
interested in room size (although I take his point on).
My point was that the metrage was being ignored, furthermore the estate
agent's disinterest backed that up.
I really wanted to sell my house at the time (I had "nasty neighbours") so
if I could see that accurate metre size would have helped sell my house I
would have made damn sure they got it right.
It's called being a realist, not a fantasist.
From: "Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:33507] RE: July 4
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:55:35 -0400
Since Steve claims to be pro-choice, I would think he would have made an
effort to have the mistake corrected so that potential metric customers
would understand the numbers instead of gloating over the error.
Dan
----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip S Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, 2005-07-11 12:53
Subject: [USMA:33505] RE: July 4
When I sold my last house the estate agent brochure described my living
room as :-
"23ft, 3in long (30 m)"
No-one questioned the fact that if I had a 30 metre long living room I
would have made a lot more money on it! Not one person mentioned the
mistake however my brochure would have gone out to hundreds of potential
customers (the succesful ones being a young couple). The reason why the
issue was not raised at al,l I believe, is obvious.
I would say it's inconclusive. It's doubtful that hundreds of potential
customers would have studied the detail and given any thought. They would
have been bombarded by all the property brochures on the market at that
time and likely as not just skimmed through it.
There is also the consideration as to whether anyone was likely to mention
it given the obvious mistake. If they were metric savvy they could just as
easily do the conversion themselves and ignore the published one as it was
quite plainly a conversion error with the metric figure being wrong.
Phil Hall
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 2005-07-09
