Are you aware that you are also quoted in an earlier article? I found a couple with my name it, too, including one with Teckstud disagreeing with me... as one would expect.
Nice to see the whiners, cheapskates and those with cereal packet MBAs are out in full force. These typically delusional types all think they know what Apple should do and that amazingly coincidentally, it is exactly what would benefit them (xMac, cheaper Macs, etc,).
As are the similarly delusion types that think Apple is a infallible religion instead of a computer maker and therefore above criticism or suggestion.
Quote:
When will you realize that Apple doesn’t owe you what you want, no matter how many Macs you’ve owned and that your insights are worth about as much as that crap you took after breakfast?
Likewise, they are not owned blind obeisance.
Quote:
Apple knows its core Mac customer segments –
1) non-geek consumers - who want style, ease of use, few cables, etc. (key growth, lots of potential)
2) education (reasonable growth, re-acquiring lost share, but lower margin HW)
3) media professionals - who amortize the high-priced HW against real revenues (low growth)
Apple doesn't want any of those.
1) Non-geek consumers tend to have very low requirements and are thrifty. Most of the time, they just stick of PCs unless their kids tell them to buy something different.
2) Education users have budgets and also tend to be thrifty. This is a bit of a holdover from pre-Jobs as Messiah Apple and really isn't the cash cow it used to be.
3) Media Professionals tend to be practically minded, independent thinking, and have actually needs. Those are three things that go against what Apple is about now.
Apple's new core segments
1) Students. They may Macs, not for the great operating systems or for quality hardware. They by them because they're in style, they have cool features like webcams and photo-booth, and because their parents will pony up the money
2) Geek fanboy types. A lot like the Trekkies and Warsies that take things way too seriously, they join Apple to be a part of something. They know that Apple released something new and cool and that just need to have it. They defense their "canon" with ferocity and generally have no respect for anyone outside their group, especially if you're in a rival camp.
3) I will call this the snob crowd. Like a Mercedes, they buy it because its expensive, looks good, and they probably don't even know how to use it to its full potential.
The thing that ties these three together, is that don't have a lot of performance needs so a laptop platform will be just fine, they buy things because "they gotta have it", and tend to be very loyal, especially if you're the only game into town. Meaning they tend to have buying habits similar to professional and education customer while being able to be pleased with only flash instead if substance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov
How about a Core i7 Mac Pro for those of us who don't need a Xeon?
The only difference between the Core i7 and the xeon 3500 is ECC memory support. Same Bloomfield core, same clock ratings, and same chip price. Either the new MPs have some new part that is a lot more expensive than the cheese grater G5s or Apple jacked up the price considerably to protect the higher ends of the iMac (suspiciously there is no overlap anymore).
That and if you're really smart and don't hold your customers in very high regard, its pretty easy to realize that a lot of your professional customers have so much invested in the Mac platform that its impractical to leave. You can charge them much higher margins than the consumers and get away with it. A couple hundred in price hikes is always being to be cheaper than a couple thousand in software and equipment.
apple needs to make better laptop screens for the macbook non-pros. This is very noticeable whiteness on the screens, otherwise I would have pulled the trigger on a macbook purchase months ago. I have a 5 year old toshiba laptop that has slightly lower resolution screen but has absolute no whiteness regardless of the viewing angle, so it's surprising that a laptop this expensive would have such an inferior screen. I have to admit the macbook pros have nice screens though--so apple knows how to put together a good screen, they're just not equipping the mac book non-pro with the right hardware!!!
Are you aware that you are also quoted in an earlier article? I found a couple with my name it, too, including one with Teckstud disagreeing with me... as one would expect.
I usually read all their stuff, but I didn't catch that one.
Of all the things I could have been quoted on, they picked the one thing that makes it seem as though Apple's sales might not hold up.
Ah, I didn't realize that. Mel Gross? First name is Italian and last is German. Italian mother and Germanic male bloodline, hence the last name?
I use my real name on certain other forums but for these types I use an alias specifically to hide my identity.
Actually, my grandparents from my mothers side were from Minsk, in Belarius, and those from my father's side were from The Austro-Hungarian empire.
My last name, as were so many others, was changed a bit by the person who signed them in, in 1883. The original name was Grosz. But obviously, the guy couldn't understand that.
My full first name is Melvin. Named after Melvyn Douglas. But at the time Melvin was a more unusual spelling, so they picked that. After Jerry Lewis came out with a schick in a variety show when I was a kid, and made fun of the name, I started using Mel instead.
I use melgross for just about everything. Having worked in my own companies from 1975 on, I've never had to hide my identity.
Actually, my grandparents from my mothers side were from Minsk, in Belarius, and those from my father's side were from The Austro-Hungarian empire.
My last name, as were so many others, was changed a bit by the person who signed them in, in 1883. The original name was Grosz. But obviously, the guy couldn't understand that.
My full first name is Melvin. Named after Melvyn Douglas. But at the time Melvin was a more unusual spelling, so they picked that. After Jerry Lewis came out with a schick in a variety show when I was a kid, and made fun of the name, I started using Mel instead.
I use melgross for just about everything. Having worked in my own companies from 1975 on, I've never had to hide my identity.
Interesting, one spelling means 144 and another is 1/100 (of a Polish dollar).
I don't think I've seen a single film Douglas was in despite his fame at the time.
I've never had to hide my identity, but I do it for precautionary reasons. With identity theft being so high and growing I don't that i'll be changing that anytime soon, especially since i do all my financials via the internet now.
Interesting, one spelling means 144 and another is 1/100 (of a Polish dollar).
I don't think I've seen a single film Douglas was in despite his fame at the time.
I've never had to hide my identity, but I do it for precautionary reasons. With identity theft being so high and growing I don't that i'll be changing that anytime soon, especially since i do all my financials via the internet now.
Well, he was a big star at the time, and had this respected kind of image. I suppose they hoped it would rub off on me, but as you can see from some responses to my posts, it didn't work.
I figure that it's so easy to find out who you are anyway, having a screen name that's consistent, and reflects me directly isn't going to make it easier.
This way people who post on other sites often ask me if I'm the melgross on such and such site, and I can say yes.
[QUOTE=solipsism;1411483]I thought it was 36% but regardless, you are talking gross profit, not net profit.
Apple is a for profit company. They, lke all other companies have assets, including cash for expenses. To say that Apple is charging too much for making too much money because they are not bankrupt is ludicrous. There are other companies that make more gross and net profits on both HW and SW. These are successful companies.
It's the one that are struggling that have had to shave more and more off their sales in order to even get a sale. When you decide to sell cheap wares with high volume in a highly competitive market segment you have no choice but to shave the price to even make the sale. This is way and Dell have increasing financial issues despite the ability to gain marketshare. Netbooks will be the same for Acer. Sales ≠ Profit. Marketshare ≠ Profit.
Really? What was the price of DDR3 notebook RAM 3 years ago? How about a 2.4GHz Montevina CPU or the Nvidia 9400M? I guess if you consider the fab cost of a sample chip then, yes, the prices have fallen considerably. I don't see how that it could have since the major parts in Apple's products weren't even on the market that long ago.
They are still a bit over priced. And to prove my point Apple will soon reduce there prices accross the board.
Nice to see the whiners, cheapskates and those with cereal packet MBAs are out in full force. These typically delusional types all think they know what Apple should do and that amazingly coincidentally, it is exactly what would benefit them (xMac, cheaper Macs, etc,). When will you realize that Apple doesn’t owe you what you want, no matter how many Macs you’ve owned and that your insights are worth about as much as that crap you took after breakfast? For the record, I think Macs are disproportionately overpriced in Britain, I would buy an xMac in a heartbeat and will probably put OSX on an ASUS 1000HE soon – but I don’t think Apple should pander to my views.
Who is the most profitable car company in the world? Porsche (sales volume ~100K). It is so financially powerful that it recently bought VW which sells over 60x the volume of Porsche. Who would you rather be? Does BMW make cars for the masses? Do they yearn to sell the numbers of GM or Ford (at GM/Ford margins)? Do they make an entry level car to take on a Corolla or Versa? No – they make the Mini and super-premium price it. When they tried to do “cheap” with the 3XXti models, they bombed. So did Mercedes with the SportKompact hatchback. Premium brands care about margin and volume growth regardless of share. Are BMW making cheap cars for BRIC countries? No, they are selling 7-Series to the newly super rich – all revenue growth, all at nice margins.
If the PC market is only growing because of netbooks, but those things have very low $ margins, why should Apple make them? They will definitely cannibalize some Macbook sales which we know make a large multiple of that profit, which will negatively impact bottom line results. You can live in a dreamland where selling half a million units per quarter at $20-$50 profit per unit is great business but in quarters where Apple makes $1.2-1.6Bn in profit, that $10-25M is chump change for the risk and investment required to achieve it. What if it bombs, what if there is a HW component issue, what if it costs Apple 50,000+ MacBook sales, etc. For the other “great Apple hope”, the xMac… why go head to head with commodity desktop boxes where comparisons to PC hardware are too obvious to command a desired premium from a typical geeky, value-oriented user. A square box with room for PCI expansion and stock Intel HW just does not have the margin generating advantage over a necessarily similar box from HP/Dell. It will also likely cannibalize iMac and MacPro sales. Again, bad business for Apple (though great for you (and me). For perspective, the iPhone/iTouch App store has probably made ~$300M dollars for Apple on a billion apps in 3Qs (assuming an ASP of $1 and 30% to Apple - I know lots are free, but many top selling games etc. are $5-20). Even at half that, that is the kind of money (at fantastic margins) Apple should invest in.
Apple knows its core Mac customer segments –
1) non-geek consumers - who want style, ease of use, few cables, etc. (key growth, lots of potential)
2) education (reasonable growth, re-acquiring lost share, but lower margin HW)
3) media professionals - who amortize the high-priced HW against real revenues (low growth)
We, the diehard Apple geeks and (dare I say it) Fanbois are now a minority and are not a target group. Thus they make the iMac & MacBooks (stylish, easy, cool, uniquely designed), MBPro/Mac Pros (Pro grade HW in (almost) every respect) and the Mac Mini (differentiated on style/size, used as a switcher gateway). The iPod/iPhone are both far better ways to introduce people to Mac than any cheap-ass Mac will ever be – create net new Mac users and do it amazingly profitably.
All good Apple fans want Apple to sell more boxes, bring more people into the cult of Mac (BTW you know this no longer exists except within these hallowed pages?) What if Apple could sell Dell volumes at Apple margins? They can’t. No-one can. We all know that Apple already has the lion’s share of the US consumer market by revenue & margin $ value (66% of PCs >$1500) so why should they need to sell Dell’s volume at Dell/Acer/HP’s margins? All this market share by unit volume is nice bragging rights but not what matters to Apple. Current OSX installed base/annual sales already justifies a reasonable and growing software library plus cloud computing is making the OS irrelevant. Apple is valued by the markets largely on its net income performance and we know how sensitive the stock price is to margin changes. Netbooks would gut this number as would cheap-ass xMacs to compete with your imaginary BYO PC makers who hang outside Apple stores stealing customers. People not buying a Mac or switching back are already factored into Apple’s calculations.
Cut the price of the plastic MacBook, re-introduce a cheaper previous generation Mini, or whatever to maintain topline sales for now, but when things turn around, cut these dinosaurs and get back on strategy. In the meantime, the new tablet/iPhone 3 will hopefully be kicking ass, taking names and up-selling full-price Macs.
Overall, to cut a long story short… stop conflating what you want (cheap-ass Macs) and your grade school economic analysis with what Apple should do as a company.
(Sorry for the long post but where I am today has no TV and sporadic internet service – too much time on my hands)
Hello you make some fine points.i only wish it was less muddled so i could respond.If you could re-do i would be happy to respond.
My last name, as were so many others, was changed a bit by the person who signed them in, in 1883. The original name was Grosz. But obviously, the guy couldn't understand that.
Since this thread is now completely off-topic... Lots of families have stories about how "the immigration officer at Ellis Island couldn't pronounce my ancestor's name so he changed it." That's a myth. The immigration ledgers were completed at the port of embarkation. The immigration officers in the U.S. simply checked off the name on arrival. But once they stepped onto U.S. soil, immigrants could call themselves whatever they wanted -- which often meant something less foreign-sounding.
Since this thread is now completely off-topic... Lots of families have stories about how "the immigration officer at Ellis Island couldn't pronounce my ancestor's name so he changed it." That's a myth. The immigration ledgers were completed at the port of embarkation. The immigration officers in the U.S. simply checked off the name on arrival. But once they stepped onto U.S. soil, immigrants could call themselves whatever they wanted -- which often meant something less foreign-sounding.
Not so. This has happened many times. Thy family name wasn't changed on purpose. Often the officers changed the spellings they couldn't figure out, or pronounce. It's a myth to think they didn't. There are many records of this being done.
Comments
I haven't been following this thread, but I came across this article:
Congrats to both ikrupp and Virgil-TB2, you're now both famous.
Scroll down to "Cheaper Macs on the Way?"
http://www.macnewsworld.com/story/Ap...ces-66958.html
Are you aware that you are also quoted in an earlier article? I found a couple with my name it, too, including one with Teckstud disagreeing with me... as one would expect.
I haven't been following this thread, but I came across this article:
Congrats to both ikrupp and Virgil-TB2, you're now both famous.
Scroll down to "Cheaper Macs on the Way?"
http://www.macnewsworld.com/story/Ap...ces-66958.html
Oh dear god. Isn't it going a bit too far when blogs start quoting anonymous commenters on other blogs?
Nice to see the whiners, cheapskates and those with cereal packet MBAs are out in full force. These typically delusional types all think they know what Apple should do and that amazingly coincidentally, it is exactly what would benefit them (xMac, cheaper Macs, etc,).
As are the similarly delusion types that think Apple is a infallible religion instead of a computer maker and therefore above criticism or suggestion.
When will you realize that Apple doesn’t owe you what you want, no matter how many Macs you’ve owned and that your insights are worth about as much as that crap you took after breakfast?
Likewise, they are not owned blind obeisance.
Apple knows its core Mac customer segments –
1) non-geek consumers - who want style, ease of use, few cables, etc. (key growth, lots of potential)
2) education (reasonable growth, re-acquiring lost share, but lower margin HW)
3) media professionals - who amortize the high-priced HW against real revenues (low growth)
Apple doesn't want any of those.
1) Non-geek consumers tend to have very low requirements and are thrifty. Most of the time, they just stick of PCs unless their kids tell them to buy something different.
2) Education users have budgets and also tend to be thrifty. This is a bit of a holdover from pre-Jobs as Messiah Apple and really isn't the cash cow it used to be.
3) Media Professionals tend to be practically minded, independent thinking, and have actually needs. Those are three things that go against what Apple is about now.
Apple's new core segments
1) Students. They may Macs, not for the great operating systems or for quality hardware. They by them because they're in style, they have cool features like webcams and photo-booth, and because their parents will pony up the money
2) Geek fanboy types. A lot like the Trekkies and Warsies that take things way too seriously, they join Apple to be a part of something. They know that Apple released something new and cool and that just need to have it. They defense their "canon" with ferocity and generally have no respect for anyone outside their group, especially if you're in a rival camp.
3) I will call this the snob crowd. Like a Mercedes, they buy it because its expensive, looks good, and they probably don't even know how to use it to its full potential.
The thing that ties these three together, is that don't have a lot of performance needs so a laptop platform will be just fine, they buy things because "they gotta have it", and tend to be very loyal, especially if you're the only game into town. Meaning they tend to have buying habits similar to professional and education customer while being able to be pleased with only flash instead if substance.
How about a Core i7 Mac Pro for those of us who don't need a Xeon?
The only difference between the Core i7 and the xeon 3500 is ECC memory support. Same Bloomfield core, same clock ratings, and same chip price. Either the new MPs have some new part that is a lot more expensive than the cheese grater G5s or Apple jacked up the price considerably to protect the higher ends of the iMac (suspiciously there is no overlap anymore).
That and if you're really smart and don't hold your customers in very high regard, its pretty easy to realize that a lot of your professional customers have so much invested in the Mac platform that its impractical to leave. You can charge them much higher margins than the consumers and get away with it. A couple hundred in price hikes is always being to be cheaper than a couple thousand in software and equipment.
Are you aware that you are also quoted in an earlier article? I found a couple with my name it, too, including one with Teckstud disagreeing with me... as one would expect.
I usually read all their stuff, but I didn't catch that one.
Of all the things I could have been quoted on, they picked the one thing that makes it seem as though Apple's sales might not hold up.
Oh dear god. Isn't it going a bit too far when blogs start quoting anonymous commenters on other blogs?
Hey, I'm not anonymous!
Hey, I'm not anonymous!
Not anonymous, but an alias. Though now we can call it a pen name.
Not anonymous, but an alias. Though now we can call it a pen name.
It's not even an alias, it's my name. I don't like it when people try to be serious but have really silly names. It downgrades their arguments.
It's not even an alias, it's my name. I don't like it when people try to be serious but have really silly names. It downgrades their arguments.
Ah, I didn't realize that. Mel Gross? First name is Italian and last is German. Italian mother and Germanic male bloodline, hence the last name?
I use my real name on certain other forums but for these types I use an alias specifically to hide my identity.
Ah, I didn't realize that. Mel Gross? First name is Italian and last is German. Italian mother and Germanic male bloodline, hence the last name?
I use my real name on certain other forums but for these types I use an alias specifically to hide my identity.
Actually, my grandparents from my mothers side were from Minsk, in Belarius, and those from my father's side were from The Austro-Hungarian empire.
My last name, as were so many others, was changed a bit by the person who signed them in, in 1883. The original name was Grosz. But obviously, the guy couldn't understand that.
My full first name is Melvin. Named after Melvyn Douglas. But at the time Melvin was a more unusual spelling, so they picked that. After Jerry Lewis came out with a schick in a variety show when I was a kid, and made fun of the name, I started using Mel instead.
I use melgross for just about everything. Having worked in my own companies from 1975 on, I've never had to hide my identity.
Actually, my grandparents from my mothers side were from Minsk, in Belarius, and those from my father's side were from The Austro-Hungarian empire.
My last name, as were so many others, was changed a bit by the person who signed them in, in 1883. The original name was Grosz. But obviously, the guy couldn't understand that.
My full first name is Melvin. Named after Melvyn Douglas. But at the time Melvin was a more unusual spelling, so they picked that. After Jerry Lewis came out with a schick in a variety show when I was a kid, and made fun of the name, I started using Mel instead.
I use melgross for just about everything. Having worked in my own companies from 1975 on, I've never had to hide my identity.
Interesting, one spelling means 144 and another is 1/100 (of a Polish dollar).
I don't think I've seen a single film Douglas was in despite his fame at the time.
I've never had to hide my identity, but I do it for precautionary reasons. With identity theft being so high and growing I don't that i'll be changing that anytime soon, especially since i do all my financials via the internet now.
Interesting, one spelling means 144 and another is 1/100 (of a Polish dollar).
I don't think I've seen a single film Douglas was in despite his fame at the time.
I've never had to hide my identity, but I do it for precautionary reasons. With identity theft being so high and growing I don't that i'll be changing that anytime soon, especially since i do all my financials via the internet now.
Well, he was a big star at the time, and had this respected kind of image. I suppose they hoped it would rub off on me, but as you can see from some responses to my posts, it didn't work.
I figure that it's so easy to find out who you are anyway, having a screen name that's consistent, and reflects me directly isn't going to make it easier.
This way people who post on other sites often ask me if I'm the melgross on such and such site, and I can say yes.
Apple is a for profit company. They, lke all other companies have assets, including cash for expenses. To say that Apple is charging too much for making too much money because they are not bankrupt is ludicrous. There are other companies that make more gross and net profits on both HW and SW. These are successful companies.
It's the one that are struggling that have had to shave more and more off their sales in order to even get a sale. When you decide to sell cheap wares with high volume in a highly competitive market segment you have no choice but to shave the price to even make the sale. This is way and Dell have increasing financial issues despite the ability to gain marketshare. Netbooks will be the same for Acer. Sales ≠ Profit. Marketshare ≠ Profit.
Really? What was the price of DDR3 notebook RAM 3 years ago? How about a 2.4GHz Montevina CPU or the Nvidia 9400M? I guess if you consider the fab cost of a sample chip then, yes, the prices have fallen considerably. I don't see how that it could have since the major parts in Apple's products weren't even on the market that long ago.
They are still a bit over priced. And to prove my point Apple will soon reduce there prices accross the board.
Nice to see the whiners, cheapskates and those with cereal packet MBAs are out in full force. These typically delusional types all think they know what Apple should do and that amazingly coincidentally, it is exactly what would benefit them (xMac, cheaper Macs, etc,). When will you realize that Apple doesn’t owe you what you want, no matter how many Macs you’ve owned and that your insights are worth about as much as that crap you took after breakfast? For the record, I think Macs are disproportionately overpriced in Britain, I would buy an xMac in a heartbeat and will probably put OSX on an ASUS 1000HE soon – but I don’t think Apple should pander to my views.
Who is the most profitable car company in the world? Porsche (sales volume ~100K). It is so financially powerful that it recently bought VW which sells over 60x the volume of Porsche. Who would you rather be? Does BMW make cars for the masses? Do they yearn to sell the numbers of GM or Ford (at GM/Ford margins)? Do they make an entry level car to take on a Corolla or Versa? No – they make the Mini and super-premium price it. When they tried to do “cheap” with the 3XXti models, they bombed. So did Mercedes with the SportKompact hatchback. Premium brands care about margin and volume growth regardless of share. Are BMW making cheap cars for BRIC countries? No, they are selling 7-Series to the newly super rich – all revenue growth, all at nice margins.
If the PC market is only growing because of netbooks, but those things have very low $ margins, why should Apple make them? They will definitely cannibalize some Macbook sales which we know make a large multiple of that profit, which will negatively impact bottom line results. You can live in a dreamland where selling half a million units per quarter at $20-$50 profit per unit is great business but in quarters where Apple makes $1.2-1.6Bn in profit, that $10-25M is chump change for the risk and investment required to achieve it. What if it bombs, what if there is a HW component issue, what if it costs Apple 50,000+ MacBook sales, etc. For the other “great Apple hope”, the xMac… why go head to head with commodity desktop boxes where comparisons to PC hardware are too obvious to command a desired premium from a typical geeky, value-oriented user. A square box with room for PCI expansion and stock Intel HW just does not have the margin generating advantage over a necessarily similar box from HP/Dell. It will also likely cannibalize iMac and MacPro sales. Again, bad business for Apple (though great for you (and me). For perspective, the iPhone/iTouch App store has probably made ~$300M dollars for Apple on a billion apps in 3Qs (assuming an ASP of $1 and 30% to Apple - I know lots are free, but many top selling games etc. are $5-20). Even at half that, that is the kind of money (at fantastic margins) Apple should invest in.
Apple knows its core Mac customer segments –
1) non-geek consumers - who want style, ease of use, few cables, etc. (key growth, lots of potential)
2) education (reasonable growth, re-acquiring lost share, but lower margin HW)
3) media professionals - who amortize the high-priced HW against real revenues (low growth)
We, the diehard Apple geeks and (dare I say it) Fanbois are now a minority and are not a target group. Thus they make the iMac & MacBooks (stylish, easy, cool, uniquely designed), MBPro/Mac Pros (Pro grade HW in (almost) every respect) and the Mac Mini (differentiated on style/size, used as a switcher gateway). The iPod/iPhone are both far better ways to introduce people to Mac than any cheap-ass Mac will ever be – create net new Mac users and do it amazingly profitably.
All good Apple fans want Apple to sell more boxes, bring more people into the cult of Mac (BTW you know this no longer exists except within these hallowed pages?) What if Apple could sell Dell volumes at Apple margins? They can’t. No-one can. We all know that Apple already has the lion’s share of the US consumer market by revenue & margin $ value (66% of PCs >$1500) so why should they need to sell Dell’s volume at Dell/Acer/HP’s margins? All this market share by unit volume is nice bragging rights but not what matters to Apple. Current OSX installed base/annual sales already justifies a reasonable and growing software library plus cloud computing is making the OS irrelevant. Apple is valued by the markets largely on its net income performance and we know how sensitive the stock price is to margin changes. Netbooks would gut this number as would cheap-ass xMacs to compete with your imaginary BYO PC makers who hang outside Apple stores stealing customers. People not buying a Mac or switching back are already factored into Apple’s calculations.
Cut the price of the plastic MacBook, re-introduce a cheaper previous generation Mini, or whatever to maintain topline sales for now, but when things turn around, cut these dinosaurs and get back on strategy. In the meantime, the new tablet/iPhone 3 will hopefully be kicking ass, taking names and up-selling full-price Macs.
Overall, to cut a long story short… stop conflating what you want (cheap-ass Macs) and your grade school economic analysis with what Apple should do as a company.
(Sorry for the long post but where I am today has no TV and sporadic internet service – too much time on my hands)
Hello you make some fine points.i only wish it was less muddled so i could respond.If you could re-do i would be happy to respond.
thank you .
My last name, as were so many others, was changed a bit by the person who signed them in, in 1883. The original name was Grosz. But obviously, the guy couldn't understand that.
Since this thread is now completely off-topic... Lots of families have stories about how "the immigration officer at Ellis Island couldn't pronounce my ancestor's name so he changed it." That's a myth. The immigration ledgers were completed at the port of embarkation. The immigration officers in the U.S. simply checked off the name on arrival. But once they stepped onto U.S. soil, immigrants could call themselves whatever they wanted -- which often meant something less foreign-sounding.
Since this thread is now completely off-topic... Lots of families have stories about how "the immigration officer at Ellis Island couldn't pronounce my ancestor's name so he changed it." That's a myth. The immigration ledgers were completed at the port of embarkation. The immigration officers in the U.S. simply checked off the name on arrival. But once they stepped onto U.S. soil, immigrants could call themselves whatever they wanted -- which often meant something less foreign-sounding.
Not so. This has happened many times. Thy family name wasn't changed on purpose. Often the officers changed the spellings they couldn't figure out, or pronounce. It's a myth to think they didn't. There are many records of this being done.
this is the worst post
dude what a mess
please re-read and re write in in a clear way
sadly you make some good points
so i was forced to muddle thru
you and can and will do better
peace
Perhaps if your own writings were clearer, you wouldn't have as much of a problem with his. Have you read your own posts?
this is the worst post
dude what a mess
please re-read and re write in in a clear way
sadly you make some good points
so i was forced to muddle thru
you and can and will do better
peace
Are you kidding me? You have a problem with punctuation, grammar, and sentence structure?
Are you kidding me? You have a problem with punctuation, grammar, and sentence structure?
Sorry ,i will try to be more clear. sorry
HUH??
yea yea
sorry i get so sloppy
i can fix 2 of the 3.
Apparently not.