Letter to Paul Holthus

[Anonymous]

methinks not only mary, but both mac fans, and non fans, are interested both in the answer, and the nonanswer :wink:

 

[John_Brandt]

What's important is that MAC knows of the problems and is working on ways of dealing with it. It's of a lower priority to MAC that Mary knows the answers to those questions.

 

[Anonymous]

Mary, you are not exactly a paying "customer" who has written a letter with legitimate complaints or questions.

So are you saying if Mary kicked MAC $1500 to be certified she'd at least get a response from Mr Holthus?

What's important is that MAC knows of the problems and is working on ways of dealing with it. It's of a lower priority to MAC that Mary knows the answers to those questions.

Mary isn't the only one who's interested in the answers to those questions. I'll ask em too:

Dear Paul,

1. MAC brochures to hobbyists are claiming that the MAC program certifies animals are coming from well-managed reefs. How can MAC make this claim if the CAMPs do not require a resource assessment to be in place prior to certification?

2. MAC certified fish are now hitting the retail market. Retailers are not being told that they are not allowed to advertise MAC certified fish unless their facility is certified. How does MAC plan to address this problem? Are there policies in place requiring this information to be distributed by MAC certified wholesalers?

3. What is preventing anyone from writing "MAC certified" on their tanks? If a retailer does this (either out of pure intention to defraud or from purchasing fish that are touted as MAC certified on their invoice), what action with MAC take?

An answer would be much appreciated (without my having to cut you a $1500 check).

 

[MaryHM]

What's important is that MAC knows of the problems and is working on ways of dealing with it. It's of a lower priority to MAC that Mary knows the answers to those questions.

How funny. Because when I approached David via phone about the issues of retailers misrepresenting themselves as MAC certified he was unaware it was happening and asked me to send him proof (via the links to threads hobbyists were posting). So basically it's this non-paying customer that brought the problem to their attention in the first place. You know, the problem that their paying customer was misrepresenting MAC certification to all of the lowly non-paying peons. Honestly John, your responses here haven't done a thing to make MAC look any better to anyone. Just the opposite. If they staunchly refuse to answer the questions, one must wonder what exactly it is that they are hiding? And for the record, I rarely received answers to my questions even when I was their golden child. At least not answers that made any sense.

Hmmmm. Maybe I should take Vitz's advice and direct my questions and concerns to the organizations that are funding MAC.....I bet I'd get a response from someone.

 

[Anonymous]

anyone here care to post a list of the org.s that fund(ed) mac?

 

[JennM]

Mary, you are not exactly a paying "customer" who has written a letter with legitimate complaints or questions. It only takes a brief moment to survey human nature to understand the answer to the question, "How come he don't call?"

MAC Certification "policing" issues in North America are the concern of David Vosseler. Rest assured, no misrepresentation of MAC Certified status will be tolerated by MAC.

John, the vast majority of wholesalers and retailers in the United States are NOT "paying customers". Does this mean that until one antes up, one isn't deserving of responses? OR are you just saying that Mary's questions are not legitmate? They appear legitimate to me, but then I'm not a paying customer either -- not YET ( and not bleedin' likely either at this rate, but it never hurts to dangle that carrot....)

Let's talk about human nature.... as it pertains to "paying customers"....

As you know, I'm a retailer. Each week I see familiar faces and new faces. Some just come in to 'pick my brain' (or what's left of it *g*). Some do not even own a tank yet. They ask questions, I point them in the direction of my book section, I answer their queries to the best of my ability - some buy, some don't (some go to the library...) some visit many times before they ever even buy anything. Some visit every store in town. I invest my time, my knowledge and my patience in each of them - and more often than not, they will come back when they are ready to buy, and they SPEND.... why? Because I invested all that time and effort into them when perhaps others did not. If I dismissed them, thinking, "they aren't paying customers" they would never become paying customers - at least not in my shop - they would go somewhere where somebody WOULD spend the time and effort with them, and value their (potential) business. Just because MAC is the only show in town, they should not have the attitude that it's "my way or the highway" because that's the surest way to alienate the largest amount of people in the shortest amount of time.

If MAC wants people to become "paying customers", then it would behove them to invest the time and effort into educating them, answering their questions, making it appealing to them. That is, unless MAC has an accountability problem or cannot or will not provide reasonable answers to the questions at hand. If they don't have reasonable solutions, then they need to stop the pissing contest and do what they need to do to work with the people they need to get along with, in order to satisfy the inadequacy. It keeps appearing to me that there is so much politicking and "I'm not going to talk to this one because (s)he ticked me off" and "Well that one is ticked off so (s)he has to call me first" that it's worse than a frigging soap opera. (And I run a website about a soap opera and it's far less dramatic than all of this!)

If Paul Holthus or the people he speaks for, can't get past their animosity toward Mary, in order to answer some legitimate concerns, that speaks huge volumes about MAC and it tells me that MAC is governed by EGO(s) and not reason.

You also mentioned that MAC will not tolerate misrepresentation (ie: non-certified retailers selling "certified" fish...) Just HOW do they intend to enforce this? It's not like they have the right to impose a fine - they aren't the "fish police" - if a non-certified retailer with a clue, received a "ticket" for selling MAC fish he'd tear it up and laugh. So what will they do? Slap a law suit on any retailer who has the whistle blown on him? Does MAC have the funds to litigate against anybody and everybody who buys fish from that LA place with certified fish, and who might sell them as such? That stuff could be tangled up in courts for YEARS - and I'm sure that the bankrolls behind MAC never intended their money to be used to sue Mom and Pop Fish Store over some questionable signage, over a fish or two that say "MAC CERTIFIED" on the invoice.... It might be an interesting legal argument - the seller bought it as "certified", just what did he do to it to make it non-certified? (oops he didn't cut that check....) the fish is still a fish....

Really, why can't MAC just answer the questions, and stop dancing around the issues? The longer the silence, the worse MAC looks.

TRANSPARENCY NOW!

Jenn

 

[Anonymous]

JennM wrote:

Really, why can't MAC just answer the questions, and stop dancing around the issues?

methinks it's because they don't have the answers-at least, so it would appear :?

maybe mac can prove this wrong? :idea:

 

[John_Brandt]

I didn't mean to imply that MAC won't answer questions by non-certified entities. I meant to imply that Mary specifically, has impressed upon the organization that she is hostile (overt antagonism). Now I don't know what Paul's intentions may be with answering Mary specifically, but as I said MAC is interested in the problems, and how best to solve them.

I posted this on April 30th:

MaryHM wrote:
Hmmm- so an unnamed wholesaler is pushing fish on people as MAC certified when they know that if they're selling to an uncertified store that the certification ends as soon as they bag it up. Did they tell you that, Glenn? I'm guessing not, but will be happy to be wrong.

This does bring up a point. If your employees had written "MAC Certified" on the tank, who is policing that? I mean, any yahoo could write MAC certified on the tank I guess. Yeah, yeah- hobbyists are supposed to look for the official MAC label but c'mon, we all know that they aren't educated enough about MAC to know any better. Sounds like someone could easily write MAC certified on their tanks, charge several bucks more per fish, and no one would be the wiser. Any comment on this, John? How does MAC plan on dealing with this?


Mary and all,

It is true that only MAC Certified facilities can sell organisms as "MAC Certified", or even display references to "MAC Certification". It is wrong for anyone to misrepresent their certification status. I'm not surprised that such things have occurred. This is unfortunate, but it does attest to the perceived "value added" feature of MAC Certified animals.

This form of misrepresentation is the direct concern of MAC Certification Coordinator David Vosseler. I will bring the citations that have been presented here to his immediate attention. There is no way to police every single retailer, so MAC does look forward to the reporting of legitimate observations of misrepresentation. I will explore the ways that MAC intends to address this situation, but I can tell you that it has been anticipated.

John Brandt

MASNA
MAC
CMAS-Chicago

And I posted this on May 1st:

MaryHM wrote:
I, for one, do not mind MAC certified fish going to uncertified facilities. But I do mind uncertified facilities touting their fish as MAC certified. And I really mind MAC certified wholesalers pushing MAC fish on uncertified retailers without explaining that the certification ends as soon as the fish is bagged and shipped. This is wrong, and I'm very curious to see if/how Paul addressed the issue.

All,

As a director of MAC, I would like you to put your creative minds together to come up with ideas for addressing this issue. I would also encourage you to specifically point out non-certified facilities who are misrepresenting themselves as certified and/or their animals as certified.

John Brandt

MASNA
MAC
CMAS-Chicago

 

[MaryHM]

John, with all due respect your replies to me in previous posts were not specific answers to the questions I have posed. Just more of the normal MAC-ese along the lines of "Yeah, we know about it and are working on it" followed by a "We don't really have an answer, so how about you give us one." I want specific answers. Frankly, I think I deserve specific answers. Paul and David both have told me to my face and in front of my husband to come to them with any concerns I might have so they can address them. This was after they knew I was "hostile" (read: publicly outing them). So was that just lip service? More of the "say whatever you need to say to try to shut up the detractors"? And if MAC thinks I'm such a leper, why do they continue to visit my facility? (I'm expecting another visit from David this summer). So please don't try the tired old "Mary hurt their wittle feelings so MAC is taking their toys and going home" line. Because the rest of their comments and actions to me do not support it. No more lame excuses. Answer the questions, MAC. We're all patiently waiting.

 

[John_Brandt]

MAC is trying to come up with good solutions to the problems of misrepresentation. Suggestions are encouraged.

Will you allow MAC to actually be "working" on something? David mentioned to me back in April that he would contact Quality Marine (MAC Certified wholesaler) to get them to adjust their invoicing terminology and policy so that non-MAC Certified retailers don't think that QM would support misrepresentation.

 

[Anonymous]

John,

Are there any other wholesalers other than Quality Marine that are certified? How many retail stores are certified?

Thanks,

Chip

 

[MaryHM]

Of course I will allow them to be working on something. Seems to me though that if they anticipated this problem of misrepresenting certification that they would have figured out a solution prior to certifying one of the largest wholesalers in the country. Man, that cart sure must get tired of dragging that horse around.

Not all of my questions are about that subject though. Where are the answers to my questions of misrepresentation from the MAC camp? They obviously aren't working on that, because they continue to put out public information restating the same old misrepresentations.

 

[mkirda]

MAC is trying to come up with good solutions to the problems of misrepresentation. Suggestions are encouraged.

John,

This seems really, really simple to me...

If you are a certified importer, you have two types of fish: Certified and non-certified.

Certified fish can only be sold to a certified retailer.
If the store is not certified, then the fish cannot be sold as certified.
IOW, no difference on the invoice, no difference in the price. They are just fish, not 'certified fish'.

Seems like the importer, in getting in a batch of certified fish, should call his certified customers and say they got them in, 'can I ship you some?'
Certified stores should get first dibs.
After that, they can be sold to everyone else, but just not as 'certified fish'.

Shouldn't this be in the Standards somewhere???
Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[Anonymous]

How funny, MAC has had millions in funding, years to figure out their certification policy, yet once it's implemented, they ask the PUBLIC for sudjestions on how to solve a problem they created and should have addressed PRIOR to implementation of their program.

Hey, no names John :wink: . You've mentioned a wholesaler by name, shame shame. I though the policy was no names, for good or worse.

 

[Anonymous]

Just my observations:

MAC doesn't need to, and can't answer every single question from every single independent retailer in the country. That's just too big of a task for them currently. All they need are a few large wholesalers, a few mail order companies, and Petco and Petsmart. That's only four or five people who they need to answer questions from. Much easier to do, and the cost/benefit ratio of their time spent per happy customer much higher. It just makes too much sense, and given the fact that they aren't really fielding very many questions from the little guys, starting to become obvious.

 

[mkirda]

a few mail order companies, and Petco and Petsmart.

To MAC's credit: According to David of MAC, they are not looking to certify Mail order companies, nor Petco/Petsmart.

Now, that may have just been lipservice to AMDA's president, who was sitting next to me at the time this was said, but David seemed sincere in this.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[Anonymous]

To MAC's credit: According to David of MAC, they are not looking to certify Mail order companies, nor Petco/Petsmart.

I know that what they say now. But I really don't see it actually happening any other way. The independents in the industry are too big and diverse a group to do it any other way, with the personel and resources they currently have. Don't take it the wrong way though, I'm certainly not trying to imply that they are being dishonest or deceitful. I think their best intentions are to certify the independents, because arguably that's where most of the problems are. (But the plans of mice and men and all that... :wink: )

 

[clarionreef]

Mike,
They have to omit those guys out of self preservation. It would be suicide to promote..."Net caught certified fish, low balled and drop shipped to the hobbyists door...the competing certified retailers would pull the plug on them and the whole chain of loyalty to this process would falter and fail.
Certified fish to the big ticket, 'know nothing' fish mills would also hurt the case for the bonafide true believer as they would cheapen the achievement and lower the value of the product. That in turn would start a chain rection of pressuring all concerned for "cheaper, cheaper" not "better , better". Low ball enterprises do concentrate money and are attractive targets for money- pot focused people, but they are the best route to the destruction of this shakey movement that assumes and gambles that the hobby will rise to a higher, and not sink to a lower level.
Imagine a movement that preaches;" More justice to the fisherman, more consciencious effort, more care and decompression, more advanced filtration and looser packing, less DOA and DAAs and all for a greatly reduced price!"
When that happens...the MAC experiment ends.
Seriously, Steve Robinson
AMDA president

 

[JennM]

I thought MAC was getting the big bucks to fix these problems, not look to us, the "non-paying customers" to fix the mess, for FREE....... :roll: (Anybody want to pay me for my input :lol: ?)

Heck, there's enough good discussion that goes on here to have at least anticipated the glaring holes in the system before they implemented said "holey" (deliberately spelled with an "e" in it...) system. Hey MAC, are you listening? (JB notwithstanding...)

It just seems that the prevelant attitude is to just plunge ahead, with no regard for consequences, and cross the bridges when they come to them. Problem is, those bridges are not being crossed - at least not with any degree of efficiency. If MAC was a privately owned business venture, it would have gone belly-up ages ago.

So QM was asked to address the matter of certified fish and non-certified retailers? Well, I do not buy from them, but I did in the past, and I still receive a stock list every week. They still list MAC fish, even though I'm not certified, I receive that option to buy, and there is no stipulation that I cannot buy MAC fish.... so I don't see that simple problem being addressed.

Jenn

 

[naesco]

a few mail order companies, and Petco and Petsmart.

To MAC's credit: According to David of MAC, they are not looking to certify Mail order companies, nor Petco/Petsmart.

Now, that may have just been lipservice to AMDA's president, who was sitting next to me at the time this was said, but David seemed sincere in this.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

That is really disappointing.
I was hopefull that at least one of the major pet supply companies and on of the major online stores would certify.
In that way it would be easy for reefers to refer other reefers to certified cyanide vendors. How would I know of a store in Miami for example.
I would encourage MAC to certify both a major and an online and would be surprised if they didn't. There is a gold mine in cyanide free online sales.