Buyback is a Sham
09-26-2003, 09:33 PM
#51
I see you
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by zoom44
where's the fun in that?:p
where's the fun in that?:p
AHHH, I was much younger then, full of **** and vinegar.........
09-26-2003, 09:56 PM
#52
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Spring
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by bureau13
No they don't. When did that come out? I'm sure it was long before there was even a pre-order mechanism in place. They can say anything they want before the car is available for purchase.
jds
No they don't. When did that come out? I'm sure it was long before there was even a pre-order mechanism in place. They can say anything they want before the car is available for purchase.
jds
The Mazda brochure states very clearly on the specification page:
Horsepower, SAE Net 250 @ 8500 rpm
The book is printed in April 2003.
It does have the disclaimer "..that certain changes in standard equipment, options, prices and the like,... may have occured and would not be included in these pages."
09-26-2003, 10:59 PM
#53
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No kidding! It actually says SAE Net 250? Damn. You got me on that one then.
jds
jds
Originally posted by 350 Formula
Now am home and have the results!!
The Mazda brochure states very clearly on the specification page:
Horsepower, SAE Net 250 @ 8500 rpm
The book is printed in April 2003.
It does have the disclaimer "..that certain changes in standard equipment, options, prices and the like,... may have occured and would not be included in these pages."
Now am home and have the results!!
The Mazda brochure states very clearly on the specification page:
Horsepower, SAE Net 250 @ 8500 rpm
The book is printed in April 2003.
It does have the disclaimer "..that certain changes in standard equipment, options, prices and the like,... may have occured and would not be included in these pages."
09-27-2003, 12:14 AM
#55
Murphy was an optimist!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Riverview, FL
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally solved this problem by having my dealer include the tinting as part of the deal. However, I want to point out 2 issues I see that most of us are ignoring:
1) Following MAZDA's recommended break in rules prevented (or should have prevented) any of us from actually fully exercising an RX-8 during a test drive. If we did not want to negatively impact the vehicle we were about to buy, testing it at the top end of it's performance curve was not an option. Hence we had to take Mazda's word on it. In my non-lawyer opinion the whole, "you tested it and liked it" argument is CRAP.
2) Tinting in Texas and Arizona was just about mandatory to resolve the **** poor performance of the Air Conditioner. I've got to say I have NO idea why this car did not come already tinted in any location where the temps typically exceed 90 degrees. It should be considered a defect in the car and we should be beating down Mazda's door for them to tint the cars for free. It could not hold it's own against temps over 95.
the folks who like the car as is need to get the hell out of the way and stop trying to shove their opinion down our throats. I LIKE the car. I OWN the car. I'm KEEPING the car. But I'd like all my horsepower (that I refused to test on the testdrive) and still feel is lacking. Hell, if I'd noticed a shortfall on the testdrive and reported it, all you happy folks would have told me to ignore it because 10,000 miles from now I'd get it! What a bunch of crap! That's 10% of the life of my car I get to wait around for the rest of my horsepower. Then when it doesn't show up I've got no recourse but to write STUPID on my forehead.
You don't like what I've got to say, great, ignore me, you've got that option.
1) Following MAZDA's recommended break in rules prevented (or should have prevented) any of us from actually fully exercising an RX-8 during a test drive. If we did not want to negatively impact the vehicle we were about to buy, testing it at the top end of it's performance curve was not an option. Hence we had to take Mazda's word on it. In my non-lawyer opinion the whole, "you tested it and liked it" argument is CRAP.
2) Tinting in Texas and Arizona was just about mandatory to resolve the **** poor performance of the Air Conditioner. I've got to say I have NO idea why this car did not come already tinted in any location where the temps typically exceed 90 degrees. It should be considered a defect in the car and we should be beating down Mazda's door for them to tint the cars for free. It could not hold it's own against temps over 95.
the folks who like the car as is need to get the hell out of the way and stop trying to shove their opinion down our throats. I LIKE the car. I OWN the car. I'm KEEPING the car. But I'd like all my horsepower (that I refused to test on the testdrive) and still feel is lacking. Hell, if I'd noticed a shortfall on the testdrive and reported it, all you happy folks would have told me to ignore it because 10,000 miles from now I'd get it! What a bunch of crap! That's 10% of the life of my car I get to wait around for the rest of my horsepower. Then when it doesn't show up I've got no recourse but to write STUPID on my forehead.
You don't like what I've got to say, great, ignore me, you've got that option.
09-27-2003, 10:35 AM
#57
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Buyback is a Sham
Originally posted by TomsterRX8
Well, looks like my 5th Mazda purchase is going to be my last. I got my repurchase papers back and Mazda is refusing to make me whole. They will not reimburse the window tint, even though it clearly adds value to the car and they will not reimburse the lost sales tax credit. Had I not bought this car, I would have a car with a trade value of $30,000. Trading that car in on the purchase of a new car would save me $1,875 in Texas sales taxes. Now I have nothing.
When I told them that I clearly relied upon the published data released by Mazda in making my decision and, based upon that data I traded in my BMW and tinted the RX8, and that there is no way in Hell they could win this argument in court, the reps answer was, "Yes we can. Horsepower estimation is not an exact science and anything plus or minus 5% is reasonable and would stand up in court. This buyback is a courtesy offered by Mazda and is not intended to reimburse all monies one might be out".
Now I know why the new horsepower figure is down only 4%......it keeps Mazda in the safe zone and free from litigation. If I didn't trust the new horsepower figures before I CERTAINLY don't trust them now.
So, had I been a moron and paid $5,000 over MSRP for this car, Mazda would reimburse even the $5,000. I did my homework, paid $500 under MSRP and Mazda will not reimburse the $2,085 I am out in tint and sales taxes. Makes a whole Hell of a lot of sense. Worse, they would not transfer me to anyone higher up and were indifferent about losing a very loyal customer. Bad business.
Well, looks like my 5th Mazda purchase is going to be my last. I got my repurchase papers back and Mazda is refusing to make me whole. They will not reimburse the window tint, even though it clearly adds value to the car and they will not reimburse the lost sales tax credit. Had I not bought this car, I would have a car with a trade value of $30,000. Trading that car in on the purchase of a new car would save me $1,875 in Texas sales taxes. Now I have nothing.
When I told them that I clearly relied upon the published data released by Mazda in making my decision and, based upon that data I traded in my BMW and tinted the RX8, and that there is no way in Hell they could win this argument in court, the reps answer was, "Yes we can. Horsepower estimation is not an exact science and anything plus or minus 5% is reasonable and would stand up in court. This buyback is a courtesy offered by Mazda and is not intended to reimburse all monies one might be out".
Now I know why the new horsepower figure is down only 4%......it keeps Mazda in the safe zone and free from litigation. If I didn't trust the new horsepower figures before I CERTAINLY don't trust them now.
So, had I been a moron and paid $5,000 over MSRP for this car, Mazda would reimburse even the $5,000. I did my homework, paid $500 under MSRP and Mazda will not reimburse the $2,085 I am out in tint and sales taxes. Makes a whole Hell of a lot of sense. Worse, they would not transfer me to anyone higher up and were indifferent about losing a very loyal customer. Bad business.
Here is one question!
IF mazda hasn't recalled HP down would you return the car or sell it?
If not, then you shouldn't do it now... Car is same as when u test drove it.... You shouldn't buy a car if you test drove it and wasn't good or fun or fast... etc.
09-28-2003, 01:49 AM
#58
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Edge
2) Tinting in Texas and Arizona was just about mandatory to resolve the **** poor performance of the Air Conditioner. I've got to say I have NO idea why this car did not come already tinted in any location where the temps typically exceed 90 degrees. It should be considered a defect in the car and we should be beating down Mazda's door for them to tint the cars for free. It could not hold it's own against temps over 95.
2) Tinting in Texas and Arizona was just about mandatory to resolve the **** poor performance of the Air Conditioner. I've got to say I have NO idea why this car did not come already tinted in any location where the temps typically exceed 90 degrees. It should be considered a defect in the car and we should be beating down Mazda's door for them to tint the cars for free. It could not hold it's own against temps over 95.
Yeah, it's a defect that Mazda doesn't factory tint the windows 50 different regulations for all 50 states because you want everything your way and don't think there are people out there that don't like their windows tinted because they can't see at night. Not to mention the police officers that put themselves on the line everytime they stop a car with dark tint and can't tell if the people inside have guns ready to shoot a cop because they didn't want a speeding ticket.
Last edited by Master Phu; 09-28-2003 at 01:55 AM.
09-29-2003, 08:55 AM
#59
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alright, here is the answer I was looking for.
I had lunch Saturday with one of the preeminent litigators in Houston. Senior partner of his own very distinguised law firm specializing in the DEFENSE of large corporations, NOT low-life plaintiff's attorneys.
I laid out the same argument I have given here in my first posting in this thread, how I relied upon faulty information from Mazda in making a purchase and how they should make me whole. Bottom line is he agreed 100% with my conclusions and said that Mazda is certainly liable and could not win in a court of law. The sales tax credit lost as well as the money spent on tinting would certainly need to be reimbursed.
He agreed the only argument Mazda could make is what the Mazda rep told me over the phone. That measuting horsepower is an inexact science and that anything +/- 5% would be deemed reasonable. Hence, the newly revised hp rating comes in at slightly less than 5% of the original. You guys really think that's a coincedence?
All this said, I have no intention of suing Mazda. My lawyer friend says that Mazda is offering this deal in the hopes that we all sign it, thus waving our rights to future suits against the company for actual damages. I'm out a little over $2,000 as a result of returning the car so the cost of ownership was about $1,000 per month. Pretty much what I suffered in monthly depreciation with my '93 RX7. If RX8's keep stacking up at the dealership like they are here in my home town, $1,000 per month ownership cost for only TWO months will seem like a bargain.
I had lunch Saturday with one of the preeminent litigators in Houston. Senior partner of his own very distinguised law firm specializing in the DEFENSE of large corporations, NOT low-life plaintiff's attorneys.
I laid out the same argument I have given here in my first posting in this thread, how I relied upon faulty information from Mazda in making a purchase and how they should make me whole. Bottom line is he agreed 100% with my conclusions and said that Mazda is certainly liable and could not win in a court of law. The sales tax credit lost as well as the money spent on tinting would certainly need to be reimbursed.
He agreed the only argument Mazda could make is what the Mazda rep told me over the phone. That measuting horsepower is an inexact science and that anything +/- 5% would be deemed reasonable. Hence, the newly revised hp rating comes in at slightly less than 5% of the original. You guys really think that's a coincedence?
All this said, I have no intention of suing Mazda. My lawyer friend says that Mazda is offering this deal in the hopes that we all sign it, thus waving our rights to future suits against the company for actual damages. I'm out a little over $2,000 as a result of returning the car so the cost of ownership was about $1,000 per month. Pretty much what I suffered in monthly depreciation with my '93 RX7. If RX8's keep stacking up at the dealership like they are here in my home town, $1,000 per month ownership cost for only TWO months will seem like a bargain.
09-29-2003, 10:05 AM
#60
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Preston, UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmmm, bit of a different perspective here in the UK, tho the 'sue at the first opportunity' culture is getting worse and worse.
Don't any of you believe in good faith?
It seems to me Mazda made a bit of a small mistake. Then went out and offered more than enough to their customers, even buy back etc.
The drop in hp is tiny and I defy anyone to tell the difference even in a back to back test.
Unless you are going to race your car the loss of a few hp beats me.
Maybe some of you guys like comparing cars bhps, 0-60 times, etc. Not sure it's worth anything unless you are really going to beat the **** out of your car all the time.
I'm wondering if Tomster would want compensating if he had spent a fortune on his car: body kit, engine mods, etc....
btw, measuring hp is an exact science, it's just gettin all the calibrations and corrections done properly. Most dynos are way out for actual measurements but more than adequate for tuning.
Don't any of you believe in good faith?
It seems to me Mazda made a bit of a small mistake. Then went out and offered more than enough to their customers, even buy back etc.
The drop in hp is tiny and I defy anyone to tell the difference even in a back to back test.
Unless you are going to race your car the loss of a few hp beats me.
Maybe some of you guys like comparing cars bhps, 0-60 times, etc. Not sure it's worth anything unless you are really going to beat the **** out of your car all the time.
I'm wondering if Tomster would want compensating if he had spent a fortune on his car: body kit, engine mods, etc....
btw, measuring hp is an exact science, it's just gettin all the calibrations and corrections done properly. Most dynos are way out for actual measurements but more than adequate for tuning.
09-29-2003, 12:12 PM
#61
I see you
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TomsterRX8
Alright, here is the answer I was looking for.
I had lunch Saturday with one of the preeminent litigators in Houston. Senior partner of his own very distinguised law firm specializing in the DEFENSE of large corporations, NOT low-life plaintiff's attorneys.
n.
Alright, here is the answer I was looking for.
I had lunch Saturday with one of the preeminent litigators in Houston. Senior partner of his own very distinguised law firm specializing in the DEFENSE of large corporations, NOT low-life plaintiff's attorneys.
n.
Remember the pinto? remember 19 year old kids burnt to death because it was cheaper to pay the claim then fix the problem(A gas issue)
Remember asbestoes? There are documents, public record, showing that the corps knew that thier product was killing people, and they did not even warn for 20 years!!
How about tobacco, who lied for years about thier product, all the time selectivley breeding their plants to maximize their addictive qualitys?(OH, to hold off some flames, I agree that once warnings were on the label, suits should be barred.)
All of this was exposed by the "lowlifes" you attack
your right to say your opinion is protected by them.
Something to think about, no?
09-29-2003, 01:22 PM
#62
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by klegg
Well, I have to take this off topic a bit. I do not like to generalize, because I know fine plaintiffs and defense attorneys, but, you have it a bit *** backwords.
Remember the pinto? remember 19 year old kids burnt to death because it was cheaper to pay the claim then fix the problem(A gas issue)
Remember asbestoes? There are documents, public record, showing that the corps knew that thier product was killing people, and they did not even warn for 20 years!!
How about tobacco, who lied for years about thier product, all the time selectivley breeding their plants to maximize their addictive qualitys?(OH, to hold off some flames, I agree that once warnings were on the label, suits should be barred.)
All of this was exposed by the "lowlifes" you attack
your right to say your opinion is protected by them.
Something to think about, no?
Well, I have to take this off topic a bit. I do not like to generalize, because I know fine plaintiffs and defense attorneys, but, you have it a bit *** backwords.
Remember the pinto? remember 19 year old kids burnt to death because it was cheaper to pay the claim then fix the problem(A gas issue)
Remember asbestoes? There are documents, public record, showing that the corps knew that thier product was killing people, and they did not even warn for 20 years!!
How about tobacco, who lied for years about thier product, all the time selectivley breeding their plants to maximize their addictive qualitys?(OH, to hold off some flames, I agree that once warnings were on the label, suits should be barred.)
All of this was exposed by the "lowlifes" you attack
your right to say your opinion is protected by them.
Something to think about, no?
But I think you know about the low-life plaintiff's attorneys I'm referring to. The ambulance chasers. The one's who pass out business cards every time a bus is nudged from behind. The one's who care nothing about justice, care nothing for their clients, care simply for their 40% fee.
Had I not put that phrase into my response you know the retort I would have received. "Yeah, that's just some slimy plaintiff's attorney telling you what you want to hear".
09-29-2003, 02:28 PM
#63
I see you
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TomsterRX8
You're right.......you're off topic.
But I think you know about the low-life plaintiff's attorneys I'm referring to. The ambulance chasers. The one's who pass out business cards every time a bus is nudged from behind. The one's who care nothing about justice, care nothing for their clients, care simply for their 40% fee.
Had I not put that phrase into my response you know the retort I would have received. "Yeah, that's just some slimy plaintiff's attorney telling you what you want to hear".
You're right.......you're off topic.
But I think you know about the low-life plaintiff's attorneys I'm referring to. The ambulance chasers. The one's who pass out business cards every time a bus is nudged from behind. The one's who care nothing about justice, care nothing for their clients, care simply for their 40% fee.
Had I not put that phrase into my response you know the retort I would have received. "Yeah, that's just some slimy plaintiff's attorney telling you what you want to hear".
Actually I trust the small "street" lawyer more then the corp type, as they are in the trenchs, fighting the good fight for the little guy. And trust me, they are not getting rich.
I suspect that your real problem has to do with a power/submissive complex, or an ugly marrage situation?
Funny, if you have never practiced law, how can you form a basis to have the rather strong opinions you have?
But again, maybe we should stay on topic.
09-29-2003, 02:39 PM
#64
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by klegg
No. IN my state, fees are capped between 20% and 1/3. It is illegal to hand cards out at accidents, and NJ is very strict on this. Runners are also illegal here also.
Actually I trust the small "street" lawyer more then the corp type, as they are in the trenchs, fighting the good fight for the little guy. And trust me, they are not getting rich.
I suspect that your real problem has to do with a power/submissive complex, or an ugly marrage situation?
Funny, if you have never practiced law, how can you form a basis to have the rather strong opinions you have?
But again, maybe we should stay on topic.
No. IN my state, fees are capped between 20% and 1/3. It is illegal to hand cards out at accidents, and NJ is very strict on this. Runners are also illegal here also.
Actually I trust the small "street" lawyer more then the corp type, as they are in the trenchs, fighting the good fight for the little guy. And trust me, they are not getting rich.
I suspect that your real problem has to do with a power/submissive complex, or an ugly marrage situation?
Funny, if you have never practiced law, how can you form a basis to have the rather strong opinions you have?
But again, maybe we should stay on topic.
So instead of them passig out business cards at accident scenes they now advertise during the Jerry Springer Show........huge step up there!
But I digress.......
Now you're gonna get this thread closed.
09-29-2003, 02:51 PM
#65
I see you
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Naaahhhh. I am not going to change your opinion, so there is no point. Wayyyy of topic anyway, and the real problem is unhappyness with how the buyback is going, which in understandable.
When you are not in the other persons shoes it is easy to think they are whiners, but I would be upset if I were you.
But, for gods sake, stop watching springer!!!!! It will rot your mind, and you may find yourself buying wankel engined products!!
When you are not in the other persons shoes it is easy to think they are whiners, but I would be upset if I were you.
But, for gods sake, stop watching springer!!!!! It will rot your mind, and you may find yourself buying wankel engined products!!
09-30-2003, 07:22 AM
#66
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tomster wrote: "Bottom line is he agreed 100% with my conclusions and said that Mazda is certainly liable and could not win in a court of law."
1. Your attorney friend is wrong.
2. You must have been spinning your facts to him.
3. If you didn't pay a fee for his advice, you got what you paid for.
4. I suspect you get into a lot of pissing contests, don't you?
Here is some friendly advice that will really help you in life. It's called diaphramatic breathing. To a slow count of four, breath deeply and fill your stomach with air, letting it extend way out like you are pregnant. Then release the air to a slow count of four. Do this five or ten times and your body will release wonderful calming chemicals. It really works for stressful times, in arguments or whenever you are about to lose your sense of reason. I offer this in a sincere effort to help.
1. Your attorney friend is wrong.
2. You must have been spinning your facts to him.
3. If you didn't pay a fee for his advice, you got what you paid for.
4. I suspect you get into a lot of pissing contests, don't you?
Here is some friendly advice that will really help you in life. It's called diaphramatic breathing. To a slow count of four, breath deeply and fill your stomach with air, letting it extend way out like you are pregnant. Then release the air to a slow count of four. Do this five or ten times and your body will release wonderful calming chemicals. It really works for stressful times, in arguments or whenever you are about to lose your sense of reason. I offer this in a sincere effort to help.
09-30-2003, 02:45 PM
#68
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Klegg, I suspect that you are kind enough to offer free legal advice to people, but would you ever ask your friend the doctor "hey, look at this thing on my leg. What should I do about it?" or your friend the landscaper "would you mind planting these trees for me" etc. While I support helping, when reasonable, legal advice over lunch is not likely to be too helpful. Did this guy research the relevant statutes? Has he found cases in the right jurisdiction with the same facts that ruled in his favor? Or did he swallow his corned beef and say "Yeah, Tom, you're right."?
My suggestion about the breathing is not intended to be a jab, either. I really mean it. That stuff helps people. Hopefully, in a quiet moment, with no one watching Tomster will try it. I'm attempting to practice compassion and wisdom.
By the way, in answer to your query a while back, I'm a PA attorney and officer for a Fortune 500 financial company.
My suggestion about the breathing is not intended to be a jab, either. I really mean it. That stuff helps people. Hopefully, in a quiet moment, with no one watching Tomster will try it. I'm attempting to practice compassion and wisdom.
By the way, in answer to your query a while back, I'm a PA attorney and officer for a Fortune 500 financial company.
10-01-2003, 01:02 AM
#69
Forum Vendor
Originally posted by 350 Formula
Rotarymagic,
Not to steal his thunder, but his point on taxes is that he traded in a $30,000 can and PAID less tax when he bought the Mazda. Now he will have to buy another car without a trade in and pay FULL taxes on the NEW purchase. Mazda is paying him back the taxes he has paid, but will not pay him for the taxes he will have to pay DUE TO MAZDA.
Rotarymagic,
Not to steal his thunder, but his point on taxes is that he traded in a $30,000 can and PAID less tax when he bought the Mazda. Now he will have to buy another car without a trade in and pay FULL taxes on the NEW purchase. Mazda is paying him back the taxes he has paid, but will not pay him for the taxes he will have to pay DUE TO MAZDA.
When I asked Mazda Canada about this specifically, they told me they WERE re-imbursing the difference on GST.
For those who don't know how GST works:
GST is 7% federal tax on goods and services you buy
Let's say you want to buy a car for $30,000.
When you trade in your old car, and they give you a $20,000 trade-in for it, the difference is what you pay taxes on. So, in this case 7% taxes on $10,000, or $700 in taxes.
If you took the buyback, you are out your old car, and the trade in tax savings.
I asked Mazda Canada about this and they told me they would re-imburse on the tax for the full amount, not just the part after trade-in.
So, in other words, the full $2,100 of GST, plus the $30,000
10-01-2003, 01:07 AM
#70
Forum Vendor
Originally posted by aussie77
Um for the record, 238 is 3.64% less than the published number of 247 hp.
Um for the record, 238 is 3.64% less than the published number of 247 hp.
But you are still right.
238 is 4.8% less than 250
10-01-2003, 10:29 AM
#71
just jd.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But wasn't it also widely publicized that the HP figures were first revised to 247 (down from 250) before the first NA customer delivery? I think the timing was pretty close anyway.
10-01-2003, 10:57 AM
#72
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ft. Walton Beach, Florida
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's called diaphramatic breathing. To a slow count of four, breath deeply and fill your stomach with air, letting it extend way out like you are pregnant.
Dear doctor Les Paul, stick to guitar lessons, your breathing exercise gave me a hernia. You gulp air into your stomach for a burping contest, you breath air into your lungs for a relaxation exercise.
Watch out, giving medical advice on a world wide forum could get you sued. HaHaHa
10-01-2003, 12:53 PM
#73
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuck wrote" You gulp air into your stomach for a burping contest, you breath air into your lungs for a relaxation exercise."
Sorry for my impresise explanation. Hopefully, people know the difference between their lungs and stomach.
This is not medical advice. It's a technique taught for stress management, bio-feedback, meditation and other applications.
More to the point, I suspect people have read enough of my posts to generally just ignore me, anyway.
Sorry for my impresise explanation. Hopefully, people know the difference between their lungs and stomach.
This is not medical advice. It's a technique taught for stress management, bio-feedback, meditation and other applications.
More to the point, I suspect people have read enough of my posts to generally just ignore me, anyway.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ChogokinRX-8
Purchasing, Financing, & Insurance
17
09-15-2003 02:17 PM
