Cheap just got cheaper

[janoskiss]

I was considering ordering some gear from a retailer till I stumbled on
this page (http://www.andrewscom.com.au/site-content-section-10-surplus.htm) on their website.

In case you missed it, this is the photo (http://www.andrewscom.com.au/images/products/telescopes/refractor/girlwithtelescope.jpg) on the page, with the caption "A nice used telescope!".

I have real no objection to that sort of thing in the right context... But .. I mean .. come on!! I am not sure whether to just walk away, or contact them and let them know that I am shaking my head in disbelief... or whether we should join forces and we should all let them know. For now all I know is I'll be looking elsewhere for my astronomy equipment needs.

[mithrandir]

First question I'd be asking Lee is has the web site been hacked.

[asimov]

It was hacked recently..Looks like it's happening again. BTW I've seen better heads on a glass of beer so the hacker sucks lol.

[janoskiss]

That did not occur to me. A couple of weeks ago I just kinda cringed a little at the photo on the binoculars page (http://www.andrewscom.com.au/site-content-section-11-andrews.htm) (scroll down to MARINE GRADE ...) without giving it much more thought. And now the "nice used telescope". It just does not seem like anything a hacker would do.

...
On closer inspection, I concede. The hacker theory makes more sense than anything else I can think of. I am so out of touch with what hackers do these days. What a waste of time! Theirs and everyone else's.

[Wavytone]

Maybe a hacker earning his P-plates.

[toc]

Interesting. Hacked by the liberal party perhaps? :)

Julia is delighted with our 10 x 50WA binoculars. Julia said that she can see the "end of the dirt road" near where she lives and can see a sign at the end of that road which indicates "Saturday, 14th September, 2013".

[janoskiss]

After seeing the picture I did not even bother reading on.
How blatantly subtle!

[Astro_Bot]

I've noticed that sort of thing before on Andrews' web page. I think it's more likely to be a web administrator with a warped sense of humour than a hack.

[Max Vondel]

I thought astronomy was all about heavenly bodies
Seems perfectly fine to me
In keeping with the theme
:lol:

Besides...How else could you sell a crap toy store telescope like that!

[rmuhlack]

Says a lot about the prevailing attitudes towards women in our country that an image like that would be considered appropriate in business advertising. In that sort of prevailing national attitudinal environment, the comments by John Laws that were widely publicised in the national press last week (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/john-laws-operating-by-laws-of-the-jungle/story-e6freuy9-1226601932426)should hardly come as a surprise, disgusting as it was. I mean - is no one else here concerned by this...?!

If Andrews don't remove the image promptly I think i'll be looking elsewhere for my next astro purchase.

[LewisM]

John Laws is a pathetic old attention whoring cretin. He should have STAYED retired.

No, the imagery is NOT appropriate for the webpage AT ALL. I am not in the least offended by it, but it should NOT be there. When Australian retailers resort to what I call Yobboism, I will usually walk away from them.

It reminds me of truck calenders or those idiotic Women and Guns calenders. Tasteless and inappropriate.

I have never been inclined to purchase from Andrews for several reasons - this NOT being one of them though.

[stephenb]

Any astute retailer with such a heavy presence on the web in such a niche hobby should have been into this by now. Whether it is hackers or a joke by the web admin or owner, they have no respect for women in our society and have lost my family's business.

[toc]

Agreed - it is tasteless, and serves no purpose. Actually I'm more annoyed by the Politics than the girl in a bikini.

Reminds me of this classic from Celestron:
http://www.philharrington.net/c-girls.jpg

[Dave221]

I emailed their Sales team and they're removing it.
David.

[AG Hybrid]

Pffffft. LOL :rolleyes::screwy:

I've bought 2 telescopes from Andrew Lee. My 6" and 12" scopes. Helps hes just a 5 min drive away. Just saying he's very reputable to me.

Yeah, his website has been crap and has not changed for pretty much the last 5 years I've been in this hobby called Astronomy. I don't think they even check their own website often. I found his prices very reasonable. More to the point I've spoke to Andrew Lee and his wife who run the business together multiple times and they were always kind, helpful and well mannered.
Also, Luke who helps with the store is very knowledgeable and helpful.

You guys over reacting need to get a damn grip of yourselves.
I noticed their is no gun to the head of the woman in the picture. Looks like she decided to wear the bikini herself. If you find that offensive and degrading, perhaps you should blame the woman in the picture? Also, do you think Mrs. Lee would let that picture be put up there without her approval?

On a further note. Why don't we all keep things in perspective. There are far far worst things that could have been done or posted.

Do I need to keep going and spell out how silly some of you have made yourselves look?

[Capricorn1(Tom)]

Concur Adrian....put into perspective.:D

[rmuhlack]

That is exactly the sort of warped attitude I'm talking about, that says it's okay not to treat women (and people generally) with respect. Many would agree that is the thin end of the wedge. Do you nod in agreement when people express views (like those mentioned in the news story i linked too) that women who dress in a certain way are 'asking for it'? That victims of abuse are responsible and not the perpetrator ?!?

Whether the person pictured posed willingly doesn't matter. Even if the image isn't real and she was 'photoshopped' in, it still doesn't matter. Its degrading. What I find offensive is the attitude you clearly display and which can be observed all too often in Australian culture which says that sort of thing is "okay". An attitude which says "relax, chill out, it's not a big deal". I think you're wrong.

People choose to do business with suppliers for a range of reasons - price, convenience, customer service, friendly staff, trustworthiness etc. For anyone not living in Sydney The Andrews Com website is the main means of communicating their product and price offerings to potential customers. The website is updated regularly. Ignorance of the website content just doesn't wash in my view. I am glad that they have removed the image when asked, but it shouldn't have been there in the first place. Is there pricing, product range and service not sufficient in their own opinion that they need to resort to that sort of base level to win business ??

I hope it wasn't uploaded to the site in the first place by one of their staff, as that shows a serious lack of judgement at best in my opinion. I have purchased from them among others previously, but they are not the only supplier in the country. I am well within my rights to take my business elsewhere.

[Dave221]

Interesting reaction from Adrian. I thought it reasonable to let the dealer know that there were some negative comments flying around because of the ad. From the tone of the comments it seemed to be in the dealers best interest to remove it. That was all.

[Astro_Bot]

Wow. Bikini-clad women being used in advertising. Who'd have thought that could happen? :rolleyes:

[MrB]

And there it is. Your opinion. Doesn't make it right.
I think you're wrong. My opinion. Also doesn't make it right.
Difference of opinion. Normal.

[rmuhlack]

Except the woman in the original photo (which has now thankfully been removed) was explicitly NOT wearing a bikini

[LewisM]

Move along, nothing to see here (or there) any more :)

[Astro_Bot]

There were at least two photos - the second one I saw being clearly (fully) bikini-clad. Edit: Actually, the first photo is still available - it's more of a lingerie thing she's wearing, but you can't see any nether regions - I've seen TV shows that reveal more.

I still think this looks more like their web admin's warped humour than anything else.

But, yeah, you're right. Call the United Nations! Someone put a nipple on the web. :rolleyes:

Edit: Remember the whole David Koch breastfeeding row, where many mothers argued it was their right (dammit!) to show a breast in public if they needed to breastfeed?

[CJ]

Storm in a D cup.

(Sorry, couldn't resist :ashamed::ashamed::ashamed:)

[Retrograde]

x2. I refuse to give my custom to any shop that plays 2GB (or Laws).
Add the topless shot & it just shows a lack of professionalism.

[AG Hybrid]

How in the blue hell did you extrapolate this line of thought from my post and why are you aiming your condescending suggestions at me? I never said anything along the lines that would suggest that a woman was 'asking for it', and if they 'get it' its their fault. I never said that or anything like that.

Your out of damn line.

Keep everything in perspective. The topic of the thread was a picture of a woman in a bikini, whether it was put there on purpose or hacked we don't know. Until we know, if we ever do, everything is hearsay nonsense.
Once again I'll say keep everything in perspective and relative to what you may find else where per say on... 4CHAN, 9GAG and Reddit, and all of a sudden this one picture is just a drop in the ocean. A very deep ocean

On second thought. Do yourself a favor and don't go to any of those sites.

More to the point what has John Laws, shock jocks and the integrity Andrews Communications and its staff got to do with each other?

[Kunama]

Maybe it has become time to take this to Private messaging???????? What has any of this to do with Astronomy Equipment, really !

Its amazing how much conflict is created in a section for Equipment discussion.

[sheeny]

OK guys, its not going anywhere pretty.

I'm closing the thread.

Al.