GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-05 > 1211055646


From: "Peter A. Kincaid" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Some truth in article was Re: Answer fromAncestorsMagazine
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 17:20:46 -0300
References: <7kincaids%40primus.ca$142.154.19.142$.8C66D00E99B3486E8E26FA265A05CA4E@PeterAKincaiPC><382357.60409.qm@web81603.mail.mud.yahoo.com><ea3bd9560805171108w2bca064focee66a3a3534ad7d@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ea3bd9560805171108w2bca064focee66a3a3534ad7d@mail.gmail.com>


For the record, when asked, I have always promoted
FTDNA as the preferred choice for Y DNA testing. The
only way that a 12 marker test is in the best interest
of the consumer is that it may entice a person, who
does not know better, from purchasing from a competitor
a lower resolution test at a higher cost. If everyone
was selling much higher resolution tests for $99 nobody
would argue with any of my points about the uselessness
of 12 marker testing. What would the tone be here if
5 markers was the $99 entry level? A 12 marker test
is an arbitrary number originally set based on batch runs.
Better than five but now pretty well just as useless.

Peter



----- Original Message -----
From: "David Faux" <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 3:08 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Some truth in article was Re: Answer
fromAncestorsMagazine


> As the former business/marketing manager of EthnoAncestry I can say with
> some authority that FTDNA is absolutely adopting the most correct approach
> with all variables consisered. Don't forget that with 12 markers FTDNA
> provides a guaranteed haplogroup assignment (a very good deal, except for
> those who are halogroup phobic), and in addition, it allows immediate
> entry
> into Dr. Hammer's extensive world-wide database for comparison purposes.
> I
> have no idea why you are both saying or implying that FTDNA is in some
> sort
> of shoddy way trying to dupe the consumer. That is absolutely not the
> case. I can report this a former competitor. They have consistently
> acted
> in a way that was in the best interests of the consumer but of course they
> cannot please everyone. One of you is a big supported of RG and will take
> any opportunity to take a pot shot at FTDNA. They are spot on in what
> they
> are doing. I know that. Most everyone else knows that. So why not end
> of
> story.
>
> David K. Faux.
>
>
> On 5/17/08, Robert Stafford <> wrote:
>>
>> I agree. The irrationality of consumers is a well-known phenomenon.
>>
>> Bob Stafford
>>
>> "Peter A. Kincaid" <> wrote:
>> Why would you need to upgrade if there was
>> value in the 12 marker results? If there were
>> no 12 marker tests offered by FTDNA then
>> 25 would be the entry level test and prices
>> would have to be adjusted accordingly. The
>> only real value of the 12 marker test for FTDNA
>> is for them to keep this as the base price/value
>> making one have to pay more for the tests of
>> real value. Anyone with business/marketing
>> experience will understand this point.
>>
>> Peter

This thread: