Arrogant tosser. In my game I'm exposed to 2 general mentallities; that of the Japenese supplier, where sales are considered pre-eminent and that of the (broadly speaking) Anglo Saxon derivation, i.e. the USA and Europe, where anti-competitive, masonic handshakes are the preferred method of business prevention. Such blatant price control, market-rigging, cartel-type operating is anathema to free trade and across Europe and particularly in the USA (with it's tough anti-trust laws), perhaps like many, I'm amazed how the likes of Porsche get away with it. Yes, it's like the old Levis in Tesco argument although within reason, viz a vis what might be justified in terms of a 'marques of distinction' type recourse to limited distribution channels (yes, a degree of exclusivity is not of itself, necessarily, going to impact on free competition); however, to actually cite, quite blatantly, retail price discounts as justification for withholding supplies is pure market manipulation and in other industries would instigate competition authority investigation and punitive fines if convictions were successfully made. Ootrageous, man!
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHNo Discounts Says Wiedking
1 matching discussions were examined; no attributable action/outcome evidence was detected. No consensus or repair conclusion is claimed.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Read captured repliesInsufficient extracted evidence does not mean there is no answer in the original discussions.
1 matching discussions · 7 captured posts examined · 1 partial discussions
Coverage and how to read this overview
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
7 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
- PistonHeads: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T144035Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
In my experience, Freemasons are anything but restrictive - in fact, they spend so much time helping other people (yes, even non-Masons) that it's about time for a better press. Perhaps even a wee bit less unfounded prejudice...
Are you a freemason?
Do you play Golf?
Anyone want to buy a voucher for a new Boxster?
I heard if you collect ten off Cornflakes packets you get a new Boxster S free!! (Don't worry, no purchase necessary ring DOmster for details)
oops.. shouldn't that be "certainly"
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.