same exact image different breeders different strain so now what ignore the pics all together when choosing strains?
The use of a certain picture or certain pictures for various different strains rather than for only one strain and by different breeders has gone on for as long as seedbanks existed. If someone scans enough sites and enough strains it is not uncommon to find two or three strains with different names and different advertising copy from different breeders all sharing the exact same picture of the exact same plant. I don't know if once since there were no more than about the first half dozen or so original seedbanks you could look through everything offered by the various breeders and not find a duplicate picture for a different strain from a different breeder.
When seedbanks were on average much smaller offering fewer breeder lines you would have to look through a few seedbanks to find a duplication. Once seedbanks grow large enough and had many different breeder lines, if you looked through just one site long enough you would find at least one picture that was used twice if not more times for different strains for different breeders.
It has almost always been that way from day one. It is just a matter of how long it takes each individual to pay close enough attention to notice it. When it happens it can become one of those really big deal breaking news alert totally brand new really old things things that like Godzilla never dies but instead only sleeps waiting to be awakened yet once again to one day return and destroy Tokyo.
Just because it has gone on ever since about a day after Al Gore invented the Internet I am not saying that makes it good or acceptable or ethical or moral or any less of a concern or anything. All I am saying is the practice is no where close to being something new.
When you think about the industry average for honesty why would you expect accurate pictures if open blatant lies and intentionally totally misleading tactics are used in other ways? There is something like 25 different White Widows, there is the original and then there is a whole pea-pot full of different breeders variations created when attempting to duplicate the original strain as closely as possible with what the breeder had to work with, in other words knockoffs. If you scan the various seedbanks and breeder sites if the breeder has one too, and you look through all the different descriptions of White Widow almost all of them will use one of two pieces of standard advertising copy from the original White Widow. They do not claim the same genetics, but they attempt everything short of that to try to mislead even just one more person into believing they are looking at the Real McCoy genetics and that will be what they end up purchasing, or at least if known or assumed to be a knockoff that it is a superior knockoff.
The more original advertising copy and originals pictures that can be used and any and all awards that the original strain won are listed or at least mentioned in some way the easier it is to fool the rubes. A perceived connection is created between the Real McCoy and the knockoff that shares the same name. With that goes perceived quality and if a truly famous strain an air of fame is also perceived to be connected.
There is more marketing and advertising thought going on behind the scenes than it appears. Not so much as in more actual advertising, but instead as in less, like trying to get more per dollar and reusing pictures now and then and borrowing pictures from other strains and if you make a knockoff why pay someone to take pictures and pay someone to write advertising copy, or even do both yourself if you have the needed skills and equipment, when you can use the original picture of the original award winning plant and use all the advertising copy, including any possible lists of awards won, for free?
Unless the knockoff breeder can win some award or awards with their genetic version of the strain, at least close to being equal to what the original did, they really cannot hope to claim to be better. They attempt to look the same and if they don't pull that off they shoot for looking as similar and or as equal to the original as possible and hope for the best after that.
When someone who is new to this at some point gets the idea they will grow some certain famous name strain and there is the original and then there are ten knockoffs the new grower will not know one from the other, not know who created the original and regardless of who did if more than one breeder somehow has the original and if so who all has it because they will scan for best pricing for the same name strain. In their minds they have already ranked all to most of them to be the very same or at least almost virtual equals. They never expect or even consider major variations to be possible let alone likely.
By chance they click on a link at a seedbank to the original breeder of the famous strain they most want to grow. They found the best of what it is they want to purchase, or think they want to purchase and plan to purchase, but along with the word best you see dollar signs or euro signs or whatever building up next to the strain name from the strain originator, and true award winner. So they look and look and see the same pictures and the same advertising copy and list of awards with differing prices next to the same strain name as they look through breeder line to breeder line.
Eventually they happen onto one that feels right. Maybe it is price. The lowest price, not the lowest price so they can tell themselves they did not purchase Roadside Red genetics but still not pay anywhere near the price of the original genetics. It is whatever fits their budget, if one exists and needs be adhered too, and if possible still allows them to feel they got something pretty darn good, maybe even the Real McCoy, at a value price or it is all they have to spend and someone offers that strain name for the amount they can spend.
It can be because even though you are only looking for one strain you look over the entire line and for whatever reason you liked it or were impressed by it. That might be what puts you over the top so you pick that particular breeder’s genetics over the others.
If the person hangs around sites like this for a while they will see the famous strain name they are interested in repeated on a semi-regular basis. If they read many or all of the messages they are bound to read some negative messages about the strain but overall by far most will be positive and when you combine that with the numbers of times mentioned that reinforces their choice of strain to purchase.
The problem is I have never seen a thread that was about a particular strain from a particular breeder remain only about that particular breeder’s strain unless it was a strain that was that breeder’s alone, that no one else had ever made their own variation of it.
You end up with mixed information where some applies to the original genetics and then some that applies to one breeders knockoff and then another breeder’s knockoff etc. but it is all information or advice that is seen or believed by many as applying 100% in every way across the board to any genetics that carry the same strain name. A parity is perceived that does not exist and many breeders take as much advantage of the misperception as they possibly can because they rely so heavily on the sales of their knockoffs, often times due to their own genetic crosses not exactly selling like hotcakes.
Is that stuff illegal but just put up with? Nope. Someone cannot patent a plant so they cannot really own and protect it. Copywriting and trademarking names could help in some cases if on a national level and depending where that is, but on an international level it’s pretty hard to enforce one or a few nations truth in advertising laws on the rest of the world so while it is not exactly the Wild, Wild West it is not all that much better than pretty darn much of whatever someone wants to say or do or infer, they can.
Not to sound like I am calling all or even most breeders less than above board and reputable but a fair percentage of how some of them willingly and intentionally do business could be summed up by using a quote. “As my dear old grandfather Litvak said (just before they swung the trap), he said "You can't cheat an honest man. Never give a sucker an even break or smarten up a chump."
In the right lines of businesses having that basic business philosophy can take you far. Add a pinch of good luck and just the occasional light dash of actual skill and the same breeder can be a breeder version of a rock star.
Then you have those who are not concerned about flat out lying. Ones like BC SEEDS and their Euphoria Unlimited. $995.00 (US) for 10 seeds and they claimed it to be a very large yielding plant measuring a consistent 36% THC.
Right! I bet the claimed THC number was the combined total IQ of the morons who actually thought people would fall for their malarkey.
If that was not enough get a load of just a tiny bit of their advertising copy; “Many actors are requesting this strain and are paying $60+/gram. They are saying it's better than the "skinny drug" because the high is more Euphoric, lasts longer with no hangovers, allowing them to work the following day. Also, they are getting 10 times the doses from a single gram at half the cost of the "skinny drug".
LIES! ALL LIES!!!!
But I guess reusing pictures is still pretty low.
