Originally Posted by Matt Trulio

There is indeed a school of thought in journalism that doesn't believe in getting "both sides." I understand it, though I don't subscribe to it.

By the standard you set above, every time we write about, for example, Fountain Powerboats, we should have to rehash the company's bankruptcy in 2009. By your high ethical standards and integrity (please), the same should apply to Eliminator Boats, which filed for bankruptcy the following year. Pantera has not been relevant for decades, and Jason's article made it clear the new owners of the Pantera molds bought them out of receivership. You seem to want the gory details. You want us to go on a crusade, it seems, against a company that's been lifeless for some time, the models of which a new owner is trying to revive. Good for you.

But that has nothing to do with journalistic integrity, something most readers outside and inside industry believe we have.

Look at me. I'm arguing with a guy who has enough courage to use a screen name. Do you have a background in my profession? Have any clips? A resume you want me to look at? Please, by all means, share them. (Psst. If you have to point out sarcasm in your writing, you're not doing it right. )

Don't like us, don't read us. But your hyper-aggressive, all-knowing posture is just silly. Breathe. You'll live longer.

Originally Posted by Jason Johnson

Point taken guys, but for my story I was doing follow-up work/vetting for a press release from a company with which I had no previous relationship. I can't just slap up a press release and assume it's accurate so I called Pepe. I also called John Clarke to confirm and get a quote about it. It is my story so I can present it as is and no way I'd call it a puff piece. That would be using superlatives to describe how wonderful it is that someone is trying to do something with a rather historic brand for our industry. If the owners had a problem with my story, I would have heard from them. I didn't not, just two emails from a partner and the PR person thanking me for the story. In fact their exact words were: "Looks great. Thanks for the support." and "Hey Jason... nicely done... thanks!"

I guess it's a good thing you're not the ones running the new company who may take offense to showing another side to a story. In my opinion, I can have one but you won't find it in my news story, the new ownership group is likely secure enough legally and mentally with their position, business model and future that having a rant from the former owner at the end of the story doesn't both them.

Originally Posted by Boatlesss

im confused. did pantera sell or was it taken from them or did the sell it or?

Originally Posted by Matt Trulio

There is indeed a school of thought in journalism that doesn't believe in getting "both sides." I understand it, though I don't subscribe to it.

By the standard you set above, every time we write about, for example, Fountain Powerboats, we should have to rehash the company's bankruptcy in 2009. By your high ethical standards and integrity (please), the same should apply to Eliminator Boats, which filed for bankruptcy the following year. Pantera has not been relevant for decades, and Jason's article made it clear the new owners of the Pantera molds bought them out of receivership. You seem to want the gory details. You want us to go on a crusade, it seems, against a company that's been lifeless for some time, the models of which a new owner is trying to revive. Good for you.

But that has nothing to do with journalistic integrity, something most readers outside and inside industry believe we have.

Look at me. I'm arguing with a guy who has enough courage to use a screen name. Do you have a background in my profession? Have any clips? A resume you want me to look at? Please, by all means, share them. (Psst. If you have to point out sarcasm in your writing, you're not doing it right. )

Don't like us, don't read us. But your hyper-aggressive, all-knowing posture is just silly. Breathe. You'll live longer.

Originally Posted by PARASAIL941

Who's the genius that came up with the business plan of resurrecting a company with a shady past , somewhat cool logo , and outdated designs? If they plan on introducing new designs and some revamped older models , why not run under the Jaguar banner ( which is also an "iconic" brand,with a cool logo), since they seemed to be partnered up to some degree. Pepe never went as fast as Jack...

Originally Posted by Jupiter Sunsation

I think they have a chance with OB powered options. The 24-36 ft market has a gap that Pantera could fill and I'd guess they scooped up the brand/molds very cheaply at the auction.

Originally Posted by Boatlesss

im confused. did pantera sell or was it taken from them or did the sell it or?