The Genii Forum

Who is this guy? Has anyone ever heard of him? I'm looking at his picture on the cover and he looks like he's a sneaky fellow to me. I thought Genii only does cover stories on people that have something to do with Magic. Hey,I know...next month why not put my plumber on the cover. Geeez Richard...what were you thinking?

If you are a collector of the finest magical apparatus available, the name of Rich Bloch should be well known to you. He, along with Nick Ruggiero, started Collectors' Workshop.

Of course he looks sneaky, he was a lawyer. LOL
Actually Rich is one hell of a talented magician, mentalist and MC, he is also the one now responsible for the Wolrd Magic Seminar and that does not include that he is a great guy just to talk with. One of my favourite all time impromptu card effects is Rich's idea, brilliant, direct and to the point as they should be. Trsut me, he deserves to be on there.

PSIncerely Yours,
Paul Alberstat
AB StageCraft
Supplying Unique Mentalism, books and supplies World-wide
http://www.mindguy.com/store

Originally posted by Paul Alberstat:
... he is also the one now responsible for the Wolrd Magic Seminar

Considering if you check Glenn's profile he has the World Magic Seminar site listed as his homepage, I think he might be messing around with us a little bit....
Grant

Mr. Farrington pulled a Phil Hendrie on us. :D

Well, I'll be D***!! ;)

oh...that Rich Bloch! ;)

You know...the one to whom Nick was always handing the batteries.... ;)

I thoroughly enjoyed the article. I really like Jon's writing...very colorful. I wish I could have kept on reading. I love learning about the lives of magicians that have "lived a little". You can look at the decisions, the mistakes, the accomplishments.

..."When I'm on stage, there is no question that I'm selling "me"--Rich Bloch. WOW!!! That is so good. I believe I remember someone else making that statement. Mr. Ortiz "Stong magic"
How about this one "You MUST have enthusiasm"--Rich Bloch. Spoken like a true salesman. I don't mean that in a negative way. You HAVE to understand the sells technique.
...keep them coming

One more thought...
This is directed to Jon, but anyone could answer who has experience.
I don't know alot about Mr. Bloch, but it sounds like he leans more towards the mechanical side of producing magic and not the skill side, as in slieght of hand. Yet, there are other magicians out there doing awesome sleight of hand that are just as successful. So for a growing magician the question shouldn't be sleight or gimmick, it should be presentation and connecting to your audience to achieve the goal of your client.
Am I in the right direction?

Yes indeed presentation, personality, energy etc
all these are more important than the trick be it
by slight of hand skill or mechanical. I assure
you Rich Bloch [even if he is a lawyer] has all this and more. He's cool under fire, reherses his presentations and has a good persona. It was a bit of a joke sometimes - that some device he was using would not work in a show - he would overcome and the bit would be even better or at least funnier than usual. Those of us who knew would be laughing out butts off on how how he was going to get out of this one. He pretty much always did. He's a real PRO.

Stefan

I have seen Rich Bloc at The Magic Castle many times. I can assure you he is one of the most entertaining magicians. Each time I see him it is practically the same act, but he kills me every time. His comedic timing is beyond compare. One night while watching, Billy McComb was sitting in front of me. Billy was reciting Rich's act word for word. At one point Rich had changed about one word of his act and it threw Billy. I heard Billy mumble "that was a good one."

Charles Spector

Hi all,

A few years ago I developed a food tin into a bill tube thingy. Being a bit cautious I told only two people; I explained the mechanics to Paul Wilson in Costco and asked Max Maven if it had been done before. A couple of months later CW started to advertise Can o Corn. Arse.

For years Rich Bloch has been 'the guy who got there first'. It's nice to know more about him now.

Take care, Ian

And no, I'm not bitter.

Ian, unless you have some specific proof that either Paul Wilson or Max Maven explained your idea to Rich Bloch, I suggest you delete your post!

Hang on. I _never_ suggested that Rich took my idea. I have _never_ suggested to anyone that I believed Rich Bloch to have done _anything_ wrong. I have _always_ maintained that this was a case of spontaneous invention and I discussed this with Paul at the Blackpool convention right after the product came out. I have never doubted the integrity of Paul or Max, or implied in any way that they gave any information to anyone.

I'm a wee bit peeved that you think I'm complaining, despite my comments at the end of my post that I was in no way bitter. I mentioned Paul and Max purely to give some detail to the story, and maybe to show that however quiet you are about something someone is bound to think of it as well.

I understand that there is a culture of 'guilty until proved innocent' in magic today (ref the 'International 3Fly debate; an effect I was working on myself knowing nothing of the other gentlemen involved) but I really don't see what I said in my story that implied theft.

I had an idea and discussed it with my friend. I checked with Mr Maven to see if I was reinventing something (which I tend to do quite often). A very similar product was produced and I was a bit down at the time (similarly I spent four years off and on developing a screenplay which I was going to make 'Mariachi style', as the current phrase is (like Nathan with Shade), which could accurately be described as 'Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Haggises'. I remember sitting in the cinema thinking 'Arse, I've just wasted four years').

My description of Rich as 'the guy who get there first' was just that; he published first. Now I know more about him from reading the article, which makes things nicer.

At the time Paul said that Rich was unscrupulously honest, which I believed, and now know to be absolutely true. However, my short story which was obliquely praising Genii for an informative article now has me being labled as a false accuser.

Members of this board have a low enough opinion of me as it is without being dragged further into the mire. I'd apreciate it if you would reread my post and let me know which points are contentious.

Take care,

Ian
Who is feeling just a wee bit persecuted at the mo.

Ian,

Do not feel persecuted. Instead reread your original post and try to read from the standpoint of someone who does not know all the subtle detail you explained in your second post. Without that detail, it is very easy to get the implication that you felt something less than honorable had happened (as opposed to a case of simultaneous though independent design).

The phrases "a couple months later" is perhaps the most telling one, however even noting that you were "not bitter" implies that there may have been something to be bitter about! Leaving out the fact that you believed it to be a case of independent invention and you simply missed the boat was an important point that should have been included in the original post. Then, none of this would have even occurred.

This is a lesson for all of us who choose to express thoughts and opinions here on the Internet: words can easily be misinterpreted especially if the emotional meaning behind them is masked. Emotion in all its levels is the most difficult thing to express in words, and yet without the clarification of the emotional meaning behind the words chosen, what is meant to be expressed can be easily taken in a direction never intended.

Dustin

Hi Dustin,

Thanks for your reply. I have reread the two posts many times in the last half hour or so (the upshot of being angry at bedtime).

Personally, I thought I was being quite clear, but obviously this is not the case. Firstly, I would not have used the slightly comical expletive 'Arse' in a serious complaint.

Secondly, I namechecked two of the more dependable men in Magic (despite any fall outs I've had with Paul in the past, they are now sorted and I have _never_ accused him of being indescrete). Again, I would not have done this in a complaint.

The phrase 'a couple of months later' was merely an accurate expression of time. I cannot see how any intelligent person who is conversant with the retail side of magic can think a new product can be developed, tested, manufactured, advertised and sold in a 'couple of months'. I certainly do not, especially CW.

Lastly, I said I was not bitter deliberately to deflect any implication that I was! I'm not bitter, and I'm not bitter with Guy richie either. However, I realised that some people thought I might have a wee chip on my shoulder so I said plainly that I did not.

Emoticons were created to make up for the lack of contextual expression in email. Perhaps I should have filled the post with wee smiley faces to get rid of any ambiguities that may or may not have been there. :confused:

It's a shame. I was having a good day up to now. Now it's a quarter to twelve and I'm still seething. Arse.

Sleep tight,

Ian

For the record:

I absolutely remember Ian describing this to me. It was a stunning idea. I also remember him finding out that Rich Bloch's company was producing one.

It was another example of the great group consciousness at work and Ian had no suspicions about me or Max tipping the work. He understood it was just "one of those things".

When I read Ian's post I understood his tone because I knew the story - I can see how it could be misinterpreted though. This is a common problem with the internet.

Ian did invent the idea but it almost certainly already existed. Ian realised that immediately.

Hope this helps....

I understood ya Ian...that counts for very little but if it makes you happy then I did my part.
Steve V

Big thanks to Paul for the corroboration. I feel slightly less out on a limb now.

For more information; there is a reason noone ever heard of my method. I had two versions, one machined by my ex flatmate (an engineer with whom I discuss my more physical ideas) and a largely improvised version that can be made up for less than a dollar/pound/euro (but probably not a rouble). This is the version I described to Paul and Max.

I knew that if I made this version public it might have hurt the sales of Can o Corn, which I remember to be quite pricey. In my turbocharged Ego I believed people would choose my cheaper version over the more expensive one (Indian reels, anyone?).

Anyway, this thread is beginning to leave a sour taste in my mouth, so I'll leave with a couple of thoughts; first, what is the ethical standpoint of me performing with my Tin Tube? Second, flatmate Max and I are working on a portable Indian Rope trick I designed. To whom should I give credit?

Take care,

Ian

P.S. Thanks to Steve, too. Your post came in as I was typing mine :)

Ian, the only problem caused in the thread was by the ambiguity in your initial post. Having to explain yourself shouldn't leave a poor taste in your mouth. It happens, or will happen, all the time. The frequency of the occurance decreases as one learns to write more clearly.
I've been writing for my entire life and it still happens to me. Fortunately, most of my writing gets proofread by several people prior to publication and the stupid stuff gets spotted right away. The Internet removes that filter and stuff gets written and posted instantly, which can lead to situations like this one.

Originally posted by Ian Kendall:
what is the ethical standpoint of me performing with my Tin Tube?

You should, of course, feel free to perform with your Tin Tube. No ethics issue there.

Things only get questionable if you consider the marketing. In that event, as we've seen thousands of times, you'd be labeled a thief in spite of independent invention. In fact, if you had invented independently years previously and only told folks of lesser celebrity, you'd still be labeled a thief if you chose to market your idea after it appeared elsewhere. C'est la vie. :rolleyes:

Hope you slept well, Ian.

Ian,
Your initial post was certainly not ambiguous to me -- and I don't know any of the participants other than Rich Bloch!

There was absolutly nothing to suggest that you believe your creation somehow "got to" or "influenced" Rich.

You make it clear (or, at least, that's how I read it!) that this was parallel lines of development at work and you conceded the field in a classy and stylish manner.

I salute you!

cheers,
Peter Marucci
showtimecol@aol.com