Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Pat,
No, I didn't count the first kiekie as a separate plant until it was separated from the mother plant. On the other hand I sometimes get the urge to count the total number of leaves on all my Phals: 160 currently, for an average of 6.7 leaves per Phal. Ok, maybe I am weird sometimes, why would anyone in her right mind care about the average number of leaves on Phals? But I do. Joanna "Pat Brennan" wrote in message ... Joanna do not think this is a such a simple addiction that there is some number. After you regularly bloom phals for a couple years, you will start grouping them as the phals and that only counts as one. You may have already reached your number cause you have started grouping the keikies. I bet you counted the first one. Do not forget Rob's first rule. Pat "J Fortuna" wrote in message news:RTXwd.160$_62.22@trnddc01... Claude, The last 42, is that a flask (or a compot)? Are you counting keikies? I did not count keikies that live with the mother plant as separate plants in my 31 plant count -- two of my pants currently have a keikie, and I am really hoping that the phal equestris will decide to have one this time (it's close to the end of this blooming season, so I'm watching it for signs of keikie). Are you intending to keep all these plants when they mature, or are you planning to give them away or exchange or something? I would think that if they are the same hybrid or same species that 42 of them would be rather much once they mature ... of course that assumes that they all will mature, what's the life-expectancy of phals in flask or in compot? I once read an article somewhere that only a certain % of such plants are likely to survive and mature, but I don't know how current and how reliable that article was. I hope it was not right, since I would think that for someone who treats each plant as an individual, watching the number dwindle would be depressing. If that's what having a flask is like, I don't think I want one any time soon. Or do I have a misconception here based on that article? Don't know who wrote it, and where I saw it, it's been a while, but this much has staid with me. Joanna "Phalguy" wrote in message ... Hello Joanna! My collection consist of: 37 Phals 2 Oncidium 2 Paph and 42 phals babies Claude "J Fortuna" wrote in message news:43Xwd.308$1U6.157@trnddc09... | This post was inspired by Dave Gillingham's moving story in the Who We Are | thread (which by the way I continue to enjoy immensely, and am very glad to | read each new post there). | | Dave's story makes me wonder what the cutoff point is for when a collection | becomes to large to rejoice over every individual plant's new leaf, new | root, and new spike. My collection currently consists of 31 orchids, and I | still watch every one carefully and rejoice over each activity of each | plant. | | I know that Claude also does that, and I have the impression that Claude's | collection is somewhat larger than mine, though I'm not sure about that. I | checked Claude's post in Who We Are as well as Claude's Web site, but I did | not see the total number of plants in your collection, Claude? | | Anyway, it appears that somewhere between 31 plants (my current number) and | about 200 (Dave's current number) one can no longer keep track of each as an | individual and rejoice in each one. I wonder what the cutoff number is? Of | course, I know that this cutoff will vary somewhat based on the individual's | determination and the amount of time available to spend with plants and | maybe some other variables, but: What is the largest number of orchids in a | collection that a single human being can report keeping track of in an | individualized way, rejoicing over each one's activity? | | This is not just a rhetorical question. I really want to know. And then I | will try not to exceed that number if at all possible. Well, probably it | will not be possible since I am an orchid addict and I feel the craving for | new orchids at most a month after the last orchid was bought. But I might | try to postpone the inevitable if I know that exceeding x amount will lead | to a dire consequence such as the de-indivualization of individual orchids. | | Joanna | | |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
For me, new plants will get a little more attention than those that
have been around for years. For example, I recently picked up several Sarcochilus species that were bare-root and a little stressed. They get a once over several times per week as I look for new roots and leaves. Some of my older plants may only get looked at every couple weeks. This time of year I look closely at my Phals at least weekly, checking for new spikes. I think once the collection grew to over 100 plants, the daily fussing over each plant stopped. Dave PS- In 'who we are' I said I have about 300 plants....I didn't count each plant in a compot as an individual. If I did, I guess I would have over 400 plants total. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I don't think you can put a number on how many,I think the more you have the
more you neglect some,so you tend not to over water & pamper them.like most you start with a phal on the window sill.Then for some reason the windowsill starts to shrink,so you start to think how you can keep them in a larger area,whether it be greenhouse or house/flat.Then you can't stop thinking about them!.Collecting them alone isn't enough for me I would love to one day sell them as a business everyday,any of you guys out there that do got any advise or do you make enough money for it to be the only income? -- Thanks Keith,England,UK. "Dave S" wrote in message ups.com... For me, new plants will get a little more attention than those that have been around for years. For example, I recently picked up several Sarcochilus species that were bare-root and a little stressed. They get a once over several times per week as I look for new roots and leaves. Some of my older plants may only get looked at every couple weeks. This time of year I look closely at my Phals at least weekly, checking for new spikes. I think once the collection grew to over 100 plants, the daily fussing over each plant stopped. Dave PS- In 'who we are' I said I have about 300 plants....I didn't count each plant in a compot as an individual. If I did, I guess I would have over 400 plants total. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
PS
Or are you loaded from selling them? -- Thanks Keith,England,UK. "keith ;-)" wrote in message news:1103410296.fc8cc05de3d84625f8e72d3acc6a3f16@t eranews... I don't think you can put a number on how many,I think the more you have the more you neglect some,so you tend not to over water & pamper them.like most you start with a phal on the window sill.Then for some reason the windowsill starts to shrink,so you start to think how you can keep them in a larger area,whether it be greenhouse or house/flat.Then you can't stop thinking about them!.Collecting them alone isn't enough for me I would love to one day sell them as a business everyday,any of you guys out there that do got any advise or do you make enough money for it to be the only income? -- Thanks Keith,England,UK. "Dave S" wrote in message ups.com... For me, new plants will get a little more attention than those that have been around for years. For example, I recently picked up several Sarcochilus species that were bare-root and a little stressed. They get a once over several times per week as I look for new roots and leaves. Some of my older plants may only get looked at every couple weeks. This time of year I look closely at my Phals at least weekly, checking for new spikes. I think once the collection grew to over 100 plants, the daily fussing over each plant stopped. Dave PS- In 'who we are' I said I have about 300 plants....I didn't count each plant in a compot as an individual. If I did, I guess I would have over 400 plants total. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
There was a time when I would have said 'Abandon all hope oh ye who enter
into the notion that you can make money selling orchids as a small vendor.' Then the business changed and now I see the only hope for orchids as the small, niche vendor. Maybe Pat, Al, Ray and Kenni can jump in here - since I'm not a vendor - and correct me if I'm wrong. In the 90s large commercial vendors found a way to sell orchids dirt cheap to large stores and orchids became expendable plants. The use of name labels - other than just 'phalaenopsis' or 'dendrobium' - is a liability to them. Too much time/$ is consumed and too many workers needed to create and keep the labels correct. Then there are those commercial businesses that just use part of a name and call that identification 'good enough', giving rise to Cambria orchids, Kaleidoscope phals and Emma White dendrobiums. I don't think I'm alone in tsking over the boring plants for sale at most stores. The same old phals: white, pink, spots. The same old dendobiums (deep purple, stripes, blushed colors), the same old oncidiums: smells like chocolate, tons of yellow flowers, small pink sprays etc. You can't compete with these guys. Small & Mid sized vendors do the same thing. They go to the large wholesaler, find out what they can buy in bloom for a buck then turn it around at the show and sell them for 15-20 dollars. Again, they are all selling the same plants except these have proper tags on them. They have to sell this common stock in order to make a living so they can buy/make the orchids that They like. This leaves me wondering what is going to happen. I think it will become like Victorian times. Orchids are a side job. A hobby. You make your money elsewhere. People who 'know' orchids will trade or sell their divisions to other like minded hobbyists, probably at a premium. People who 'know' orchids will continue to make crosses that interested them and grow up select few of the crosses because bench space is limited and expensive. Hobbyists will flask their orchids and make them available to other hobbyists in their area. (or via folks like Troy Meyers) .. Where does this leave you? I think it leaves you to buy the same old boring plants at a wholesaler, take them to a show and hope like hell that you chose to sell a bunch of plants different from whatever the other vendors brought. Anything left over you dump because it costs too much money to house the remainders. You keep your benchspace to grow up the few crosses that interest you. You intersperse these amongst your commercial wares and see if anyone buys them. You give a few talks at local societies explaining why real orchids are different from orchids bought at DIY box stores and hope to develope a clientell. You also have a good internet presence. This means you become a slave to your email because the internet marketplace has ADD. Customers expect immediate attention or else you're no good. Ok I've spent enough time on this missive, Good luck. K Barrett "keith ;-)" wrote in message news:1103410296.fc8cc05de3d84625f8e72d3acc6a3f16@t eranews... [snip]Collecting them alone isn't enough for me I would love to one day sell them as a business everyday,any of you guys out there that do got any advise or do you make enough money for it to be the only income? -- Thanks Keith,England,UK. "Dave S" wrote in message ups.com... For me, new plants will get a little more attention than those that have been around for years. For example, I recently picked up several Sarcochilus species that were bare-root and a little stressed. They get a once over several times per week as I look for new roots and leaves. Some of my older plants may only get looked at every couple weeks. This time of year I look closely at my Phals at least weekly, checking for new spikes. I think once the collection grew to over 100 plants, the daily fussing over each plant stopped. Dave PS- In 'who we are' I said I have about 300 plants....I didn't count each plant in a compot as an individual. If I did, I guess I would have over 400 plants total. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Wow, some of you must be doing some things right. As a "small niche
vendor" and producer of Everything Orchid Management System since just prior to 1998, we sell our program and flasks just to buy a few more orchids. And, to all of you out there, I guess I want to wish you a Happy Holiday Season. .. . . Pam Everything Orchid Management System http://home.earthlink.net/~profpam/page3.html Some flasks too. http://home.earthlink.net/~profpam/page3.html And, yes, we moved due to the loss of our ISP. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K Barrett wrote: There was a time when I would have said 'Abandon all hope oh ye who enter into the notion that you can make money selling orchids as a small vendor.' Then the business changed and now I see the only hope for orchids as the small, niche vendor. Maybe Pat, Al, Ray and Kenni can jump in here - since I'm not a vendor - and correct me if I'm wrong. In the 90s large commercial vendors found a way to sell orchids dirt cheap to large stores and orchids became expendable plants. The use of name labels - other than just 'phalaenopsis' or 'dendrobium' - is a liability to them. Too much time/$ is consumed and too many workers needed to create and keep the labels correct. Then there are those commercial businesses that just use part of a name and call that identification 'good enough', giving rise to Cambria orchids, Kaleidoscope phals and Emma White dendrobiums. I don't think I'm alone in tsking over the boring plants for sale at most stores. The same old phals: white, pink, spots. The same old dendobiums (deep purple, stripes, blushed colors), the same old oncidiums: smells like chocolate, tons of yellow flowers, small pink sprays etc. You can't compete with these guys. Small & Mid sized vendors do the same thing. They go to the large wholesaler, find out what they can buy in bloom for a buck then turn it around at the show and sell them for 15-20 dollars. Again, they are all selling the same plants except these have proper tags on them. They have to sell this common stock in order to make a living so they can buy/make the orchids that They like. This leaves me wondering what is going to happen. I think it will become like Victorian times. Orchids are a side job. A hobby. You make your money elsewhere. People who 'know' orchids will trade or sell their divisions to other like minded hobbyists, probably at a premium. People who 'know' orchids will continue to make crosses that interested them and grow up select few of the crosses because bench space is limited and expensive. Hobbyists will flask their orchids and make them available to other hobbyists in their area. (or via folks like Troy Meyers) . Where does this leave you? I think it leaves you to buy the same old boring plants at a wholesaler, take them to a show and hope like hell that you chose to sell a bunch of plants different from whatever the other vendors brought. Anything left over you dump because it costs too much money to house the remainders. You keep your benchspace to grow up the few crosses that interest you. You intersperse these amongst your commercial wares and see if anyone buys them. You give a few talks at local societies explaining why real orchids are different from orchids bought at DIY box stores and hope to develope a clientell. You also have a good internet presence. This means you become a slave to your email because the internet marketplace has ADD. Customers expect immediate attention or else you're no good. Ok I've spent enough time on this missive, Good luck. K Barrett "keith ;-)" wrote in message news:1103410296.fc8cc05de3d84625f8e72d3acc6a3f16@ teranews... [snip]Collecting them alone isn't enough for me I would love to one day sell them as a business everyday,any of you guys out there that do got any advise or do you make enough money for it to be the only income? -- Thanks Keith,England,UK. "Dave S" wrote in message roups.com... For me, new plants will get a little more attention than those that have been around for years. For example, I recently picked up several Sarcochilus species that were bare-root and a little stressed. They get a once over several times per week as I look for new roots and leaves. Some of my older plants may only get looked at every couple weeks. This time of year I look closely at my Phals at least weekly, checking for new spikes. I think once the collection grew to over 100 plants, the daily fussing over each plant stopped. Dave PS- In 'who we are' I said I have about 300 plants....I didn't count each plant in a compot as an individual. If I did, I guess I would have over 400 plants total. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
There was a time when I would have said 'Abandon all hope oh ye who enter
into the notion that you can make money selling orchids as a small vendor.' Then the business changed and now I see the only hope for orchids as the small, niche vendor. Maybe Pat, Al, Ray and Kenni can jump in here - since I'm not a vendor - and correct me if I'm wrong. In the 90s large commercial vendors found a way to sell orchids dirt cheap to large stores and orchids became expendable plants. The use of name labels - other than just 'phalaenopsis' or 'dendrobium' - is a liability to them. Too much time/$ is consumed and too many workers needed to create and keep the labels correct. Then there are those commercial businesses that just use part of a name and call that identification 'good enough', giving rise to Cambria orchids, Kaleidoscope phals and Emma White dendrobiums. I don't think I'm alone in tsking over the boring plants for sale at most stores. The same old phals: white, pink, spots. The same old dendobiums (deep purple, stripes, blushed colors), the same old oncidiums: smells like chocolate, tons of yellow flowers, small pink sprays etc. You can't compete with these guys. Small & Mid sized vendors do the same thing. They go to the large wholesaler, find out what they can buy in bloom for a buck then turn it around at the show and sell them for 15-20 dollars. Again, they are all selling the same plants except these have proper tags on them. They have to sell this common stock in order to make a living so they can buy/make the orchids that They like. This leaves me wondering what is going to happen. I think it will become like Victorian times. Orchids are a side job. A hobby. You make your money elsewhere. People who 'know' orchids will trade or sell their divisions to other like minded hobbyists, probably at a premium. People who 'know' orchids will continue to make crosses that interested them and grow up select few of the crosses because bench space is limited and expensive. Hobbyists will flask their orchids and make them available to other hobbyists in their area. (or via folks like Troy Meyers) .. Where does this leave you? I think it leaves you to buy the same old boring plants at a wholesaler, take them to a show and hope like hell that you chose to sell a bunch of plants different from whatever the other vendors brought. Anything left over you dump because it costs too much money to house the remainders. You keep your benchspace to grow up the few crosses that interest you. You intersperse these amongst your commercial wares and see if anyone buys them. You give a few talks at local societies explaining why real orchids are different from orchids bought at DIY box stores and hope to develope a clientell. You also have a good internet presence. This means you become a slave to your email because the internet marketplace has ADD. Customers expect immediate attention or else you're no good. Ok I've spent enough time on this missive, Good luck. K Barrett "keith ;-)" wrote in message news:1103410296.fc8cc05de3d84625f8e72d3acc6a3f16@t eranews... [snip]Collecting them alone isn't enough for me I would love to one day sell them as a business everyday,any of you guys out there that do got any advise or do you make enough money for it to be the only income? -- Thanks Keith,England,UK. "Dave S" wrote in message ups.com... For me, new plants will get a little more attention than those that have been around for years. For example, I recently picked up several Sarcochilus species that were bare-root and a little stressed. They get a once over several times per week as I look for new roots and leaves. Some of my older plants may only get looked at every couple weeks. This time of year I look closely at my Phals at least weekly, checking for new spikes. I think once the collection grew to over 100 plants, the daily fussing over each plant stopped. Dave PS- In 'who we are' I said I have about 300 plants....I didn't count each plant in a compot as an individual. If I did, I guess I would have over 400 plants total. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
6.7 is a great average, only a couple of mine have 6 leaves.
-danny "J Fortuna" wrote in message news:m0_wd.3573$rL3.2735@trnddc03... Pat, No, I didn't count the first kiekie as a separate plant until it was separated from the mother plant. On the other hand I sometimes get the urge to count the total number of leaves on all my Phals: 160 currently, for an average of 6.7 leaves per Phal. Ok, maybe I am weird sometimes, why would anyone in her right mind care about the average number of leaves on Phals? But I do. Joanna "Pat Brennan" wrote in message ... Joanna do not think this is a such a simple addiction that there is some number. After you regularly bloom phals for a couple years, you will start grouping them as the phals and that only counts as one. You may have already reached your number cause you have started grouping the keikies. I bet you counted the first one. Do not forget Rob's first rule. Pat "J Fortuna" wrote in message news:RTXwd.160$_62.22@trnddc01... Claude, The last 42, is that a flask (or a compot)? Are you counting keikies? I did not count keikies that live with the mother plant as separate plants in my 31 plant count -- two of my pants currently have a keikie, and I am really hoping that the phal equestris will decide to have one this time (it's close to the end of this blooming season, so I'm watching it for signs of keikie). Are you intending to keep all these plants when they mature, or are you planning to give them away or exchange or something? I would think that if they are the same hybrid or same species that 42 of them would be rather much once they mature ... of course that assumes that they all will mature, what's the life-expectancy of phals in flask or in compot? I once read an article somewhere that only a certain % of such plants are likely to survive and mature, but I don't know how current and how reliable that article was. I hope it was not right, since I would think that for someone who treats each plant as an individual, watching the number dwindle would be depressing. If that's what having a flask is like, I don't think I want one any time soon. Or do I have a misconception here based on that article? Don't know who wrote it, and where I saw it, it's been a while, but this much has staid with me. Joanna "Phalguy" wrote in message ... Hello Joanna! My collection consist of: 37 Phals 2 Oncidium 2 Paph and 42 phals babies Claude "J Fortuna" wrote in message news:43Xwd.308$1U6.157@trnddc09... | This post was inspired by Dave Gillingham's moving story in the Who We Are | thread (which by the way I continue to enjoy immensely, and am very glad to | read each new post there). | | Dave's story makes me wonder what the cutoff point is for when a collection | becomes to large to rejoice over every individual plant's new leaf, new | root, and new spike. My collection currently consists of 31 orchids, and I | still watch every one carefully and rejoice over each activity of each | plant. | | I know that Claude also does that, and I have the impression that Claude's | collection is somewhat larger than mine, though I'm not sure about that. I | checked Claude's post in Who We Are as well as Claude's Web site, but I did | not see the total number of plants in your collection, Claude? | | Anyway, it appears that somewhere between 31 plants (my current number) and | about 200 (Dave's current number) one can no longer keep track of each as an | individual and rejoice in each one. I wonder what the cutoff number is? Of | course, I know that this cutoff will vary somewhat based on the individual's | determination and the amount of time available to spend with plants and | maybe some other variables, but: What is the largest number of orchids in a | collection that a single human being can report keeping track of in an | individualized way, rejoicing over each one's activity? | | This is not just a rhetorical question. I really want to know. And then I | will try not to exceed that number if at all possible. Well, probably it | will not be possible since I am an orchid addict and I feel the craving for | new orchids at most a month after the last orchid was bought. But I might | try to postpone the inevitable if I know that exceeding x amount will lead | to a dire consequence such as the de-indivualization of individual orchids. | | Joanna | | |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
6.7 is a great average, only a couple of mine have 6 leaves.
-danny "J Fortuna" wrote in message news:m0_wd.3573$rL3.2735@trnddc03... Pat, No, I didn't count the first kiekie as a separate plant until it was separated from the mother plant. On the other hand I sometimes get the urge to count the total number of leaves on all my Phals: 160 currently, for an average of 6.7 leaves per Phal. Ok, maybe I am weird sometimes, why would anyone in her right mind care about the average number of leaves on Phals? But I do. Joanna "Pat Brennan" wrote in message ... Joanna do not think this is a such a simple addiction that there is some number. After you regularly bloom phals for a couple years, you will start grouping them as the phals and that only counts as one. You may have already reached your number cause you have started grouping the keikies. I bet you counted the first one. Do not forget Rob's first rule. Pat "J Fortuna" wrote in message news:RTXwd.160$_62.22@trnddc01... Claude, The last 42, is that a flask (or a compot)? Are you counting keikies? I did not count keikies that live with the mother plant as separate plants in my 31 plant count -- two of my pants currently have a keikie, and I am really hoping that the phal equestris will decide to have one this time (it's close to the end of this blooming season, so I'm watching it for signs of keikie). Are you intending to keep all these plants when they mature, or are you planning to give them away or exchange or something? I would think that if they are the same hybrid or same species that 42 of them would be rather much once they mature ... of course that assumes that they all will mature, what's the life-expectancy of phals in flask or in compot? I once read an article somewhere that only a certain % of such plants are likely to survive and mature, but I don't know how current and how reliable that article was. I hope it was not right, since I would think that for someone who treats each plant as an individual, watching the number dwindle would be depressing. If that's what having a flask is like, I don't think I want one any time soon. Or do I have a misconception here based on that article? Don't know who wrote it, and where I saw it, it's been a while, but this much has staid with me. Joanna "Phalguy" wrote in message ... Hello Joanna! My collection consist of: 37 Phals 2 Oncidium 2 Paph and 42 phals babies Claude "J Fortuna" wrote in message news:43Xwd.308$1U6.157@trnddc09... | This post was inspired by Dave Gillingham's moving story in the Who We Are | thread (which by the way I continue to enjoy immensely, and am very glad to | read each new post there). | | Dave's story makes me wonder what the cutoff point is for when a collection | becomes to large to rejoice over every individual plant's new leaf, new | root, and new spike. My collection currently consists of 31 orchids, and I | still watch every one carefully and rejoice over each activity of each | plant. | | I know that Claude also does that, and I have the impression that Claude's | collection is somewhat larger than mine, though I'm not sure about that. I | checked Claude's post in Who We Are as well as Claude's Web site, but I did | not see the total number of plants in your collection, Claude? | | Anyway, it appears that somewhere between 31 plants (my current number) and | about 200 (Dave's current number) one can no longer keep track of each as an | individual and rejoice in each one. I wonder what the cutoff number is? Of | course, I know that this cutoff will vary somewhat based on the individual's | determination and the amount of time available to spend with plants and | maybe some other variables, but: What is the largest number of orchids in a | collection that a single human being can report keeping track of in an | individualized way, rejoicing over each one's activity? | | This is not just a rhetorical question. I really want to know. And then I | will try not to exceed that number if at all possible. Well, probably it | will not be possible since I am an orchid addict and I feel the craving for | new orchids at most a month after the last orchid was bought. But I might | try to postpone the inevitable if I know that exceeding x amount will lead | to a dire consequence such as the de-indivualization of individual orchids. | | Joanna | | |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Reactor size VS Tank Size? | Freshwater Aquaria Plants | |||
orchid collection size and individualized care question | Orchids | |||
FA Orchid Book Collection | Orchids | |||
SNAILS? (was: Some Pond Questions (Size, Care, Fish)) | Ponds | |||
Some Pond Questions (Size, Care, Fish) | Ponds |