Are bpal blends all-natural?

[steelfaerie]

Personally, I do believe that BPAL is all-natural - but that's only from what I've read on the forum, not from the site itself. Why not be proud of this and state it clearly in the FAQ?

 

I completely agree, ClareN. It seems to me like this nitpicking over what the phraseology means has been going on for long enough. I really would love some actual clarification.

[grneyes3737]

Ok...I've been looking around to see where the best place to post this query would be...and this is the most appropriate thread I can find (please feel free Mods to do your modorating) if it is not.

 

I have a question about one of the ingredients in some of the scents...as I'm a Vanilla lover...and this particular ingredient is paired often with Vanilla.

 

Thanks to BPAL I've been doing some reading up on the different ingred, So I'll know which ones are best suited to my aromatic nature.

 

Tonka

 

Is coumarin in the compound?

I'm thinking if so ,it's in minute quantities...

[olive]

I was scouring the web for info about CB I Hate Perfume when I came across this thread: http://www.atforumz.com/archive/index.php/t-307395.html

 

The subject veered toward a CB vs BPAL debate and someone posted something that I just can't seem to shake, mostly because I think he's full of it (at least I hope he is) but I wish we could have an official word. Here's what the guy (troll?) posted:

 

Ok, I'll be nice now. BPAL creates fragrances and people like them and buy them. Good. By ready-made bases I mean simple blends of aroma-chemicals sold by certain companies. Accords named "cupcuke", "dulce di leche", "blackberry musk", "ocean mist #2",etc, etc.

 

In my honest opinion, all of you can make as good, or maybe even better, blends as BPAL if you buy and mix your own bases. I'm not saying they smell bad, it's just the sheer volume of it that makes me question the quality of it all. The woman behind BPAL isn't a perfumer and I think she'll be the first to admit it. In the beginning she claimed her oils were natural. She later had to withdraw that claim (because she learned from other sources she were wrong?).

 

BPAL is fun. I can understand their charm and they deserve their success. But even a mediocre fragrance takes at least weeks until you get it right. Endless adjustments by people who have studied organic chemistry and perfumery for many years.

 

(Edit) A simpified explanation:

 

BPAL; 2 parts blood orange, 3 parts Egyptian musk, 1 part ocean mist.

 

CB; 20% Iso-E Super, 5% geraniol, 2% cinnamic aldehyde (10% in DPG), 20% galaxolide, 10% floralozone, 15% jasmine absolute, 2% hexenyl salicylate, 10% rosa centifolia etc...

 

 

A perfumer works with single building blocks . BPAL buys ready-made mixes of building blocks and blend them together. A perfumer has to have control over every single ingredient or molecule he or she uses. Their perfume has to smell good the moment you spray it on, still smell good when you're ordering dinner at the restaurant, and fade without smellimg weird.

 

I want to tell this guy off (as I'm sure we all would!) but I want to make sure I know what I'm talking about. Personally it doesn't matter either way, I think bpals smell great and I don't care if they're made from scratch with pure essential oils or synthetic, pre-made accords. If it smells good it smells good, end of story.

[Quinara]

The main thing I don't understand about that guy's post is what the difference is between working with one set of ingredients or another. I'm pretty sure CB doesn't create all the chemicals himself (and why should he?) instead of buying them from elsewhere - in fact I think when I was in the New York shop he was chatting about getting in some really exciting new rose absolute. I know next to nothing about how Beth creates her perfumes, though from what I've gathered she prefers absolutes and bouquets from more natural sources like EOs, rather than completely manufactured chemicals. The thing is, I don't think that makes any difference (from a difficulty-to-craft perspective). Both BPAL and CB buy in hundreds of ingredients from different sources and work with them to produce the effect they want, and it's the fact they're good at doing that that makes them perfumers. I mean, to take another art, I could record a CD of myself playing something on the piano (with the necessary equipment), but it wouldn't be nearly as nice to listen to as one I bought from a professional - who is a professional musician because they make good music, not because they have the ability to record it. After all, to go back to perfume, I doubt there's anything to stop people buying in some chemicals and perfumer's alcohol and trying that at home as well.

 

*tries to be on-topic* Um, as for the Lab stating in the FAQs that they're 'all-natural', I wouldn't be surprised if there was some tricky legal issue involved in that (say proving sources or something). It's enough for me that they try. *shrugs*

[forspecial_plate]

As a habitual over-analyzer, I think that's what we're doing here. I understand why some people would really want to know the answers to these questions. Personally, I just trust the lab. When I think about my favorite bpal perfumes, I can honestly say I've never smelled or encountered any other perfume oil blends that evoke the feelings that they do. If someone handed me an unlabeled bottle of Djinn (before I tried it), and didn't give me any idea of what it was, the memory of that scent would still haunt me as it does, and I would go to great lengths to obtain it. Add the descriptions and inspirations for the scents, and how well they are conveyed through scent, and I'm sold.

 

If I learned that Pumpkin Cheesecake was made up of some stock fragrance blends called pumpkin, cheesecake, spice, and graham cracker.....I would still love it. Beth is an artist. I don't question her media, I just indulge myself and find wonder and beauty in her creations.

 

As for other perfume companies that I love (CBIHP is one of them), they are also wonderful, yet truly different in character from Black Phoenix.

 

I was scouring the web for info about CB I Hate Perfume when I came across this thread: http://www.atforumz.com/archive/index.php/t-307395.html

 

*snip*

 

In my honest opinion, all of you can make as good, or maybe even better, blends as BPAL if you buy and mix your own bases.

 

*snip*

 

I call bullshit on that. People have tried to emulate the lab's scents, yet the sheer size of this very forum speaks for the high quality of Black Phoenix Alchemy Lab, and its following. If it were that easy, well......we would see more of it, wouldn't we? Maybe that's false reasoning, and I can only speak for myself, but the lab has truly won my heart, and it's not an exaggeration to say they changed my life. I've smelled other perfumes that remind me of Black Phoenix, but that doesn't make me run to their web sites buying more. In fact, it's just the opposite. Find your own voice!

 

I apologize if I sound like a crazed fan-boy, and I'm not trying to stomp on questioning opinions. I'm just feeling more vocal than usual right now.

[maewitch]

Oh for the love of God.

 

1) Beth is a trained perfumer. (And a trained aromatherapist. And a trained rootworker, for that matter.)

 

2) The Lab doesn't purchase pre-made stock oils to blend together. In fact, this is what a lot of wannabe 'perfumers' do in order to imitate BPAL's blends, and it shows in how their blends smell (which can be anything from awful to nice, but if you compare them side by side, you can tell the obvious difference between a BPAL perfume and a stock oil blend).

 

3) Beth does spend weeks, if not months or years tweaking most of her oils. A lot of RnD goes into the making of her blends, and the sheer multiplicity of scents is not reflective of how easy that process is, but how damn hard she and everyone else at the Lab works.

 

4) Yes, you can buy a 'cupcake' stock oil from cheap-ass fragrance oil companies, or less cheap-ass manufacturers like Givaudin. You can also purchase simpler or more complex synthetic notes from them. That doesn't mean Beth does.

 

5) Beth either blends together her own accords, or sources them from other people who make them. These accords are from natural essences. For example, in this post, she talks about how her vanilla flower note is a mix of an orchid accord she blends together and vanilla oleoresin. In other posts, she's talked about blends being discontinued because the person who made a certain note died and never passed on the extraction/blending technique, about specific sources for her orchid notes, and about how because the oils are natural sometimes the textures vary and there's occasionally 'bits' floating in there from the infused materials. This is a big part of why some prototypes never go live - the source materials are sometimes too rare or difficult to acquire or blend on a large scale. (Which is not something that would be a problem if she was simply using stock oils from a supplier like Givaudin.)

 

Beth does what CB does - she bends together perfumes from individual building blocks (eo's, absolutes, concretes, infusions, macerations, etc) as well as accords, except she does it from natural sources, whereas he mixes in synthetics as well. It's either a misconception or a lack of imagination on this poster's part if he thinks she's doing something else.

 

(Small edit, because the wording in the last paragraph came across like I was conflating this poster with the creator of CB perfumes.)

Edited August 30, 2008 by maewitch

[Mrs.Black]

"All of our scents are 100% naturally derived".

 

This quote from the BPAL website is very clear, I don't understand all the confusion and people saying that the Lab hasn't made a clear statement on this. The reason they say "naturally derived" and not "natural" is that there are many notes that cannot be extracted directly. This is true for most fruits, many flowers, leather, etc. For example, there is no such thing as "natural strawberry oil", but it's possible to mix certain natural oils to create the strawberry accord, which is what the Lab does.

[Morrighana]

ing, all!

[ClareN]

"All of our scents are 100% naturally derived".

 

This quote from the BPAL website is very clear, I don't understand all the confusion and people saying that the Lab hasn't made a clear statement on this. The reason they say "naturally derived" and not "natural" is that there are many notes that cannot be extracted directly. This is true for most fruits, many flowers, leather, etc. For example, there is no such thing as "natural strawberry oil", but it's possible to mix certain natural oils to create the strawberry accord, which is what the Lab does.

Thanks Mrs. Black, that does make it clearer, but where on the website does it say that?

[dronzeka]

Wow, I don't want to sound like a crazed fangirl either, but this:

 

BPAL; 2 parts blood orange, 3 parts Egyptian musk, 1 part ocean mist

 

just seems so completely simplistic! Beth isn't reaching for Ye Olde Bottle of "Ocean Mist" - she's blending a whole bunch of EOs, absolutes, and all the other things people have mentioned to create something that smells like ocean mist (and then blending that with blood orange and Egyptian musk). I mean, jeez. And it DOES take her weeks to blend these things - which is why there are limited editions that we anticipate (eagerly, drooling) for weeks, and why something like Carnival Diabolique has taken so long to finish.

 

I can kind of understand the skepticism about the volume of scents that BPAL produces - not that I agree, but I can kind of understand. There are SO MANY different BPAL scents, I can see thinking that they must start to repeat themselves, and yeah, there are some scents that smell a lot like one another (see the threads about GC equivalents to LEs and the like). But none of them are absolute dupes of one another - none! Obatala smells a lot like Milk Moon 2005 (thank god, or I wouldn't have a decent substitute for MM!), but they're *not* the same, and even if they are really close, some people are going to like the one better, and others will like the other. And part of BPAL's niche is to have this crazy variety (as opposed to CBIHP, which is going for a different niche). If the scents weren't actually different, people would figure it out and the strategy wouldn't work (because I just don't think consumers are quite as stupid as everyone assumes they are). Or to put it another way, maybe we all are brainwashed, but if we like the way BPAL does things, what's his problem with it?

 

Individual notes are like letters - there are only 26 of them, but they can be combined in nearly infinite ways, and the resulting words combined yet again. Or we're talking about the ways that individual food ingredients can be combined into a ZILLION different recipes.

 

(Sorry, I'm really rambling, but that post is kind of amazingly ignorant. Or just snotty.)

[olive]

Wow, I don't want to sound like a crazed fangirl either, but this:

 

BPAL; 2 parts blood orange, 3 parts Egyptian musk, 1 part ocean mist

 

just seems so completely simplistic! Beth isn't reaching for Ye Olde Bottle of "Ocean Mist" - she's blending a whole bunch of EOs, absolutes, and all the other things people have mentioned to create something that smells like ocean mist (and then blending that with blood orange and Egyptian musk). I mean, jeez. And it DOES take her weeks to blend these things - which is why there are limited editions that we anticipate (eagerly, drooling) for weeks, and why something like Carnival Diabolique has taken so long to finish.

 

I can kind of understand the skepticism about the volume of scents that BPAL produces - not that I agree, but I can kind of understand. There are SO MANY different BPAL scents, I can see thinking that they must start to repeat themselves, and yeah, there are some scents that smell a lot like one another (see the threads about GC equivalents to LEs and the like). But none of them are absolute dupes of one another - none! Obatala smells a lot like Milk Moon 2005 (thank god, or I wouldn't have a decent substitute for MM!), but they're *not* the same, and even if they are really close, some people are going to like the one better, and others will like the other. And part of BPAL's niche is to have this crazy variety (as opposed to CBIHP, which is going for a different niche). If the scents weren't actually different, people would figure it out and the strategy wouldn't work (because I just don't think consumers are quite as stupid as everyone assumes they are). Or to put it another way, maybe we all are brainwashed, but if we like the way BPAL does things, what's his problem with it?

 

Individual notes are like letters - there are only 26 of them, but they can be combined in nearly infinite ways, and the resulting words combined yet again. Or we're talking about the ways that individual food ingredients can be combined into a ZILLION different recipes.

 

(Sorry, I'm really rambling, but that post is kind of amazingly ignorant. Or just snotty.)

 

Exactly. Ignorant doesn't begin to sum it up. I wonder if he could name any company that produces as many great scents as bpal. It's almost like he (or she?) is saying that the longer you work on one smell, the better it must be, never taking into account some people just have a knack for scents and a super refined sense of smell and maybe doesn't require abundant amounts of time to create a single scent.

[Mrs.Black]

"All of our scents are 100% naturally derived".

 

This quote from the BPAL website is very clear, I don't understand all the confusion and people saying that the Lab hasn't made a clear statement on this. The reason they say "naturally derived" and not "natural" is that there are many notes that cannot be extracted directly. This is true for most fruits, many flowers, leather, etc. For example, there is no such thing as "natural strawberry oil", but it's possible to mix certain natural oils to create the strawberry accord, which is what the Lab does.

Thanks Mrs. Black, that does make it clearer, but where on the website does it say that?

 

Well I'll be damned! I can't find it any more, ClareN, although I'm sure it used to be in the FAQ page. In fact, I cannot find any reference to the products being natural, or naturally derived, in the whole Lab website.

 

As I said before, I personally couldn't care less about the issue because:

 

1. Many natural products and essences are harmful and you wouldn't want them anywhere near your skin, so to me what is important is quality and safety (and for the stuff to smell good), and I get all these needs met through BPAL.

2. There are artificial molecules that are used to enhance natural essences in perfumery. This is to me an acceptable practice as long as it's done judiciously by a talented perfumer, which Beth is. Aldehydes, for example, an artificial compound, are said to be the "secret" that made Chanel n 5 into much more than just another rose/jasmin perfume among thousands.

 

Having said all this, I do think it would be in the Lab's best interest to bring back a clear statement about the "natural" issue to their website, since so many people set so much stock by this.

Edited August 30, 2008 by Mrs.Black

[dzurlady]

BPAL is fun. I can understand their charm and they deserve their success. But even a mediocre fragrance takes at least weeks until you get it right. Endless adjustments by people who have studied organic chemistry and perfumery for many years.

Oh, for christ's sake. Beth does spend a long time working on her oils. She's been working on an upcoming Cabaret series since Spring 2003 and it's still not live.

[ivyandpeony]

"All of our scents are 100% naturally derived".

 

This quote from the BPAL website is very clear, I don't understand all the confusion and people saying that the Lab hasn't made a clear statement on this. The reason they say "naturally derived" and not "natural" is that there are many notes that cannot be extracted directly. This is true for most fruits, many flowers, leather, etc. For example, there is no such thing as "natural strawberry oil", but it's possible to mix certain natural oils to create the strawberry accord, which is what the Lab does.

 

Thanks Mrs. Black, that does make it clearer, but where on the website does it say that?

 

talula_fairie had just posted a response she received from the Lab via e-mail a page or two back that used that phrase precisely - I thought maybe Mrs. Black's fingers got ahead of her and that's what she was referring to in her post Given that Beth's due to pop at any moment, I doubt we'll be seeing revised FAQ on the website or an official statement or anything of that nature in the immediate future, but I think we can take talula_faerie's word about the e-mail. She's got no vested interest in the argument. And if people on lj counter that with, "well, it sure smells synthetic to me," c'est la vie. We all have opinions.

 

...

 

Btw, I did email the lab, and here is the response:

 

Black Phoenix uses no synthetics, no fillers and no garbage. All of our scents are 100% naturally derived. With the exception of our honey products, BPAL perfumes are vegan. Our 'civet' and 'ambergris' are bouquets, and thus, are composite scents created from plant-derived perfume oils combined to best approximate the scent. Black Phoenix is entirely cruelty-free, as our four dogs, many fish, and resident lab cat will attest.

 

 

 

While we use no preservatives, our oil blends will last for over one year, if they are cared for correctly. Please keep all of our products in a cool, dark place to maximize their shelf life.

 

 

 

Unfortunately, we cannot further divulge our ingredients due to protecting our recipes from competitors.

 

[Mrs.Black]

I did see talula_fairie's post before I quoted that sentence. I didn't realise though that what she was quoting was an e-mail from the Lab and not the Lab's website because, as I said, I'm pretty sure I've seen the same statement before on the Lab's website.

 

No, of course, no-one would expect Beth to change the copy on the website any time soon, although I wouldn't assume she is the only person authorised to do so.

[Lycanthrope]

I just wanted to weigh in to add my perspective regarding the whole 'accords' versus 'base chemicals' issue.

 

I paint with acrylics. I know that you can buy your own separate pigments and mix with gesso base to 'make' your own specific colors. I'd say that sounds like what the lab does (takes components from various sources to make their own bases), or, like me, you can buy premixed tubes of paint in standardized colors.

 

Does the fact that I don't mix my own pigments make me less of an artist? It's what one does with the components and the final product that really matters. You can be mind-bogglingly obsessive about mixing up every bit of the palette and come out with a generic painting, or you can use premixed potential to make something awesome.

 

Regardless of what the method is, I think the end result are unique blends that cannot be so 'easily emulated or better produced' with self-blending.

 

I've dabbled in using bases (premixed, Sweetcakes) and essential oils to try to make my own blends, and they've turned out really, not very good. Heh heh. Partially a physical problem of getting oils to stay in solution, or the aromas smelling imbalanced or off because of the balances of different scent oils that are already far too complex. I've yet to try using pure perfumer's bases because I don't have a hold of where to buy those components.

 

Overall, Beth creates something unique no matter what the pathway to get there that is special and I treasure it.

[talula_fairie]

I have to say, it would be helpful if there were a clearer statement about this on the Lab's website. It comes up so often, and the statement that is usually pointed to in the FAQ is technically about veganism, not about whether the oils are all-natural. If you were skeptical about BPAL's use of synthetics, you'd notice that it only says that the civet and ambergris blends are made of plant oils. It doesn't have anything to say about whether the strawberry and caramel blends are made of plant oils (they could be synthetic but still be vegan). This is what talula_fairie's friends were talking about.

 

Personally, I do believe that BPAL is all-natural - but that's only from what I've read on the forum, not from the site itself. Why not be proud of this and state it clearly in the FAQ?

 

Totally. I agree.

[Stephanie]

I have to say, it would be helpful if there were a clearer statement about this on the Lab's website. It comes up so often, and the statement that is usually pointed to in the FAQ is technically about veganism, not about whether the oils are all-natural. If you were skeptical about BPAL's use of synthetics, you'd notice that it only says that the civet and ambergris blends are made of plant oils. It doesn't have anything to say about whether the strawberry and caramel blends are made of plant oils (they could be synthetic but still be vegan). This is what talula_fairie's friends were talking about.

 

Personally, I do believe that BPAL is all-natural - but that's only from what I've read on the forum, not from the site itself. Why not be proud of this and state it clearly in the FAQ?

 

Totally. I agree.

 

I the beginning when I was new to BPAL, there used to be a statement on the website (in the FAQ's) saying that the blends were all-natural. But now that's gone and I'm not sure when it was changed.

[talula_fairie]

I have to say, it would be helpful if there were a clearer statement about this on the Lab's website. It comes up so often, and the statement that is usually pointed to in the FAQ is technically about veganism, not about whether the oils are all-natural. If you were skeptical about BPAL's use of synthetics, you'd notice that it only says that the civet and ambergris blends are made of plant oils. It doesn't have anything to say about whether the strawberry and caramel blends are made of plant oils (they could be synthetic but still be vegan). This is what talula_fairie's friends were talking about.

 

Personally, I do believe that BPAL is all-natural - but that's only from what I've read on the forum, not from the site itself. Why not be proud of this and state it clearly in the FAQ?

 

Totally. I agree.

 

I the beginning when I was new to BPAL, there used to be a statement on the website (in the FAQ's) saying that the blends were all-natural. But now that's gone and I'm not sure when it was changed.

 

I swear I remember seeing that FAQ too.

[jewelbug]

I have to say, it would be helpful if there were a clearer statement about this on the Lab's website. It comes up so often, and the statement that is usually pointed to in the FAQ is technically about veganism, not about whether the oils are all-natural. If you were skeptical about BPAL's use of synthetics, you'd notice that it only says that the civet and ambergris blends are made of plant oils. It doesn't have anything to say about whether the strawberry and caramel blends are made of plant oils (they could be synthetic but still be vegan). This is what talula_fairie's friends were talking about.

 

Personally, I do believe that BPAL is all-natural - but that's only from what I've read on the forum, not from the site itself. Why not be proud of this and state it clearly in the FAQ?

 

Totally. I agree.

 

I the beginning when I was new to BPAL, there used to be a statement on the website (in the FAQ's) saying that the blends were all-natural. But now that's gone and I'm not sure when it was changed.

 

I swear I remember seeing that FAQ too.

Ditto. It used to be there, because I was looking for it the other day to refer a friend to, and couldn't find it.

Now, I'm as big a fan girl as most here, I guess, but the removal of that statement implies that it was no longer accurate, and it would definitely be nice to have a bit of official clarification.

 

Personally, I love my bpal and I'll use it no matter what (okay, maybe if they started juicing kittens, I'd stop ). But this question is very important to others, and a clear, public statement (on the website for example) would be appropriate.

[talula_fairie]

I have to say, it would be helpful if there were a clearer statement about this on the Lab's website. It comes up so often, and the statement that is usually pointed to in the FAQ is technically about veganism, not about whether the oils are all-natural. If you were skeptical about BPAL's use of synthetics, you'd notice that it only says that the civet and ambergris blends are made of plant oils. It doesn't have anything to say about whether the strawberry and caramel blends are made of plant oils (they could be synthetic but still be vegan). This is what talula_fairie's friends were talking about.

 

Personally, I do believe that BPAL is all-natural - but that's only from what I've read on the forum, not from the site itself. Why not be proud of this and state it clearly in the FAQ?

 

Totally. I agree.

 

I the beginning when I was new to BPAL, there used to be a statement on the website (in the FAQ's) saying that the blends were all-natural. But now that's gone and I'm not sure when it was changed.

 

I swear I remember seeing that FAQ too.

Ditto. It used to be there, because I was looking for it the other day to refer a friend to, and couldn't find it.

Now, I'm as big a fan girl as most here, I guess, but the removal of that statement implies that it was no longer accurate, and it would definitely be nice to have a bit of official clarification.

 

Personally, I love my bpal and I'll use it no matter what (okay, maybe if they started juicing kittens, I'd stop ). But this question is very important to others, and a clear, public statement (on the website for example) would be appropriate.

 

But I emailed them directly and was given that quote this week. So if it's not true anymore, they wouldn't be emailing people with that info....I would think.

[maewitch]

I think it was removed when Beth started experimenting with aldehydes (the synth note in some unreleased blends like...Toxin, I believe?). Since those blends never made it to the catalogue, the response you got from CS makes sense. I seem to recall Beth saying something about the FAQ needing to be updated.

Edited August 30, 2008 by maewitch

[Morrighana]

I think it was removed when Beth started experimenting with aldehydes (the synth note in some unreleased blends like...Toxin, I believe?). Since those blends never made it to the catalogue, the response you got from CS makes sense. I seem to recall Beth saying something about the FAQ needing to be updated.

 

To the best of my knowledge, the full list of prototypes in circulation that may contain aldehydes are Toxin, Nihil, and Zero. They were involved in the forum fundraiser raffle last year. Nothing currently on offer from BPAL contains synthetics, or the Lab would be very clear about saying so.

 

 

 

And, like others have said above, I wouldn't be expecting that FAQ update until well after the little one arrives.

[jewelbug]

[quote name='talula_fairie' post='1225638' date='Aug 30 2008, 01:38

Ditto. It used to be there, because I was looking for it the other day to refer a friend to, and couldn't find it.

Now, I'm as big a fan girl as most here, I guess, but the removal of that statement implies that it was no longer accurate, and it would definitely be nice to have a bit of official clarification.

 

Personally, I love my bpal and I'll use it no matter what (okay, maybe if they started juicing kittens, I'd stop ). But this question is very important to others, and a clear, public statement (on the website for example) would be appropriate.

 

But I emailed them directly and was given that quote this week. So if it's not true anymore, they wouldn't be emailing people with that info....I would think.

Oh, I don't doubt that the products are natural and that the lab is giving out accurate info via email. I think they are, indeed "Natural", but the implication is still there because the website used to say so and doesn't now, if that makes sense.

 

maewitch--that definitely makes sense regarding the aldehydes.

[kebechet]

The revision of the faq has been in the works for about a year. I've been insanely busy at work and in my personal life, so the revision ended up on the backburner. Kathy and Bill have a list about 60 pages long of things I should address there, and I'm still working on it. Honestly, it isn't going to get done any time soon. Sincerest apologies if that bothers people, but I just don't have any time at all right now.

 

After the sales of the Synthetic Line prototypes, I could no longer state that we have never sold anything that doesn't contain synthetics, so I pulled the statement completely lest there be a misunderstanding.

 

When I'm not bombed by a million BPAL and BPTP issues and the imminent birth of Junior, I'll get back to revising the faq. =)

 

And regarding how prolific we are... I don't have the time to be insulted right now. I can always slow down the updates if that'll increase buyer confidence. That's an option.

 

For Yule, all you get is Rat King. How's that?

 

(I kid, I kid.)