Stone tablet at 90 feet

[GravelTeeth]

That's quite the acrobatic leap in calling my doubt of their sincerity to be a conspiracy theory. What I see are 2 guys who've found a fun way to earn a paycheck.

Okay, without rehashing too much of my previous points, if they've presented it as one thing and you and others say no, they are doing this other thing, but it's secret and THEY (producers and stakeholders) keep the secret safe with NDAs, etc., that's classic conspiracy. In law, generally speaking, all that's required for conspiracy is two or more people acting in concert for the nefarious goal. In common parlance, we don't need the deed to be technically illegal, just for it to smack of unsavory or unethical behaviour. I would find lying to people about the premise of an entertainment show to be unethical.

Another element that usually accompanies is a certain unrealistic scope of the cooperation needed. That scores of people could be "in on" the secret over the years and yet competent evidence never confirm it is just not the way humans work. As we've known since all the way back to Poor Richard's Almanac at least, three can keep a secret if two of them are dead.

--GT

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Carl-NC]

and THEY (producers and stakeholders) keep the secret safe with NDAs, etc., that's classic conspiracy.

I would be shocked if everyone involved wasn't under an NDA. That's not a conspiracy, that's good business sense. It protects the integrity of the show.

Addendum: I did 10 minutes of poking around the Internet. According to MULTIPLE people who have been on the show, not only did they have to sign an NDA, but it has been described as a very restrictive one. That's very normal in the TV/film industry, and especially for a "reality" show.

 

[GravelTeeth]

I would be shocked if everyone involved wasn't under an NDA. That's not a conspiracy, that's good business sense. It protects the integrity of the show.

Addendum: I did 10 minutes of poking around the Internet. According to MULTIPLE people who have been on the show, not only did they have to sign an NDA, but it has been described as a very restrictive one. That's very normal in the TV/film industry, and especially for a "reality" show.

Oh, I'm quite sure you are correct that they are all under an NDA of some sort. What I'm saying is, NDA or no, with all the hundreds who have passed through this production over twelve years, if they had a secret as big as "they aren't really looking for anything", it WOULD get out. The threat of litigation really only works against people who have enough assets to get protective feelings about ... some shlub making shlub money as a gopher or assistant to an assistant and who wanted to spill would not be cowed by that. (As I can attest as someone who had a very robust "so sue me" period when I had virtually no assets.) Not to mention that there are lots of ways to let a secret out without the NDA clauses kicking in: "Oops, I left my shooting script on the subway seat, I'm sorry"; surreptitious POV phone vid; anonymous letter packed with enough detail to make its genuineness irrefutable; etc. Just look at how many here think they are doing god's work by pointing out their THEORIES about it being fake. You don't think there has been at least one of the hundreds who would have been morally offended at taking part in a lie, enough to act against such opprobrium? Be realistic is all I'm saying. Humans can't keep secrets; cats do not remain in bags.

--GT

 

[Carl-NC]

It appears you think I am rigidly saying they are faking the whole thing. I'm not. All I'm saying is, from what I can see, the show appears to be an entertainment reality show as opposed to a serious treasure hunt. Maybe they really believe the treasure is there, I don't know, but what they do on the show doesn't offer a whole lot of confidence in that. Maybe they're just incompetent treasure hunters.

 

[n2mini]

How would you like the show to go to prove they are actually looking for treasure. Lay out your script for the show however you think they should be doing it, Other then drilling 8' dia. holes, 6'' holes, sonar this, sonar that, cameras in the holes, metal detecting all over, digging in the swamp, dealing with Fred Nolan's cross, archeologists digs, etc etc.. What is your plan to dig for treasure. Keep in mind everything you do has to be permitted and run thru an Archeologists first...

 

[deducer]

It boggles the mind that you think they would go to all that trouble, with that scale of investment in contracted services and heavy equipment, rearranging the landscape to the tune of thousands of cubic meters of earth moved, putting people's lives at real risk (e.g. the divers), all just to make it look authentic for an imaginary goal ... for the remaining profit from selling ads? There are millions of more efficient ways to turn a profit, Mr. Carl ... thousands of ways to better use that money even in just the reality TV genre. It requires too much suspension of disbelief to think that ANY network or creative/production team would greenlight diverting that much cash (reducing the profits) into what in your theory would amount to dressing the set. It's ludicrous.

Your signature snippet, Carl, which you probably mean as a dig at others, seems quite apt for your own rigid thinking here. I'm curious how many other conspiracy theories you believe in? But I shan't ask which ones, for that might take us into realms of the forbidden on these boards.

--GT

Sure, the Laginas and partners have sunk over $10m into cranes and caissons and moving them around in circles on the island.

But consider this: At $20 CPM (cost per thousand viewers), a 3-million-viewer episode pulls $60k per 30-second spot, 10-15 ads per hour-long episode and 20+ episodes a season, that’s $12-18 million in ad cash per year, 12 seasons plus the side hustles (tours, etc), the Laginas are pulling in a good amount on their split.

That's a pretty good return on investment.

Personally, I think the use of heavy cranes and huge caissons is a genius move because it makes the viewer think "Wow, that's a substantial investment, something must really be there!"

They've been pretty good at driving viewership because they understand the importance of always making people feel that there's something big at stake.

 

[deducer]

Okay, without rehashing too much of my previous points, if they've presented it as one thing and you and others say no, they are doing this other thing, but it's secret and THEY (producers and stakeholders) keep the secret safe with NDAs, etc., that's classic conspiracy. In law, generally speaking, all that's required for conspiracy is two or more people acting in concert for the nefarious goal. In common parlance, we don't need the deed to be technically illegal, just for it to smack of unsavory or unethical behaviour. I would find lying to people about the premise of an entertainment show to be unethical.

Another element that usually accompanies is a certain unrealistic scope of the cooperation needed. That scores of people could be "in on" the secret over the years and yet competent evidence never confirm it is just not the way humans work. As we've known since all the way back to Poor Richard's Almanac at least, three can keep a secret if two of them are dead.

--GT

They don't have to do anything. FCC doesn't regulate cable content for truthfulness. Also the fine print on History's TOU includes statements such as "for entertainment purposes only," and "History doesn't guarantee the accuracy of...." etc. etc.

Also the show itself does cover its butts by having, let's say, Martin, say things like: "This could be Templar-related," instead of "This is Templar related." Opinion is protected speech.

 

[deducer]

How would you like the show to go to prove they are actually looking for treasure. Lay out your script for the show however you think they should be doing it, Other then drilling 8' dia. holes, 6'' holes, sonar this, sonar that, cameras in the holes, metal detecting all over, digging in the swamp, dealing with Fred Nolan's cross, archeologists digs, etc etc.. What is your plan to dig for treasure. Keep in mind everything you do has to be permitted and run thru an Archeologists first...

They can dig all over the island because they own most of it at this point.

The fact that the show pretty much has not had conflicts with archaeologists or problems in obtaining dig permits and treasure trove licenses from the province over the last 12 years, is the single biggest clue that there is actually nothing on the island.

 

[n2mini]

Do you not remember when they first started wanting to drain the swamp. They had to wait to get the permits, couldn't pump the water into the ocean, permit was only good for a certain time frame, they had to end the search and do it all over again the next time they wanted in there. Kinda like the metal barricade they put in the ocean to dig by the shore. They only had a certain amount of time with that permit.. Just because they own the land they still have to get permits for any major depth dig. I remember a couple of times when they were digging on other lots, they had to stop at a certain depth and get a permit to go deeper.. Yes, I wish they would take that whole Money Pit area and expand it to know for sure they have it in there some where and dig and pump water out down to 150 feet or more so we can all see it... but that is not going to happen apparently..

 

[n2mini]

Sure, the Laginas and partners have sunk over $10m into cranes and caissons and moving them around in circles on the island.

But consider this: At $20 CPM (cost per thousand viewers), a 3-million-viewer episode pulls $60k per 30-second spot, 10-15 ads per hour-long episode and 20+ episodes a season, that’s $12-18 million in ad cash per year, 12 seasons plus the side hustles (tours, etc), the Laginas are pulling in over $100 million on their split.

That's a pretty good return on investment.

Personally, I think the use of heavy cranes and huge caissons is a genius move because it makes the viewer think "Wow, that's a substantial investment, something must really be there!"

They've been pretty good at driving viewership because they understand the importance of always making people feel that there's something big at stake.

Surely you don't think the Laginas get to keep all the ad money the show generates. The network is banking all of that and the Laginas draw a salary per episode. Sure there might be some incentive based bonus depending on viewership, and longevity of show, etc. Not that they have any control of that..

 

[n2mini]

I almost forgot about the Mi'kmaq pottery and stuff they found in the corner of the swamp area by the road/shore line. They are now forbid from digging anywhere near that area...

​

 

[Carl-NC]

How would you like the show to go to prove they are actually looking for treasure.

First, get rid of the clowns pretending to be experts. Bring in some real experts. Back in the 90s Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute did a brief geological analysis which, in 225 years, is the only serious impartial analysis ever done. Yet their access was limited by Triton so it was not a thorough study. I would start there, get an independent, professional, and thorough geological analysis of the entire area. This will tell them what is really under their feet in terms of strata and what treasure scenario might even be possible (or, more importantly, impossible). For example, even the brief Woods Hole investigation found that the "flood tunnels" were simply natural caverns under the island. This strongly suggests that burying a treasure (much less constructing a "treasure vault") over 100 feet deep would have been absolutely impossible in the 17th or 18th centuries. So, yeah, first step is to stop digging random holes and figure out the reality of what's under their feet.

But this won't sell 30 second ads, at least for very long.

 

[GravelTeeth]

They don't have to do anything. FCC doesn't regulate cable content for truthfulness. Also the fine print on History's TOU includes statements such as "for entertainment purposes only," and "History doesn't guarantee the accuracy of...." etc. etc.

Also the show itself does cover its butts by having, let's say, Martin, say things like: "This could be Templar-related," instead of "This is Templar related." Opinion is protected speech.

It's not that there's a threat of criminal or other legal ramifications from the government. The point is that, in this scenario that some here are pushing, there's an unethical thing going on that multiple people are involved in and are going to rigorous lengths to keep secret. That's the description of a conspiracy, and to believe in it is therefore to be a conspiracy theorist, ipso facto. Pretty simple. The downside for the show & those responsible for it if the supposed secret is revealed doesn't have to be jail time for it to qualify as a conspiracy.

Or if your point is that the concept I describe as unethical is so mundane that no-one would bat an eye about taking part in it, and therefore it doesn't rate as conspiracy, well I guess we'll just disagree.

--GT

 

[Carl-NC]

there's an unethical thing going on that multiple people are involved in and are going to rigorous lengths to keep secret.

Even if the Laginas are faking it, why would you assume that to be unethical, culminating in a conspiracy? Those guys are entertainers, and their show is entertainment -- it is not a historical documentary to be taken seriously. An NDA for everyone involved is normal for such a show, and the people who appear on it are probably grateful for their Andy Warhol moment. I see nothing sinister going on here, certainly nothing that rises to a conspiracy level.

 

[GravelTeeth]

Even if the Laginas are faking it, why would you assume that to be unethical, culminating in a conspiracy? Those guys are entertainers, and their show is entertainment -- it is not a historical documentary to be taken seriously. An NDA for everyone involved is normal for such a show, and the people who appear on it are probably grateful for their Andy Warhol moment. I see nothing sinister going on here, certainly nothing that rises to a conspiracy level.

If you watch a show produced for dramatic or comedic effect you know going in that it's a scripted fiction. They don't have to make a disclaimer at the beginning telling you so; it's understood. The roles are played by actors who typically assume different names from their everyday names. We don't call actors liars because they take on such fictional roles. TCoOI, on the other hand, has the premise, made implicitly or explicitly, that it is non-fiction. The participants use their own names, furthering the premise. If it turned out they were in fact acting, they would be liars. I hope you don't need me to explain why lying is unethical, 99 times out of a hundred. If no-one should get their knickers in a twist to find that everyone involved is play-acting, then why not just out with it? The answer, of course, is that many hundreds of thousands or millions of viewers take the premise at face value and would be unhappy enough about learning it was fake to stop watching. A profit-motive lie is pretty crass. <-- It feels weird to be arguing from this side to explain why it's unethical when my whole starting position is that there's no evidence supporting the notion that it's fake.

NDAs probably are the standard on many types of shows, and in the case of Curse, when they are filming in summer and broadcasting in winter, I'm sure one of the goals is to preserve and not spoiler the dramatic effect if they ever find anything significant (but good luck with that -- as I've commented before that would be one tough secret to keep under wraps). And because it is normal, the existence of NDAs on Curse isn't enough to explain the lack of whistleblowers among the hundreds who have participated if there were any such scheme (if you prefer that term) of false narrative.

P.S. Some jurisdictions will decline to enforce any part of a contract that is unconscionable, so it's an open question if an NDA would even hold up under such circumstances as are contemplated by our cynics.

--GT