# A314, Disturbing News **URL:** \ **Category:** Men's Pheromone Advice & Field Reports\ **Created:** [March 5, 2014, 10:22pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299 "2014-03-05T22:22:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![monesmadedoit](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/monesmadedoit/32/325_2.png) [@monesmadedoit](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/monesmadedoit)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2014, 9:09pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/21 "2014-03-12T21:09:27Z")
Please listen to some of the feedback GT and others are giving you, Nick. I hold some similar views myself. I hold back and even censor myself because I don’t want to project and unhelpful attitude. This discussion could be taking place in the A314 Members Section, but that area is badly lacking leadership and participation lately. Whatever feedback changes you plan, by all means move forward deliberately but cautiously. Phero users are a stubborn bunch. Some of the culture of secrecy has outlived its usefulness. Maybe in 2006, when top-quality DHEAS or Beta Androsterone as a dosed spray was harder to come by, putative coding was justified. Now, when you can just buy the stuff at putative prices (and access all of the benefits of the academic literature, if you choose), it hardly seems with the trouble coding it. Product development has been sluggish. The store text of A314 Spray was 3 revisions behind the actual product. P94 is a Golden13 molecule with virtually no reports. Won’t be, either, unless freebie testers are sent. Ditto P95 and TAK. I would prefer a feedback template that provides data as useful to you as to me. If you gave reward points for every 314 user that posts public feedback, you’d have a clearer picture of what people have been saying publicly, privately, here and elsewhere for 2 years: 314 is good, but it ain’t what it used to be. Because of the way copulins and Rev 31 were handled, there has been some lasting damage to Androtics reputation. I feel it was a communication breakdown. Here’s a plan Nick and Brian, when you get an RMA for one of these products, test it yourself. I can tell you for sure my bottle of 314 last year was too thinned out. My current one isn’t. I left feedback, you adapted. Why not stock the winter and summer blend year round and let people order as they please? Instead of feedback, feedForward. Before shipping a new 314, send it to some beta testers. I see some people who swear the current MX353 is Not the one they previously tested or not the disclosed formula. It’s an issue of trust. Jasmin released that formula of her own volition. When I asked John that specific question, he gave me the brush off. People take this stuff seriously. When you speak of chemists, do you mean a certain person or a laboratory? I stopped posting IUPAC names of molecules in my journal, because, if you Google it, one of the two world-leading steroid labs (both begin with the letter S) pop up. There are also research chemists (like Dr. P. in San Diego) that do bespoke asymmetric induction synthesis on an hourly rate. I do find it very difficult, because I can’t have a frank, honest discussion about some of these topics. In other words, if you have the proper nomenclature, every world lab selling THDOC pops up. I could send you a list of at least ten researched [putative pheromones](https://pheromonelabs.com/product-category/advanced-pheromones/putative-pheromones/), probably some of which you haven’t got or haven’t tested. But, would it matter. If you put out a call for user mixes, will you actually release these MX or molecules. The new crew deserves a chance to prove themselves, but nothing hasn’t been said by others well before my time. Steve is what he is due to street cred. Something very tough to earn. So, for you, Nick, if it were me, I’d test and report on 314, MX353 and P96 myself, in order to take a leadership position on this board. A few veteran members sort of lost that status because they stopped reporting. That kind of happened with John too. Harris was the designer of the products. You knew it. You could PM him. I don’t know who designed Rev. 32. That’s what I’m getting at. I cited Dr. P. as an example of a real chemist. He’s authored dozens of papers on neurosteroid chemistry. But, yes, he’s probably getting to retirement age. You can make a career as a steroid chemist. You will probably _not_ make tenure as a pheromone researcher. ---
**Author:** ![Centaur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7c8e57/32.png) [@Centaur](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/Centaur)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2014, 12:26pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/22 "2014-03-17T12:26:34Z")
Well this explains it. I have a double label a314. The bottom sticker says rev 31 and the silver label says 32, and it has performed differently as well. I ordered a few months ago, but just opened it a few weeks ago since I was using up what was left of my old bottle. So what do we do? Will androtics exchange the bottle? Is it rev 31 or rev 32? As expensive as a bottle is I don’t understand why they are changing formulas anyway. A314 was the bomb, why not just use the old formula and leave it at that? So should I open a ticket? or is this the legit rev 32? ---
**Author:** ![leon333](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/leon333/32/539_2.png) [@leon333](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/leon333)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2014, 11:11pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/23 "2014-03-17T23:11:58Z")
I also have a rev32 bottle with rev31 sticker on the bottom.much better stick to the older formula,make everyone happy ---
**Author:** ![ss109](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eada6e/32.png) [@ss109](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/ss109)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2014, 11:22pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/24 "2014-03-17T23:22:55Z")
> [@Centaur](#): > > Well this explains it. I have a double label a314. The bottom sticker says rev 31 and the silver label says 32, and it has performed differently as well. I ordered a few months ago, but just opened it a few weeks ago since I was using up what was left of my old bottle. > So what do we do? Will androtics exchange the bottle? Is it rev 31 or rev 32? > As expensive as a bottle is I don’t understand why they are changing formulas anyway. A314 was the bomb, why not just use the old formula and leave it at that? > > So should I open a ticket? or is this the legit rev 32? Hello, Could you please elaborate as to how it has performed differently? I presume you are comparing the newer double sticker bottle to the original rev 32 bottle? These reports are really bothering me, I was seriously going to order several A314 bottles and now am totally holding off until we get more clarity. ---
**Author:** ![ss109](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eada6e/32.png) [@ss109](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/ss109)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2014, 11:30pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/25 "2014-03-17T23:30:47Z")
> [@fishdude](#): > > I still keep finding younger women being submissively attracted to rev 32. Post office yesterday to ship of some MX353, yes Kimba ,I bought. 3 bottles too . Beside the point , girl at the post office, 20 ish is normally indifferent to me. But 2 drops A314 and some nols, she was quite sweet, laughing at my jokes and small talk . > > Now, frankly, I’m not interested in A314 to be an attraction mix. Normally, it’s a solid base for an attraction mix . Add some shine or anything with a little none and watch out. > > I have dropped my dosage down to 2 drops which is plenty and there is some intimidation at first but if you carry it well with proper body language and smile you can turn it around. > > I really hope we can get to the bottom of all this A314 controversy as it is AD’s star product and they should focus on clearing any issues up. Summer/winter A314, really? > > FD FD, as usual, I find your comments spot on. A314 rev 32 @ 1 drop is a superb attraction mix. It gets me a ton of head-turns and has been very consistent stuff thus far. It seems to possess a lot of range too. I see no intimidation whatsoever @ 1 drop, 2 drops tends to make me OD, however 1 drop + 2.5mcg [P75](https://pheromonelabs.com/product/p75/) is very intimidating. However, the confusing sticker situation coupled with negative user feedback is preventing me from buying more bottles. ---
**Author:** ![paradox1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/paradox1/32/1196_2.png) [@paradox1](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/paradox1)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 12:05am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/26 "2014-03-18T00:05:23Z")
All of the old A314 mixes were good heavy hitters. Those who experienced the old revisions miss the bite that A314 had. A314 had a board room quality. It had intimidation, trust and fallout. This new iteration is ok but it’s not what A314 was… Something went very wrong with rev 31 and 32 was an improvement on 31 but still not up to snuff. I tried rev 32 and thought to myself “What is this? What happened to A314?” Only by searching the forum did I discover that this was a quick correction on rev 31. As a company I’m sure Androtics did not want to dump thousands of dollars of rev 31. So what happened to the bottles of rev 31. Were they dumped down the drain?..or… IMHO pre rev 30 A314 is the best mix on the market. I would like to see a return to rev 29. The real question for Brian F is when is revision 33 coming out? ---
**Author:** ![ss109](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eada6e/32.png) [@ss109](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/ss109)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 12:23am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/27 "2014-03-18T00:23:11Z")
If we go back to the prior (29) revs (It ain’t happening) I’ll buy all the bottles myself! ---
**Author:** ![monesmadedoit](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/monesmadedoit/32/325_2.png) [@monesmadedoit](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/monesmadedoit)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 12:33am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/28 "2014-03-18T00:33:25Z")
> [@paradox1](#): > > This new iteration is ok but it’s not what A314 was… > > Something went very wrong with rev 31 and 32 was an improvement on 31 but still not up to snuff. > > I tried rev 32 and thought to myself “What is this? What happened to A314?” Only by searching the forum did I discover that this was a quick correction on rev 31. So, you’re saying Rev. 32 really isn’t comparable to 23-29? I’m not exposed to products that predate my joining the board. But I have studied the reports. In terms of a product to be worn without anything else, to perform all around as attraction, business, status, fallout…I can apply only business and status to 32. A single-word description would be “compliance.” This does not mean Bond Girls will compliantly get naked on cue. I can use the spray effectively for any purpose with no additions. The oil I cannot. It could be climate. The formulations _are_ different to me. Congruency is a logical non-sequitur, since both are technically A314. It could be my sweet spot is less than one drop of oil. I don’t think they would intentionally recycle RMA’ed 31 product. That would be a catastrophic miscalculation. But this thread does argue for some type of beta test of new revisions before they hit the street. The little cologne glass sampler 1 mL vials with a dabber. I think some people would welcome that if the beta were a smash hit…which hopefully it would be a hit. Successful products require extensive beta testing and feedback from all users. Only a fraction of users offer feedback. “Joe Smith is a crooked Commie who conspired to bugger my 314 in the formulation lab” would not be constructive feedback. I’m not ready to call any company or its employees unethical so long as they are willing to resolve customer service. But the process of developing future A314 needs some work. The 314 forum needs some work. Been needing it for a good while. ---
**Author:** ![monesmadedoit](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/monesmadedoit/32/325_2.png) [@monesmadedoit](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/monesmadedoit)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 12:39am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/29 "2014-03-18T00:39:15Z")
> [@ss109](#): > > If we go back to the prior (29) revs (It ain’t happening) I’ll buy all the bottles myself! I can’t find any universal agreement on the superiority of Rev. 29, Rev. 23, 23-29 or pre-23. I’m not sure there is an agreement. A problem unto itself. Maybe there needs to be several. Then the whole raw 5-molecule formula and LS formula is a different matter. Maybe people would like a cheaper 5-molecule blend? There has a been a consumer demand for oil choices for many years. Many of them sell at around $75. Profitably I presume. ---
**Author:** ![2000GT](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/2000gt/32/389_2.png) [@2000GT](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/2000GT)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 1:08am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/30 "2014-03-18T01:08:24Z")
As is the case with any product, you won’t find a universal consensus. Generally, anything from Rev 23 and older were hard hitters, most more so than rev23. I came on board just as rev 23 came out and most people back then said “It’s good, it’s solid, doesn’t have that same amazing leadership vibe but still good.” People still bought it. Current revs are nothing compared to what I used to use. I don’t even use A314 anymore as the current revs just don’t do anything for me anymore. 32 was a step in the right direction but I remember when 1-2 drops was more than enough. Now I’m reading 3-5 and you still don’t the same results. The formula needs to be re-worked. A314 used to be bar none, the best out there. To justify the price point, it needs to come back to its former glory. Maybe it can, who knows. ---
**Author:** ![monesmadedoit](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/monesmadedoit/32/325_2.png) [@monesmadedoit](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/monesmadedoit)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 1:47am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/31 "2014-03-18T01:47:04Z")
It’s a question of whether the pre-23 revisions could be effected by altering ratios or reducing steering. If so, they could be reissued at the same price. Some vendors to use closer to a 5 mL oil. If the ultimate objectives of this board are to develop and test superior products that the public will buy (Nick is trying to effect a better feedback system, hopefully for that purpose), then this discussion thread is helpful. I don’t know that they could offer a 17-molecule formula at current prices. Maybe one of the historic ones without more than 9. I couldn’t specify what that would be. It was around 23 that the current price of 314 was adjusted to reflect recessionary conditions and shortages. ---
**Author:** ![Brian\_F](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/brian_f/32/1573_2.png) [@Brian\_F](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/Brian_F)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 5:13am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/32 "2014-03-18T05:13:23Z")
First things: Thank you for your feedback (and feedforward) on this issue. > [@fishdude](#): > > I don’t believe the double posting of labels myself. I checked my records and have ordered over $5000 from AD and never a double label. Also , I feel that the labels would be put on by hand. They are a science and research company, according to Tisha, so why have an automated bottle facility. > > And why did that not happen 100 times , double label with A314? Everyone that bought some would write in about it. Bottom batch labels _are_ hand applied per batch. > [@mobocaster](#): > > I seriously doubt any consumer product would be labelled individually when filled - More like a load of bottles would be done in one batch, before or after filling, then stored for sale. > > And the new labels have all the info in one place, negating the need for a second sticker altogether - I’m still leaning towards someone simply not checking. Correct. A bottle lot gets put together every week or thereabouts, depending on demand. Our fulfillment team works on a “[JIT](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_in_time_%28business%29)” style management system (like toyota) and manufactures things on an as needed basis per store demand. Lot numbers and batch numbers are marked on the bottom of the bottle. These key identifiers give us traceability – knowing who did what and where – and that is why we ask you for these numbers here, in tickets, and on the phone, when something goes wrong. From what I gather, it seems our fulfillment team was mistakenly placing outdated Rev 31 bottom stickers on the bottles. It was a matter of choosing the wrong file and loading the wrong database, and not double checking. Human error. Did we catch it before a blast of these mislabeled A314’s went out? No, we didn’t. Damn. Did we take this as a [learning] opportunity to adjust the database and retrain our fulfillment staff? Yes, we did. > [@KIMBA](#): > > I received a bottle like this from a friend, she started a return request and got no reply. Shame really. Still odd. Could be human error. Could be aggressive helpdesk email filters. Depending on the date, it could also be during the time when AD was “changing the guards”. In January, John Sebastian was outbound and I accepted [way more] responsibilities [than I could have imagined at the time], and I’m guessing some things may have misfired. Especially with February’s FedEx Fiasco. Note: I just got word that we just saw your friend’s RMA in our system earlier this week. > [@KIMBA](#): > > Here is the thing FD, the person who purchased it opened a return request the day they got it, three weeks ago if I recall correctly. I attempted to post pics here on the forum, but the image file is too large from my phone. > > Is it in my own mind? Maybe. I do not get the same reactions and I can be to blame, but with my bottle saying Revision 31 on the bottom, as well as me noticing a difference, I spoke up. I tried to keep it to myself and not post a thread on here and let the customer service/return system handle it. But after that taking weeks, I had to comment. Your friend initiated an RMA. Usually we’re the ones who do that, after we receive an email or ticket. This incidence just taught me what happens when a user initiates their own RMA without sending us an email, which is rare, but happens once or twice a month. User-intiated RMA’s go to an unmanned ordersdept email address. This is the same No-reply email that sends you your Invoices, receipts, and tracking numbers. Why it goes here, I’m not sure, but I can’t fix it easily, because it’s hardcoded into the cart. I’m having a tech look into it and reroute to the helpdesk, so we can track it and solve it. Always a new learning opportunity. > [@](#): > > That is about all I have to say on this one guys. I appreciate Brian trying to get us to email him about this, but I will wait for my customer return ticket to get replied too, if ever. Pic’s can then be sent. And this can be resolved. I just do not feel I need to post about customer issues on here when I already attempted to resolve it via the normal channel. > [@monesmadedoit](#): > > The ambitious goals for 2014 cannot happen without more transparency. The ability of users to interact directly with the Master (whomever it may at present be) is of utmost importance. Someone wearing the product and constantly open to tweaks and feedback. > > What I’m calling for here is serious, fearless, two-way interaction between the product designer(s) and users. > > So, Hey there Nick and Brian, are you 314 users? Do I need my head examined or what? We are as transparent as we can be without hurting our core business. I know that’s not the invisibly clear answer I sense you are gunning for, but I am trying to do my best to serve both the community and the company. FWIW, Even if I am unable to keep up with public statements as often as the community can sometimes demand, I read your feedback in all channels, public, private, or otherwise, and adjust and tweak accordingly. **Someone is listening**. (They just may be too shy to speak publicly) FWIW #2, After reading these A314 threads, I made some changes at the lab to mitigate cross contamination. We had a protocol in place, and I went ahead and made it more specific/improved upon it. I’d like not to detail it further, as to avoid educating the wrong parties, but if you’d like to know specifics, my box is always open. > [@2000GT](#): > > To be fair, I used to be a heavy user of A314. Rev23 was amazing for me and I heard it wasn’t as good as the older versions. I have rev 29, works fine but there are two problems: > > 1. it doesn’t hit like rev23 and older versions used to. It’s more like A314 with ED. It needs some serious viagra. > > 2. I can’t wear it any more. For whatever reason, whatever AD has put into it recently, I can’t wear it as it severely irritates my skin. That never used to be an issue for me in the past but rev29 onward has become almost painful to wear. As a result, I don’t wear it anymore. A shame, but that’s where I’m at. 2000GT, I’m interested in checking out your batch/lot#s and following up with you. Insights are greatly appreciated. Have any other regimens changed over the years? Have you recently been diagnosed with any allergies, or have any allergic symptoms with any other products? Have you moved locations? Has your diet significantly changed at all? Where are you located? There can be many confounding factors, and I like to get a broad general picture. We haven’t been adding more. If anything, we have been systematically stripping A314 down over the past few iterations (since Rev 31) to identify confounding factors. We’ve removed some of the natural musks and ingredients. Naturals are the usual suspects when it comes to irritants. > [@monesmadedoit](#): > > Because of the way copulins and Rev 31 were handled, there has been some lasting damage to Androtics reputation. I feel it was a communication breakdown. Fortunately, with every subsequent communication breakdown we learn more about ourselves, our systems, and our customers. Whenever something breaks, it’s an opportunity to examine and make things better. > [@](#): > > Here’s a plan Nick and Brian, when you get an RMA for one of these products, test it yourself. I can tell you for sure my bottle of 314 last year was too thinned out. My current one isn’t. I left feedback, you adapted. Why not stock the winter and summer blend year round and let people order as they please? Instead of feedback, feedForward. Before shipping a new 314, send it to some beta testers. This is good feedback and is in implementation. > [@](#): > > I see some people who swear the current MX353 is Not the one they previously tested or not the disclosed formula. It’s an issue of trust. Jasmin released that formula of her own volition. When I asked John that specific question, he gave me the brush off. People take this stuff seriously. When you speak of chemists, do you mean a certain person or a laboratory? 1: MX353 has had the same formula and batching procedure since it’s inception. From our logs, I can’t detect any obvious process variations. There are possibly confounding factors that I haven’t yet taken into account, like changing staff members from 2009 to present, or honestly, I’m not sure. Any evidence helps. 1a. I’ve considered the time between batches. People age, lifestyles change. Nasal hardware isn’t a set thing, and people’s senses of smell change over time as they age (or change epigenetically/diet/body composition/partners). Does this have an effect pheromonally? I speculate so!! More fuel for thought: Geneticist Richard Newcomb of the New Zealand institute for Plant and Food Research in Auckland and his colleagues searched for olfactory genes by testing 187 people’s sensitivity to ten chemicals found in everyday food, including the molecules that give distinctive smells to blue cheese, apples and violets. They found that, as expected, the smelling abilities of their subjects varied. The team then sequenced the subjects? genomes and looked for differences that could predict people’s ability to detect each chemical through smell. **Related stories** - [Soapy taste of coriander linked to genetic variants](http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/nature.2012.11398) - [Mammalian brain followed a scented evolutionary trail](http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/news.2011.302) - [Flies sniff out heavy hydrogen](http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/news.2011.39) [More related stories](http://www.nature.com/news/sense-for-scents-traced-down-to-genes-1.13493#related-links) For four of the ten chemicals, the researchers identified clusters of genes that convincingly predicted smelling ability, as they report today in _Current Biology_[1](http://www.nature.com/news/sense-for-scents-traced-down-to-genes-1.13493#b1). The study could not conclude whether similar genetic associations exist for the other six compounds, or whether factors other than genes play a role in those cases. Previously, only five regions of the genome had been shown to affect olfactory ability when they undergo mutations, so Newcomb’s study has nearly doubled the number of genetic associations known to influence smell. And because there is nothing special about the chemicals they studied, Newcomb says that it is logical to think the findings would extend to lots of scents, meaning that people experience the plethora of chemicals surrounding them in endlessly different ways. ?All of these genes are on different chromosomes, acting independently, so all these different people ? even just for these four compounds ? are having totally different experiences of the chemical world through their sense of smell,? Newcomb says. …] **Source** : [Sense for scents traced down to genes : Nature News & Comment](http://www.nature.com/news/sense-for-scents-traced-down-to-genes-1.13493) I forsee us modernizing the MX system in the near future. We’ll post about it so it’s clear on all fronts. > [@](#): > > \*\*You can make a career as a steroid chemist. You will probably _not make tenure as a pheromone researcher._ Well, there are a few distinguished folks who have had high ranks elucidating pheromone effects, most famous probably being Dr McClintock. On the other side of the spectrum, you can be the exact opposite: detracting pheromones as a myth while still holding high office at U Penn’s Smell and Taste Center, like Dr Richard Doty. When you get down to it, pheromones, specifically [human pheromones](https://pheromonelabs.com/), are at best a protoscience. _Olfaction_ isn’t even well understood or elucidated, yet, nevermind human pheromone functions. Technology and connectivity is blowing the gates open for communication between the sciences and engineers in the past decades. However, it’s actually astounding that, after years of collusion, we still don’t really know if you smell by electron vibration, or if each odor molecule is a key, and your nose contains thousands of individual locks, or… 😕 Pheromone functions are not well understood or elucidated. _Yet_. You’re part of a decades long science project doing just that. Elucidating. This is why we don’t mention molecule names specifically – codifying them – so you don’t happen to read studies and get really invested into a proposed result or function. That said, for our academic clientele, we offer all named compounds listed in most major studies. I say “most”, just in case we missed something. However, the founder of this project was extremely thorough and the library he built for us is extensive. You can email me for further details. [brian@androtics.com](mailto:brian@androtics.com) There are plenty great folks here lending their voice to this project, all which is greatly appreciated. Keeping the tone positive and outcome-focused is my goal here. Anything I can do to help mitigate errors and extract honest data – keep the party going, so to speak – is my duty. > [@Centaur](#): > > Well this explains it. I have a double label a314. The bottom sticker says rev 31 and the silver label says 32, and it has performed differently as well. I ordered a few months ago, but just opened it a few weeks ago since I was using up what was left of my old bottle. > So what do we do? Will androtics exchange the bottle? Is it rev 31 or rev 32? > So should I open a ticket? or is this the legit rev 32? Yes. We will exchange A314 bottles. Rev 31 does not exist anymore. That last stock of this shipped months ago. There’s no way you can have a Rev 31 bottle shipped from our fulfillment team. More Q&A to follow. ---
**Author:** ![Brian\_F](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/brian_f/32/1573_2.png) [@Brian\_F](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/Brian_F)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 5:54am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/33 "2014-03-18T05:54:10Z")
> [@](#): > > Wolfe, I mean no disrespect at all but that is a line that has been used here for quite a while, this whole “the chemist is super awesome and super rare and is dying and once he’s gone, the molecule is gone as well.” This has been said about P86 yet now we see that it has returned. I just took inventory of all our stock (something other managers failed to do), and decided I had enough to put _in_ stock, and offer for a long enough time to the right people (reporting users). You don’t have to report to the forum to be a reporting user, but you do have to report. > [@](#): > > We’ve been told for years that the formula for A314 has never changed, yet we’ve seen changes in its performance and strength constantly over the years. I’m a businessman, been in customer service relations since I was 15. If there is one thing I cannot abide by is when I’m being fed a BS excuse. These lines we keep hearing about super secret, super awesome, super dying chemists, while I don’t doubt there is a certain degree of truth to it, it still reeks of BS. Sadly, there’s been a decent amount of spoon feeding of distorted truths here for quite some time now and I admit that has saddened me greatly as AD was my first step into pheromones and made some damn fine products. “Super dying” - I hope I can sense the levity in your tone… I laughed out loud. I think the “BS” you are referring to is just a simple lack of education. When stuff goes wrong, some folks rush in to report before they know the whole story. And the whole story takes a long, long time to observe. (And a lot of questions, information, and introspection) We try not to misinform anyone deliberately; any misinformation artifacts might just be our earnest attempts at making sense of an error. There are, however, plenty of sideline discussion boards out there who _do_ profit when we make errors, or profit at our expense, and it’s in their general best interest to spread rumors or misinformation. While I don’t have a voice there, I _do_ have a voice here, and it’s my personal motto to be as upfront and honest as I possible. That way, I can reduce any spurious correlations and stick to the facts. Facts get things solved. Anything else is noise. > [@](#): > > The general change in staff as of late, hopefully is for the better. It’s great that Brian has been much more energetic in trying to bring out new mixes and old molecules. But the best thing the two of you can do, is to be straight up, honest and to the point. If AD is out of stock on a molecule, just say “We’re out of stock, production of this molecule is expensive and time consuming so we’re waiting on the production time.” I have a shortlist of these compounds that I’m hesitant to list, because I don’t want to say “Never”. Nor do I want to stimulate “competitors” to knock off P##, claim they have “Elusive Molecule P##” simply because we stated we don’t have it. We don’t carry Androstadienone, but plenty of people will. Likewise, John Sebastian benched P86 for some time, and other vendors swept in to claim they reverse engineered it (but got it wrong, btw, despite their firm, thousand percent affirmations to the contrary). I’m hesitant to repeat the inevitable, but I do want to share the information, for sake of transparency. At this time, I’m in a pickle: not sure what the best plan of action is. I’m open to suggestions, both publicly and privately. [brian@androtics.com](mailto:brian@androtics.com) > [@](#): > > Too often AD has released amazing mixes, only to watch them vanish into obscurity because of the adage “We must move on for the sake of advancing the science.” I think this might be an artifact of a bygone management style (or lack thereof). The MX system will duly be modernized and posted about in the near future. I’m a fan of providing effects people want, and likewise, am happy to restock mixes that haven’t been in rotation for a long time. Obviously, some technical caveats exist, ie - I can’t restock a game-scented mix like Asian Persuasion [MX200](https://pheromonelabs.com/product/mx200/) as MX200. But I can restock a FF21-scented Asian Persuasion mix as MX4##. As always, my box is open for this sort of suggestion, and I thank the ones who have already wrote me. [brian@androtics.com](mailto:brian@androtics.com) I’ve also restocked some P’s that have fallen out of rotation, or have not even been in rotation to begin with (I have no idea why. I look at our library and wonder why more isn’t released to the public). My goal is to stimulate new mixmaking, and support the mixmakers in their endeavors. Very simple. > [@](#): > > A314 HAS been changed over the years, it’s lost its punch and it’s lost its flare. It’s still a good product and I know you guys have the formula for the previous versions that were so beloved. I think a lot of us would be more happy if we hear something along the lines of “A314 has changed, but we would like to re-create it from its heyday. We need your help to test new components.” And this is why batch numbers help us. Rev 23 had a few iterations and batches. If you are serious about us rebatching a Rev 23, then you will be serious about tracking down your batch/lot ID (or Order ID if you lost your batch #) and sending it our way. > [@](#): > > My apologies for this rant, but it’s been a long time coming and I see a glimmer of hope from you and Brian. I also hope that this post isn’t deleted as that seems to be happening quite a bit lately to anyone with a critical view on the company. No need to apologize, it keeps us on top of our game. Thanks for the honest feedback. We don’t need blind cheerleading, we need collaborators. As for deleting posts: I’m a light handed moderator. If I _do_ deem a post is unhelpful to the general tone of the forum, I specifically say something before the post goes dark. This action sends an alert to everyone that is subscribed to the thread, so you readers have some _closure_. Any other missing threads that go dark or get deleted aren’t moderated by me, but by the respective post’s owners. Hope this helps clear up some general misconceptions. As always, I thank y’all for your business and readership. Thank you for keeping us limber. ---
**Author:** ![paradox1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/paradox1/32/1196_2.png) [@paradox1](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/paradox1)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 2:59pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/34 "2014-03-18T14:59:40Z")
Wow Brian F, thanks for the production breakdown and statement about A314. That resolves alot of questions. Here is my question. Does the formula for A314 get tweaked or changed? Is that why each revision is different? Or is it what John S said which was that chemical suppliers were producing chemicals at different strengths thereby altering A314? ---
**Author:** ![ss109](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eada6e/32.png) [@ss109](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/ss109)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 4:42pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/35 "2014-03-18T16:42:48Z")
> [@Brian\_F](#): > > Yes. We will exchange A314 bottles. > > Rev 31 does not exist anymore. That last stock of this shipped months ago. There’s no way you can have a Rev 31 bottle shipped from our fulfillment team. > > More Q&A to follow. Brian, thanks for the detailed response, much appreciated. Do you think that the conflicting sticker bottles may have a different enough composition than the original rev 32 bottles? Is that why you are willing to do an exchange? (I am not intending to sound accusatory in any way here) You mention improving protocol with regards to cross-contamination, do you suspect this issue has something to do with the perceived inferiority (at least by some users) of the conflicting sticker bottles? On an entirely different note, was the recently re-offered P86 the original synthesis or a new one? Sorry if this question has already been answered. Thanks so much, (Just trying to get my hands on some of the original rev 32 bottles but need to be sure before I order) ---
**Author:** ![2000GT](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/2000gt/32/389_2.png) [@2000GT](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/2000GT)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 5:24pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/36 "2014-03-18T17:24:02Z")
Brian, the batch number you asked for of rev23 is batch 17. Just dusted it off to use today and it hits just as hard as it did back in the day, had an excellent day with a grumpy client and an employee that was not being reasonable, now he was. So despite a change in diet, age, age of the batch, etc. it still works. Whatever made batch 17, was good. That would be a good starting point imo. Thanks for the responses. Very good and long over due. Thank you. ---
**Author:** ![stld82](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@stld82](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/stld82)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2014, 7:23am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/37 "2014-03-20T07:23:04Z")
a314 is the product the same from smartmones and [a314.com](http://a314.com)? Got no response when I sent an email about my order. ---
**Author:** ![mackie72](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/mackie72/32/623_2.png) [@mackie72](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/mackie72)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2014, 4:52pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/38 "2014-03-23T16:52:55Z")
Just realised the A314 I have been using for the last 5 years is rev23 batch 1 having just looked under the bottle. Now I have never used other A314’s but I will test A314 rev32 and report any differences. I agree rev23 is amazing but I have had problems wearing it consistently without experiencing fatigue. If rev32 can remove this problem then this would would be a massive plus to me. ---
**Author:** ![fishdude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/4bbf92/32.png) [@fishdude](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/fishdude)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2014, 7:36pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/39 "2014-03-23T19:36:27Z")
Looking forwards to reading your results. FD ---
**Author:** ![paradox1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/paradox1/32/1196_2.png) [@paradox1](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/paradox1)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2014, 2:29pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299/40 "2014-03-24T14:29:14Z")
> [@2000GT](#): > > As is the case with any product, you won’t find a universal consensus. Generally, anything from Rev 23 and older were hard hitters, most more so than rev23. I came on board just as rev 23 came out and most people back then said “It’s good, it’s solid, doesn’t have that same amazing leadership vibe but still good.” People still bought it. Current revs are nothing compared to what I used to use. I don’t even use A314 anymore as the current revs just don’t do anything for me anymore. 32 was a step in the right direction but I remember when 1-2 drops was more than enough. Now I’m reading 3-5 and you still don’t the same results. The formula needs to be re-worked. A314 used to be bar none, the best out there. To justify the price point, it needs to come back to its former glory. Maybe it can, who knows. **Agreed. Stamped and Seconded.** [Previous page](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299.md?page=1) [Next page](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/a314-disturbing-news/61299.md?page=3)