Are All Clad pans and their clones superior to the conventional types with
aluminum or copper sandwich bases? Presumably, they would be for the
saucière-type, simmering pans but I cannot see any real advantage for the
others.
Graham

"Graham" > wrote in message
news:JVLKb.7589$X%5.5068@pd7tw2no...
> Are All Clad pans and their clones superior to the conventional types with
> aluminum or copper sandwich bases? Presumably, they would be for the
> saucière-type, simmering pans but I cannot see any real advantage for the
> others.
> Graham


That's a constant point of contention here. I have Wolfgang Puck cookware
with encapsulated disk bottoms. I does everything I want, so for me, All
Clad wouldn't offer any advantages. I think that the secret is that WP has
very heavy disks. I have seen some disk-type cookware that wasn't as hefty
and I'm sure it wouldn't work well. Consumer Reports rated WP cookware
superior to All Clad in cleanability, finish, and performance. I think that
if you can identify a specific need that All Clad will satisfy, it makes
sense to by a piece. When I got my WP cookware, they didn't have any
non-stick pieces. I got a set of two Kirkland, tri-ply, non-stick skillets
form Costco to fill the gap. Some people have concerns that the disk will
delaminate if you leave the pan on the stove and it accidentally overheats
(i.e.., boils dry over high heat). That is the only objective issue that I
can think of that gives tri-ply cookware an edge over encapsulated disk
cookware.

"Graham" > wrote in news:JVLKb.7589$X%5.5068@pd7tw2no:

> Are All Clad pans and their clones superior to the conventional types
> with aluminum or copper sandwich bases? Presumably, they would be for
> the saucière-type, simmering pans but I cannot see any real advantage
> for the others.
> Graham
>

I own an old set of Calphalon that I am beginning to replace, piece by
piece. I am looking at All Clad, but also at odd pieces at Ross &
Marshall's. I bought a Stainless pan with copper bottom & disc, can't
remember the brand right now. Very nice pan, but, as I'm used to a pan
with a uniform thickness throughout, I find this new pan very unbalanced.

It is fine when cooking on the stove. But, if you go to tip it to pour
something out, or when hand washing it, it is extremely bottom heavy,
which I don't like at all. It makes it difficult to hold. It was an
innexpensive experiment, and it does simmer very very well, but the way
it feels in my hand is enough to tip me toward an All Clad type pan.

Just my two cents....

David

As you say, the answer to whether it makes a difference is "it depends". It
depends on what disk type pan you are comparing to. It depends on what
cooking technique you are using. Etc. But, all in all, I'd say that (despite
CR) tri-ply is the overall winner vs. disk bottom because it has advantages
in some cases and no disadvantages (other than cost).

BTW, All-clad will also delaminate if you severely overheat it. I've done it
(though All-clad replaced it no argument). Of course if you have a non-stick
coating this will begin to vaporize (and give off nasty fumes) long before
delamination.

You mention you have non-stick tri ply. Personally, I'm still unconvinced
that its worth investing in expensive non-stick ware. I have some Paderno
stainless w/ alu. disk pots that are going on 20 years and essentially look
the same as new and will surely outlive me. But I can't conceive of any
nonstick coated pan lasting a lifetime regardless of how you baby it. So
aren't you better off with relatively cheap thick pure aluminum so that you
can discard the pan no regrets when the coating breaks down? And what good
does the stainless inner ply do when the inside of the pan is coated in
non-reactive telfon anyway?

"Vox Humana" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Graham" > wrote in message
> news:JVLKb.7589$X%5.5068@pd7tw2no...
> > Are All Clad pans and their clones superior to the conventional types
with
> > aluminum or copper sandwich bases? Presumably, they would be for the
> > saucière-type, simmering pans but I cannot see any real advantage for
the
> > others.
> > Graham
>
>
> That's a constant point of contention here. I have Wolfgang Puck cookware
> with encapsulated disk bottoms. I does everything I want, so for me, All
> Clad wouldn't offer any advantages. I think that the secret is that WP
has
> very heavy disks. I have seen some disk-type cookware that wasn't as
hefty
> and I'm sure it wouldn't work well. Consumer Reports rated WP cookware
> superior to All Clad in cleanability, finish, and performance. I think
that
> if you can identify a specific need that All Clad will satisfy, it makes
> sense to by a piece. When I got my WP cookware, they didn't have any
> non-stick pieces. I got a set of two Kirkland, tri-ply, non-stick
skillets
> form Costco to fill the gap. Some people have concerns that the disk will
> delaminate if you leave the pan on the stove and it accidentally overheats
> (i.e.., boils dry over high heat). That is the only objective issue that
I
> can think of that gives tri-ply cookware an edge over encapsulated disk
> cookware.
>
>

"Jack Denver" > wrote in message
...
> As you say, the answer to whether it makes a difference is "it depends".
It
> depends on what disk type pan you are comparing to. It depends on what
> cooking technique you are using. Etc. But, all in all, I'd say that
(despite
> CR) tri-ply is the overall winner vs. disk bottom because it has
advantages
> in some cases and no disadvantages (other than cost).
>
> BTW, All-clad will also delaminate if you severely overheat it. I've done
it
> (though All-clad replaced it no argument). Of course if you have a
non-stick
> coating this will begin to vaporize (and give off nasty fumes) long before
> delamination.
>
> You mention you have non-stick tri ply. Personally, I'm still unconvinced
> that its worth investing in expensive non-stick ware. I have some Paderno
> stainless w/ alu. disk pots that are going on 20 years and essentially
look
> the same as new and will surely outlive me. But I can't conceive of any
> nonstick coated pan lasting a lifetime regardless of how you baby it. So
> aren't you better off with relatively cheap thick pure aluminum so that
you
> can discard the pan no regrets when the coating breaks down? And what good
> does the stainless inner ply do when the inside of the pan is coated in
> non-reactive telfon anyway?


The non-stick pans were a gift, so there was no investment on my part. I
use them infrequently when I make eggs or crepes. I find that regular
stainless or cast iron is adequately non-stick for most of my cooking needs.
Furthermore, I like to made sauces with the fond that accumulates on
cookware so the non-stick isn't my surface of choice in most cases. I think
you are right that solid aluminum with a non-stick surface is the most cost
effective (an maybe the best construction) for a non-stick pan. The cost
difference between All-Clad and WP is so enormous that I would have to have
a very specific need in order to justify buying All-Clad. I don't mind the
weight of the WP cookware, but I suppose the for someone without much
strength, that could be an issue. All-Clad pieces of comparable size weight
less.














>
> "Vox Humana" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Graham" > wrote in message
> > news:JVLKb.7589$X%5.5068@pd7tw2no...
> > > Are All Clad pans and their clones superior to the conventional types
> with
> > > aluminum or copper sandwich bases? Presumably, they would be for the
> > > saucière-type, simmering pans but I cannot see any real advantage for
> the
> > > others.
> > > Graham
> >
> >
> > That's a constant point of contention here. I have Wolfgang Puck
cookware
> > with encapsulated disk bottoms. I does everything I want, so for me,
All
> > Clad wouldn't offer any advantages. I think that the secret is that WP
> has
> > very heavy disks. I have seen some disk-type cookware that wasn't as
> hefty
> > and I'm sure it wouldn't work well. Consumer Reports rated WP cookware
> > superior to All Clad in cleanability, finish, and performance. I think
> that
> > if you can identify a specific need that All Clad will satisfy, it makes
> > sense to by a piece. When I got my WP cookware, they didn't have any
> > non-stick pieces. I got a set of two Kirkland, tri-ply, non-stick
> skillets
> > form Costco to fill the gap. Some people have concerns that the disk
will
> > delaminate if you leave the pan on the stove and it accidentally
overheats
> > (i.e.., boils dry over high heat). That is the only objective issue
that
> I
> > can think of that gives tri-ply cookware an edge over encapsulated disk
> > cookware.
> >
> >
>
>

"Vox Humana" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Graham" > wrote in message
> news:JVLKb.7589$X%5.5068@pd7tw2no...
> > Are All Clad pans and their clones superior to the conventional types
with
> > aluminum or copper sandwich bases? Presumably, they would be for the
> > saucière-type, simmering pans but I cannot see any real advantage for
the
> > others.
> > Graham
>
>
> That's a constant point of contention here. I have Wolfgang Puck cookware
> with encapsulated disk bottoms. I does everything I want, so for me, All
> Clad wouldn't offer any advantages. I think that the secret is that WP
has
> very heavy disks. I have seen some disk-type cookware that wasn't as
hefty
> and I'm sure it wouldn't work well. Consumer Reports rated WP cookware
> superior to All Clad in cleanability, finish, and performance. I think
that
> if you can identify a specific need that All Clad will satisfy, it makes
> sense to by a piece. When I got my WP cookware, they didn't have any
> non-stick pieces. I got a set of two Kirkland, tri-ply, non-stick
skillets
> form Costco to fill the gap. Some people have concerns that the disk will
> delaminate if you leave the pan on the stove and it accidentally overheats
> (i.e.., boils dry over high heat). That is the only objective issue that
I
> can think of that gives tri-ply cookware an edge over encapsulated disk
> cookware.
>

Thankyou for your comments and to Dave and Jack for theirs.

My cookware is Danish, Eva-Trio, a basal sandwich type, with which I am
satisfied. The reason I asked is that my son is getting married and I want
to get them some decent cookware (or make sure that a good brand is in their
register). I know that you get what you pay for generally but the expensive
brands such as All-Clad, Silga and La Pentole are not an option at the
moment. Several of the somewhat less expensive brands of reasonable quality
offer both encapsulated bottom disk and tri-ply models. I think that I'll
opt for the simpler style for now. I can always buy them the good stuff
later, piece by piece, as they get more cooking experience

Thanks again for your input.
Graham

Be careful of the rivet caps on the Wolfgang Puck cookware. Someone on the
cookware board of thathomesite.com recently said theirs shot off with an
explosive sound, and spattered hot oil. I've read that reported several times
online, and also have heard of the rivets corroding, and the handles becoming
loose after only 2-3 years of use.

"Sheellah" > wrote in message
...
> Be careful of the rivet caps on the Wolfgang Puck cookware. Someone on the
> cookware board of thathomesite.com recently said theirs shot off with an
> explosive sound, and spattered hot oil. I've read that reported several
times
> online, and also have heard of the rivets corroding, and the handles
becoming
> loose after only 2-3 years of use.

I use oven clean on the pans periodically and haven't noticed any corrosion.
The pans go from stove top to oven to dishwasher and so far I haven't had
any problems with the rivets. There are two lines of WP cookware. HSN
sells the Bistroware line and I have seen another line of WP sold at Sam's
Club. The latter is not the same as the former. Maybe that accounts for
the different experience with the rivets. That said, I could replace all of
my WP cookware for what one large covered skillet costs in the All-Clad
line.

"Graham" > wrote in message
news:JVLKb.7589$X%5.5068@pd7tw2no...
> Are All Clad pans and their clones superior to the conventional types with
> aluminum or copper sandwich bases? Presumably, they would be for the
> saucière-type, simmering pans but I cannot see any real advantage for the
> others.
> Graham
>
>
I can only think of one theoretical reason that clad sides are an advantage
in cooking. That would be a reduced tendency to scorch if the pan is used
on a large gas burner that is turned up enough for the flames to reach the
sides directly. Personally, I don't think it would be a significant
advantage and I would see no advantage on an electric range. It is best to
confine the flame on a gas range within the diameter of the bottom anyway.

Since the clad cookware has an aluminum core and since aluminum conducts
heat faster than steel, I suppose one could argue that a clad pan would be
more efficient at heating its contents from the sides. I would also view
this as more in the area of theoretical rather than practical importance.

The thick clad bottom, on the other hand, is a distinct advantage as it will
reduce the tendency to scorch and reduce or practically eliminate hot spots.
I use and appreciate clad cookware personally but I doubt it would
meaningfully outperform cooware with just a thick base. It is perfectly
appropriate to appreciate great tools in the kitchen simply because they
give pleasure to the user, assuming the user gets pleasure out of cooking.
I assume most of the people that read this newsgroup do.

Fred
The Good Gourmet
http://www.thegoodgourmet.com

Which line of WP cookware do you have?


"Vox Humana" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Sheellah" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Be careful of the rivet caps on the Wolfgang Puck cookware. Someone on
the
> > cookware board of thathomesite.com recently said theirs shot off with an
> > explosive sound, and spattered hot oil. I've read that reported several
> times
> > online, and also have heard of the rivets corroding, and the handles
> becoming
> > loose after only 2-3 years of use.
>
> I use oven clean on the pans periodically and haven't noticed any
corrosion.
> The pans go from stove top to oven to dishwasher and so far I haven't had
> any problems with the rivets. There are two lines of WP cookware. HSN
> sells the Bistroware line and I have seen another line of WP sold at Sam's
> Club. The latter is not the same as the former. Maybe that accounts for
> the different experience with the rivets. That said, I could replace all
of
> my WP cookware for what one large covered skillet costs in the All-Clad
> line.
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.559 / Virus Database: 351 - Release Date: 1/7/2004

"Mark" > wrote in message
...
> Which line of WP cookware do you have?

I have the Bistroware. You can see it he
http://tinyurl.com/2dvcm






>
>
> "Vox Humana" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Sheellah" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Be careful of the rivet caps on the Wolfgang Puck cookware. Someone on
> the
> > > cookware board of thathomesite.com recently said theirs shot off with
an
> > > explosive sound, and spattered hot oil. I've read that reported
several
> > times
> > > online, and also have heard of the rivets corroding, and the handles
> > becoming
> > > loose after only 2-3 years of use.
> >
> > I use oven clean on the pans periodically and haven't noticed any
> corrosion.
> > The pans go from stove top to oven to dishwasher and so far I haven't
had
> > any problems with the rivets. There are two lines of WP cookware. HSN
> > sells the Bistroware line and I have seen another line of WP sold at
Sam's
> > Club. The latter is not the same as the former. Maybe that accounts
for
> > the different experience with the rivets. That said, I could replace
all
> of
> > my WP cookware for what one large covered skillet costs in the All-Clad
> > line.
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.559 / Virus Database: 351 - Release Date: 1/7/2004
>
>

I don't have the cookware. I use All-Clad and Le Creuset right now. The
cookware reported with the exploding rivets was the Cafe line, although
problems with the rivets have also been reported with the Bistro line. People
have also reported leaking at the rivet site. I assume water or other liquids
could corrode the rivets too, if water can leak through.

Here is a link to one of the threads. Do a seach on there for others.

http://ths.gardenweb.com/forums/load...0820987.html?6


<< Which line of WP cookware do you have? >>

"Sheellah" > wrote in message
...
> I don't have the cookware. I use All-Clad and Le Creuset right now. The
> cookware reported with the exploding rivets was the Cafe line, although
> problems with the rivets have also been reported with the Bistro line.
People
> have also reported leaking at the rivet site. I assume water or other
liquids
> could corrode the rivets too, if water can leak through.
>
> Here is a link to one of the threads. Do a seach on there for others.
>
> http://ths.gardenweb.com/forums/load...0820987.html?6
>

I did a Google search on "Wolfgang Puck" + rivet; "Wolfgang Puck" +
corrosion; "Wolfgang Puck" + leak; and "Wolfgang Puck" + failure. The only
mention of problems with the rivets was from the Gardenweb discussion that
you posted and the following Gardenweb thread.
http://ths.gardenweb.com/forums/load...013727241.html

If you read though them, most of the comments are positive. There is some
discussion about the rivets based on a person's speculation that they may
fail because they are aluminum. My previous cookware was aluminum and with
20 years of constant use, exposure to acidic food, and daily trips through
the dishwasher, they never showed any corrosion beyond surface
discoloration. I find it difficult to believe that solid aluminum rivets
would corrode to the point that they would fail. That they might become
dull doesn't mean that they are dangerous. Let's face it, restaurants have
piles of aluminum cookware that doesn't disintegrate, leak, or have the
handles fall off. With the millions of pieces of WP cookware sold, that
there are only one or two bad experiences discussed on the Internet is truly
amazing. When you consider that some of the problems are minor, cosmetic
issues, and one is a speculation about the rivets, it is even more amazing.

Rivet failure on an All-Clad pan requiring replacement:
http://kitchen.cheap-internet-store....stick_Fry_Pan/

You can read similar negative comments about All Clad here including
complaints about welds and a spout failure on a tea kettle:
http://www.target.com/gp/detail.html...sin=B00005AL6N

I wouldn't suggest that All-Clad is bad stuff because a few people had
isolated problems.

???????

<< Just because someone said it doesn't make it true. One needs do no
more than read your posts for an illustration of this fact.

Andrew
>>

"Fred" > wrote in message
news
>
> "Graham" > wrote in message
> news:JVLKb.7589$X%5.5068@pd7tw2no...
> > Are All Clad pans and their clones superior to the conventional types
with
> > aluminum or copper sandwich bases? Presumably, they would be for the
> > saucière-type, simmering pans but I cannot see any real advantage for
the
> > others.
> > Graham
> >
> >
> I can only think of one theoretical reason that clad sides are an
advantage
> in cooking. That would be a reduced tendency to scorch if the pan is used
> on a large gas burner that is turned up enough for the flames to reach the
> sides directly. Personally, I don't think it would be a significant
> advantage and I would see no advantage on an electric range. It is best
to
> confine the flame on a gas range within the diameter of the bottom anyway.
>
> Since the clad cookware has an aluminum core and since aluminum conducts
> heat faster than steel, I suppose one could argue that a clad pan would be
> more efficient at heating its contents from the sides. I would also view
> this as more in the area of theoretical rather than practical importance.
>
> The thick clad bottom, on the other hand, is a distinct advantage as it
will
> reduce the tendency to scorch and reduce or practically eliminate hot
spots.
> I use and appreciate clad cookware personally but I doubt it would
> meaningfully outperform cooware with just a thick base. It is perfectly
> appropriate to appreciate great tools in the kitchen simply because they
> give pleasure to the user, assuming the user gets pleasure out of cooking.
> I assume most of the people that read this newsgroup do.
>
> Fred
> The Good Gourmet
> http://www.thegoodgourmet.com
>
I am inclined to agree with your comments. I t seems unnecessary in most
cases to have anything other than a thick basal disc.
Last night I did some comparison shopping and found a wide range of types
including one model that I thought might be "over the top." It was not only
a tri-ply/clad but also had a basal sandwich making the base 5-ply
(ss/al/ss/al/ss)!! One thing that I noticed was that many of the brands
were very heavy, something that I will have to take into consideration.
They might be OK for me, 200lbs/6'3", but my future DIL would find them too
cumbersome.
Graham

I'll forgive your mean spirited stupidity, and take the time to inform you that
Kitchenaid has since changed their rivets to stainless from aluminum. Seems
that had a problem with the aluminum rivets. Not so wacked out now is it? BTW,
Kitchenaid doesn't make a multiply. It's called 5-ply! If you would bother
doing some research instead of making inane comments, you will see that several
higher end
cookware manufactureres have switched to all stainless rivets. When you're
paying that much for pans, details like that do count!!!

<< Sheellah made the same wacked out comments about Kitchenaid multi-ply
in this group awhile ago. Any one who knows her history here would
have to take any comment she made with a pound of salt. >>

Well, it's better than having no brains, and no money....LOL!!! Jealous are we?
All my cookware has been VERY carefully evaluated as my other posts show, and
the cookware that I didn't want was sold at a handsome profit, allowing me to
get what I did keep at an awesome price! Please feel free though, to continue
this thread all by yourself..:-).

<< Wacked out by buying the kitchenware flavor of the month. God knows
how much cookware Sheellah has gone though without ever really being
able to evaluate it. Having more money than brains must be an
interesting phenomenon.

Andrew
>>

"Sheellah" > wrote in message
...
> Well, it's better than having no brains, and no money....LOL!!! Jealous
are we?
> All my cookware has been VERY carefully evaluated as my other posts show,
and
> the cookware that I didn't want was sold at a handsome profit, allowing me
to
> get what I did keep at an awesome price! Please feel free though, to
continue
> this thread all by yourself..:-).
>

Since you brought it up, I have to ask what's up with you and the endless
acquisition of cookware? Are you a compulsive buyer or do you have some
sort of job evaluating cookware?

Hi! I wish I had such a job...LOL! It's just as simple as not being able to
resist a great bargain. I'm a compulsive great bargain buyer only ;-). I see an
awesome deal on something I want, buy it, and figure if I don't want it later I
can sell it and make a nice profit on it. The prices on the high end cookware I
bought were about 1/4 to 1/2 of the regular discounted prices. I'm going to
start a website, and mailing list soon to let others know of the deals out
there. Not sure if there would be a demand for such though.

The 9 piece stainless Kitchenaid 5-ply set I had was bought for $157 including
shipping, and the 9 piece All-Clad stainless set was $350 + a free 11" AC
grill, a William Bounds pepper mill, and another AC set of items worth $60. I
was able to get a 7 qt. Le Creuset first quality oven for $39. Just can't say
no....LOL! Would you leave those behind??? It's just a matter of willpower, and
I don't have much when an awesome deal is to be had. I do love great
cookware...so I hope that ends the mystery ;-).



<< Since you brought it up, I have to ask what's up with you and the endless
acquisition of cookware? Are you a compulsive buyer or do you have some
sort of job evaluating cookware?
>>

"Sheellah" > wrote in message
...
> Hi! I wish I had such a job...LOL! It's just as simple as not being able
to
> resist a great bargain. I'm a compulsive great bargain buyer only ;-). I
see an
> awesome deal on something I want, buy it, and figure if I don't want it
later I
> can sell it and make a nice profit on it. The prices on the high end
cookware I
> bought were about 1/4 to 1/2 of the regular discounted prices. I'm going
to
> start a website, and mailing list soon to let others know of the deals out
> there. Not sure if there would be a demand for such though.
>
> The 9 piece stainless Kitchenaid 5-ply set I had was bought for $157
including
> shipping, and the 9 piece All-Clad stainless set was $350 + a free 11" AC
> grill, a William Bounds pepper mill, and another AC set of items worth
$60. I
> was able to get a 7 qt. Le Creuset first quality oven for $39. Just can't
say
> no....LOL! Would you leave those behind??? It's just a matter of
willpower, and
> I don't have much when an awesome deal is to be had. I do love great
> cookware...so I hope that ends the mystery ;-).
==
Ok, fess up--Just *how big* is your kitchen and how do you store all those
lids?
(I need some tips on lid storage :-)
==
==
>
>
>
> << Since you brought it up, I have to ask what's up with you and the
endless
> acquisition of cookware? Are you a compulsive buyer or do you have some
> sort of job evaluating cookware?
> >>
>
>
>

My kitchen is a whopping 125" X 65.5". It's called a closet outside of
NYC...LOL! Thank heavens I have a small utility closet next to it, and will be
getting an armoire that will go outside it. I really haven't kept that much
stuff of what I originally bought. Mostly several All-Clad pieces, some
Multiclad, and a selection of Le Creuset ovens, and a few odds and ends. Lid
storage is a hanging rack on the door.

Wish I had space for a pot rack. I think the best way is looping the lid over
the handle and hanging the whole thing together.


<< Ok, fess up--Just *how big* is your kitchen and how do you store all those
lids?
(I need some tips on lid storage :-) >>

"Sheellah" > wrote in message
...
> My kitchen is a whopping 125" X 65.5". It's called a closet outside of
> NYC...LOL! Thank heavens I have a small utility closet next to it, and
will be
> getting an armoire that will go outside it. I really haven't kept that
much
> stuff of what I originally bought. Mostly several All-Clad pieces, some
> Multiclad, and a selection of Le Creuset ovens, and a few odds and ends.
Lid
> storage is a hanging rack on the door.
>
> Wish I had space for a pot rack. I think the best way is looping the lid
over
> the handle and hanging the whole thing together.
==
That works for my Cuisinart pans but not Le Creuset, stock pots and Dutch
ovens.
I used to keep them in my range drawer but my new range that has a warming
drawer
down there so I can't use it for storage. I told DH the only solution to the
lid problem is
a larger kitchen, which of course, must be attached to a larger house--He
agreed, so I am now
perusing houseplans. That worked out well, wouldn't you say?
==
>
>
> << Ok, fess up--Just *how big* is your kitchen and how do you store all
those
> lids?
> (I need some tips on lid storage :-) >>
>
>
>

In article >,
Vox Humana > wrote:
>
>"Sheellah" > wrote in message
...
>> Well, it's better than having no brains, and no money....LOL!!! Jealous
>are we?
>> All my cookware has been VERY carefully evaluated as my other posts show,
>and
>> the cookware that I didn't want was sold at a handsome profit, allowing me
>to
>> get what I did keep at an awesome price! Please feel free though, to
>continue
>> this thread all by yourself..:-).
>>
>
>Since you brought it up, I have to ask what's up with you and the endless
>acquisition of cookware? Are you a compulsive buyer or do you have some
>sort of job evaluating cookware?
>
>


ROTFLMAO!!!



Joe