Solo Longjack supp?

sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
no worries on the Nutrex topic. I understand what you’re saying.

Longkat XT lol.....that would actually be a terrible idea i think.

I’d say go with LongJack XT and just explain differences in the writeups. Get it out there man.
Thank you. We have the raws so it really has been just the labels + production time holding it up.

I'll get things rolling on it. It'll probably be more on the 8 week side of things just guessing, because we have the Optimize-T release coming up and don't want to do release the LongJack right when we release Optimize-T or Optimize-T would definitely overshadow it.
 
ELROCK

ELROCK

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
Yeah, that's what I've been struggling with. The label text has been done for over a month and I've been trying to figure out the best name for it. It's down to LongJack XT, Tongkat XT, and Tongkat Ali XT. I'm leaning toward LongJack XT myself.
Tongkat Ali XT is the best name for it IMO.
 
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
Tongkat Ali XT is the best name for it IMO.
Thank you. That was my original pick. It's been split almost 50/50 on opinions between that and Long Jack XT. I'm leaning towards Tong Kat Ali XT though.
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
5
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
Thank you. We have the raws so it really has been just the labels + production time holding it up.

I'll get things rolling on it. It'll probably be more on the 8 week side of things just guessing, because we have the Optimize-T release coming up and don't want to do release the LongJack right when we release Optimize-T or Optimize-T would definitely overshadow it.
going to be hard to beat m-test....i would love to see a solo fadogia!!!
 
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
going to be hard to beat m-test....i would love to see a solo fadogia!!!
It's not meant to compete with M-Test at all.

We have teased an Optimize-T product for years but the biggest reason it took so long to develop and come out with Optimize-T is because M-Test is such a great formula and we didn't want to compete with it. So it took years to settle on a formula that we were happy with.

Optimize-T will stack perfect with M-Test for people wanting to stack them.

And it will be a perfect alternative for people that want a testosterone booster that doesn't have KSM66 or Mucuna in it. I personally love those ingredients, but there are a few people out there that either doesn't want them or uses them in different products so they don't want to use them in more than one thing.

I love M-Test and I use it as a daily use supplement. I won't be stopping it at all, but I'll be adding Optimize-T to it :)
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
5
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
It's not meant to compete with M-Test at all.

We have teased an Optimize-T product for years but the biggest reason it took so long to develop and come out with Optimize-T is because M-Test is such a great formula and we didn't want to compete with it. So it took years to settle on a formula that we were happy with.

Optimize-T will stack perfect with M-Test for people wanting to stack them.

And it will be a perfect alternative for people that want a testosterone booster that doesn't have KSM66 or Mucuna in it. I personally love those ingredients, but there are a few people out there that either doesn't want them or uses them in different products so they don't want to use them in more than one thing.

I love M-Test and I use it as a daily use supplement. I won't be stopping it at all, but I'll be adding Optimize-T to it :)
let me know when i can get a bottle of optimize-t...got several bottles of m-test to stack with it!!!
 
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
let me know when i can get a bottle of optimize-t...got several bottles of m-test to stack with it!!!
I'll let you know as soon as I have a definite ETA. Labels are done, raws are in; just a matter of production time :)
 

totalpackage

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
you tried Barlowes 100:1, why not the 200:1. Get kind of confusing with all the extracts
When I used Barlowes it was about 4 yrs ago and their 100:1 extract cost $17.95 for 60 caps
then they added Pasak Bumi TKA 200:1 extract to their site for $49.99 for 60 caps but why
would I wanna pay DOUBLE the price when I was already getting good results form the 100:1
and just because it's 200:1 doesn't mean it's gonna be more effective cause I've seen feedback
in the past where some just didn't get much from the 200:1 and the 100:1 was more effective
but as always herbals effect everyone differently so again when I go to Barlowes in the future
I'm sticking with the 100:1 cause it WORKED for me in the past and price is decent.:)
 
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
any update on this?
I'm sorry, I 've been talking about several different products in this thread so I'm not sure which one you're asking about.

LJ100 - we are going to do it, it just has several new products in front of it.

The other LJ extract - raw materials are in; just need to decide a name and have labels printed.

Optimize-T - will be out before the above; everything is done on this and its just a matter of production time.
 
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
If you need helpful suggestions on names, I think we can assemble just the right creative and marketing-oriented team.
Ha. I agree.

It's probably between Longjack XT and Tongkat Ali XT and leaning towards Tongkat Ali XT.
 

uncle-rico

New member
Awards
0
I'm trying to get my Hands on LJ100 in the EU and found some at Biovea. Does anyone know if it's legit? Because it's not listed at hpingredients.

Same for Nutrex Tested. I could get it, but it's also not listed there.
 
Last edited:
Rostam

Rostam

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
I want to try The 2% extract from Nootropic depot but seen many feedbacks with nausea as side effect so I’m hesitating. I’ve never had this issue with other Tongkat supplements.
 
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
We have a really good extract in the production lineup but I'm not sure of an exact release date yet. We have so many things in production that its kind of gotten pushed back a little but but it should be within the next 2 months I hope.
 
barische

barische

Member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
I want to try The 2% extract from Nootropic depot but seen many feedbacks with nausea as side effect so I’m hesitating. I’ve never had this issue with other Tongkat supplements.
I just ordered it. Im hearing that nausea is due
To empty stomach
 
barische

barische

Member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
We have a really good extract in the production lineup but I'm not sure of an exact release date yet. We have so many things in production that its kind of gotten pushed back a little but but it should be within the next 2 months I hope.
Whats the eurycomanone % gonna be
 
uforce

uforce

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I want to try The 2% extract from Nootropic depot but seen many feedbacks with nausea as side effect so I’m hesitating. I’ve never had this issue with other Tongkat supplements.
i wasn’t a fan. got no libido boost and had increased joint pain. couldn’t finish the bottle.
 
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
Whats the eurycomanone % gonna be
Minimum 2%.
i wasn’t a fan. got no libido boost and had increased joint pain. couldn’t finish the bottle.
I just want to remind everyone to please don't judge ours based on theirs.
What people are reporting experiencing with theirs is not indicative of what 2% Eurycomanone should be.

When we were looking at different types, we had some samples of the the one we are going to be offering. We let people try it ranging from myself to people in their 60's to some of the younger guys at the gym. The libido increase is noticeable, very noticeable.
 

alvin1

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
  • RockStar
I just want to remind everyone to please don't judge ours based on theirs.
What people are reporting experiencing with theirs is not indicative of what 2% Eurycomanone should be.

When we were looking at different types, we had some samples of the the one we are going to be offering. We let people try it ranging from myself to people in their 60's to some of the younger guys at the gym. The libido increase is noticeable, very noticeable.
Will this Tongkat ali replace the one in your M test formula?
 
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
Will this Tongkat ali replace the one in your M test formula?
No, this has nothing at all to do with M-Test. The type we use in M-Test works great with the M-Test formula and people love M-Test so we definitely don't want to change anything with it.

We had people asking us to do a single ingredient one under SNS, so that's what I'm referring to here.
 
Rostam

Rostam

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
what is the percentage of eurycomanone in M-test’s tongkat if you could share? Why using different extract than what you have in M-Test?
 
Last edited:
aaronuconn

aaronuconn

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
what is the percentage of eurycomanone in M-test’s tongkat if you could share? Why using different extract than what you have in M-Test?
Obviously not intending to answer for Steve here, but just my thoughts below.

Not putting a % allows for flexibility. Maybe one batch has 2%, the next has 3%, then the next has 1.5% due to instability in the Tongkat Ali supply chain/procurement process. If you claim a specific number on a label, you have to be producing that every batch. If not, you’d need a new label each time, which is $$$.

I thought I read somewhere a while back that the non-licensed tongkat ali market wasn’t super stable and it was hard to get the exact same extract time and time again. I could be way off, and now I can’t remember where I read that, but that could be a reason not to claim a % on the label.

Also, LJ100 has MAP pricing. The lowest you can price it for is like ~$30. M-Test costs about that with a ton of other high quality ingredients. If M-Test were to use LJ100, or another branded Tongkat Ali product like Bionutricia, it may drive the overall product cost way up.
 
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
what is the percentage of eurycomanone in M-test’s tongkat if you could share? Why using different extract than what you have in M-Test?
The simple answer would be - to give people options.

In the discussions in this thread people have discussed different types of and wanting to try different types of Tongkat Ali. A good example is in this thread we've been asked to do an LJ100 and then we've had other people say that they hope we won't do an LJ100 and will pick a different type to do. I'd confirmed at that time that we had already selected a type that we really liked and were going to be doing but that we would be glad to offer an LJ100 too if people wanted it.

The more detailed answer would be:

Even though people on AM associate SNS and Competitive Edge Labs, they are two completely separate companies and except for the forum customer base here, they generally cater to completely different customer bases. At least once every couple of days, I'll reply to an email from a customer asking a question from my SNS email and they'll reply back that they had no idea SNS was in any way associated with CEL or vice versa. People tend to view CEL as the more hardcore bodybuilding brand whereas SNS is generally viewed as a bodybuilding brand and also appeals more to the general health and fitness crowd. That's one reason why SNS has so many more products than CEL does. People tend to look to CEL for hardcore options and products whereas they tend to look to SNS for a variety of options.

Where I'm going with this is to answer your question, we've been asked to do a single ingredient Tongkat for awhile now. Earlier in this thread, there were people that said they wanted to see us do an LJ100 and then there were people that said they wanted to see us do a type besides LJ100. I confirmed at that time that we had already selected a type that we really liked and were going to be doing but that we would also be glad to offer an LJ100 too if people wanted it.

^^^ That ties into SNS being the brand that offers more options.
CEL already has M-Test which has Eurycoma in it and the type used in it is a great for that product, as evidenced by the large amount of great feedback on it. M-Test works great, people love it, is cost effective, and there is absolutely no reason for us to want to change anything about it.

But there are still a lot of people out there that want us to do a solo Tongkat Ali product, and with SNS we focus a lot on branded ingredients and have great relationships with a lot of branded ingredient suppliers, so a lot of times the single ingredient things you'll see from us will be branded ingredient options when there are good options available and they make sense to use.

Besides, no one said that the version I'm talking about won't be in the upcoming SNS Optimize-T ;)
 
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
Obviously not intending to answer for Steve here, but just my thoughts below.

Not putting a % allows for flexibility. Maybe one batch has 2%, the next has 3%, then the next has 1.5% due to instability in the Tongkat Ali supply chain/procurement process. If you claim a specific number on a label, you have to be producing that every batch. If not, you’d need a new label each time, which is $$$.

I thought I read somewhere a while back that the non-licensed tongkat ali market wasn’t super stable and it was hard to get the exact same extract time and time again. I could be way off, and now I can’t remember where I read that, but that could be a reason not to claim a % on the label.

Also, LJ100 has MAP pricing. The lowest you can price it for is like ~$30. M-Test costs about that with a ton of other high quality ingredients. If M-Test were to use LJ100, or another branded Tongkat Ali product like Bionutricia, it may drive the overall product cost way up.
Thank you. You brought up some excellent points.

Not putting an exact % does definitely allow for more flexibility like you stated above.

I have made the mistake before of specifying a percentage of an ingredient on a label and then that ingredient became unavailable for x amount of time and then you either have to be out of stock of it or change your labels (which costs more than just the cost of labels themselves - graphic arts fees, new renders, labels, etc.). A lot of brands just substitute a different % without disclosing it but that's not the way we do things.

And also it makes it harder to copy M-Test's formula; which as you know, there have been companies try to do since the product first came out. If someone doesn't know the %'s, they can't copy it. And 99% of the time, they're going to guess lower than we actually use to try to keep their costs down. With M-Test, we always have and still do use high quality extracts and take a very low markup margin on this product in order for retailers to be able to offer it at around 29.99 because we want it to be affordable for everyone that wants to use it.

And yes, you are absolutely correct on LJ100 pricing. They require a MAP price of >30.00 which is more expensive than a lot of retailers sell M-Test for. But I wouldn't even want to use LJ100 in M-Test regardless bc LJ100, as evidenced in this thread is a type that people either seem to love or it doesn't seem to work well for them. (But unfortunately, there are also a lot of brands that claim to offer LJ100 that probably aren't really using it in their products due to the price).

Great post. Thank you.
 
barische

barische

Member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
According to nootropics, many eurycoma doesnt have any eurycomanones per their testing. Will you post COA / % hplc reports.
 
Last edited:
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
According to nootropics, many eurycoma doesnt have any eurycomanones per their testing. Will you post COA / % reports.
My reply here isn't specifically to you - I just wanted to emphasize that bc you probably already know a lot of this. I didn't want it to come off as replying directly to you and overexplaining it to you. I hope that makes sense. I'm more posting this to educate the people that don't, like people that may be reading that don't post. :)

The simple answer to your question is:
The Tongkat we'll be doing will be a licensed branded ingredient so the quality will have been tested and authenticated by both the branded ingredient supplier and by the contract manufacturer per GMP protocols.

To expand on your question and just discuss some QC industry things in detail:

I do agree that there are many brands that claim that their raw materials contain a certain % of Eurycomanone and it doesn't test out. That's why I like to use branded ingredients bc even though you may pay a little more, you know you're getting a consistent percentage of material (not just on this ingredient, but others as well).

In the old days, we did post COA's or lab reports for everything. Now days, there's no way I can keep up with posting COA's and Lab Reports of every batch of every product when we have over 60 sku's and over 20 in various stages of production. There aren't enough hours in the day to do my job as is, and there definitely wouldn't be to do that.

Every single product of ours is made in FDA registered GMP compliant manufacturing facilities. What this means is that they receive FDA inspections and follow all GMP guidelines including microbial testing, heavy metals testing, finished product testing, etc. This is no knock at any other companies, but we're one of the very few on AM that are FDA registered and receive FDA inspections.

^^^ That's one reason that you'll never see me post certain things like you see some companies post. Again, not knocking anyone, just explaining. When a company posts something to consumers like 'we just received raw materials in today and it'll be capped and bottled and ready to order by Friday', what the average consumer sees is 'Yay, I can get my stuff Friday'. What a company owner that uses GMP compliant contract manufacturers sees is 'Wow, that's impossible because it wouldn't even be out of QC by Friday. They aren't doing any microbial testing and aren't following the guidelines, I hope everyone that uses it will be okay. I wonder if its being professionally made or if they're bottling it themselves.' I do believe that not all companies that are doing it that way are doing it trying to hide things; from their side, its time consuming, expensive, decreases their margins, etc. But that doesn't make it any less risky.


I'll also say that what most companies post and claim are COA's aren't worth the paper they're on bc they are things that could be created in a word document or Adobe in less than 5 minutes.

But in fairness to companies that will not post or show real supplier COA's, I don't view that as shady at all because there's an obvious reason that they may not want to that most people don't think about - and that's that they probably don't want their competitors to know where they're buying their raws from and a real supplier COA will have the supplier information on it, not the finished company information on it.

There have been so many cases over the years where I've seen places slip up on a 'COA' and leave things on there that I could tell they were editing them themselves; that's where my policy of never speaking negatively about other brands sometimes can become a real moral and ethical conflict when I see things like that.

I posted an example one time years ago, I wish I still knew where it was but its on an old laptop or something. I had created an example document of a COA for Unicorn Fairy Sprinkles from 100% real Unicorns and harvested by Fairies or something like that just to show how easy it was and how so many companies are full of it. (What was really funny is that I got so many pm's from people that normally don't post that had kids that had printed that and showed their kids for laughs haha).
 
Rostam

Rostam

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Thank you. You brought up some excellent points.

Not putting an exact % does definitely allow for more flexibility like you stated above.

I have made the mistake before of specifying a percentage of an ingredient on a label and then that ingredient became unavailable for x amount of time and then you either have to be out of stock of it or change your labels (which costs more than just the cost of labels themselves - graphic arts fees, new renders, labels, etc.). A lot of brands just substitute a different % without disclosing it but that's not the way we do things.

And also it makes it harder to copy M-Test's formula; which as you know, there have been companies try to do since the product first came out. If someone doesn't know the %'s, they can't copy it. And 99% of the time, they're going to guess lower than we actually use to try to keep their costs down. With M-Test, we always have and still do use high quality extracts and take a very low markup margin on this product in order for retailers to be able to offer it at around 29.99 because we want it to be affordable for everyone that wants to use it.

And yes, you are absolutely correct on LJ100 pricing. They require a MAP price of >30.00 which is more expensive than a lot of retailers sell M-Test for. But I wouldn't even want to use LJ100 in M-Test regardless bc LJ100, as evidenced in this thread is a type that people either seem to love or it doesn't seem to work well for them. (But unfortunately, there are also a lot of brands that claim to offer LJ100 that probably aren't really using it in their products due to the price).

Great post. Thank you.
Thank you for your responses.
My question about the percentage of the eurycomanone in M-test was more related to it’s effect on testosterone/cortisol. I was just wondering if a 2% extract for example is good to support testosterone or if a specific extract would be needed for this.
 
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
Thank you for your responses.
My question about the percentage of the eurycomanone in M-test was more related to it’s effect on testosterone/cortisol. I was just wondering if a 2% extract for example is good to support testosterone or if a specific extract would be needed for this.
No, it wouldn't be specific to an exact extract. For example, 200 mg. of a 2% or 400 mg. of a 1% should in theory work out the same.

But there really is a big issue with a lot of raw materials on this particular ingredient in general, in that a lot aren't what they're supposed to be. You can look at what's going on with LJ100 for example - the same person that gets results from one brands LJ100 may not from the next brands; BUT the raw materials should be the same bc they should be buying them from the branded ingredient supplier. Stuff like this is why we don't mind offering more than one version of the same ingredient and why we're trying to greatly expand this year in terms of branded ingredient. I can't help what company XYZ does and I hate to guess whether this or that company is really using the branded ingredient they say they are, but what I can control is that if we offer it ourselves I know its legit :)
 
Rostam

Rostam

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Waiting for the SNS LJ100 to be released, you guys have a suggestion on the brand? after reading few comments on the ND's I'm not sure I'll buy my tongkat from them.
 
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
Waiting for the SNS LJ100 to be released, you guys have a suggestion on the brand? after reading few comments on the ND's I'm not sure I'll buy my tongkat from them.
That's a tough one. I would have said Nutrex bc I do trust the brand but there's been some bad feedback on theirs in the thread and I don't think they even make it anymore. I did a search for you and I can't find it at a 100 mg. dose by any brand I trust right now. I trust NOW Foods but theirs is 50 mg. and I trust Source Naturals but theirs is 80 mg.
 
sns8778

sns8778

Board Sponsor
Awards
4
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
  • Best Answer
how many mg per serving will SNS’s LJ100 be?

Bluebonnet is trustworthy imo
Well, here is what worries me on that (Blue Bonnet) - Nutrex is an absolutely trust worthy brand. So by people saying that theirs didn't seem to be what it was supposed to be, it would make me question not them, but the contract manufacturer that they use. So that could carry over to other brands and I just can't speak for or against theirs. NOW Foods and Source Naturals have their own contract manufacturing facilities so that's an extra layer there. I actually didn't see Blue Bonnet making one when I searched, so I'm not speaking for or against theirs, I'm neutral. It takes a lot for me to vouch for a brand. Hope that makes sense.

Most likely ours would be 60 Veg Caps @ 100 mg. LJ100 per capsule. I like the idea of 60 caps @ 100 mg. versus 30 caps @ 200 mg. for versatility.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Supplements 1
Supplement Auction 0
Anabolics 10
RIPDanDuchaine Training Forum 0
Supplements 9

Similar threads


Top