|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
209.119.132.238
In Reply to: RE: Actually... posted by mkuller on September 12, 2015 at 21:01:21
The money I was paid for the reviews I wrote for Listener worked out to a lot less than a dollar an hour for the time each review required. I'm not a natural writer so I sometimes spent a couple of hours polishing just one paragraph to my satisfaction. I completely agree with Mr. Kuller that the real reward for writing the articles was getting to play with cool expensive gear for free. Also, since I was being paid (albeit modestly) for writing, there are various tax angles one can work to get Uncle Sam to effectively subsidize your hobby.
Follow Ups:
There are some reviewers who purchased mega-buck systems. In addition to tax write-offs they may be able to get, they saved substantial amounts of money on their purchases. A reviewer whose system sells for $100,000 retail may have in effect received a $40-50,000 benefit. Consider a guy like Fremer, who does have a mega-buck system no doubt all bought with a discount.
I'd think that at the least quite a few reviewers basically get equipment for free. Just as an example.......
Two years after writing a rave review of a $6500 (at the time) Wells Audio amp culminating in telling readers he purchased the amp, Doug Schroeder listed the amp on A'gon for $3500. That's probably what he paid for it with his discount. Presumably it sold - the listing is gone.
One way to look at it is that the use of a $6500 amp for two years at zero cost is remuneration. BTW - *I'm in no way implying anything untoward about Doug or other reviewers*. Just sayin' that maybe things like that should be counted as remuneration rather than trying to minimize it by referring to it as a mere "perk".
I suppose it does.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: