Home Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

If the review period is long over and the reviewer does not.....

consider the cables so good that he/she "must" purchase them -- at insider's discount price -- why are they listed as being part of the reviewer's reference system? This seems to be an obvious built-in incentive for cable manufacturers to leave their cables with the reviewer for advertising purposes. Some may not want to do that with very expensive items, but what about brands/models for which manufacturers determine the benefit of what amounts to free advertising trumps getting the cables/equipment back?

You have plenty of rules. It appears that you just don't enforce rules when it comes to cables. Additionally, it makes the cables in the associated equipment list meaningless. The reader has no way to tell what cables the reviewer actually liked well enough to purchase vs. cables the manufacturer wants them to have so the brand will continue to appear on the list. Does this same situation apply to components/spkrs on the associated comp. list?

Two simple solutions occur to me: a) Don't list cables (or anything else) the manufacturers refuse to pay return shipping for when the review is done; b) announce a policy that all cables not purchased by a reviewer after the review is concluded will be auctioned if the manufacturer does not pay for return shipping within X time period. This could certainly be written into a review contract signed by the manufacturer. Its tough to believe that a manufacturer wouldn't think that a good review in S'phile is worth shipping costs.

I would like to see a true Reviewer's System list which ONLY includes equipment the reviewer has purchased for their system. Other products employed in the review process? Fine, list them seperately.



This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Amplified Parts  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
  • If the review period is long over and the reviewer does not..... - Rick W 10:27:37 02/21/07 (0)


You can not post to an archived thread.