| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Gould,
Since you used the movie metaphor, lets follow the thread a little farther. If you read a movie critic who thinks every movie he sees is wonderful, you would begin to question the critic's ability to provide a review one can believe in. When one reads "boat reviews", the "reviewer" always loves the boat. There are movie critics who can be bought. The distributors give them a airline ticket to Hollywood, put them up in a 5 star hotel and the distributor is guaranteed a 5 star review. These movie "critics" are whores, who sell themselves for the price of an airline ticket and hotel. The difference between these unreliable movie critics and Boat reviewers are the price they charge to sell out. Boat Reviewers use ad dollars as the price to give a great review, they might also be persuaded by perks offered by the mfg. There are many reliable movie critics who are not whores, the same came not be said about boat reviewers. You boat review provided a valuable service, because it highlighted the need for boat buyers to take what they read in boat mags with a grain of salt. wrote in message oups.com... Nonsense. To do a truly objective test, you not only need to run the compared boats on the same day under the same conditions, you need to do like Consumer Reports does and actually buy the products, anonymously, at retail, from a dealer. Otherwise, how can you be certain that somebody hasn't "tweaked" something just a bit? In Herring's example, we would spend what, a quarter million bucks? To make sure we got undoctored boats for a single article? I know this is a hard concept for many of you to understand, and the posts of some here certainly support my observations, but it is possible to comment on Thing A without running down Thing B or Thing C at the same time. Most of the items a shopper will consider are subjective, and subject to individual preference. You guys seem to expect an objective comparison between top sirloin, lamb, and lobster and some definitive answer about which meal is "best". When you read a restaurant review, do you fault the reviewer for failing to comment on every other Chinese joint in town? How about movie critics? Can a critic say anything useful about "Lord of the Rings" without discussing "Ray", "The Titanic", and "Glory"? Boat reviews point out the highlights, and any glaring deficiencies in a boat. You don't read that many with glaring deficiencies because by the time a builder gets to major mfg status, the market weeds out the guys building true crap. I've never seen a major mfg. boat that is totally unsuited for safe and appropriate use by somebody, under the right conditions. Two equally knowledgeable boaters will evaluate the same boat, and one might rule it out immediately and go on to buy something else, while the other likes it so much he writes a check on the spot. Which one was "right"? (Hint: most likely both, they simply prioritized different needs). |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Bought a Reinel 26' | ASA | |||
| 'Lectric boats | General | |||
| does anyone talk about BOATS here, ever? | General | |||
| rec.boats.paddle sea kayaking FAQ | General | |||
| "The SEARCH" redux (long, as usual) | Cruising | |||