strondbakken
Guest
- Messages
- 13
- Reaction score
- 0
hmmmmm.....
ScubaPro not Allowing Testing of Products
- Thread starter 5615mike
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
ams511
Contributor
Look I used to be affiliated with a watersport magazine and I can tell you that product testing is biased. Manufacturers send gear that never gets returned and a contract for multiple insertions in exchange for favorable reviews. Skin Diver used to be the most blatant, you read the review and the next page would be the ad. This is nothing new. If you notice Sherwood and Poseidon regs generally are not reviewed either. What happens is a new company comes along with a big ad budget and suddenly their equipment is a must have. Same thing happens with an established manf. with a new product. Look at Scubapro. Poseidon, and Sherwood; they are established companies with mature product lines and excellent reputations. Why do they need to spend money on advertising just to get non-biased reviews?
Panama Jack
Guest
I want to argue, too. The fellow diver that mentioned consumer reports, indeed does not have ad's. The bad news is consumer reports has lost a few court cases after some incriminatng video was released depicting the editors trying over and over to duplicate a SUV rollover in the early 90's.
As far as the reviews in Rodales, SP is out, whatever. I don't dive a test sheet. Like a vehicle review, I also don't drive a test sheet. I get reviews from those I trust in diving. This may be a dive shop owner. He sells a few different brands, like 10 different regs. He will sell me whatever I want, really. He may be biased, but he is alive. I can trust that living though thousands of dives on SP gear, thats the only review I really need. Other magazine reviews are nice, second opinion, but if SP is out, so is my subsciption. This month happens to be renewal month for me.
As far as the reviews in Rodales, SP is out, whatever. I don't dive a test sheet. Like a vehicle review, I also don't drive a test sheet. I get reviews from those I trust in diving. This may be a dive shop owner. He sells a few different brands, like 10 different regs. He will sell me whatever I want, really. He may be biased, but he is alive. I can trust that living though thousands of dives on SP gear, thats the only review I really need. Other magazine reviews are nice, second opinion, but if SP is out, so is my subsciption. This month happens to be renewal month for me.
Former FLL Now MSP Diver
Contributor
ams511:
What magazine were you affiliated with that did this?
Marc
The Kraken
He Who Glows in the Dark Waters (ADVISOR)
ScubaBoard Supporter
Scuba Instructor
Divemaster
FLL,
I dare say theat ams511 would probably prefer not to answer your question out of legal concerns . . . .
I dare say theat ams511 would probably prefer not to answer your question out of legal concerns . . . .
Former FLL Now MSP Diver
Contributor
The Kracken:
If it's true and can be substantiated, then there shouldn't be a problem.
Marc
Greg Barlow
Contributor
archman:
It certainly doesn't make me an expert. I am on this board to learn just like everyone else.
Greg
Panama Jack:
A company aquires/merges with another company for a couple big reasons: they are trying to aquire marketshare, they see another company as having products which complements or completes gaps in their product lines, the other company owns trademarks, copyrights, or patents which they wish to own, it goes on and on...
The reality of aquisitions in many cases is that product development can go one of two ways - get a lot better or get a lot worse. Products (at least well developed ones) have strong teams of talented people that in many cases have been working in their industry for a very long time. Often, companies that get aquired go through a reduction-in-force to right-size the company and eliminate redundant jobs. What often happens is that they let the wrong people go... or the process by which they develop their products begins to fluctuate and they never collected enough data about how they actually developed the product in the first place - so when they need to recreate a product development environment, they can't.
A lot of times - people just don't get along and have divergent ideas on how a company should develop it's products. In the end - it doesn't take long to figure out which way things are going to go.
On the other hand, sometimes aquisitions end up producing GREAT products... when the great minds from two different companies come together. Although I think this happens less often then corporate america would like to admit. I can't speak for scubapro but its likely that they were bought for the marketshare and brandname. A talented aquisition manager can help eleviate some of the stresses which cause companies to go from good to bad after an aquisition or merger.
Greg Barlow
Contributor
One bit of info for those who have an interest....While I held my editorial position at Rodale's I was responsible to Senior Editor David Taylor. David left the mag some time ago to venture into other facets of the diving industry. Short and simple, he is a class act. While Dave was in charge he had one simple rule that was NEVER allowed to be altered...NO GIFTS ARE ALLOWED TO BE ACCEPTED BY ANY OF THE STAFF. Every piece of gear submitted by the manufacturers was inventoried, evaluated, and returned to the corporations. I had to keep accurate records along with FedEx receipts showing when items were shipped and to their contents.
As far as ScubaPro employees or anyone else wanting to provide documentation that this policy was not strictly adhered to during Dave's tenure, then put it in print. I'm certain that the mag's attorneys would love to see that written on a coroporate letterhead. I can't speak for the mag after Dave and I left, but I do know what the policy was during that time period. For example, being actively involved in technical diving research, Jarod Jablonski sent me a complimentary copy of the Fundamentals of DIR . I read it twice, spoke to Jarod on at least three different occasions concerning my perspective of its contents (I was greatly impressed), and wrote my review. Well, I told Jarod that I'd like to charge its cost to my credit card. Jarod told me to please keep it as a gift for my time. I explained to him the policy and he said that he completely understood. By the way, Jarod is another class act. You may or may not adhere to the DIR approach, but he is a real nice guy.
Sherwood, along with some other companies, has over the years claimed that Rodale's reg tests were filled with incorrect breathing simulator scores. Hummmmm....Take the time to compare the scores from the mag DIVER at www.divernet.com. Correspond with some German divers and ask them to share the ANSTI simulator scores from their country's mag Undertasser. They are for the most part virtually identical.
Subjective testing protocols are not very scientific, even when you try to control the variables. Being of a scientific nature, I trust simulator scores when comparing "apples to apples". Sure, the erogonomics and breathing patterns can be loosely compared, but they are far from being capable of standing on their own merits.
Also, some of you may remember the hoopla over the article I wrote on comparing the various teaching materials used in open water courses from the different agencies. Some agencies were, shall I say a bit pi**ed off. Funny, though, some of my recommendations came up in later teaching materials. I can't claim the credit, but I ALWAYS called a spade a spade. Dave wouldn't let it be any other way.
Greg
As far as ScubaPro employees or anyone else wanting to provide documentation that this policy was not strictly adhered to during Dave's tenure, then put it in print. I'm certain that the mag's attorneys would love to see that written on a coroporate letterhead. I can't speak for the mag after Dave and I left, but I do know what the policy was during that time period. For example, being actively involved in technical diving research, Jarod Jablonski sent me a complimentary copy of the Fundamentals of DIR . I read it twice, spoke to Jarod on at least three different occasions concerning my perspective of its contents (I was greatly impressed), and wrote my review. Well, I told Jarod that I'd like to charge its cost to my credit card. Jarod told me to please keep it as a gift for my time. I explained to him the policy and he said that he completely understood. By the way, Jarod is another class act. You may or may not adhere to the DIR approach, but he is a real nice guy.
Sherwood, along with some other companies, has over the years claimed that Rodale's reg tests were filled with incorrect breathing simulator scores. Hummmmm....Take the time to compare the scores from the mag DIVER at www.divernet.com. Correspond with some German divers and ask them to share the ANSTI simulator scores from their country's mag Undertasser. They are for the most part virtually identical.
Subjective testing protocols are not very scientific, even when you try to control the variables. Being of a scientific nature, I trust simulator scores when comparing "apples to apples". Sure, the erogonomics and breathing patterns can be loosely compared, but they are far from being capable of standing on their own merits.
Also, some of you may remember the hoopla over the article I wrote on comparing the various teaching materials used in open water courses from the different agencies. Some agencies were, shall I say a bit pi**ed off. Funny, though, some of my recommendations came up in later teaching materials. I can't claim the credit, but I ALWAYS called a spade a spade. Dave wouldn't let it be any other way.
Greg
Similar threads
