I'm not interested in who you are working for- it would be a touch unrealistic to expect you to name them when you've explained the marketing practices you use.
However you did use the phrase 'little known' - I took that to have the commonly accepted meaning, and merely enquired as to whether your approach was getting the desired results.
I'm not too sure what you mean by 'justify my viewpoint...' etc.
"I find it wierd when a mag has say a big fullpage ad from say Specialized and a favourable review all in the same issue."
LOL. It's neither conspiracy nor coincidence. Big successful companies tend to do two things: - make good products and advertise them.
Does anyone here really think Specialized (usually the ones cited in these arguments) makes rubbish bikes? Is it really that surprising that their bikes get good reviews? Is it really that surprising that they advertise a lot?
It might be weird or suspicious if they hardly ever advertised, but in the one month they did, their usually or obviously rubbish product got a great review, but that's just not the reality.
Thanks Dave that is why I like and buy singletrack because I feel that soem of the testing is done by ordinary bods, possibly better skill level than me but not full time journos, I feel it is a more honest approach possibly mixed with a touch of realism of where we ride, northern grit and so on, I also like the fact singletrack still responds online and has kept integrity in the 'product'. Long may it continue.
[b]WHY DO ALL THE MAGS RATE FOX FORKS?[/b]
.
.
.
.
.
TBH? If I could afford 2009 Fox forks I'd rate them to the max. As it is I can't afford them so I'm limited to pressing my nose against the shop window glass and staring in..Value for money - go for Pikes/Mazz pre-2007. Otherwise the future is ££$$££..
Vinnyeh, sorry, justify was the wrong turn of phrase, 'valiadate; might have been more accurate. It's not the marketing practices 'we' use, everyone does, at least the successful brands, regardless of their field.
Is sq225917 working in the US or UK? I've noticed things seem to be a bit different in the US. I bought a mag last time I was there and it featured a few bikes, but they weren't really reviews - just long adverts. There was patently nothing objective in them at all, and I found this quite shocking.
I would suggest that in the UK at least there are so few MTB magazines that the manufacturers need the ad space, rather than the other way round. You can only use something as a bargaining chip if the other party needs it more than you do. If you don't advertise in say MBR, then you are missing a massive chunk of the MTBing population, and probably most of the spending power.
Sq, I think you should keep quiet before you get a solicitor having a chat with you!!
I don't know how you have kept calm, Mark.
I would like to know what products sq225917 sells, so I can keep well away from them. Obviously they can't be good enough on their own merit and need bribery and coertion to sell any at all.
Hasn't anyone ever noticed a bike review which has rated the product as poor, with the manufacturers advert near it? I have, and always wondered why they bothered advertising when the review was unfavourable. Why did they? Because, as Mark says, there is no link between the advertising revenue and the review.
And I can back up his claim about ST being disorganized, their last place was a tip! Great coffee, cheers guys. 🙂
Sq, I think you should keep quiet before you get a solicitor having a chat with you!!
On what basis?
I don't believe Sq accused Singletrack Mag directly of anything.
Rob, Please try to a least read what I wrote, not what you think I wrote.
Please point out where I stated that bribery or coercion were required to sell any product or that I advised trying them.
I'll state it one more time for those at the back who are having trouble understanding.
There are a multitude of different, positive ways in which you can 'unduly' influence the outcome of a review, without having to resort to any 'negative' tactics. A good product manager will know the review staff on his magazines intimately and ensure that he does all he can to punch their happy buttons when they are reviewing his product.
Rob, companies will have an advert next to a poor review because they book spreads of adverts and get a lower rate for say 6 or 12 issues than they do by spotting ads on an ad hoc basis. You can't just pull a single advert from an issue when you have a 12 month contract. Well you can but you'd look like a dick, after a few poor reviews you'd be pulling your adverts anyway.
I wasn't talking about making shit products seem better than they are, I was talking about what makes the difference between the leader and the good also rans. It's What makes Specialized and Burton for example, different from say Trek or Nitro Snowboards, and why Fox gets so much press when their products aren't exactly built to last.
Molgrips, I'm UK based geographically, but work for a US company with a global reach.
splitting hairs there sq, sure you didn't directly state that bribery and coercion were used to sell your product. You did however state
If I couldn't exert some leverage over the magazine who reviews our kit you can be damn sure they'd not get kit to review or adverts placed with them.
To me the implications are (and please correct me as to what your intentions were, if I'm misreading):
that either you personally or the company you work for expect some positive return for providing review product and/or purchasing advertising, above and beyond an unbiased review.
If that's not the case, then what purpose does this 'leveraging' have but attempting to increase sales through bribery or coecion ie leveraging, unless of course you're receiving kickbacks yourself?
There are some amazingly naive people about if they don't believe gifts and trinkets bestowed in order to create a positive opinion of a company, though not to the extent of trying in affect specific outcome, doesn't go on in the bike industry. It happens in all industries.
Of course the term 'bribe' is too strong a word for what goes on as that in my mind conjures up images of brown envelopes stuffed with used notes but 'corporate hospitality' is a not insignificant industry for a reason. Keeping people you rely on happy is useful.
Vinney - there's a big difference between bribery and 'putting a positive slant on things'.
take someone sunny and have them experience your kit in that environment is going to produce a more favourable response than a wet, blowy thursday in the middle of the moors. not necessarily because the trip is free, but simply because human beings are generally happier when the sun shines. it's the same difference between surly bu66ers trying to sell stuff and a nice looking girl - 'he's a **** but their stuff is alright' or 'lovely norks and great kit too'.
which one makes you feel more positive? it's bound to come out in the writing.
oh, and FWIW i'm not about to spend 50 or a 100 quid a year servicing a fork which costs 2 or 300 quid. i'd rather bin and buy another when it starts playing up. my time is worth more than that.
jeezzz.... this has to be the most boring thread in a while. It's a fork, on a bike. Some work all of the time, badly. And others work well but only some of the time.
It's a fork.
move on, nothing more to see here.......
st - you've posted on our website basically questioning our professional integrity - you should have seen my pre-edited response! 😉
I don't think he's questioning your professional integrity, I'm sure most would agree that the reviews published in ST mag leave those of us mags a little in the shade (and no, thats not an attempt to suck up to the ST crew), its just that although you are reviewers you are also (I believe) human beings.
We humans (even the mighty members of the breed known as reviewers) are fallible creatures and can be coerced both consciously and subconsciously by others through a variety of means to look on those 'others' in a more favorable light.
I don't believe he is suggesting bike companies lean on you with the promise of more 'test camps' in exotic destinations for a favorable review but trying out a new products for the first time in Moab rather than a damp field in Droitwich may unconsciously lead to a better piece of coverage for said item. Admittedly though ST rarely (if ever) gives a comprehensive review on an item in such a honeytrap, perfering it seems to (rightly) hold the full report until you've introduced said item to some UK Slop and Grime.
[i]There are a multitude of different, positive ways in which you can 'unduly' influence the outcome of a review, without having to resort to any 'negative' tactics. A good product manager will know the review staff on his magazines intimately and ensure that he does all he can to punch their happy buttons when they are reviewing his product.[/i]
I'm starting to feel left out now.
I've never met nor heard from the product managers of any kit I've tested. And no one has ever punched my happy button (where is it anyway and am I missing out?)
A bribe would only work if say you had products that were more or less equal and it was a hard choice between 5 equal products. Then you could get away with it. However Manitou would have to provide a minibus full of Czech ladies of the night, a mountain of Coke, many bottles of Jack Daniels and $10,000 in cash. Even then Manitou would finish 4th? 🙄
Re: mark's point about KE advertising alongside the article about one of their adventures:
'If I'd known you were running a piece that featured one of our trips I'd have told the marketing dept. to run and ad in this issue.'
The gist of the article being "we didn't know the trail had been washed down a river 2 weeks previously, we had a miserable old 'ride' and had our arses saved only by the kindness of some locals we luckily chanced upon."
I can't say I am overwhelmed with confidence about a smoothly run riding trip. Were they not better off spending the money advertising in the following issue anyway?
Though oddly for reading the article I am quite keen on riding in Morocco now. Just not with them. 😆
I suppose that the problem is not everything can be tested over a year or so's hard messy riding. So durability is always likely to be missed in reviews.
A possible solution would be to pass on review kit to registered members of the public to thrash for a while and report back on reliability alone - not on riding issues that should have been covered by the experienced reviewer.
Let me be the first to put my name down 🙂
[i]It seems a shame that they just cant improve the manufacturing process to the same level of the competition. While I personally have never had a problem with my old vanillas (03/04?) Ive seen enough worn stancions on some of the air forks.[/i]
Why do you think quality problems are always manufacturing issues? A poor design with all dimensions manufactured to nominal will still make a poor product! Quality starts at the design.
A good product manager will know the review staff on his magazines intimately... ....with a global reach.
the lengths some folk will go to for a little praise eh! 😆
I know a guy who is a competitive rider, goes out with a bunch of superfit full on riders. They all ride hardtails and a few have switched to rigid forks due to failures. They get through so much kit it's astonishing. Some ride single speed too. The focus seems to be on weight saving. Loosing your high-end forks for a pair of Pace RC29's makes a big weight difference! So does loosing a rear cassette, shifters, deraileurs, associated cables and triple chainset. Less to go wrong and no fancy temperamental forks to maintain. They claim that a fully rigid bike is more challenging and yet more connected to the trail.I like the look - free of clutter. Frankly, reading this thread, i'm sold on the idea myself.
So whats the best fork to get then?
Fox
One day PACE will make a freeride DH fork and we can all be happy. I'd kill for a PACE built Totem-esque fork.and yes, if Pace made a 170-180mm fork I'd be in that queue!!
Didn't think Pace made forks anymore- and I don't think that their reliability was being praised to the heavens when they did.
Many moons ago, Pace made the DH specific RC 150 Monster fork.
It was ****, you would spend more time servicing it than riding on it.I used to work at a Pace status one dealer. We used to call Pace forks "homing forks" as we were always sending forks back to Pace for problems that Pace had, apparently, never encountered before, even though we were constantly sending forks back every week with the same issues!
Strange,
I am now on my 3rd pace fork in 7 years (RC36 Evo III, RC36 stealth, RC40 ph1), and each has only been changed due to upgrades. All were 2nd hand, each was only serviced once a year, used regularly, and were working when done. RC40's are 3yr old and working flawlessly, cant find another 1.8kg 130mm adjustable coil fork thats as good either.
Totally gutted with the whole DT thing, unless they pull there finger out and cut prices they are lost. Should have been an institution like Hope, but seem to be struggling, just hoping they have more decent frames planned instead, part carbon RC303 would be lush
re reviews
its a bit like the stw review of crank bros cranks, review was positive.....
alledgely a week later the SS plates fell off and a few months later Crank Bros withdraw the product
not seen an update in print though
then again I could have made it all up
Vinnyeh, there's little point me explaining it further, for some reason you seem hooked into the idea of bribes and blackmail which has nothing at all to do with what I was talking about.
Your comments and what you incorrectly read into what i have written are far more telling of your psyche, than the game that is played out between magazines and advertisers.
