Biased Aviation Consumer

[Luke]

I have have been an off and on subscriber to the aviation consumer
publication, but more and more I learn that they are not as unbiased
as people may think.

I had a chance to talk to several members of the AEA and they often
mentioned that in their opinion they felt the need to send free "no
strings attached" avionics to one of the editors Paul to give
favorable results.

While they may make many good points I think, you have to keep in mind
that an editor who has just received a free multi-thousand dollar
piece of avionics equipment for their aircraft may tend to give
credance over some which demand the product back or payment. In light
of this I wrote Aviation Consumer and let them know my opinions on
this bias, and also told them I will cease membership until these
editors, or problems are resolved. To my knowledge this is the only
publication which offers a "unbiased review" of products, and it is
sad to see some in this organization taking advantage of the
situation.

Until then I rely on actual pilot feedback to make my considerations.

Luke

[Dean Wilkinson]

Yes, I agree that Aviation Consumer is biased. When they did a review
of all of the flight planning software on the market a year or so ago,
the editor refused to review mine because it wasn't "one of the
mainstream products". I have reached 1,000 customers worldwide and
growing. I also have a quality product for a reasonable price. Who
cares if I am the market leader or not as long as I have a good
product at a fair price? I suspect that many of their readers might
at least have wanted the opportunity to find out about my product as
well...

Dean Wilkinson
Razor's Edge Software

(Luke) wrote in message >...
> I have have been an off and on subscriber to the aviation consumer
> publication, but more and more I learn that they are not as unbiased
> as people may think.
>
> I had a chance to talk to several members of the AEA and they often
> mentioned that in their opinion they felt the need to send free "no
> strings attached" avionics to one of the editors Paul to give
> favorable results.
>
> While they may make many good points I think, you have to keep in mind
> that an editor who has just received a free multi-thousand dollar
> piece of avionics equipment for their aircraft may tend to give
> credance over some which demand the product back or payment. In light
> of this I wrote Aviation Consumer and let them know my opinions on
> this bias, and also told them I will cease membership until these
> editors, or problems are resolved. To my knowledge this is the only
> publication which offers a "unbiased review" of products, and it is
> sad to see some in this organization taking advantage of the
> situation.
>
> Until then I rely on actual pilot feedback to make my considerations.
>
> Luke

[Luke]

Do you recall which editor you spoke with? I have heard this same
sort of experience from other people, and I am curious.

(Dean Wilkinson) wrote in message >...
> Yes, I agree that Aviation Consumer is biased. When they did a review
> of all of the flight planning software on the market a year or so ago,
> the editor refused to review mine because it wasn't "one of the
> mainstream products". I have reached 1,000 customers worldwide and
> growing. I also have a quality product for a reasonable price. Who
> cares if I am the market leader or not as long as I have a good
> product at a fair price? I suspect that many of their readers might
> at least have wanted the opportunity to find out about my product as
> well...
>
> Dean Wilkinson
> Razor's Edge Software
>
> (Luke) wrote in message >...
> > I have have been an off and on subscriber to the aviation consumer
> > publication, but more and more I learn that they are not as unbiased
> > as people may think.
> >
> > I had a chance to talk to several members of the AEA and they often
> > mentioned that in their opinion they felt the need to send free "no
> > strings attached" avionics to one of the editors Paul to give
> > favorable results.
> >
> > While they may make many good points I think, you have to keep in mind
> > that an editor who has just received a free multi-thousand dollar
> > piece of avionics equipment for their aircraft may tend to give
> > credance over some which demand the product back or payment. In light
> > of this I wrote Aviation Consumer and let them know my opinions on
> > this bias, and also told them I will cease membership until these
> > editors, or problems are resolved. To my knowledge this is the only
> > publication which offers a "unbiased review" of products, and it is
> > sad to see some in this organization taking advantage of the
> > situation.
> >
> > Until then I rely on actual pilot feedback to make my considerations.
> >
> > Luke

[Dean Wilkinson]

I believe it was Marion Blakely...

Dean

(Luke) wrote in message >...
> Do you recall which editor you spoke with? I have heard this same
> sort of experience from other people, and I am curious.
>
> (Dean Wilkinson) wrote in message >...
> > Yes, I agree that Aviation Consumer is biased. When they did a review
> > of all of the flight planning software on the market a year or so ago,
> > the editor refused to review mine because it wasn't "one of the
> > mainstream products". I have reached 1,000 customers worldwide and
> > growing. I also have a quality product for a reasonable price. Who
> > cares if I am the market leader or not as long as I have a good
> > product at a fair price? I suspect that many of their readers might
> > at least have wanted the opportunity to find out about my product as
> > well...
> >
> > Dean Wilkinson
> > Razor's Edge Software
> >
> > (Luke) wrote in message >...
> > > I have have been an off and on subscriber to the aviation consumer
> > > publication, but more and more I learn that they are not as unbiased
> > > as people may think.
> > >
> > > I had a chance to talk to several members of the AEA and they often
> > > mentioned that in their opinion they felt the need to send free "no
> > > strings attached" avionics to one of the editors Paul to give
> > > favorable results.
> > >
> > > While they may make many good points I think, you have to keep in mind
> > > that an editor who has just received a free multi-thousand dollar
> > > piece of avionics equipment for their aircraft may tend to give
> > > credance over some which demand the product back or payment. In light
> > > of this I wrote Aviation Consumer and let them know my opinions on
> > > this bias, and also told them I will cease membership until these
> > > editors, or problems are resolved. To my knowledge this is the only
> > > publication which offers a "unbiased review" of products, and it is
> > > sad to see some in this organization taking advantage of the
> > > situation.
> > >
> > > Until then I rely on actual pilot feedback to make my considerations.
> > >
> > > Luke