![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 om... 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 . com... 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 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I believe it was Marion Blakely...
Dean (Luke) wrote in message om... 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 om... 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 . com... 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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
How safe is it, really? | June | Piloting | 227 | December 10th 04 05:01 AM |
Associate Publisher Wanted - Aviation & Business Journals | Mergatroide | Aviation Marketplace | 1 | January 13th 04 08:26 PM |
Associate Publisher Wanted - Aviation & Business Journals | Mergatroide | General Aviation | 1 | January 13th 04 08:26 PM |
MSNBC Reporting on GA Security Threat | Scott Schluer | Piloting | 44 | November 23rd 03 02:50 AM |