AMK000 Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 .... I would like to add some more of my thoughts regarding this topic. 1) Not anybody can correctly review a watch. - Gen to rep carefull comparison is required. - Mechanics (movement) of the watch should be reviewed too. - The rep should also be compared with other reps too (such as this has better or worse AR , the band , the clasp on this is better than the other)., etc.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted February 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 I would have liked my post to be answered in a more unpompous fashion as it has been by your good self, thank you and your points are well recieved. Like I said, most people appreciate reviews. The surprising part of your comment is that you don't. What part of my having said this in my original response wasn't clear? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raijor Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 I was influenced by the review. Before reading the review the watch was just an interesting oddity to me. I had read about the gen in a watch magazine and felt no real interest in it. When I first was made aware of the rep I felt it looked different in a gimmicky sort of way. After reading the review the watch became more interesting to the point that I am interested in what it may have to offer me as a potential rep purchase. Now, I am still a ways from actually buying this rep but my feelings toward it have been moved. Time for more research on my part. The reason for my change in opinion has to do with the quality of the review and by the person who reviewed it. It was a good review. It presented the watch to me in ways that answered questions in the narrative and the photos and moved me to think. Since joining this forum I have come to know Pugwash as a person of strong opinions and as someone willing to share them. He is a talented photographer and has a broad base of knowledge on many subjects. I do not agree with all he has to say all the time but have found him to be fair minded. To me the issue is a non-issue. I am only posting in this thread because I want to make my opinion known. I do not care if a reviewer receives the watch in return for writing a review or for posting photos or writes a review of a watch they have paid for. Everybody has their own set of biases that they start out with irrespective of the circumstances behind how they acquired the watch. Thus, I look for value in the form of what can I learn when reading any watch review. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SliceMaster Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 I started out buying reps about a year ago and after I found these forums and started reading reviews I have learnt alot, my 2 watches are a BeginMariner from Josh and a Breitling Navitimer TT, I bought both of these after reading By-Tor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corgi Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 I just wanted to say thank you to all of the members willing to voice their opinions regarding the ethics underlying this very controversial issue. I'm very happy to see that I am not alone in my beliefs, and I really like the idea of sending the watch to auction to benefit RWG. One member wrote that the reviewer earned "$270" for his review, the value of the watch (or at least the hypothetical value.) I would really like to underscore this point because I completely agree. Furthermore, I also agree that if the watch had a problem he would have never disclosed it under these circumstances. I certainly hope we see the watch in question up for auction at the trade section, otherwise this Corgi is going to be very disappointed. Do you like RWG? Do you like the honest approach it brings to folks looking for an alternative to those website trying to scam them? Then lets do something good for the community. By-Tor's reviews are worth a lot more when their value is knowledge for everyone here, not just merchandise for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted February 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 I certainly hope we see the watch in question up for auction at the trade section, otherwise this Corgi is going to be very disappointed. Sorry, but you're going to have to be disappointed. You should be used to that by now, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TTK Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 (edited) Sorry Corgi......that was a foregone conclusion.......this was a PAID for review........! If there is to be some sort of review system.....then the only way that I could possibly see it working is by the following. 1. Admin / Mods....post a request for a particular item that the members would like to see reviewed......majority opinion applies...! 2. Admin then approach dealers.....not just one....and ask if they wish to provide a watch for review purposes.....first to step up to the plate supplies the watch......! 3. The watch is sent to the reviewer......who does the review with no knowledge of who the dealer is......that maintains objectivity....! 4. After the watch is reviewed.......it is sold by auction.....proceeds of which go to the dealer for the COST + EXPENSES of the item......any surplus funds generated are applied to the forum...for the benefit of the forum......no single individual benefits from the review. 5. After the item is sold off....the ID of the dealer can be revealed and he can be thanked for his participation in the review. 6. The reviewer earns thanks and merit for his particpation in the review.....! Edited February 3, 2008 by TTK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted February 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Sorry Corgi......that was a foregone conclusion.......this was a PAID for review........! Thanks for the unbiased and objective view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted February 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 If there is to be some sort of review system.....then the only way that I could possibly see it working is by the following. This is a workable system. I'd be interested in seeing how many dealers are interested. One problem that I can see is that it's not only dealers that incurr expenses. Maybe insured postage doesn't take too much of a dent out of some peoples' disposable incomes, but I for one cannot afford to pay for the privilege to spend hours of my free time for the good of the community. Also, you'll need very specific suggestions on how to post the watch to and from people. Nothing can sour an excellent idea as fast as people not discussing who covers the costs in case of seizure, damage or loss beforehand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pix Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Why oh why do people want to set a rule for something that happened once and even was originally not thought for RWG... Pug, IMO your only mistake was to post that here. I respect everyone's opinion on "should he have ?" or "can we accept that ?"... However, at the end, this watch wasn't stolen nor anyone has the right to raise a demand about where it should go... Did I miss something ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raijor Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Furthermore, I also agree that if the watch had a problem he would have never disclosed it under these circumstances. Do you know this to be true or is it something you believe to be true? There is a significant difference between the two and you should be very clear in what you are saying. Saying "... if the watch had a problem he would have never disclosed it under these circumstances. ..." should be substantiated and if can not be somehow supported it should be qualified as your opinion only and that you have no evidence to support this claim. It is a matter of fair play. I am of the opinion that all reviewers are biased and all reviews they write reflect their biases. That is what I believe not what I know. Consequently, when I read a review I keep that in mind and take from it the things I want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted February 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Do you know this to be true or is it something you believe to be true? You can take me at my word when I say that if the watch had had a problem it would have been reviewed and the problem mentioned. It's very easy to say how I would have behaved, but you're projecting what you think of me when you do so. People have to stop thinking of this as a Pugwash thing. It's not. Don't use this as an opportunity to sharpen your spurs on an old gunslinger when that will get in the way of the core debate. I've been very open about the whole thing and still think I have done nothing wrong. What's done is done, so let's see what we as a community can gain from this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted February 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 I am of the opinion that all reviewers are biased and all reviews they write reflect their biases. I agree. Every post on a forum is biased: it's what makes a forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raijor Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 .... The person giving the review feels OBLIGATED TO MENTION ONLY THE GOOD STUFF....even if he is reviewing a watch that he does not like.... Again: Do you know this to be true or is it something you believe to be true? There is a significant difference between the two and you should be very clear in what you are saying. It is a matter of fair play. I am of the opinion that all reviewers are biased and all reviews they write reflect their biases. That is what I believe not what I know. Consequently, when I read a review I keep that in mind and take from it the things I want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raijor Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 You can take me at my word when I say that if the watch had had a problem it would have been reviewed and the problem mentioned. I believe this to be true because it been the pattern of behavior I have witnessed from Pugwash on this and other forums. I have not always agreed with what he has had to say but I can say I have witnessed a consistent pattern of him calling it like he sees it. Consistency of behavior should count for something. It does for me. I've been very open about the whole thing and still think I have done nothing wrong. I agree and feel that nothing wrong has been done. Full disclosure has been made and that is sufficient. Nothing more need be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capice Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 I don't think anyone here is questioning Pug's integrity besides a few cinics and there's nothing wrong with personal opinions. Like I said earlier, in almost all branches items to be reviewed are send to the reviewers and afterwards returned. In some cases the items are given as appreciation for work done, no matter a positive or negative review. Just to thank for the time invested. Here we are not only talking about our hobby. For us as collectors we do but for some dealers it is pure business in my personal opinion so a positive review will raise sales....... So whether it is biased or not, we as members will draw our own conclusions and will or won't buy... The reviews from the guys with more watchknowledge such as Pugwas, By-Tor, The Zigmeister ect are always interesting to me but I also read every other review of a watch I'm interested in whoever wrote it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted February 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Like I said earlier, in almost all branches items to be reviewed are send to the reviewers and afterwards returned. Can you give an example of where this is done? Oh, please be careful to not use examples where the person is doing the review as part of their job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 When I first saw the thread title, I thought "This is a bad idea..." and generally think that people 'getting stuff for free for review' is going to create mistrust. I think Pugwash's situation was totally reasonable: He made a comment, the dealer chose to go with it, knowing that Pug is a damn good photographer, so indeed, that's good publicity, but, I can totally understand how people may feel that any positive reviews (under such circumstances) could be related to having received something for free. I think TTK has made the best suggestion in his above post on this page. I'll be the first to admit, that taking photos and writing a review take time, and, people do deserve to be compensated for their time, but, I feel that in the sense of true impartiality, if someone writes a 'sponsored review', then they should not keep the watch afterwards, but it should either be returned to the dealer, (balancing shipping costs) or auctioned off with proceeds going towards forum upkeep. That should prevent anyone from saying "But they only wrote a good review because they got a free watch out of it!" I don't think it would discourage people from reviewing their own pieces at all, but, I would agree that such 'sponsored reviews' might be viewed with suspicion if guidlines such as TTK suggested are not adhered to. As someone else mentioned, if there are dealers who can't operate without LWL, how can 'sponsored reviews' be viewed as anything other than suspicious? Were it not for Pugwash explaining the situation, then someone of a suspicious nature could even say that it is simply a Cartel ploy to gain more favorable publicity. That clearly was not the case here though, as it was an existing conversation. Time to read the review Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pix Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Can you give an example of where this is done? Oh, please be careful to not use examples where the person is doing the review as part of their job. Also...don't forget we're in an illegal hobby... Dealers, manufacturers and habits are not the same as in other hobbies... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capice Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 (edited) Sorry, I know only workrelated examples so I don't know if it can be compared to your question about sponsored reviews I have a client owning a publishingbusiness for professional photographymagazines. Whenever a new camera, lens,printer ect is launched, they get the item to test it and review. Sometimes they can keep the stuff just to say tnx for their time. A friend of mine writes for computermags, same story there. There is a Professional Photographyacademy here where a few studyrooms are totally sponsored by the big brands, ie Canon,Nikon ect. Their name is on all the walls and that means the students will by the brand more easily, that's what marketing is all about isn't it? In your case I am sure the review would have been the same if the dealer send you the watch without you knowing his/her name but would that be interesting for the dealer? I don't think so....... Would be totally unbiased though if the dealers send watches for review to the admin for example and he /she would send it to the reviewer anonymously? Edited February 3, 2008 by capice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TTK Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 (edited) Thanks for the unbiased and objective view. My view was entirely biased and yet completely objective.....coloured by details that you and I are privvy to......and which are not presented here as you well know......... but as I don't really have an agenda here....I'm going to bow out of this now....! Having spoken with a number of dealers....the consensus is that a review system is unworkable for many reasons.....and the general opinion on the dealer's side of the fence is that the forums already have a number of facilities in place for reviewing watches......it's the forum in general.....EVERY member has the right to review both his dealer of choice and the item he PAID for........no need for anyone to review an item that he's been PAID to review......! Edited February 3, 2008 by TTK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capice Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Neill, another oneliner to be written in historybooks..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pix Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 If one wants to compare the reviewing system with what is done in real life for legitimate products, then we should not even speak about dealers : the system you think about should be done in connection with the rep manufacturers, not with resellers. Unthinkable. I really can't see in what a good or bad model can influence one single dealer, except if he has an exclusivity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capice Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Then we totally disagree here Pix. Is there a reviewing system? Who makes money on reps on the fora? The dealers and I hope they make a lot( at least I'm willing to contribute.. ) A good/positive review by a wellappreciated member will raise sales Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pix Posted February 3, 2008 Report Share Posted February 3, 2008 Sure. I was mentionning that to those who'd like to consider rep reviews like other products reviews. BTW, a positive or negative review of a rep should finally not disturb if your real concern is the service of the dealer... Then, back to the original problematic : what advantage does the watch review of Pug give to Angus ?? The only advantages I see are for the rep manufacturers, and all the dealers carrying the model. In this frame, I'm still thinking that these discussions about independancy of "reviewers" are not founded and that I would have done the same as Pug. Those who want to frame the reviews should also frame the dealer's descriptions and habits (behaviour ?) : Mission Impossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.