Scubapro STINKS!

[MikeFerrara]

OOOPS...

 

[Diver0001]

docmartin once bubbled...
excuse me but this is getting a little too imaginative. you are jumping to conclusions based on absolutely nothing. while i agree that sp and al are major competitors i fail to see where sp has ever gotten a bad review from rodales. sp is about the last company with reason to complain about rodales test results. furthermore, what kind of contract could preclude rodales from buying gear through retail channels? these could only be contracts between rodales and each manufacturer. that seems silly and improbable. in any event, if scubapro just terminated their relationship rodales would now be free to buy the gear.
obviously something happened in the relationship between sp and rodales but the facts are that sp has always looked golden in rodales' reviews. any speculation about Al outbribing sp for good reviews is just that - speculation with no facts to support it.

I guess this was directed at me.

You're right. It's all speculation with no directly supporting facts. What I *do* know for a fact is that this sort of thing happens but in this case I can't say with 100% certainty that this is the reason Rodales and SP are scrapping. It all sounds suspiciously familiar but it should be said out loud for anyone who was totally convinced by my scenario.

Re contracts to only review submitted products. Why would this not be the case? I know such agreements are made in the PC computer industry I don't know why the scuba industry would be any different.

As for SP always looking good in Rodales, I'd say this support my argument/scenario more than anything else. How would you react if one of your major advertisers were suddenly to start betting on a new horse?

R..

 

[5615mike]

Diver0001

Rodales under contract to only review those items submitted for review Under contract with who?

Who is going to keep them from reviewing anyone's products? You like others continue to focus only on the reg's portion of their business. Hell SP makes alot of gear. As mentioned earlier, I have not seen a poor SP reg review so why would they be so concerned about that anyway.

 

[docmartin]

here is what i do not understand: if what Diver0001 describes is indeed happening then i would assume most if not all manufacturers would know about it. after all the game can't be played if noone knows the rules. so let's assume certain companies such as sp and al buy good reviews from rodales. again, this would hardly be a secret in the industry and Diver0001's scenario implies that sp would know about a new al deal with rodales. why on earth would any other manufacturer such as atomic, mares... submit their equipment for testing when they know in advance the tests are rigged and they can only lose?

also, if this is how it works everybody would want to bribe because otherwise the review of your equipment could be nothing but disappointing. however, if everybody pays they would obviously all want a great review in return. but to have a winning review there must be some losers. how do you determine the losers when everybody is paying? the ones who pay the least? i don't think so. they would be better off not participating at all instead of paying anything. so in the end you'd end up with a couple of deep pocketed companies all paying the same amount in bribes for the same meaningless test scores (A+ for all). that's obviously not happened judging by rodales scoring.

don't get me wrong, i certainly find many flaws with rodales testing (mikeF gave some good examples). the point i am trying to make is that this scenario of companies buying reviews and outbidding each other is just too simplistic and unlikely to work. they all are industry pros and know what's going on. scuba is a small industry and people change companies and allegiances. if tests were rigged like that the losers would make it known. after all, right or wrong, a lot of buying decisions are based on these reviews.

 

[redacted]

any more than than American corporations buy support from elected representatives. ... Well, maybe that isn't such a good example. ... Or maybe it is!

I'm betting that there is a disagreement over testing methodologies because the results basically say that there is a whole bunch of pretty darn good stuff coming from lots of manufacturers. I don't think SP likes being one of a number of "top dogs" in the pack and they are going to try to break that image on there own.

Shall we start a pool on when the next SP add will appear in RDS? I'm just amazed that two mutually dependent businesses could not work this out. I think they are just hurtting each other.

 

[docmartin]

well there you have it. that's a great example. and everybody knows that corporations are doing it. campaign contributions are not a secret. of course this analogy does not fit when it comes to the mystery why manufacturers would submit gear for review when they know the tests are rigged and they can't win.
interesting point about why sp may be unhappy with the testing methodologies. could be although i did not think they were that generous with their tester's choice stamp. the hard reality probably is that there are a number of manufacturers that make decent gear and the differences just are not that great. maybe they should try to differentiate themselves in different ways. for example, if they started selling service kits i would become a customer

 

[Diver0001]

docmartin once bubbled...
here is what i do not understand: if what Diver0001 describes is indeed happening then i would assume most if not all manufacturers would know about it. after all the game can't be played if noone knows the rules. so let's assume certain companies such as sp and al buy good reviews from rodales. again, this would hardly be a secret in the industry and Diver0001's scenario implies that sp would know about a new al deal with rodales. why on earth would any other manufacturer such as atomic, mares... submit their equipment for testing when they know in advance the tests are rigged and they can only lose?

also, if this is how it works everybody would want to bribe because otherwise the review of your equipment could be nothing but disappointing. however, if everybody pays they would obviously all want a great review in return. but to have a winning review there must be some losers. how do you determine the losers when everybody is paying? the ones who pay the least? i don't think so. they would be better off not participating at all instead of paying anything. so in the end you'd end up with a couple of deep pocketed companies all paying the same amount in bribes for the same meaningless test scores (A+ for all). that's obviously not happened judging by rodales scoring.

don't get me wrong, i certainly find many flaws with rodales testing (mikeF gave some good examples). the point i am trying to make is that this scenario of companies buying reviews and outbidding each other is just too simplistic and unlikely to work. they all are industry pros and know what's going on. scuba is a small industry and people change companies and allegiances. if tests were rigged like that the losers would make it known. after all, right or wrong, a lot of buying decisions are based on these reviews.

Thinking in bribes is too simplistic. A "kick back" can take many forms, not all of which are simple bribes. You said yourself that scubapro hardly (if ever) gets a bad review in Rodales. Mike F cited an out-and-out endorsement of TDI's solo course. How do you think those things happen?

Is it
(A) because TDI's solo course is *so* worthy of specific endorsement? or
(B) because Dread Gilligan did the I-scratch-your-back-and-you-scratch-mine thing with them......

Likewise not many people would easily be convinced that Scubapro's stuff is out-and-out the best on the market but if you only read Rodales you might think so. Where do you think these biases come from?

Does it seem impossible to you that many, most or even all of the manufacturers indicate what they would like to see written in the "subjective" part of the reviews? It wouldn't surprise me at all to find out that they even supply Rodales with the text. Don't forget these reviews are advertising and the companies involved want results. I'll see if I can invent a few:

"I get better air consumption with these split fins"
"regulator X breathes dry inverted"
"when I'm diving in condition X I want this reg"

How about this one. A direct quote from a review of a Scubapro computer:

Scubapro's Uwatec Smart Com air-integrated and Smart Pro non-air-integrated computers use a unique algorithm that takes into account actual diver behavior and environmental conditions, and additionally providing the user with the ability to program in six levels of micro-bubble suppression to increase safety. Screens are 35 percent larger than previous generations with larger numbers and icons but no color highlights. Desaturation time and time to fly are calculated instead of using a standard countdown. Replaceable hinged screen covers protect the displays. The Smart Com reads tank pressure to 4,350 psi in one-psi increments and is available with a quick-disconnect hose fitting (about $15 extra). Each computer comes with its own padded storage bag and SmartTrak software that uses an infrared PC interface.

Ask yourself. Does that sound like a review or does that sound like an advertisement? Who do you *really* think wrote that?

And finally, check this out. On one of the gear reviews (fins) they even put in this bit of text

In appreciation

Many thanks to Bayman Bay Club for their help and hospitality, to Scubapro for the loan of air-integrated dive computers, to Polar USA for the loan of heart monitors, and to Cetacea Diving Products for providing underwater slates and other equipment for the tests.

For crying out loud, Rodales is even *telling* you what the kick-back was! BTW, the Scubapro twin jet reviewd in that article got yet another (3 in a row) glowing review and tester's recommendation ....... They even say that the scubapro twin jet is the fastest fin they've ever tested accompanied by another review that sounds like an advertisement to me..... Personally I'm skeptical.

Obviously you're under no obligation to believe a thing I'm saying but I will say that I know from first hand experience that these things happen. And believe me the higher the stakes get the more intense the game. That Scubapro "gets" (in the sense of "acquires") good reviews in Rodales seems tame and perfectly normal to me in the context of the world I work in.

As for Atomics, they don't get bad reviews in Rodales either. Look at the reviews they get. Look at *most* reveiws. They're hardly ever negative and at probably about 30% of the products get "testers choice" stamps. Atomics might not get the superlatives that Scubapro gets but it still gets positive advertising.

R..

 

[docmartin]

i am with you on this. what you describe about how manufacturers or agencies buy coverage and make sure certain comments etc are inserted does not surprise me. you quoted some great examples. it is more subtle than buying outright first place in a test. sad state of affairs. the alert consumer has to learn how to read between the lines.

 

[grouchyturtle]

Or read between the posts! I get most of my product reviews from this board.

 

[rescuediver009]

Like any other reg, scubapro has its ups and downs. They are a good reg and they are extremely rugged and durable, however if you priced one out, you could buy an entire apeks set-up for the price of only the scubapro 1st & 2nd. They likely perform just as well if not better. Not to mention servicability. Unless you go to a scubapro dealer you will have a hard time finding someone with the right tools. Meanwhile apeks is one of the simplest regs to service and they are just as rugged and reliable. Not to mention the great environmental seal and their versatility.
:doctor: