MarkTheSpark
Senior Member
Kind of a carry-over from the AT: irresponsible reporting thread which strayed on to this subject.
I used to do tackle reviews in angling magazines and know the problems; criticise a manufacturer's tackle and they cancel their advertising. In effect, they have a gun to the magazines' collective heads, and with the recession, that advertising is keeping our mags going.
So it's difficult for the reviewers, and most just review what they are sent or avoid booking any rubbish tackle, and thus avoid having to tell the truth about it.
The problem with this strategy is that rubbish tackle stays on sale and anglers unwittingly buy it because there's nobody around to tell them any different.
That said, there are some great reviewers and some great reviews. I'm just interested to know whether FMers trust tackle reviews, or if they've ever bought recommended gear which turned out to be rubbish.
What do you think about the 'marks out of ten' which reviewers give? Are they realistic? Are reviewers tough enough on bad tackle?
I used to do tackle reviews in angling magazines and know the problems; criticise a manufacturer's tackle and they cancel their advertising. In effect, they have a gun to the magazines' collective heads, and with the recession, that advertising is keeping our mags going.
So it's difficult for the reviewers, and most just review what they are sent or avoid booking any rubbish tackle, and thus avoid having to tell the truth about it.
The problem with this strategy is that rubbish tackle stays on sale and anglers unwittingly buy it because there's nobody around to tell them any different.
That said, there are some great reviewers and some great reviews. I'm just interested to know whether FMers trust tackle reviews, or if they've ever bought recommended gear which turned out to be rubbish.
What do you think about the 'marks out of ten' which reviewers give? Are they realistic? Are reviewers tough enough on bad tackle?