Anyone is free to re-post this to anyone they like.
> You make a good point Pete. Our beloved "League" has enough on it's
plate
> without having to risk its advertising revenues by calling it the way they
> see it.
I disagree with this. I used to manage Ameritron through the startup period,
and contracted with MFJ as a consultant until recently terminating my
contact.
I always got put in the middle of reviews, and I know how the system works
in great detail.
As far as I know MFJ spends more advertising money than anyone else in the
industry, and probably by a considerable margin. Consider what it costs to
have a tear-out catalog sent in a large publication, or to buy 5 to 10 pages
in a magazine every month! Despite that, QST was never influenced by
pressure of any type.
QST normally does ask a manufacturer for comments just before deadline on a
review. Sometimes (but not always) QST will correct their mistakes, but when
they have a policy about a test method they stick with it no matter how much
a manufacturer complains. Sometimes even when they are very clearly wrong. I
experienced this with an AL1200 review, where they had a power line
regulation problem. They never corrected that review even after they knew
they made a mistake! (I'm sure that would NEVER repeat anything like that
again, because they still hear about that from me.)
Rumors that QST coddles manufacturers get started by people who have no idea
how the process works, or who have a personal agenda behind discrediting
QST.
It does, however, take pressure to change HOW they do things. Once they feel
that pressure, things will change. A manufacturer can't possibly stop a
movement by the masses to get more reliable and meaningful data in reviews.
Any manufacturer would be stupid to withdraw advertising based on honest
reviews anyway.
What we need to do is to let it be known we want meaningful clear
information in reviews and better testing, and let to the technical staff
determine how things are worded. Once a spectral plot of a transceiver is
published on SSB and CW with actual keying, and we get rid of the useless
pictures of CW envelopes and tables of 3rd and 5th order TX IM with a
two-tone test, we will see things change.
Read the replies in the discussion at:
http://www.eham.net/articles/4691
73 Tom
|