you suspected this, now you have it confirmed

**creaky fossil** · 12-15-2014, 01:01 PM

like him, hate him, or be ambivalent about him -- I don't care about your opinion of Maurice Tierney outside what I'm about to share. don't be an ideological prick and dismiss because you dislike or prefer to ignore him, or because he doesn't say what you want him to say.

instead, let's all give a big round of applause to Mike Levy for being a gigantic fucking coprolite, and to Maurice Tierney for giving us the thing that shows Levy's assholeness clearer than any bit of satirical observation I might add.

pinkbike negotiates revenue conditioned on positive reviews

**creaky fossil** · 12-15-2014, 01:32 PM

here's why you don't let people who are naive and mostly complicit have some convincing influence over your views:

i wasn't really familiar with 'global' advertising models such as this, though it's certainly not surprising. just a more broad spectrum application of adversing dollars. imbedded advertising is the norm, alas. to be fair, the document in no way suggests bias towards favourable review content.

as much as people really want it all to be a huge conspiracy looking to screw you, the consumer, over....this is actually closer to the truth than people want to believe

ooh nice job, deflect onto "conspiracy," set up false binary in which conspiracy = idiots and thus mockable

if you can't see that the contract and the revenue depend on positivity that's probably because you're an Industry Inside Bro who likes your revenue/profile/schwag/connections/fame deriving from this bullshit model

anyone who thinks most MTB riders who read stinkbike etc are discerning folks with lots of saddle time and wrenching experience informing a healthy skepticism, well you're deluding yourself, especially in this Grow the Sport mindset/practice bringing fad-following know-nothings into a sport for lifestyle/image purposes. that's EXACTLY what Levy & co bank on.

what a naive idiot.

**grabtindy** · 12-15-2014, 02:31 PM

Are there any mtn bike publications (ink or pixels) that produce critical reviews of bicycles? I don't think I can really ever recall seeing a review that criticized a product beyond aesthetics or some other barely tangible aspect like "mid to late stroke suspension responsiveness" (leaving out settings, tires, rider weight, etc).

I remember as a 14 year old reading MBAction and noticing the full page ads directly facing a positive review and knew it was BS. I don't know that anyone looks to PB for journalistic integrity. I don't follow the players involved, but have they ever claimed otherwise?

**creaky fossil** · 12-15-2014, 02:49 PM

as someone who fished for a reviewer job by contacting and talking to Levy and getting his low-down on what PB does and why, I can tell you that what they do is different from what they present themselves as

the % of people who are skeptical about "journalists" in MTB is a small minority, plenty of people I know or have encountered routinely cite MTBR and/or pinkbike as good sources of info. most people don't realize that the average commenter on the internet, "journalist" or not, is lying. usually selling self as more informed/experienced than reality would show, and nearly all the people I've talked to about MTB websites in casual settings are not skeptics at all, but thankful such "resources" exist.

it's infested this place on MTB and ski gear too. phonies preening around with regurgitated mfr ad copy lingo.

hey stuckie.

**stuckathuntermtn** · 12-15-2014, 03:22 PM

Just let him have his own thread with himself. It's adorable.

**creaky fossil** · 12-15-2014, 04:03 PM

"adorable"

it's funny watching you be gaily superior while complaining women don't go out with you. I watched a movie about you last night, made in 1969 by Bernardo Bertolucci, it's called The Conformist.

it bugs you that your phoniness can't be maintained, eh fatty?

**scrublover** · 12-15-2014, 05:32 PM

Good God. Magazine/online/whatever bike reviews done by CF?

*shudder*

**creaky fossil** · 12-15-2014, 05:41 PM

I know, the industry would collapse because it would be the essence of anti-hipster, anti-insider-bullshit, anti-growth, anti-stupidity and people just don't know how to handle that kind of information. I'd probably have to hire a bunch of bodyguards and move to planet jupiter.

I didn't say I actually wanted to do the reviews, it was more curiosity about how lousy writers who can't analyze, can't ride, and can't think for themselves end up writing for the biggest publications. with a history of growing up among journalists covering federal matters, I had some idea why shit-for-brains was dominant, but wanted to confirm it.

**abraham** · 12-16-2014, 04:59 AM

Hey creaky, are you a chef or a camera operator? Do you have first aid skills? You can apply for a chance to volunteer those skills for the largest mountain bike festival in the world. You just need to buy a plane ticket to New Zealand.

Details here:
http://www.pinkbike.com/news/crankwo...eers-2014.html

**Vt-Freeheel** · 12-16-2014, 06:39 AM

I have been contemplating a new ride and wasted some time reading reviews. One sticks with me concerning the only complaint, 2 reviewers stating they wish the bars were wider, 740mm not wide enough. Even worse was time spent on MTBR, way too many "experts" there.

**kootenayskier** · 12-16-2014, 09:19 AM

In 2014 information is only as relevant as we determine it to be. I recently sat through a presentation which included stats on consumer's rating the credibility of product information sources. What stood out to me was that official company websites were rated significantly higher than magazines/websites, and that while "consumer" ratings were considered most credible, it was only a by a small margin. Regardless of how accurate or current this data is, my point is that companies and the media are always trying to game the system, but that consumers will factor this into how much credibility to assign. Pinkbike reviews do seem overtly brand friendly, Blister and Dirtrag claim independence, and most consumer ratings (and TGR postings) are full of shit. We get to judge, and balance that against as many other sources of info as we choose.

**creaky fossil** · 12-16-2014, 10:40 AM

Originally Posted by abraham

Hey creaky, are you a chef or a camera operator? Do you have first aid skills? You can apply for a chance to volunteer those skills for the largest mountain bike festival in the world. You just need to buy a plane ticket to New Zealand.

Details here:
http://www.pinkbike.com/news/crankwo...eers-2014.html

I want Brad Ewen's job.

WHAT'S HE GOT UP HIS SLEEVE?
CLOSE THE BACK DOOR!
THAT WAS RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!

tens of children age 4-9 are stoked!

**JeffreyJim** · 12-16-2014, 11:17 AM

I actually am in a rare place to comment from "behind the scenes" here...

I own a small media company (earlyups) where we do a fair amount of reviews. I also write for Vital. Here is the no nonsense answer to how things go down.

1) Vital - I'll start here because it is a bigger site that *actually* produces a real profit. Their bottom line is directly leveraged to the companies they offer up reviews on. In the 5 (?) reviews I've done for Vital I can say I was not steered toward "giving a positive review". If something didn't work like I hoped or I found an issue with a product, for instance the way the Pike would bind a bit under severe load, Vital would offer the review to the "powers that may be" at SRAM to be sure what I was noticing wasn't a product defect. If they could offer no explanation for such an "issue" or failure, it went to print. On the contrary, if a product had an issue that was one-off or similar, it'd still be discussed but a remedy would be offered and this too would go to print. You can see this in Vital's breakage of the Mojo SL-R.

Still, its review world - and a lot of shit is just plain hard to review. Like a jersey, a pair of knee pads or a handlebar. So a number of these product receive 4-5 star reviews without really being stand out performers...just because its hard to delve into the "pros" and "cons" of such a product.

Finally, its pretty damn tough to find good product reviewers. Its actually a lot harder than saying "this was good" or "this was bad". Its a subjective take on something absolutely objective. A perfect reviewer will be very competent - near pro level rider who also has the perceptiveness to know "who might most benefit from this - even if it isn't me" or "who might this best be for". The number of people that can really do this without the review being an ad-vo-torial is pretty damn small (and I'm not saying I'm the "best" at it by any means - just mentioning being a product review guy won't pay your bills but takes a pretty unique skillset to pull off well)

2) Earlyups - I own the site. But the beauty is we take zero dollars from in industry sponsors (hard goods) so whatever. I can write what I see fit. Truth is there are very few poor performing skis/bindings/boots but still, if something sucks, I can write just that. I still give the company first look to offer any sort of explanation but again, I'm not "told" to give a good review. We've toyed with the idea of doing a paypal based "keep us alive" type "donation" for those that like what we do. That way we stay independent... Its the real only way to continue to offer unbiased gear reviews while keeping the lights on...

Sites like Blister drive me up the fucking wall. That site has the reviewer's own "style" impregnated in the review (personal taste) and passed off as gold. Put another way, they sort of remind me of the sorta-in-shape guy at the gym telling me how to do a certain lift or giving me their $0.02 as to how I should be working out.

Our latest ski review I tried my best to address the "personal taste" problem by letting more than 1 reviewer ski each ski. I think this is paramount to good product reviews... sample size has to be greater than one. Something I am very guilty of.

Anyway...I'll quit there.

/rant

**creaky fossil** · 12-16-2014, 11:20 AM

you mean to say people struggle to find discriminating features?

that sounds like the wrong people are doing "reviews" if you ask me.

**JeffreyJim** · 12-16-2014, 11:34 AM

Originally Posted by creaky fossil

you mean to say people struggle to find discriminating features?

that sounds like the wrong people are doing "reviews" if you ask me.

Sure but honestly - how many people *really* ride enough to be able to tell a few small differences from product to product? There really aren't that many obsessed enough to do this..

You need to be on the bike, often in an objective (timed) environment, more than I'm willing to admit to really offer data-based results. Otherwise you are commenting on feel...which is just as influenced as your morning's coffee as it is product...

**creaky fossil** · 12-16-2014, 11:37 AM

so... what explains the inability to detect, analyze and report on things at the level of NSMB, pinkbike, vitalMTB?

and what's the influence of cube-farm-animals needing "stoke" while simultaneously lacking insights of their own?

**creaky fossil** · 12-16-2014, 11:38 AM

could it be that being a Former Honch like Sven Martin doesn't mean anything other than you're named Sven Martin and you're a Former Honch?

maybe this is kinda like shitty skiers looking at a PSIA L2 and thinking because L2 skis like a golf cart, L2 knows nothing to share. if you don't have a "rep" among "core honches" you can't possibly know anything? and if you do have a "rep" you're a genius of insight, rather than someone who rode a bike at a high level but maybe not capable of discerning subtleties anyway?

lots of athletes can perform at a high level w/o discerning small things in their gear. their performance is a testament to genetic gifts.

the one you want to review things is the one who worked hard to overcome genetic mediocrity AND who detects small things. detecting those things is another genetic gift, and doesn't always coincide with a high degree of natural athletic skills. they're not the same thing, performing and analyzing performance. the people who helped Tiger Woods become a dominant golfer aren't able to swing a club or play a course as well as Tiger.

**kidwoo** · 12-16-2014, 11:40 AM

Is a frame's suspension leverage rate a discriminating feature or a nebulous non-tangible?

I'm confused

**creaky fossil** · 12-16-2014, 11:44 AM

me too

let's just throw up some charts

**El Chupacabra** · 12-16-2014, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by JeffreyJim

Sites like Blister drive me up the fucking wall. That site has the reviewer's own "style" impregnated in the review (personal taste) and passed off as gold. Put another way, they sort of remind me of the sorta-in-shape guy at the gym telling me how to do a certain lift or giving me their $0.02 as to how I should be working out.

Blister's reviews are weird because of that "style" thing. The ski reviews in particular -- e.g. "I mounted it at +3... and experienced tip dive in powder."

Well, no shit.

**creaky fossil** · 12-16-2014, 11:54 AM

they're even weirder when they complain about existing reviews not mattering to anyone, but then they brag on jet-setting around the globe to ski.

blister gear review: for the 1%er who can't abide proles skiing, boating, riding bikes without using a jet to get there.

I flew to the Andes to test the new EnduroSlayer650Bee. Grumman Jetstream. Cigars and brandy. Foot massage. Sensory deprivation tank.

**stuckathuntermtn** · 12-16-2014, 11:59 AM

I like Blister, but some of their latest articles are retarded. The Inn at Steamboat? The "new and improved" Pivot Mach 429 carbon? Am I reading Outside?
I'll be sure to checkout Earlyups some more maybe.

**kidwoo** · 12-16-2014, 11:59 AM

**creaky fossil** · 12-16-2014, 12:06 PM

now we're getting somewhere

what kind of stylus did you use there?

**scrublover** · 12-16-2014, 09:30 PM

Originally Posted by creaky fossil

I know, the industry would collapse because it would be the essence of anti-hipster, anti-insider-bullshit, anti-growth, anti-stupidity and people just don't know how to handle that kind of information. I'd probably have to hire a bunch of bodyguards and move to planet jupiter.

I didn't say I actually wanted to do the reviews, it was more curiosity about how lousy writers who can't analyze, can't ride, and can't think for themselves end up writing for the biggest publications. with a history of growing up among journalists covering federal matters, I had some idea why shit-for-brains was dominant, but wanted to confirm it.

That's...not at all where I was going with my comment, but carry on!

Read all reviews with a large grain of salt.