1) What material consideration do you speak of? Proof or just making that up?
ASR receives review samples which are not returned, meaning they are gifts. Amir posted photograph/s and acknowledged same in a discussion thread recently. I was unaware of the scope of that consideration, and said so. In the same thread ’master contributor’ @restorer-john recommended that a register be maintained for transparency, and that statements of interest posted with reviews be more specific/informative. For example ’supplied by manufacturer’ is often noted, but ’gift’ is not. Amir did some handwaving, but didn’t address the substantive issues ... @restorer-john was attacked by a moderator, and the usual ’out-of-line’ bluster was dished out (the moderator later apologised, which was novel).
2) Amir said that he started working with the AP equipment professionally, I think at Microsoft, so that statement appears false as well. Most of us are self taught on much of the equipment we use. That is what owners manuals, videos, and other resources are for. When our results match others results, we know we are using it properly. He also clearly has a close relationship with Audio Precision, perhaps Klippel too, so this second statement by you also appears to be made up and not factual or relevant.
We all pick up skills using tools in our vocations. Formal training is another thing. You’ve no doubt seen (or should see) the amusing YT videos featuring beginner Amir asking AP personnel newbie questions, and their commendably polite responses (yes, after his time at MS). Close relationship? Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps.
But you’re on step 50 it seems, 206 to go ...