The "how many reviews it got" rule

Tannoys a big name but rarely do their big speakers get reviewed. These are companies with great, efficient speakers.

I think in order for a product to get reviewed, it either has to have one of these:
1. The company has to have some sort of relationship with the magazine either through PR or advertisement.
2. The product has to be a revolution of very outstanding of some types and competitive in pricing vs its peers.

For #1, it’s rather obvious.
For #2, I could name a few components that have had universal acceptance. I don’t know them all but I can certainly name a few. Arcam CD23, Conrad Johnson 17LS, ART preamp, Simaudio Moon W3 amp, Thiel CS2.4, Pass Lab XP10, Living Voice
Those above if you do search on the web, they were reviewed by pretty everybody including their grand parents.

And sometimes big, well connected companies, choose not to give out components for reviews 

XTAC speakers commentary on why they are unique and superior to ALL other speaker designs (per the manufacturer). https://audiomachina.com/xtac/commentary/

I’d love to hear speaker engineers/designers comment, especially on the Time/Amplitude equation.

Here's the extract from his white paper on what a speaker should be:
1. Full frequency range without the use of different driver types or any crossovers. 2. Adequate Dynamic Range and S/N ratio. 3. Absence of diaphragm flexure or breakup in the audible range. 4. Idealized acoustic radiation pattern. 5. Real-world room installation and performance optimization. 6. Reasonable manufacturing and installation difficulty. 7. Reasonable cost.

TAS had a preview of the XTAC and photos in the September 2018 issue.  Interesting concept.