Hi soix
Most publications/sites pay reviewers next to nothing for the many, many hours of work it takes to write a review from unboxing to finish
I take issue with these terms of work, but I suppose it’s the reality in magazine/publication economics. The problem, as I see it, is it incentivizes reviewers to review gear they are personally interested in and anticipate buying. If the publication assigns the items to be reviewed, that makes it more neutral. I will admit that I would write a review of the Treo CT if I could buy them for a 50% discount! 😎
I only bought a review sample if it was significantlybetter than what I had in my review system, and since most reviewers have at least pretty good systems/components it makes quite a statement if something gets purchased after a review is completed.
As I said, it is an endorsement of a bought piece...the reviewer putting their money where their mouth is.
In a more perfect world, more magazines would be like Consumer Reports and would buy the gear they review, to maintain more objectivity. Prohibitively expensive of course.
I appreciate your candor and feedback (and you love Vandersteens too!).