LeSving,
Uninformed, subjective criticism along the lines of “all Apple products are crap” is just boring and a waste of my time and screen real estate. Especially from someone who can go straight to say “Apple products do what they are supposed to do, and they do it brilliantly.”
So, if I see someone saying “all xxx products are crap” I not only dismiss that opinion, but it lowers (considerably) the value I place on any other opinions expressed by that person, as I can see that they lack critical judgment.
Consider music. It can be described in forms of musicality, rhythm and so on. Some musicians are better than others, some music is more complex and advanced etc. But ultimately, the “points” a person gives to a tune is based on a subjective experience he/she gets when listening. The Toyota Syndrome. Excellent cars, runs for ever, no faults, They do the job like no others. Yet, driving a Toyota is a seriously dull experience, and I would not dream of recommending it based on pure objective factors. Those objective factors are of minor importance for most people (when it comes to cars), and probably even less with airplanes for recreational use. For those who only want a means of transportation, Toyotas are great of course.
Then consider classical rhetoric. A decision can be described as a complex combination of Ethos (ethics, authority), Pathos (emotions) and Logos (logic, facts). All three are of importance, yet what ultimately turns the tide in a difficult decision process, is Pathos (emotions).
Regarding aircraft I look at Ethos as safety aspects, environmental aspects and descriptions or write ups made by some respected person or identity. Logos is performance numbers, economics and other practical aspects. Pathos is looks, how it feels flying, how other people look at it, how other people look at me when I fly/own it, it makes me feel special or whatever.
There is no denying Apple products works well. But it does this by tying you into a monopoly of services you cannot get out of, and these services do not work without anything but overpriced Apple products. In the end though, what makes Apple products utterly crappy, is I do not like to be associated with all these bozos that think Apple products are the greatest “technological advancement” since sliced bread. Lucky for me there is something called Google 
(which accidentally actually happens to be the best thing after sliced bread, and this is from a pure objective point of view 
)
Numbers, practicalities and tests by some “authoritative GA personality” means nothing, unless you want to build a commercial argumentation with the aim of selling the stuff. Then you also throw in some cheesy “it’s a large airplane, but handles like a fighter” or the opposite “it’s a small airplane, but has this airline feel to it” or some other equally meaningless nonsense. I have subscribed to “Pilot Magazine” enough years to have seen it all, even several times over. I have since long stopped that subscription.
Today, YouTube and internet is what sells stuff. It’s easy to see what kind of aircraft (ordinary) people get a “kick” out of flying and owning by doing a search at YouTube. This is also seen in the statistics. According to statistics, Total shipment of GA single piston is about 800 per year the last 5 years. This is much less than what is lost (age, accidents and so on). The net decrease of SEP in the US is 4500 per year, the last 5 years. The net increase of experimentals are 700 per year in the US. The total “production” of experimentals world wide must be well over 1000 per year. The net production of microlights in Europe is about 1600 per year, the net production of SEP in Europe is 150 or something, with DA-40 occupying 70-80% of that. Considering experimentals are by now the de facto standard for private aviation in the US (even for those with no urge to build their own aircraft with these “two weeks to fly” programs) and ultralight serving somewhat the same purpose in Europe with some experimentals here and there, and both of these categories aircraft does not even exist within the EASA regulations, it is simply amazing how tied up EASA is in its it’s uselessness in it’s ivory towers.
But back to topic. There are other forums around, forums more specialized than this one (homebuilders forums mainly), but that also has advertising from whoever is willing to pay for it. At those forums positive and negative things are discussed at length. It is shown again and again that discussing it ends up with the problem being much smaller than first thought, more of a nuisance if anything at all, already solved or a solution being just around the corner, and/or a simple fix. By not discussing it, the problem will exist as a myth for ever, and continue to look like a huge unsolvable problem. Examples are fatigue cracks in Van’s anodized main wing spars, broken cranks in AeroVee kit engines, and so on. Even so, these “problem” will surface every now and then, but the next times they are easily hammered down by a simple link.
I don’t know, but I think most homebuilders are more open towards looking into problems than others. We don’t purchase certified equipment, and consequently the producer has no obligation showing the equipment is fit for purpose. In the end we are the sole responsible for the intended functionality in an aircraft, and therefore we cannot afford to sweep problems under the carpet.
The only aviation mag I believe to be reasonably truthfull is Aviation Consumer – they carry no advertising.
The only aviation mag I believe to be reasonably truthfull is Aviation Consumer – they carry no advertising.
That may (or may not) be true, but just because you carry advertising doesn’t mean you must disallow negative comments about products. It might mean that advertisers are disinclined to advertise with you in future if you allow negative comments, but even that isn’t a given. And if your motivation isn’t maximising revenue then that might be absolutely fine. Of course for most magazines revenue is a motivation, but it’s not necessarily for all websites
We are involved with other discussion forums which have a substantial amount of negative comments about some of their advertisers. It doesn’t stop the advertisers advertising though.
Those advertisers must believe in the adagio of one bespoke airline manager – “there is no such thing as negative publicity, whenever one gets mentioned in the media that is a good thing even if the mention is in negative words” or something to that effect.
Jan, there is probably a bit of that. After all, at least if their products are being discussed then they are in the minds of their potential buyers. I actually think it’s more the case that some companies are realistic. Pulling your ads from a medium which brings you lots of customers just because that medium allows some of their users to say negative things would be bad for business; where would it end? You’d not be able to advertise anywhere.
Look at how big brands engage with Twitter, despite bad things being said on Twitter about that brand. Should Marks and Spencer not allow their ad to be shown on YouTube because elsewhere on YouTube there are presumably comments saying that M&S are rubbish, given that YouTube puts their ad in front of millions of people for free?
If magazines really do never say anything bad about bad products to protect ad revenue then maybe that’s a lesson their publishers need to learn from the internet and they shouldn’t complain when those ad revenues fall because their readership falls because people don’t want to pay to buy a catalogue every month.
“The only aviation mag I believe to be reasonably truthfull is Aviation Consumer – they carry no advertising.”
That is my conclusion also, although I might say “balanced” instead of “truthful”. I do not think every advertising magazine is untruthful. But Aviation Consumer is currently the only aviation magazine I subscribe to. I actually feel good about supporting – if not PhD work, then fairly well performed evaluations, supposedly free from bias.
I get AOPA Magazine also, but each issue is a heavy pile of paper with only limited interesting information, although some of the writers are quite good. I am a member because I see AOPA do very useful work for GA in Denmark/Europe, but I have asked not to recieve the magazine. So far, without success. I believe the product reports in the magazine are generally more kind to the manufacturers than informative to the readers.
Having been on forums since about 1993 the thing I find most perverse is manufacturers not participating in the forum.
You know they read it.
You know their staff is banned from participating – except in the big US ones.
They just sit there and couldn’t care less if their products are discussed and they could have valuable input.
They just sit there and couldn’t care less if their products are discussed and they could have valuable input
That’s not the case with some (successful) companies on Twitter. Try tweeting “@Ocado, your service is brilliant” and see how quickly someone from the company will pick it up and re-tweet it (post the same message from their own account, for the non-Twitter initiated). Likewise, try tweeting “@Ocado is rubbish, all my eggs were broken when they arrived” and see how fast they tweet trying to solve the problem.
Having been on forums since about 1993 the thing I find most perverse is manufacturers not participating in the forum.
You know they read it.
You know their staff is banned from participating – except in the big US ones.
They just sit there and couldn’t care less if their products are discussed and they could have valuable input.
This is different from company to company. Personally I don’t think it is healthy for staff to participate. They would be dragged into “never ending” discussions, distracted from their real work, only to increase their blood pressure above normal healthy levels. Thick skin is a must at least, as well as self discipline. In the kit-industry, with all the companies I have been involved with, they have excellent one to one e-mail and telephone support.
MGL Avionics, have been known to participate, and several one man companies use the forums as their main customer arena. They probably pay some amount for this?
Vendor participation needs to be done carefully.
I have seen successful cases. The company has to assign somebody to do it, whose job it is formally.
The problem is that if the employee writes a load of crap to one person’s email enquiry, probably only that person will see it, but if he writes a load of crap in a forum, thousands will see it. So you have to appoint somebody who is not a d1ckhead like so many people at the customer interface of so many companies are these days. You have to find somebody intelligent, polite and who can write properly.
And that isn’t easy.
For a start, it is a rare combination to find at a salary level coresponding to a customer interface employee who nowadays is in a script monkey call centre and is paid the NMW, plus maybe a little bit. You need somebody with tech knowledge and the pay will be 2x higher. Most companies will begrudge that.
On the big US forums, firms like Garmin have official participation. The people are smart, well spoken, well informed, have a channel to the right people in the company (which is extremely rare these days if you enquire directly; 99% of the time your enquiry stops at the script monkey) but obviously avoid getting into anything controversial.
(The big sites (Facebook, Twitter, etc) will have mfg participation because it is absolutely necessary. Anyway, presence on these is mandatory for a big-retail-name player.)
Their presence usually prevents technical threads degenerating into drivel – because they can post authoritative information.
It would be a farcical if you had a forum with advertising down the sides and the advertiser didn’t participate and allowed misinformed threads to develop. It would be a really cynical outcome – throwing money at a community site so people buy your stuff and allowing it to degenerate into a debate which leads nowhere because of lack of information. Yet that is exactly what happens on every European GA forum.
Smaller companies do use forums for business and we happily allow that here on EuroGA provided that the posters participate usefully in the forum. I am really keen on this and I think that really enhances the site. Obviously, some have sailed close to the line… just plug their product and then vanish for 6 months.
Unfortunately the big players prefer to hide…
