"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...


I am curious. What exactly is your relationship with Consumer
Reports?

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)



John,

I received a 1 year subscription to Consumers Reports as a wedding gift in
the late 1960s when I got married. Ever since then, I have renewed the
subscription, and used their reviews to assist me in making shopping
decisions. I have purchased many major items over nearly 40 years with their
input, and in many if not most cases, found their comparisons and data to be
accurate and generally valid. In cases where I have been disappointed, I can
often find a good reason which really explains why their choice and my
experience differ, typically my false assumption that they will compare
products using much the same discriminants which I would.

When I retrospectively look back upon items I have purchased for which they
collect and report reliability, my experiences are very much correlated with
their data. Obvious examples would be extreme satisfaction with my current
car's repair history, which matches their data to an uncanny extent, as well
as dissatisfaction with the repair history of a few home appliances which
they now report in the lower ranking repair data.

My only other connection was a single opportunity to perform certain testing
which fell under a non-disclosure agreement whose duration I cannot
accurately recall as a hired consulting engineering company employee in the
early 1990s. They impressed me tremendously with their very thorough, very
well informed, and very meticulous approach to the specific testing which
required lab facilities which they lacked and my employer possessed.

You asked a full disclosure and this is about all I can offer. There are,
and have been, specialized test facilities and labs whose opinions and
evaluations I would value as superior to CU. For many years as an avid
(rabid?) audiophile, I would not especially trust my selection of audio gear
to CU when better evaluations were being offered in the audiophile magazines
and from some distinguished engineers whose opinions I valued. To this day,
I would put more stock and value in reading lens evaluations and camera
evaluations from others on the Internet and elsewhere rather than depend on
CU. I do sincerely believe, however, that they act with integrity, very good
technical judgment, impartiality, and mostly correct metrics.

Incidentally, I have been briefly involved with the CPSC, the Consumer
Product Safety Commission, in a consulting role. I won't elaborate except to
say that they are an extremely poor excuse for a testing organization.

Smarty