RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - General


Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )


Censoring Reviews??????????????(103 posts)

Censoring Reviews??????????????Zaphros
Aug 23, 2001 6:10 AM
There seems to be an awful lot of reviews for the Airborne Zeppelin, all being posted in groups at roughly the same time, all from people giving glowing praise for a bike which they just got. Somebody posted in a review there the other day that the company was giving a rebate for each review people posted there!! As if that wasn't bad enough, the moderater has removed that review!! ARE THE REVIEWS JUST A SHAM???
re: Censoring Reviews??????????????Jeremy Mudd
Aug 23, 2001 7:13 AM
Zaphros,

I can assure you that these reviews are not a "SHAM". Airborne does offer free water bottles for anyone who purchases a new bike or frame from us and posts a review, whether it be good or bad. These posters must have a valid serial number in order to qualify for this promotion(this prevents any invalid reviews from people who like to post about things that they don't even use or own). This basically means that Airborne is so confident that we manufacture a good product, that we are willing to to take a chance by doing this. Where would we be if people had bad experiences and posted them? We'd have negative publicity and we'd still have to give people free waterbottles!

This is a valid promotion that promotes communication and allows perspective buyers to be educated. I would say that if Airborne offered waterbottles for "positive reviews", this would be a bad situation, but that is not the case.

As far as the post being deleted that you spoke of, the post was one of two deleted. There was an extremely negative post by someone who does not own an Airborne product, and another poster posted a good one to offset it (they stated this in their posting, and discussed the water bottle offer as I am now). Some faithful Airborne customers saw this negative post, and alerted the moderator to this fact. I think that it was the right thing to to, remove it and the off-setting "good" post.

If you have any more questions or concerns, please feel free to email me or call Airborne Direct. We would be happy to speak with you directly.

Sincerely,

Jeremy L. Mudd
Marketing Coordinator
Airborne Direct Bikes
wait a minute...jbrown2036
Aug 23, 2001 7:20 AM
so can any company have a review deleted if they don't like it? I'm pretty sure that most people are smart enough to recognize a phony post when they see one, so what's the need?
wait a minute...4bykn
Aug 23, 2001 7:33 AM
The offending review was actually not a review. It was posted anonymously, unless his real name is "Joe Blow". And furthermore, Airborne didn't request that it be deleted, I did. Feel free to ask Gregg, the administrator here. This review admitted that he/she didn't own an Airborne and also stated that he/she felt that some of the reviews were "Airborne generated", and gave Airborne the lowest possible rating to hold down the average rating. If you feel the "bottle for rating" skews the reviews, then all you need do is only read the reviews from more than a month ago, as the program is relatively new. I have a review there from a while back, under the name "Mike from Normal, IL". In fact, Airborne did ask to have a review removed, but it was a false positive review, posted to offset the one I asked to have removed. I hope this helps clear this misunderstanding up.
thanks for the details, but...jbrown2036
Aug 23, 2001 7:55 AM
Thanks for giving me some more detail on what happened. While I can see where you are coming from with both of the reviews mentioned and applaud your quick action, I still think deleting them was an overreaction. If the reviews were as negative/positive as you said then wouldn't it have been obvious to any person reading them that they were not to be taken seriously?

Please don't take this in the wrong manner, and I have no problems with Airborne products.
obviousSteveS
Aug 23, 2001 8:29 AM
Ah, good, I haven't had one of these threads for a few days and I need to stock up before I go on tour for a few weeks.

No, not all reviews are as "obvious" as one might think. There are indeed malevolent people who intentionally lie about having owned/tested/ridden an Airborne product, and they have been around from the beginning of Airborne's appearance. I like to challenge them. The only obvious guess is who they might be are either the competition who hated a lower priced internet seller or someone of naieve world politics. I will give an example.

About a year ago, a poster named "Ed" claimed to have test ridden someone else's brand new Zeppelin at the Ride the Rockies event in Colorado. I challenged him on the truth of his statement and it continued as a thread like this for awhile, him repeatedly asking why I didn't believe him. (As if a new owner loans a stranger his brand new bike to test ride thoroughly and magically everything fits) Later on, through the Airborne forum, I found the only Airborne Zeppelin rider who rode that event and he told me he never loaned his bike to anyone to test ride, let alone "Ed." Oh, yeah, "Ed" never could come up with the name of the individual who loaned him a brand new Zeppelin for a test ride. So, what was Ed's purpose in lying on a forum? He is the type who writes fake/false reviews, not the owners of Airbornes. Not all are obvious.

There is another individual headcase that posts under a number of fake names (hi, Derek, I know you are out there) and he may well be "Go Huffy." His animus and psychological problems are obvious to everyone who knows his history. He has written several fake reviews, can you or anyone else identify which ones they were or under what name? I doubt it.

Where all these debates fall flat from the fake posters or paranoid posters standpoint, is that the vast number of Airborne buyers are quite happy with their product and the company is successful. If it were otherwise, these little tiffs wouldn't constantly happen. Little Derek and the bicycle competition can't stand losing, but they keep trying. And if a prospective buyer decides not to buy an Airborne, so be it. Personally, I don't want to see Airbornes all over the road like some other brands. Reality is, however, they are going to sell quite nicely and this little "much ado about nothing" will pass away into nothingness. Go Airborne.
obviousSteveS
Aug 23, 2001 8:53 AM
Ah, good, I haven't had one of these threads for a few days and I need to stock up before I go on tour for a few weeks.

No, not all reviews are as "obvious" as one might think. There are indeed malevolent people who intentionally lie about having owned/tested/ridden an Airborne product, and they have been around from the beginning of Airborne's appearance. I like to challenge them. The only obvious guess is who they might be are either the competition who hated a lower priced internet seller or someone of naieve world politics. I will give an example.

About a year ago, a poster named "Ed" claimed to have test ridden someone else's brand new Zeppelin at the Ride the Rockies event in Colorado. I challenged him on the truth of his statement and it continued as a thread like this for awhile, him repeatedly asking why I didn't believe him. (As if a new owner loans a stranger his brand new bike to test ride thoroughly and magically everything fits) Later on, through the Airborne forum, I found the only Airborne Zeppelin rider who rode that event and he told me he never loaned his bike to anyone to test ride, let alone "Ed." Oh, yeah, "Ed" never could come up with the name of the individual who loaned him a brand new Zeppelin for a test ride. So, what was Ed's purpose in lying on a forum? He is the type who writes fake/false reviews, not the owners of Airbornes. Not all are obvious.

There is another individual headcase that posts under a number of fake names (hi, Derek, I know you are out there) and he may well be "Go Huffy." His animus and psychological problems are obvious to everyone who knows his history. He has written several fake reviews, can you or anyone else identify which ones they were or under what name? I doubt it.

Where all these debates fall flat from the fake posters or paranoid posters standpoint, is that the vast number of Airborne buyers are quite happy with their product and the company is successful. If it were otherwise, these little tiffs wouldn't constantly happen. Little Derek and the bicycle competition can't stand losing, but they keep trying. And if a prospective buyer decides not to buy an Airborne, so be it. Personally, I don't want to see Airbornes all over the road like some other brands. Reality is, however, they are going to sell quite nicely and this little "much ado about nothing" will pass away into nothingness. Go Airborne.
this is censorshipcyclopathic
Aug 23, 2001 12:00 PM
thanks for explaining how it works.
It messes up the scoring averageRich Clark
Aug 23, 2001 8:17 AM
Which was the stated purpose of "Joe Blow." He deliberately set out to bring down the product's score.

It was a stupid posting that would have damaged RBR more than anything else if it had been allowed to stay. The site owners have an obligation to police their content.

RichC
I see your point. NMjbrown2036
Aug 23, 2001 8:28 AM
re: Censoring Reviews??????????????Go Huffy!
Aug 23, 2001 7:38 AM
Jeremy, the marketing manager says, "As far as the post being deleted that you spoke of, the post was one of two deleted. There was an extremely negative post by someone who does not own an Airborne product, and another poster posted a good one to offset it (they stated this in their posting, and discussed the water bottle offer as I am now). Some faithful Airborne customers saw this negative post, and alerted the moderator to this fact. I think that it was the right thing to to, remove it and the off-setting "good" post."

No one may criticize the regime! No negatives will be allowed to flourish regarding the divine status of Airborne's Chinese slave labor Huffies!
Its in the Little Red Book - comes with the Mao suit and the water bottle - a bad review just comes with a deletion from the board, a knock on the door and your family is sent the bill for the bullet....
Hey, they're learning! What a bunch of losers - a company that used to be about building a value now is just about building image while suppressing any contrary opinions re their products.
I guess if you advertise here you get to make the rules for the board as well - I cannot understand how anyone can take anything positive said about Airborne seriously again. They obviously cruise this board and effect the reviews and post regarding their company - how many different screen names does "Jeremy" have?
What a coincidence that the "marketing director" just happened to stumble on this board this AM - how bloody pathetic can you get? Give this some thought before flaming......
You almost sound rational...nova
Aug 23, 2001 8:26 AM
at certain points in your post, except for the socio-political ranting which belies some kind of predjudice that you have. I've had an Airborne since 1999, and I posted a (mostly) favorable review some time ago. Fact is - they didn't offer me a thing at the time, and I'm not 100% enthusiastic about Airborne as a company (customer service issues a while back). I'm *mostly* satisfied with both the product and the company, and that just seems to tick people like you off.

I hope you don't buy Japanese products. After all, they waged genocide against the Chinese following General Doolittle's (US Army)air raid on Tokyo in 1942. Wouldn't want to put $$ in the pockets of murderous Japanese. And let's not forget the formerly Fascist, currently Socialist Italian State. The Facist Italians were allied with the Nazis and the Japanese against the US, now they are a bunch of neo-Communists with Socialized public policy.

I hope to hell you aren't buy Italian frames or components, or else you are endorsing anti-American policies.
Too bad you don'tGo Huffy!
Aug 23, 2001 8:53 AM
Well, lets see, between the early 1930's and the late 40's I probably would have had a lot more affinity to Chinese products than those made at the time in Japan.
The Fascist Italian state of the 30's and 40's would not have earned my cash either.
And I probably would not have been in line for the first Bug to roll off VW's production line in the early 40's.
I am also not the first in line for products from a country that routinely executes people for their religious or political beliefs (to the tune of over 1000 a year - THAT WE KNOW OF), that oppresses whole nations under its thumb - talk to the Dalai Lama about freedom, or sells body parts of live prisoners to the highest bidder.
Today's Italy, Japan and Germany are not the same nations with the same leadership and policies as they were during the Axis Alliance. I have no problem with supporting their people or their industry - even if they are dumb enough to have a quasi socialist regime that collapses every 12 months or so.
If and when the Chinese choose to become something less than international pariahs and allow their people to have political opinions without the risk of death, even if those happen to be as misguided as the socialist ones held by many Italians - I will be glad to support their products - until then I'll reserve the right to spend my dollars elsewhere..
wait a minutenova
Aug 23, 2001 10:22 AM
You said...
"until then I'll reserve the right to spend my dollars elsewhere.. "

You are obviously intelligent enough to know that you have defined a fundamental aspect of FREE ENTERPRISE. Wooo wee!

Imagine that! people spending their money on the products or services that they decide upon; Airborne, religious charaties, pornography, cancer research... anything they want! Unless of course, it is contrary to YOUR point of view, in which case free enterprise is a bad thing.

You don't see flaw in your stance, do you? If free enterprise weren't a problem for you, you would drop the whole GO HUFFY/Slave labor nonsense and ride your bike.
wait a minuteGo Huffy!
Aug 23, 2001 11:20 AM
A responsible free market (if there is such an animal) rests on the ability of consumers to make informed decisions regarding the expenditure of their funds. I'm not trying to ban Airborne - just critique the company - or is a free market of ideas a problem within your free market of consumerism?
Add a logic class or two to your fall schedule along with US and Asian government classes..
wait a minutenova
Aug 23, 2001 11:29 AM
So let's see - you are currently in or recently completed (or perhaps dropped out of) college. You are one of the few, if any, in your family to ever attempt higher education, and your ego reflects that fact. Why else is formal education such an issue for you? It is a d!ck measuring contest for you. I completed grad school years ago, so maybe I am a bit senile in my old age.

You are frustrated in your life. - your work, if any, isn't up to your expectations, and there obviously is little female companionship in your life beyond the attentions of your mother, if she is still in your life.

You are wrong about Airborne, you are wrong about me, you are wrong about both the US & Japan, but you are correct concerning the evils of a totalitarian Communist government. I'm thankful that I live here, in the US, where people like you can spout off, no matter how misguided or frustrated you may be.

Get some excercise, you might feel better about yourself.
hmmm....alex the engineer
Aug 23, 2001 11:40 AM
several "tu quoques" and "ad hominems" in your attack there, if I remember my Critical Thinking course. If you are trying to make a valid argument, try to avoid these fallicies. They hurt your case.
(And I'm only an engineer, not a lawyer).
Don't confuse my postsnova
Aug 23, 2001 11:46 AM
The above is a psych profile of Derek, I mean of Go Huffy. It isn't meant as anything other than that. The other portion of the thread is indeed a reasoned argument which avoids (and mostly succeeds) at avoiding the fallacies which you mention.

Perhaps you could look at the html links I posted in your free time, as well.
OK - You're doing a hell of a job of that yourself.... (nm)Go Huffy!
Aug 23, 2001 11:51 AM
Don't confuse my postsSteveS
Aug 23, 2001 12:10 PM
Methinks you have discovered the Derek Mattice syndrome quite well. He was attending some small school at home and was most impressed when he discovered "The Economist" magazine.
Derek & Dokkennova
Aug 23, 2001 12:20 PM
He apparently listens to Dokken while wrenching on his non-Communist hardware: (Just an observation, not a judgement of him based on his taste in music - seriously)

http://www.dokken.net/issues/dokken170.html
From: Derek Mattice [mailto:derek11@tir.com]
Subject: VH1 Top 100 Hard Rock Acts

I an quite puzzled as to why they thought you might be interested in this
show. Dokken wasn't even on there (but King's X was). Considering Dokken
was nominated for a Grammy and I don't believe Ratt every was, I'm a little
perplexed as to how they made it over Dokken, Cinderella, etc. But then,
Nirvana was in front of Van Halen and Guns N' Roses-what a joke!
Don't confuse my postsnova
Aug 23, 2001 11:46 AM
The above is a psych profile of Derek, I mean of Go Huffy. It isn't meant as anything other than that. The other portion of the thread is indeed a reasoned argument which avoids (and mostly succeeds) at avoiding the fallacies which you mention.

Perhaps you could look at the html links I posted in your free time, as well.
Was your mother killed by Chinese titanium welders or something?JS5280
Aug 23, 2001 9:31 AM
Hello Go Huffy!,

Surprised you haven't popped up for the other recent Airborne posts here lately. I so enjoy your blathering. My thoughts before flaming you is that you continue to discredit your own self with your McCarthyism rhetoric against Airborne, particular with the frames being made in China. Now I can respect (but not agree) with you if you think that by buying products manufactured in China supports a country that's had major human right violations, but this is a discussion board on bicycles, not the politics of globalization. Enough of the world thinks that China is progressing that the 2008 Olympics will be held there and I think that and the further industrialization will improve the conditions for all Chinese people. The U.S. certainly doesn't have a snowy white past but I don't flame Litespeed for residing in a state that supported slavery or is in a country that currently has the greatest per-capita of its citizens behind bars.

If you read the review in question, it was painfully apparent that it was a bogus review, written w/ the same disregard for facts as your postings. Hmmmm, anyway to check the IP address to see if they match? It is NOT uncommon for such postings to be removed from RbR. As far as receiving a water bottle for posting a review, BFD! It's a water bottle! I doubt someone's comments on a $2000 bicycle are swayed significantly by a water bottle. You get a free water bottle and t-shirt at just about every ride you do, that doesn't make you a paid endorser of that organization does it? I choose Airborne in large part to the near unanimous EXCELLENT reviews of the bike over the years of posting on RbR.

Your knee-jerk remarks remind me so much of the late 70's/early 80's about those crappy Japanese cars. Hmmm, kind of kicked our American ass back in shape didn't it? Have you ever even seen an Airborne bike, let alone ride one? They are great bikes, I own a 2001 Zeppelin, have 1200 miles on it and I love it. It's a great bike for the riding I do and it's what I could afford. Go surf your Huffy-phobic ass to some other board where your comments might be construed as intelligent. I look forward to dropping your sorry ass while on my "Huffy".
Thanks for the info Jeremy, your policy needs some review.MB1
Aug 23, 2001 7:41 AM
This seems like a pretty questionable way to spread the word about your product.

When this group has discussions such as the one about Waterford/Gunnar frames as we do below or other products I would like to think the posters are not influenced by that companies marketing efforts but are honestly reporting their experiences and thoughts.

Your decision to remove some posts is censorship. I will certainly be questioning at least to myself posts about Airborn products from now on. I believe you have created a disincentive for consumers to consider or recommend your bikes.
BTW, do I get a free waterbottle for this? nmMB1
Aug 23, 2001 8:01 AM
that means:zaphros
Aug 23, 2001 7:49 AM
you must post the review how soon after you buy the bike?? How long do you have to actually RIDE the damn thing before the offer is no longer valid?
Seems to me that this is skewing the whole reason for a site like this. If you give people goodies, OF COURSE they will say nice things about you!! This IS a scam!!
In light of this outside enticement, the only HONEST thing that Roadbikereview.com CAN do is to not permit any reviews from this manufacurer. Will they do this?? I doubt it. I'm expecting this thread to dissapear soon, too!!!
As long as you're in the mood to do some cleaning...Cliff Oates
Aug 23, 2001 8:06 AM
There seem to be several (I stopped counting when I got to 5) duplicate reviews of the 2001 Zeppelin. Those folks probably don't own 2 of your frames, and the duplicate reviews skew the results for your product. I think it's safe to say your strategy of buying reviews is one of the causes behind these duplicate reviews. Why don't you ask site to delete the duplicates from the reviews for your product?
Biasgrzy mnky
Aug 23, 2001 8:19 AM
By making an offer of any sort you are introducing bias and skew the results. People are no longer self selecting. Obviously someone who has already made the purchase of an Airborne is going to feel differently, but that's pretty much the way all reviews work unless you've had a bad experience. To be fair you should offer the water bottle to *anyone* who reviews an Airborne - owner or not. How about someone offering free hummers to review an Airborne as long as you're NOT an owner? Any problem with this?

It's pretty lame when you have to offer treats, maybe your customers are simply lap dogs? Aren't your bikes good enough that people would naturaly post a review on their own? Apparently not.

No matter what anyone says, it appears that there's more than enough profit margin an what is already a "budget bike" to pay for slick advertising in mags and give away water bottles - sounds like the auto industry. How about a cash rebate?
A Brilliant Plan (not)Rich Clark
Aug 23, 2001 8:27 AM
Let me get this straight.

You think people who don't own and use something would make better reviewers than people who do?

Right.

Perhaps you could review for us the concepts of "logic" and "objectivity."

RichC
A Brilliant Plan (not)grzy mnky
Aug 23, 2001 10:42 AM
No you missed my point or I didn't make it very well or both. Of course people that own stuff should review it they're in a good position w/1st hand experience, but their motivation should be entirely of their own - just like with every other product. Providing extra incentive to a carefully selected group introduces bias and makes the rating meaningless. Get it?
A Brilliant Planpeloton
Aug 23, 2001 10:47 AM
I agree with Grz. Anytime you offer a reward to post a review of a product, it has to alter the results somewhat. It creates a playing field that is not level for everyone participating.
A Brilliant Plan (not)Rich Clark
Aug 23, 2001 11:00 AM
The group consists of owners of the bikes who chose to subscribe to the e-newsletter. I don't understand how that constitutes "careful selection."

That's pretty much the same type of group that revews every product on every ConsumerReview site -- owners of the products.

What motivates people to post reviews here normally? The desire to help other cyclists? Sometimes. The desire to sound like an expert? Sometimes. The desire to bash a product that didn't work out? Sometimes. The desire to bash a product because the buyer made a bad choice and wants to blame the company instead of his own stupid self? Sometimes. The desire to identify oneself with a community of like people? Sometimes.

My point is that peoples' motivations for posting reviews are complex and unpredictable.

Now, what conceivable motivation do all these Airborne owners have for posting only positive reviews? If you can answer that, you might be onto something.

RichC
ExcellentSteveS
Aug 23, 2001 12:31 PM
Not so long ago, a frequent poster to this forum and an employee at a shop that sold Litespeeds, posted his impressions of a Zeppelin that he said came into his shop. (the post was here in the forum rather than the Reviews section, ostensibly so more people would read it?) He went ahead and panned it in comparison to his Ultimate or Vortex or whatever. Hmmm, an employee's hourly wage, salary, or commission comes from selling a frame that costs 3.5 times the cost of the Z and several posters chime in things like "thats what I thought" or whatever accepting this person's opinion as unbiased? I think not.

Hmmm. So, I challenge this person and his shop to sell me a Tuscany at the retail price (the price which in one phone call I could beat via the internet) in order that I have a bicydle so much marvelously better than my bike. All his shop had to do was what Airborne does every day, give me 10 days to look, ride and decide if there was "no comparison" between their bike any my Z. If it was superior, I keep it; if it wasn't I return it at their expense with my money back. Same as Airborne offers. Guess what? They wouldn't take my deal. Folded. What, there are no Litespeed dealers that cruise this website and have faith enough in their product to try to convert me? Guess not. Yet, this same individual-shop was considered an "objective" reviewer of a Zeppelin. I think not.

Since that time, Robert Millar's review has since borne out my assesment of the ride of my bike. Thats why I am confident in the hugely positive opinions of owners of Airborne frame, and why I intend to challenge an opinion that seems suspect or with a vested interest in skewing a review. Honest differing opinions are welcomed.
Exactlygrzy mnky
Aug 23, 2001 12:52 PM
> My point is that peoples' motivations for posting reviews are complex and unpredictable.

So lets keep it that way. Offering trinkets and tokens removes this ascpect.
What in the hell happened to your font? (NM)9WorCP
Aug 25, 2001 2:13 PM
nm
BiasSteeve
Aug 23, 2001 9:16 AM
I disagree on all of your arguements.

Offering water bottles does not skew the results - both positive and negative get the bottle.

"To be fair you should offer the water bottle to *anyone* who reviews an Airborne - owner or not." - That is ridiculous! Owners only is the fair way.

Do you know how cash rebates work, and why they were developed?
Biasgrzy mnky
Aug 23, 2001 10:48 AM
Who says that a non-owner can't provide a review? Are they not qualified? Does this make reviews in a magazine worhtless b/c they don't own the product? Of course not. Under you plan only some one foolish enough to buy a truly cruddy product would be able to review it. Sound like a good idea? The bias is that you're providng additional motivation to a pre-selected group - in essence a paid testimonial - and people should know that.

Cash rebates are a marketing tool desinged to sell stuff that wouldn't otherwise move. It's implicit acknowldegement from the manufactuer that the price is too high. Apparently the low price of an Airborne isn't low enough.
BiasSteeve
Aug 24, 2001 5:43 AM
Are you foolishly saying that those who have never even seen the bike (but say that they have to get a bottle) should be considered valid reviews?

Even you know that your arguement about magazines providing reviews is stupid.

Who said anything about a truely cruddy product? Expain why Airborne bikes are truely cruddy.

You miss the real reason why rebates were born. They started in the auto industry to provide a means for purchasers to effectively reduce the downpayment to loan ratio. A buyer would use the rebate toward the downpayment. Example: A buyer has only $1000 available for downpayment on a $10,000 car which requires 15% down. The manufacturer offers a $600 rebate and increases the price of the car to $10,600. The buyer now has his original $1000 plus the $600 rebate for a total of $1,600 down on a $10,600 car. He now has over the required 15% down. Get it?
Biasgrzy mnky
Aug 24, 2001 8:28 AM
Obviously if you're going to review a product some first hand knowledge is required - you just don't have to be an owner - so why should owners be the only ones to get the bribe?

For the magazine aspect see above.

Never said Airborne was cruddy (you thinking it might be?) I just said one is not required to own a cruddy product to be able to review it.

So effectively the manufacturer has raised the price of the car, covered the increase and left the buyer financing a larger portion of the loan (than he'd otherwise be able to) and they get to pay more interest which goes along with the higher share of the risk taken b the loan holder.
BiasSteeve
Aug 24, 2001 12:10 PM
Grsy mnky are you brain damaged? Go back and look at the example. See if you can figure out that the buyer finances $9,000 in both cases.
Obviousgrzy mnky
Aug 24, 2001 2:32 PM
Buyer is paying $9,000 out of pocket for a car that he intially couldn't afford b/c he wasn't qualified. Using an accounting trick the auto manufacturer figured out a way to make it possible and circumvent the limitation on the loan risk. In the straight up deal a $9,000 loan wasn't acceptable. The actions of the manufacturer made it possible - hence subsidization.

How does any of this have much to do with the original question?
BiasRich Clark
Aug 24, 2001 1:03 PM
<>

Because otherwise Airborne would be potentially obligated to give away millions of water bottles... and there would be no way to assure readers that the reviews are coming from people qualified to write them.

Airborne is not controlling who posts reviews. Anybody can post a review. And usually does.

What's unusual about Airborne is that it's an Internet-based bicycle company that is in more direct touch with its customers than most bike companies are. There is nothing preventing any other company from encouraging its owners to post reviews. And for all anybody knows, it's already been done... only this time, it worked.

I'm glad this happened this week, while I'm on vacation. I've been riding 50-75 miles a day (on my Airborne), and looking forward to the entertainment provided by this board, and particularly this thread. I'll regret having to go back to work next week, but at least I'll still get my 26 miles a day (on my Airborne) commuting.

Because the bottom line is that it's a truly great bike.

RichC
Hah!grzy mnky
Aug 24, 2001 2:26 PM
>Because otherwise Airborne would be potentially obligated to give >away millions of water bottles... and there would be no
>way to assure readers that the reviews are coming from people >qualified to write them.

So then the only people quailified to write a review is an owner? I think not. Point is if the bike is so damn good people should be falling all over themselves to write reviews of their own free will without some enticement. Apparently this isn't happening as much as Airborne would like. How about free hummers for any Serotta owner (you have to prove it) that writes a review.
Hah!Rich Clark
Aug 24, 2001 2:49 PM
We're going around in circles here. Point is, you know how it is on the internet: word get out -- "hey, if you write a review of an Airborne bike you'll get free waterbottles." Pretty soon everybody with a modem is writing reviews, whether they know a bike from a wheelchair.

As it stands, the reader is getting reviews from people who own the bikes. I think it was responsible of Airborne to impose that restriction.

I seem to recall MTBReview giving away free magazine subscriptions in exchange for posting a review, a year or two ago. It was a way to help ConsumerReview.com compete better with other review sites, like e-opinions, etc. It worked, too.

RichC
Suregrzy mnky
Aug 24, 2001 3:41 PM
We just need to understand people's motivations. major diffferenece is that the MTBReview offer was to anyone for any review. Airborne has limited it to only owners. All I'm saying is that this changes things.
SureRich Clark
Aug 24, 2001 5:25 PM
No, it was to anyone who could write a proper review that conformed to the MTBR TOS. Including giving a valid e-mail address, for example, and all the other normal conditions for submitting reviews. And the purpose of the incentive was to promote ConsumerReview.com's competitive edge -- exactly the same motivation as Airborne's.

I don't disagree that the presence of an incentive changes things. But what it changes in this case is the number of reviews, not their content. If the take-away message is that a lot of people own Airbornes and that nearly all of them really like their bikes, well, what a few peeople here seem to have a problem with is that that's just the truth.

RichC
told too many lies todaysid vicous
Aug 23, 2001 1:04 PM
help me
attention Jeremy Muddnova
Aug 23, 2001 8:39 AM
I've never been to China, but I'm 100% convinced that the people who are fabricating these aerospace grade titanium frames are in fact being whipped ruthlessly and are building the frames at gunpoint. Word is that Airborne employees in Ohio send their leftover pizza crusts over to China via the slow boat as a 'gesture of compassion.' In reality, they just want their slaves to have the strength to keep building these shoddy frames on which Airborne is making 100% profit.

We all know that the godless communist Asian "people" don't deserve to make a decent living and provide for their families like us well-fed 'Mericans and of course the oh-so fashionable Eye-talians.

Sometimes it seems that the majority of people on this board are the stars of the Tonight Show's "Jaywalking" segment. If you understand that reference, then it probably doesn't apply to you.

OK - bonus points for the first person who can tell me what form of government exists in Japan....
You's a bright one ain't you's?Go Huffy!
Aug 23, 2001 9:19 AM
Parliamentary - what did you just have a PoliSci 001, Intro to International Politics class at 'Nova this year?
Your understanding of geopolitical and economic constructs is right up there with that of a CNN Headline "News" anchor.
The ability to rattle off commonly help stereotypical critiques does not impress anyone but a first year TA. No one here is demeaning or stereotyping the people of China (or Americans) but you. And if you want to argue that China is a benevolent and misunderstood regime you must either be a fund raiser for the DNC or truly a candidate for "Jaywalking."

Bonus for you: What form of government does the PRC have - and how does this form of goverment effect the freedom of its citizens (especially those outside of the coastal industrial regions)?
Here is the answernova
Aug 23, 2001 10:30 AM
The answer is: Constitutional Democracy, as instituted by the US Army, and General MacArthur in particular, following the unconditional Japanese surrender in 1945.

FYI - This is the SAME FORM OF GOVERNMENT AS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Here it is again: Constitutional Democracy.

They have a constitution. They elect their officials in national and regional elections. They have term limits. They have a house of representatives. Why? Because the USA set it up that way.

My point is (was, and has been) that people in general just don't know what the hell they are talking about when it comes to Asian culture and politics. (like the guy who used the term "Slave Labor") Thanks for illustrating my point. And no, I'm not Asian.
wrong answeralex the engineer
Aug 23, 2001 10:43 AM
actually, we are a REPUBLIC, not a democracy, since we do NOT directly elect our chief executive (President). Please get your facts straight.
NOnova
Aug 23, 2001 10:59 AM
Same with the USA. But try explaining to Americans that they live in a republic, and not a true democracy, and it just doesn't work. Hence all the "What is the electoral college?" questions during the last election.

Academically, both countries are democratic, but thanks for pointing out the practical reality.

(and to the Republic, for which it stands, one nation, blah blah blah)

PS - get off your high horse.
NOgrzy mnky
Aug 23, 2001 11:02 AM
> PS - get off your high horse.

What, is he blocking your view over the little people?
LOL!nova
Aug 23, 2001 11:06 AM
Yes, I'll climb down now too.

Thanks :-)
Here is the answer - sorry wrong......Go Huffy!
Aug 23, 2001 11:10 AM
Alex was right to append my answer to also mention that it is a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary system of government (much of the monarchy is ornamental).
Now you need to go back to that PoliSci 001 on the descriptions of both the US and Japanese systems of government.
NEITHER is a "constitutional democracy" (which, by the, way is an oxymoron, or in your case just a civics moron), - The US is Republic and not a Democracy and Japan is a Constitutional Monarchy and again not a Democracy. Both use a variation of a representative system to enact legislation (Congress/Diet (parliament)).
Seems to be new to you but the US and Japanese systems are vastly different. The Japanese do not elect their Prime Minister directly as we do a president (Republican vs. Parliamentary system of state). Other differences (bicameral vs single legislative chambers, party systems and electoral thresholds, etc) are probably outside the scope of this response and your intellect. You really need to go back to school......
And damn talk about not knowing your head from your ass. You say other people do not know anything about Asian culture - hell, you don't even know what type of government your OWN country has. I starting to believe everything I have heard about the American education system.
- sorry wrong......nova
Aug 23, 2001 11:23 AM
So we elect the president directly here in the US? Is that why Al Gore is in the White House at the moment? He received the majority of the vote, after all. Not even W. would contest that.

When you are finished with the insults, and if you are capable of reasoned critical thought (as opposed to lashing out), perhaps you could do a little remedial research.

Here is something on the high school level for you:
http://www.remc11.k12.mi.us/dowagiac/duhsw/hssocstcv.html

Here is something which illustrates that, academically, the United States of America is a Constitutional Democracy:
http://www.claremont.org/publications/Kesler13.cfm

Here is something from Smith College which discusses Constitutional Democracy in Japan: http://www.smith.edu/newsoffice/Releases/robinson.html

I'm looking forward to your citations to the contrary.
- sorry wrong......Go Huffy!
Aug 23, 2001 11:46 AM
OK you got me, I left out the electoral college, gee sorry.
Other the other hand, the first article you site is dead wrong, the second does not refer to your point at all, and neither does the third - you should read them before you post off a Yahoo search - anyone can type in a search - understanding what you get is a whole different ball of wax...
There is a vague touchy feelly urge on the part of the American populace to believe that we live in a democracy - which is untrue - actually the Japanese system is closer to a pure democracy than we are.
Democracy means that people vote for legislation directly (referendum is a good example) - A representative democracy (which is about as close as you can claim the US and Japan to be) is a system in which individuals elect officials to then make laws on their behalf.
So again, the US is a republic and Japan is a constitutional monarchy. Go take that PoliSci 001 it just might help.
Dereknova
Aug 23, 2001 11:57 AM
"There is a vague touchy feelly urge on the part of the American populace to believe that we live in a democracy - which is untrue - actually the Japanese system is closer to a pure democracy than we are.
Democracy means that people vote for legislation directly (referendum is a good example) - A representative democracy (which is about as close as you can claim the US and Japan to be) is a system in which individuals elect officials to then make laws on their behalf. "

I totally agree, which is why I didn't even bother to try to explain it to you in the first place. (Check back about 5 posts or so) But since you DO understand the difference, then you and I are in agreement, as much as you hate to admit it.

Drop the "Monarchy" part, and you're all set. The emporer has absolutely no legitimate role in the government at all.

By the way, there is another Airborne thread going above, near the top of the board. Better jump in there!
Pseudo intellectual Jerko*f session.J.S.
Aug 23, 2001 12:06 PM
I bet your the guy that's sits at parties waiting to impress everyone with your superior intellect but you end up standing by yourself because NO ON CARES.
that's why George Shrub is president...(nm)alex the engineer
Aug 23, 2001 12:39 PM
Here is the answerWooL E CReaTuRe
Aug 23, 2001 11:35 AM
For nobody in particular...

Can you say constipated monopoly?

How many sides does a cirlce have?
Finally, some sense in all of this - Thank you! (nm)Go Huffy!
Aug 23, 2001 11:52 AM
Is that Island Lake to the East of your house?nova
Aug 23, 2001 12:55 PM
Ever jump off a dock into the lake with a Mountain bike?
attention Jeremy Muddalex the engineer
Aug 23, 2001 9:24 AM
it is a constitutional monarchy.
They should clean out trash reviewsAlpedhuez55
Aug 23, 2001 7:50 AM
There are a few narrow minded people out there who have something against Airborne because of their financial relationship with Huffy or the fact that the frames are built in China. They post crap each time someone asks about one even though they probably have never ridden them or maybe they have a connection to another Ti bike manufacturer.

If the moderator were to delete a well written thoughtful negative review, that would be one thing. Deleting an ad that does not review the product in question is OK. There is a lot of trash on the product reveiws and it should be cleaned out. Also you will see someone give a negative review of a bike after a two minute test ride in a bike shop parking lot. Does that honestly belong on this site?

From what I heard Airborne was sending out Water bottles to people who wrote a review of their bike here. If it gets more people to use this site, great!!! More power to them!!! If it is a first impression after owning the bike for a few weeks, maybe they will come back and write another one in a few months.

I am strongly considering a Zeppelin or Valkyrie. The owners seem very happy with them and that is what is most important. Robert Millar also wrote a fantasic review of the Zepplin in the new isssue of Pro Cycling bragging about it's comfort. While I am sure the ride is not quite the same as a Seven, Merlin or Lightspeed the frame costs about 1/2 to 1/4 of some of the other Ti frames out there. I would love to get a Custom Seven someday but it is beyond my means right now. For the money, it sounds like a great deal and the fit seems to work for me since I have short legs and a long trunk. The welds look great as well. I have not made my decision yet but I have heard very few bad things about Airborne and there is a very good chance I will be riding one soon.
They have a word for people like you...Go Huffy!
Aug 23, 2001 8:02 AM
SUCKER! (or an Airborne/Huffy employee)..
I guess you didn't sign the pact, hm? (nm)Rich Clark
Aug 23, 2001 8:21 AM
Try two words educated consumerAlpedhuez55
Aug 23, 2001 9:16 AM
No I do not work for Huffy, Airborne or anyone in the bike industry. If you are a small businessman in search of payroll and merchant solutions, feel free to contact me and I will help you out. I just like to ride and have been considering buying their product. I do try research all of my major bike purchases. I do not want to add a $1000 frame to the box of old bicycle parts I have collected over the years. I have read reviews and magazine articles on Airborne and they are for the most part positive and seem to be a great value. If my Powerball number comes up on Saturday, my first stop will be at either the Seven or IF Factory, both within 10 miles of my house, getting custom fit for my dream bike.

If you want to flame on people have the guts to post a real profile with an email address. I am an active contributer to the message boards. I usually post or respond to posts 2 or 3 times a day.

If you you want want to pick on employees posting trash reviews go to Hot Deals Board and flame on the idiots who write a post about the stupid Tiawanese Pedal Scooters every few days.

For the sake of all of us, go away GO HUFFY!. Come back when you get a life.
Try two words educated consumer??????????????Go Huffy!
Aug 23, 2001 9:28 AM
Anyone who would mail order a bike on the basis of on-line and magazine reviews is 1. naive 2. utterly unwashed in the psychological motivation behind "consumer" reviews or the business motivations behind "professional" reviews & 3. hardly an educated consumer..........
Try two words educated consumer??????????????Alpedhuez55
Aug 23, 2001 10:50 AM
If I buy it it will be at a small local bike shop, Paramount Bicycle Repair in Somerville, Massachusetts. They are on the Airborne Dealer list. I looked at the Lucky Strike and Zeppelin he had in the shop and test rode a Lucky Strike last year at Pedrosfest.

Reviews are helpful because they point out the weaknesses of a bike. Even a positive review will have a couple of minor compaints such as tire clearance of frame flex. I more or less ignore overly positive reviews and look for the ones that have critical comments. A lot of the negative ones on Airbore are sizing issues. Their sizing seems to work to my advantage though because of my build. The main concern I have with any Ti frame is bottom bracket flex. If I do not like it, there is a 10 day money back guarantee. These are all issues that are making me consider their frame.

I think after reading that, you will realize that I do know what I am talking about. There are a few other frames I am considering but there is a good chance, about 30%, I will end up with an Airborne.

Yes there are some political issues with buying a chinese product. You could also argue the more money that goes there, the more the situation will improve. If the builders of those frames are welding with a gun to their head, they have a pretty steady hand. If you want to complain about politics, complain about the Chinese funneling money to the Democrats.

If you want to give us the real reason you have an axe to grind with Airborne, please feel free. You have tried to insult me by trying to call my calling me names. I have no choice but to defend myself. I think I know alot on the subject of bicycles. I wish the RBR staff could figure a way to block people like you from polluting these boards.

There is a saying for people like you Go Huffy!...
Better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you are stupid than open it and remove all doubt.
suggestion that would helpDuane Gran
Aug 23, 2001 8:09 AM
(Gregg if you are reading this, please consider this suggestion)

A good solution would be to have the ability to meta-moderate (a slashdot word I am borrowing here) the reviews. They do this on Amazon.com with book reviews where you can easily answer "was this review helpful?" and the system promotes more helpful reviews to the top of the list.

There may even be a way to develop a fair algorithm that applies a multiplier to a review score based on its positive image from the community, but I don't have a suggestion offhand. Personally I find the commentary to be much more useful than the numbers themselves. I would prefer to see that a product had X number of helpful reviews as judged by the community.

Will this do anything to eliminate ballot stuffers and stat hounds? Probably not, but if you set up a system that generally rewards useful content then the junk will settle at the bottom.
It seems to me...alex the engineer
Aug 23, 2001 8:34 AM
..that rewarding people for reviews destroys what little legitimacy this site has. If you go into the reviews, you will soon see that many posts are by people who have just bought whatever it is, or might not even own it. Yet, these reviews get equal weight in the average rating at top.
I have seen other reviews of things which I know are junk, but have glowing reviews by people who have just installed the thing on their bike. I know whether or not something LOOKS good, I want to find out if it WORKS!
Some people have said good things about the Airborne products, others have said bad things. After hearing about this crass and blatant attempt to hoodwink the public, I wouldn't EVER cosider buying their product. If this is the way they try to advertise, can you imagine what their customer support must be like?
Now that the cat is out of the bag, what will roadbikereview.com do about it? If they continue to accept reviews on these products, they will have lost all credibility. If they drop these reviews, they will lose all advertising from the Huffy/Airborne/Schwinn/whatever mega-corporation. Watch to see what happens-actions speak louder than words (or press releases).
The fact is...Rich Clark
Aug 23, 2001 8:37 AM
...that all this Airborne-bashing has nothing to do with the bikes. With few exceptions, the people who own the bikes love them, and are very happy with their purchases. Consumer reviews and "professional" reviews in the cycling press are in general agreement about the quality and performance of these bikes.

A couple of loudmouth yahoos here seem to have an axe to grind against the company, for reasons they don't seem to want to clearly explain. Even they don't seem to have anything credible to say about the bikes, but if they did I'm sure it would be accepted in the spirit offered.

Personally, when I posted a review of my Airborne Carpe Diem, it was before the water-bottle offer was made. There were dozens of reviews of Airborne bikes posted already, and as far as I can tell, the ratings were just as high before as they are now.

RichC
IGNORE ALL AIRBORNE REVIEWS!!!!!dizzy
Aug 23, 2001 8:43 AM
so they are caught in a foolish game and now try to spin it to make themselves look better. ALL reviews of products here have the possibility of being written by self interested promoters. Use them only as a most basic guide. When we find out one is so full of fraud, such as this airborne one, ignore everyone posted under that product. Maybe the company will learn that trying to influence our minds with their ignorant games will only HURT them in the long run.
skepticism a good thingDaveG
Aug 23, 2001 8:47 AM
I think all the reviews here need to be treated with some degree of skepticism and caution. The vast majority of the reviews are generally gloating over how incredibly smart their purchase was. Objectivity varies greatly. There are a few overly negative reviews by folks with an axe to grind. Becuase of the Huffy/China/affordable Ti angle, Airborne seems to draw a larger share of these. Personally, I think we have more than enough of Airborne reviews - is anyone going to offer anything new that hasn't already been addressed about Airborne? Don't take that to be anti-Airborne (i'm not), I'd just like to see some more diverse reviews.
skepticism a good thingAlpedhuez55
Aug 23, 2001 10:00 AM
Just to throw in another Anti-Airborne angle, many Local Bike Shop owners also do not like them because the sell direct on the Internet. I have heard that complaint as well. They do have a good dealer network though and if I do buy mine it will at a shop near my house in Boston and not on the net.

I think you need to read all the reviews with a grain of salt. Also realize that most of us love and take pride in our bikes!!! If we are going to write a review about them, they tend to be positive. That is just the nature of this type of site.

Some of the negative reviews are due to poor setup by the shop they bought them in. A couple of well written negative review has made me to consider a different product on a few occasions. A "This Bike Stinks" review with a bunch of misspelled words does not anything to me and is probably fake.

I think I posted a great 5 chilli review about my old Proflex Mountain bike on MTBR a few years ago. I loved that bike the first two years I had it. Now after riding my Specialized Cromoly hardtail for a year, I wonder what I was thinking!!!
All reviews are biased but that does not make them useless...Bruno S
Aug 23, 2001 9:20 AM
Most reviews in here are biased. The reviewer most of the time has just bought the product, paid some good money and will give it a high rating. In many cases the more expensive a product is the more reviews it has. The reviewer could also had a problem with the product which has motivated him/her to post a review to warn other people. So, if a product is defective 5% of the time the people that bought those defective product will be more likely to post which will create the impression that the product is always defective.

In the case of my bike the review rating is high but it is also pointed out that it has several defects which myself have experienced.
Does the rating mean anything? Not really but in most cases there is some truth in these reviews which can be valuable information.
Wish I'd heeded Flight Deck reviews.Brian C.
Aug 23, 2001 9:32 AM
Got talked into buying one, even though reviews raised several issues, which have proved to be legitimate.
re: Censoring Reviews??????????????Mike K
Aug 23, 2001 9:52 AM
Go forbid anyone bursts the Airborne bubble.
Then again the way this company garners reviews and has non-complimentary ones edited/removed does make most anything said about/by them on this board or in the review section less than relevant.
"The Big Lie"Rich Clark
Aug 23, 2001 10:34 AM
That's the principle that if you keep repeating an untruth often enough, people will start to believe it.

There is no evidence that any non-complimentary reviews were removed. What was removed was not a review, but rather a smear that was posted using the review form. Another comment, made in response to it (which gave a 5/5 rating) was also removed. These would have been removed by RBR anyway, since they violate the TOS.

There are in fact some uncomplimentary reviews of Airborne bikes on the site, and they've been there all along.

RichC
Brain Cells...Kristin
Aug 23, 2001 10:48 AM
...or lack there of...

This is an interesting thread. But I'm wondering if the whole thing is overblown. Most people reading the reviews are smart. Heck, most people who ride road bikes are highly intelligent. Intelligent enough to see thru sensless rantings and meaningless drivel. As a rule of thumb, I always disregard the most positive and negative reviews of a product.

By pulling this review, Airborne merely states that it wants to preserve for itself a niche of customers who the lack common sense to discern between a valid review and biased rantings. (Not to say that Airborne owners are mentally challenged. That is not at all what I mean.) I'm saying rather, that Airborne implies it doesn't want to lose any possible customers just because they're clueless.

A better thread would be: Why there isn't a better selection of product reviews? There are soooo very many products missing from the list. And the process to request a new product review is neither easy or self evident. The result being that fewer people will bother to request them. This is too bad and makes me wonder about sponsorship bias. Probably isn't, but still makes me wonder.
Why there isn't a better selection of product reviews?Go Huffy!
Aug 23, 2001 11:25 AM
Probably because others are not giving away waterbottles or spending a mint of RBR/MTBR advertising...
Brain Cells...Bikenut
Aug 23, 2001 3:49 PM
Kristin,
I'm probably missing something, but I found the following instruction quite easily and it appears on every review page heading that I checked:
"If there is a product that you feel should be listed below, please submit the information here."
I'm sure you can list any bike related product you wish and maybe someone with real experience with that product will post their experiences. Hopefully that response won't be opinion without foundation being passed off as fact
instructionsfuzzybunnies
Aug 23, 2001 4:57 PM
I've tried twice to get a derosa frame added following those same easy instructions and have gotten no results. So I guess you can't list any product that's wished. TTFN
Felt morbidly guilty when I read your postKristin
Aug 24, 2001 6:48 AM
...but then I revisited two product review pages and found no such link. Next, I visited the road bike review section and found the link referred to in your post. It really depends on what you're reviewing. Some pages (mostly on MTBR) don't offer the option to request a new product review. So I was not posting out of total ignorance.

In retrospect, I do feel badly for suggesting that this is a ploy to bias consumers. More likely, its just code gaps left by developer turnover. Happens to a lot of .com's. Sorry for the paranoia.
Jeremy Mudd, a couple of ?'sGW Rider
Aug 23, 2001 10:58 AM
Is anyone else curious as to why the Marketing Coordinator of Airborne was the first one to respond to this post??

Whatever your reasons are for liking or disliking Airborne, you would have to assume that they are quite receptive to anything that smacks of bad publicity. Whether that publicity is a bad review or a flame war, it seems that the Marketing Coordinator is right there.

My questions are, Why isn't the Customer Service Coordinator involved in this post? Is there a Customer Service Coordinator at Airborne? Or is Airborne just interested in marketing and selling their bikes and not in servicing their customers?

Just a few questions to ponder.

Keep the shiny side up and the dirty side down.
What?Rich Clark
Aug 23, 2001 11:07 AM
I'm sorry but that made no sense.

Do you think "marketing" is a curse word or something?

Do you see any Airborne customers here who need help with their bikes?

(Marketing comes before the sale; CS comes during and after.)

RichC
Too much stink!wink
Aug 23, 2001 12:23 PM
This whole allegation and Mudd's reponses leads me to the conclusion to totally disregard all of the Airborne reviews. Unless I see someone get off their Airborne and subsequently give me a review I am going to place no value on any internet post regarding Airborne!
Terms of ServiceDog
Aug 23, 2001 1:43 PM
Here are the site's Terms of Service with respect to reviews:

Review Guidelines

"Do not post a product review unless you own or have used the product
Post only one review for each product. Multiple posts for the same product are acceptable if new information is provided
To ensure high quality, useful reviews, please explain in detail your experience with the product. What did you like or dislike about the product and why? Reviews should be a minimum of 50 words
Outrageous or suspicious reviews may be verified by email
Employees of manufacturers (and their relatives) are not allowed to post reviews for their company's products or for competitors' products"

The owners of the site have the right to reject ("censure", if you will) suspicious or sham reviews. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, and I'd think that is much better than having useless drivel there for everyone to read -- and ignore.

The water bottle offer seems almost nominal to me. Who the heck is going to write a review purely for a water bottle, much less skew it favorably for the company. Just for a bottle? What is that worth, two bucks? After spending two or three thousand dollars on the bike?

BTW, I had an Airborne mountain bike and thought it was great. Even wrote a review.

Dog
once again...4bykn
Aug 23, 2001 11:33 PM
Once again Do(u)g speaks wisely, thanks, dog.
censorship by exclusionhank
Aug 23, 2001 4:52 PM
Another form of censorship is by exclusion of products. I filled in the form asking that Brooks saddles be added to the list and they still are not there. Anyone looking at the reviews would have no idea that this excellent product even exists.
censorship by exclusionRich Clark
Aug 23, 2001 6:10 PM
Indeed. I waited almost a year after asking before the Novara Randonee was listed. Some other products I've requested that have not been added, or that I wished were listed so I could see reviews:

Avocet road tires (there are none at all; I have CrossK's on my touring bike, 3300 miles, still going strong)

Continental TopTouring 2000 tires (I bought 'em anyway on my Airborne; so far, so great)

Planet Bike Protege bike computer (POS)

Mavic touring rims (221 and 519)

I don't know if it's censorship, lack of resources, or just ineptitude. Advertising-supported sites generally operate on shoestring budgets, and I don't doubt they have very little staff.

RichC
so did I!! (nm)alex the engineer
Aug 24, 2001 5:58 AM
I have an idea!!!!TiRider78
Aug 23, 2001 5:35 PM
For all the non-belivers go to the Airborne website and go to the Pilots Log http://www.airborne.net/eready/janette/store/2001/pilotslog.asp and email one of the customers who has purchased an Airborne and ask them how they like their bike etc... A majority of them have never put a review up in RBR but the proof is in the picture. They are owners of the product and most would probably be happy to respond to your query.
brilliant!!!spook
Aug 24, 2001 6:11 AM
So do you think airborne posted addresses of the UNhappy P'ed off customers as well as the satisfied ones?
brilliant!!!TiRider78
Aug 27, 2001 5:40 PM
What a nickname...You sure are one.
I have an idea!!!!TiRider78
Aug 23, 2001 8:01 PM
For all the non-belivers go to the Airborne website and go to the Pilots Log http://www.airborne.net/eready/janette/store/2001/pilotslog.asp and email one of the customers who has purchased an Airborne and ask them how they like their bike etc... A majority of them have never put a review up in RBR but the proof is in the picture. They are owners of the product and most would probably be happy to respond to your query.
<font size=3 color=red>WHAT!..no honesty on the net??</font>harlett
Aug 23, 2001 8:44 PM
A little help please Mr Go Huffypfw2
Aug 23, 2001 10:13 PM
Perhaps you would kindly publish a list of all the products made in China so that we do not support this regime? It would be churlish and unfair to single out Airborne.
Let me get you started: almost every running shoe I looked at in Sportmart recently(Ascics, Saucony, Addidas etc); large sections of Boeing 747s,for which Boeing got a $400 million tax break by the way(foreign trade incentive) and enabled them to put thousands of American employees out of work; Probably half of the items you use or wear in a day; and (my personal favorite) nearly every feakin' Stars and Stripes flag in the country!
Nah, screw it. Just do something useful, like protesting outside of your nearest Chinese embassy and stop wasting your time here. There are Chinese prisoners making US army uniforms right now damnit!
some helpfuzzybunnies
Aug 25, 2001 3:46 PM
Check out new balance which has about a third of thier shoes made in the usa. I make a habit of checking the labels and buying from anyplace other than china if I can help it. The primary reason I don't buy from wal mart. Buy american and american's work, sounds corney but true. TTFN
some helpTiRider78
Aug 27, 2001 5:47 PM
Wow...only 1/3. Oh wait what year is it 2001 we aren't in the industrial revoloution anymore when we made everything for everyone here in the USA. Oh lets see, I just bought a cordless phone from Siemens that was made here in the USA. Wow what a piece of crap that was and the reviews on Amazon proved it. By the way I went to the store and replaced it with a phone made in China. There was more quality and innovation in that phone.
interesting1-day license
Aug 24, 2001 7:01 AM
All these posts directed to Mr. Jeremy Mudd, but no responses. What do you think this says about the company?
A possible solutionMeDotOrg
Aug 24, 2001 7:09 PM
I think of a "consumer review" as being written by someone who consumes the product, it this case, someone who rides the bicycle.

I respect that someone may have issues as to how the bicycle is manufactured. Maybe it should be possible to enter a comment about a bicycle or product (or the company that manufactures it) without giving it any stars. A "null star" rating would mean that the text would be counted as a comment and not a review. That way people could post their feelings about the manufacturer without skewing the actual reviews of people who have used the product.