|
|
Post by MartinT on Feb 8, 2016 18:56:09 GMT
We're seeing some pushing of the boundaries by certain vendors keen to promote their products, so here are a set of simple guidelines: - We expect vendors to represent themselves first and foremost as hi-fi and music enthusiasts rather than as sales people for their business
- If it looks like a hard sell, it probably is. That's not allowed on TAS
- Vendors are welcome to reply to member's questions at any time with appropriate replies
- If new information looks like it's for the benefit of members and not just for the vendor, it may stand
- If new information is a blatant product promotion, it will be removed
We really do welcome vendors to partake but we remind them that TAS is not a commercial site, that it makes no profit (and never will), that its minimal running costs are paid for by three enthusiasts and that it will always be a site for the sharing of information and experiences. Let's help to keep it that way while growing the presence of industry expertise and commentary. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2016 16:22:17 GMT
So if I create a thread on behalf of a vendor, it is acceptable, but if a vendor does it, it's not?
Just wanted to make sure it's clear.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Feb 9, 2016 17:32:04 GMT
So if I create a thread on behalf of a vendor, it is acceptable, but if a vendor does it, it's not? Good questions. I would say... Create a thread on behalf of a product and you'll have no problem. Create a thread on behalf of a vendor and we'll take on a case by case basis whether it's enthusiasm for service well rendered or whether it's shilling. If a vendor creates a thread on behalf of said vendor, it would have to be for technical support purposes only. |
|
|
|
Post by John on Feb 9, 2016 17:33:46 GMT
Yes it is acceptable to ask questions but what we hoping to achieve is genuine dialogue without the pressure of over promotion
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Feb 11, 2016 7:57:21 GMT
My recent observations of this site would suggest that the above guidelines are very vague. You have threads based on the concept of product promotion through the loan scheme with a requirement to review them as part of the condition for the loan. This requirement turns the scheme into shilling to an extent as they are by the very nature of the condition, spoken about on the forum. Although not a hard sell it seems no different than Mr Brook posting a picture of a tonearm. His trade interests are stated, and there is no link to an advert or price. The only difference being one is a loan scheme, and the other is a product that will be stocked. Both will available from the organisations that the individuals are linked to. How is it any different? The requirement to review the product after loan is down to the loan scheme run by the vendor. There is no requirement that the review be positive! A review is in keeping with our remit to promote discussion, after all that is what a forum is for. Whatever the outcome, we want to hear about it. I can't see how it could be shilling since the members have no affiliation with the vendor (that we know about). For instance, I loaned a BMU and wrote positively about it, but I didn't buy one because my P10 regenerator outperformed it. On another occasion, I loaned a TIS cable and ended up buying one. Two different outcomes and no shilling involved, just enthusiasm for good products. Mr Brook did indeed post about a new arm. We decided to let the thread stand because the arm is of general interest to the membership and a technical discussion ensued. The bit about his stocking it was the only moderation, as it was considered to be going too far. However, now that the price has been requested, MCRU is able to furnish that information without breaking the rules. We're not trying to be vague but we don't want to stifle good product conversation, either. It's a fine balance. |
|
|
|
Post by DaveC on Feb 11, 2016 9:22:03 GMT
However, now that the price has been requested, MCRU is able to furnish that information without breaking the rules.
I just need a shill then ? This is political correctness gone mad !
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Feb 11, 2016 9:27:14 GMT
It's a fine line Dave and we're keeping it on track with a few adjustments here and there.
|
|
|
|
Post by DaveC on Mar 10, 2016 8:27:03 GMT
Post by MartinT today at 6:33am : Last Edit: today at 7:36am by MartinT
Now that we feel a vendor loan scheme works and there is no conflict with our stance (in other words, loan schemes are primarily for the benefit of our members, the incentive for you as the vendor is potential sales), we would like to invite trusted vendor members who wish to inaugurate a Loan Scheme to contact us via PM to discuss starting a thread for you. You would manage the scheme within your own thread in the Vendors section and set your own rules. You maintain the list of requests and inform the current evaluator where to send it next. TAS is a facilitator only and will not be involved with the loan, nor will it ever make any financial gain from it. Interested vendors should note that we expect this to be for genuine loans, not sale-or-return of product.
Loan schemes are not a shop front, so the thread must not become a sales mechanism, you are free to respond to any technical or sales questions asked. Any thread drift or hijacking from members will be tightly controlled. Of course, you are welcome to conduct any resultant sales via the existing PM mechanism. NOTE: this has been edited since my reply below (I don't have the original that my reply below refers to) :
____________________________________________________
Martin
With the greatest respect; the loan scheme is a benefit to your vendor(s). The loan scheme is a shop front and it is also a sales mechanism, how could it not be ? At one point a vendor had 3 posts in the 10 most recent, is that not a shop front ?
Also running a thread (once again) about a product that had finished production, when in fact it hasn't at all, is also a shop front and of benefit to the vendor.
A vendor showing a product but not quoting the price is also a shop front and a sales mechanism.
The loan scheme in my view directly violates your stance/ethos. Also in my view it disenfranchises those vendors who choose globally not to run loan schemes.
Why not level the playing field and let "trusted" vendors have their own moderated area ? I know it would conflict with your ethos, but you moved to accommodate the loan scheme ?
This is a great forum, lets make it greater ?
Regards
Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Mar 10, 2016 10:42:30 GMT
I agree 100%, Dave. To me, the 'vendor loan scheme' looks like an online market stall in direct contradiction to TAS's stated non-commercial ethos. The clue is in your own chosen word - vendor.  "The Audio Standard forum is a not-for-profit enterprise with no commercial agenda. We, as owners, will not benefit financially from its existence and neither will we allow others to use it for that purpose" It's your own stated rule. |
|
|
|
Post by John on Mar 10, 2016 11:02:19 GMT
In my view Dave suggestion is a step to far for the site as we want to maintain our independence but have this opportunity for people to hear stuff they would never have the opportunity to hear.
It be interesting to hear other peoples views on this
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2016 11:06:02 GMT
I would also agree with both Jerry and Dave which is a miracle in itself  For a business and personal point of view I feel it is very open to interpretation and while TAS is a very decent forum and has nice standards it would be a real shame to see descend into the mire which other forums seem to breed on. TAS has a decent reputation due in no small part, that there is NO trade section here, and that both members and traders freely interact without any shilling, subversive issues or agenda's (save a very small minority which is generally kept in check.) Too many possible ways of going the way of wrong very quickly. While I recognize you wish to expand the forum premise I would urge you to re access this, other wise Dave's suggestion for a trade section maybe worth considering. One point Dave made 'Loan schemes are a shop' just by another way is quite correct. Being a trader you could make the observation that I would have a vested interest in having a loan scheme which maybe true, however there is nothing stopping any member of the public calling up and asking for a loan of equipment, pretty convinced a great number of dealers work that way. As for NVA I feel this has just been a method of side stepping the issue of their owner, nothing to do with the products or pricing. All grist for the mill. |
|
|
|
Post by jazzbones on Mar 10, 2016 12:16:50 GMT
I am in total agreement with some of the preceding posts. I ask myself, WHY would a vendor wish to have a loan scheme in the first place if he/she was not wanting to engender a hope for sale? Repeated brand naming within the post (necessary I suppose) is a form of subliminal product advertising is it not? It must be alot of work for a vendor to undertake without expecting a monetary return?
|
|
|
|
Post by Slinger on Mar 10, 2016 13:01:25 GMT
I think one of the major problems is that only one vendor has offered the loan service. If a few more stepped up to the plate, so to speak, then that one vendor would not be sticking out like a sore thumb and attracting so much negative attention. It also doesn't help that said vendor's "personality" affects a few of the comments passed. That being said it's also a nice change to see so many unbiased comments about the product (and not the person) here when there are quite a few places where it's not even allowed to be mentioned, let alone reviewed.
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Mar 10, 2016 13:22:10 GMT
I am in total agreement with some of the preceding posts. I ask myself, WHY would a vendor wish to have a loan scheme in the first place if he/she was not wanting to engender a hope for sale? Repeated brand naming within the post (necessary I suppose) is a form of subliminal product advertising is it not? It must be alot of work for a vendor to undertake without expecting a monetary return? Ron, There are many online merchants of electronic equipment, NVA being just one of them. All of them have to offer a cooling off period as part of the online trading deal, but it means you shell out the dosh first and then hope it will be refunded when and if you return said goods. NVA is just extending that to make online gear available for just the cost of onward carriage. Several BMU 'loanees' have said 'Thanks but no thanks' for example and all RD's asked for in return as part of the deal is a fair appraisal of the product.
Dave C is a traditional retailer who I think? has an online 'store' as well (am I correct Dave?). I doubt it's possible to offer many Timestep Techie mods on a free trial basis, as it entails a lot of practical work in the fitting of said products, but even so, I'm sure a purchaser of some of the accessories has a right of return if they don't work for them as intended. Very expensive record weights and 'feet' could possibly be offered on a loan scheme though, as could other traders' mains and interconnect cables and so on?
I repeat, I've been told in no uncertain terms that I'm NOT to push NVA here or anywhere, although I do like and use much of it myself, having bought units I had on loan. The brand itself has ALWAYS had a good reputation in forum-land so making it available for interested parties to try is surely not shilling or spivving the brand?
No easy answer, but hopefully NVA won't be the only small trader to offer loan gear. I mean, Firebottle and Arkless Jez are both offering samples of their product for free appraisal at home now.
|
|
|
|
Post by chukka on Mar 10, 2016 13:29:29 GMT
The said products would sell much better if the contentiousness around these products where abandoned once and for all. But that won't happen as long as the said person is at the helm.
I do think that the loan scheme is a good idea but it is also redundant given that the vendor accepts returns of the goods without charge. So, to me, this is clearly a "marketing strategy" although the term "strategy" is probably a little strong in this context.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Mar 10, 2016 13:31:20 GMT
I think one of the major problems is that only one vendor has offered the loan service. If a few more stepped up to the plate, so to speak, then that one vendor would not be sticking out like a sore thumb and attracting so much negative attention. It also doesn't help that said vendor's "personality" affects a few of the comments passed. That being said it's also a nice change to see so many unbiased comments about the product (and not the person) here when there are quite a few places where it's not even allowed to be mentioned, let alone reviewed. Thank you. We had to start somewhere and we started with a company that appeared to make great products but about which all talk was stifled in other forums. We don't do that here on TAS so we decided to take the bull by the horns and get a loan scheme running to - wait for it - benefit our members. Now that the scheme mechanics are proven, we don't want to be running a single vendor scheme, we want to run several to give our members an even better choice of kit to try out. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2016 14:49:50 GMT
The said products would sell much better if the contentiousness around these products where abandoned once and for all. But that won't happen as long as the said person is at the helm. I do think that the loan scheme is a good idea but it is also redundant given that the vendor accepts returns of the goods without charge. So, to me, this is clearly a "marketing strategy" although the term "strategy" is probably a little strong in this context. If said person was not at the helm NVA would not exist at this point since he designs the gear and builds most of it apart from some products farmed out to Dave (who is not an employee but freelance). RD does not do promotion or marketing as he does not believe in it and is against the 'bullshit' others put out about their products. NVA sells itself mainly through ebay sales and provides enough work for a sole trader. |
|
|
|
Post by Pinch on Mar 10, 2016 14:55:19 GMT
My two cents:
The thing I like about TAS's vendor policy is that it makes for a marked difference in tone from other forums, where vendors use the forum as a means of direct marketing, with all the salesperson guff that goes along with that. I don't enjoy being advertised at or sold to (not to mention the more clandestine and underhand stuff that's very clearly occurred elsewhere), and if this was the upshot of a relaxing of the vendor policy then I'd be less likely to visit here.
A well run loan scheme, as we've had with NVA, clearly can result in some good promotion, and sales, for the vendors involved, but it's entirely driven by members and their verdicts on the products in question, rather than by the vendor and attempts at direct marketing and promotion. People who participate in the loan scheme are not even required to feign the slightest interest in purchasing the product; the requirement to publish their opinion on the product can, of course, result in some good press, but it needn't, and I find these reviews far more interesting for the fact that they're not made on the back of purchase (I sometimes have the impression that, out of pride for their new toy, and perhaps to justify a purchase to themselves, people tend to offer over-enthusiastic reviews for things that they've just bought). I've followed the loan-scheme threads and I've not noticed an direct marketing or promotion, or found myself cringing at any salesperson guff - there are just honest reviews by interested members. This has not even come close to shifting the tone of the place to the sort of thing that I described above, and I think the vendor rules are designed to prevent that from happening; long may they stand.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheMooN on Mar 10, 2016 17:18:14 GMT
A balanced point of view from Pinch if I may say.
With regards to the manufacturers 30 day return policy, whilst I might concur over a set of IC's or similar, It appears to me that the loan scheme enables an individual who might not have the disposable income available to purchase at present , say the TOTL amplifiers and Pre amp, however they may avail themselves of said equipment for a week or so, evaluate, perhaps then to make plans for purchase when affordable.
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Mar 10, 2016 18:26:25 GMT
It's a classic win for all parties. TAS members get the change to listen to kit they may or may not be interested in. *Any* vendor has the danger of making a sale or 2 or 3. Repeat - any vendor. NVA saw this as the area they were happy to work in. No one else so far which is a shame. There is an element of risk for the vendor as the kit might be damaged or go missing. TAS members give some reduction in that risk - as we are all wonderful people !  If the kit is good they get good writeups, if poor they won't be doing it for long. I've borrowed kit from Tony C and he has been incredibly helpful and patient. Didn't buy some, did buy others. 'Course he knows where I live |
|
