Reply to comment

Nov. 5, 2014, 10:14 a.m. -  YVR

#!markdown Testing a bike and publishing an online article is promotion. It's a plain and simple contract. No money has to change hands - only 'consideration' (i.e. something of value for each side). Manufacturer offers product for 'test'. NSMB accepts product for use. NSMB gets to use the product for free and manufacturer receives (public) feedback. NSMB gets use of product (or free product or product at discount - I'm assuming POC doesn't expect return of used helmets/gloves) and the ever valuable 'content'. Manufacturer takes risk of potential negative feedback … but that's rare as everyone has to eat. Worst case odds in most cases is getting '3 stars out of 5'. If manufacturers didn't want to promote a product via NSMB, they could offer the product to anyone on the street. Or solely collect rider feedback at a bike demo event. Or in-house engineering feedback. Or in-house administrative assistant feedback. But they don't. Because NSMB is a promotional platform gone long past the days of a simple blog/discussion thread. For NSMB to weasel out of a sense of responsibility to the MTB community under the guise of 'we're just educating the consumer' is weak. Even more hypocritical when NSMB is publically shaming RedBull for disserving the MTB community for less than optimal Rampage commentary.

Post your comment

Please log in to leave a comment.