D Peter Maus wrote:

Eric F. Richards wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:


[...]
Instead superserving the one reviewer who had already
endorsed the radio as, 'the best shortwave receiver in the world,'
before the first prototype was built. Also something less than honest.



WHOA, HOLD ON A SEC!

I know you don't like Larry Magne. I frankly don't care why -- we've
covered it repeatedly in email, so I don't think we need to go there
again.

But if you claim he, or any other reviewer, called the Sat 800, quote,
"the best shortwave receiver in the world," unquote, you'd better be
able to back that up, chapter, verse, publication, page, etc.

That's way the hell over the line, Peter.



I'll refer you to any SAT 800 direct mail piece,

That's not a review. That's a direct mail piece.

the preview
commentary by Grove

Grove isn't Magne. Magne isn't Grove. And I know from personal
experience that Grove will defend himself.

and any of the numerous ads for SAT 800

That's not a review. That's an ad.

during the
first couple of years of release. It's been published vitually
continuously.

Then, why can't *I*, certainly no fan of the 800, find it?

And discussed here to death. It's also in virtually any
e-Bay listing straight from the Lextronix presentation materials offered
to 'officially authorized retailers.'

If you want page numbers, I'm sorry. I read the comments, laughed out
loud and dismissed them. I didn't catalog them. Maybe I should start
doing that, this being USENet, and all.

Perhaps someone here has a SAT 800 direct mail piece they can scan
for you. Particularly the one where SAT 800 is claimed to be German
radio would be fun.

Direct mail pieces aren't reviews.

Here, maybe I can help you out a little:

Passport, 2000, page 126-127:

"We tested a pre-production prototype, so our observations our
provisional and WE HAVEN'T RATED THIS NEW RECEIVER--tempted though we
are by its CONSIDERABLE PROMISE." (emphasis mine)

"Its performance looks EXCEPTIONALLY PROMISING..." (emphasis mine)

There is no phrase there saying, "the best shortwave receiver in the
world." None. Nada.

Passport 2001, pp 127-135:

4 stars. Not even an implication of "the best shortwave receiver in
the world."

One full page of "Pro," one full page of "Con." In the "Verdict"
section, it says, "But all is not kudos. Construction consistency was
wanting during the 'shakedown cruise,' with perhaps eight percent of
units being returned to dealers for one reason or another."

In the "Evaluation of new model" section, 5 pages, the review cites
the R8B as doing "virtually everything well."

In the "Bottom Line" section it does say, "it outperforms any PORTABLE
OR PC-CONTROLLED RECEIVER WE HAVE TESTED," (emphasis mine), which is
still a long way from implying or stating "the best shortwave receiver
in the world."

At the end of the review, it states: "The Passport portatop review
team includes Lawrence Magne, Tony Jones, Craig Tycon and George
Zeller, with Avery Comarow, George Heidelman and John Wagner.
Laboratory measurements by Robert Sherwood."

So, doubtless out there somewhere, in a parallel universe, there is a
Passport review stating it is "the best shortwave receiver in the
world," and the generally positive comments about its lab performance
were forced at gunpoint from Robert Sherwood, and the rest of the
review board was told to stuff it or forget the $500 pay check they
were getting this year, right?

You claimed that is a direct quote from a reviewer. Back it up. If
you have an ad saying that some reviewer said it, prove it. If you
have a review saying that some reviewer said it, prove it. Some
nebulous comment about "some flier" or an eBay seller won't cut it.


--
Eric F. Richards

"Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass,
often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940