Mar 2, 2009 at 1:53 pm #1234470
@quoddyLocale: New York/Vermont Border
How can a Brand Manager for MSR give his product a 5/5 and refute the many readers that have rated it as a poor quality product?
I also found this filter useless after a few days on the trail. Fortunately I had a backup in the form of tablets.
I am referring to the fact that a brand manager is rating his own product on the reader's reviews. I say feel free to give any updates to the product's problems and recall and in the gear section, but to rate your own product is a bit much.Mar 2, 2009 at 2:25 pm #1482037
Is your criticism a little harsh here? The brand manager is probably talking about the current version and it looks like they are replacing the problem versions:
( KENLARSON – M )
Hyperflow Filter – RECALL on 02/25/2009 10:24:58 MST
Rating: 5 / 5
I purchased one of the very first MSR Hyperflow filters from REI (April08) and experienced many of the filter issues that have been mentioned (reduced output, hard pumping, backflushing difficulties and the need to backflush more than the recommended amount). After contacting MSR (Nathan Hamm, email@example.com) and spending much time discussing the MSR Hyperflow he said that:
“We have been seeing issues with some of the filters which are prone to clogging and proper backflushing did not restore the expected performance. We are working with our suppliers to identify the source causing variations in the filter performance. Once we have resolved the problem I will send a free replacement cartridge to you.”
As promised I did receive the updated filter that performs 100% better than my original! It also has been brought to my attention at an outdoor equipment store I visited yesterday (24February09) that ALL of their MSR Hyperflow’s were RECALLED and they had just received the “updated” versions this past week. So for all of you that have filters purchased April 2008 – December 2008 I would check with MSR or the person you purchased the MSR Hyperflow filters from to see if you have an “updated” cartridge.Mar 2, 2009 at 3:04 pm #1482053
I just called the 800 number the brand manager said to call and spoke to a lady named Amber. She said it would be no problem to get the replacement cartridge but to provide the S/N on the existing one, which is at home now; I'll call them again tomorrow to give them that information.
The 800 number is listed at the original threadMar 2, 2009 at 4:45 pm #1482086
Nick GatelBPL Member
@ngatelLocale: Southern California
I guess he can rate it if he wants. But as a consumer, I am skeptical. Bottom line, as end users, we have to think for ourselves.Mar 2, 2009 at 8:47 pm #1482188
I'm pretty sure it's not – as it's just not a review of the product. I would flag it.Mar 2, 2009 at 8:58 pm #1482192
Why would you want to flag a post by a product support manager who is asking people who have problems to call them, at which point they're offering replacement cartridges to solve the problems? I don't get it. They did not even bother to ask me when I purchased the item. If we flag this post, we're asking BPL members to just suck it up and live with their problems instead of encouraging other vendors to likewise support their products. Like I said, the guy is probably rating their current product not the one people are complaining about. I can't understand the animosity here towards someone who is providing good support.
You all act as if the guy's purpose in posting was to provide a 5/5 rating, I bet you can't even post to the review page without providing a rating. What would you expect the guy to say about his own product? He didn't post to do the 5/5 rating, he posted to show that the company stands behind the product. Why else give out the phone number with people taking the calls and being very supportive about the issues/product?Mar 2, 2009 at 9:35 pm #1482197
Bob BankheadBPL Member
@wandering_bobLocale: Oregon, USA
I agree with Roleigh. Give the guy the benefit of the doubt. He sure seems to be trying to do the right thing.
If he had simply tried to rate his own product without the offer to fix known problems, then I'd agree he should not be allowed to do so. The same goes for anyone with a financial interest in a product.
Wandering BobMar 3, 2009 at 5:38 am #1482240
@quoddyLocale: New York/Vermont Border
I can see how some might think that I over stated how I felt about this, but when the poster's only post, ever, is to state that there are problems with the product and to call for instructions as to it's operation (no mention of replacement). I don't think that qualified as a fix. Yes, later, due to the many customer complaints, MSR did institute the replacement policy and I think that says a lot for them in backing their product. MSR puts out some good products, and my post was not aimed at them. Skewing the overall rating in a weak defense was. I, and others, actually use the overall rating when quickly checking out a product.
Perhaps had I not been put in the position of having to carry a 9oz brick for another month while doing that particular hike I would have held onto it and tried to get a replacement. As it turned out I dumped it two days later in the first trash bin I found while doing a road crossing. When my back-up tablets ran out, I didn't use filtration.
You'll note that I didn't rate the filter since the problems that would have caused me to rate it as a 1 had been fixed. Based upon that, I wouldn't drag the rating down and maybe I expect the same rating policy from others.Mar 6, 2009 at 1:54 pm #1483380
>Why would you want to flag a post by a product support manager who is asking people who have problems to call them, at which point they're offering replacement cartridges to solve the problems?
I would flag it because it's simply not a review. A fix for a product could surely be posted elsewhere. The fact that the review section requires someone to rate a product reinforces the fact that it is for reviews rather than product support.Mar 6, 2009 at 2:02 pm #1483384
Devin, but if a product rating is required to respond to a negative review, do you not want a responsible vendor to respond indicating that somewhere else a fix is available (for some reason you don't want the fix information posted in the review) but a pointer to the fix information elsewhere will still cause the vendor to rate the product in providing that pointer to elsewhere.
I hope you are not advocating that vendors can not participate in reviews, offering help or support. That is like advocating trials where one can not confront their accuser.
Perhaps the solution is for BPL to allow responses without ratings to reviews and for a request to Vendors to not rate their own products.Mar 6, 2009 at 4:29 pm #1483426
Franco DarioliBPL Member
The idea of a "manufacturer's comment" sounds good to me, not only should it be allowed ,but encouraged.
At the same time in any other thread any financial involvement should be disclosed by the ones that are not commonly known here, IE the Henry/Brian/Rons and co.
FrancoMar 6, 2009 at 8:06 pm #1483470
It sounds like my comment is coming off as anti-vendor, and that's not what it's meant to be. I wasn't particular bothered by the vendor's post, but agreed with the original poster that it wasn't a review, and seemed ill-suited to the section.
I agree that the particular vendor in question obviously had no ill intent with their post, so maybe it's a problem with the section. Your suggestion of allowing vendor responses to a review would be absolutely fine – this kind of dialogue could surely be a good thing. Other fixes for vendors would be to PM the member with an issue and post a general notice of some problem or fix in forums.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.