BPL reviews etc.

I see 18 reviewers listed in the corporate masthead. But I have seen reviews from only a handful of those. Reader reviews have been quite helpful. A more formal approach like Backpackgeartest would be good for a standard testing procedures the readers could follow to submit. I don't recall anyone complaining about the cottage manufacturers websites in this thread, so I don't know where that is coming from.Or what good it is doing for this discussion, The gear is out there to be reviewed regardless. And as a long time paying subscriber I don't consider my opinion to be whining, just my opinion.

BPL is expanding guys, they will always market to their biggest audience as any company does. AS the audience grows, more and more people are coming in who are not ul, but more in the lightweight category, Expect to see more lightweight stuff instead of ul. Just my 2cents.

What % of our membership is going into R&D and production for current and future BPL manufactured (or sourced) gear? (ex: packs, bivys, quilts, shelters, Bozeman Mountain Works lineup etc.) Is a % going towards this?

Perhaps, a larger portion of the BPL budget for 2011 could be set aside towards acquiring gear "ahead of the curve" from the UL "cottage" industry that seems to be well represented amongst the BPL subscribers. I believe this would help guide incoming new readership and members alike in making informed decisions concerning: current and upcoming UL frameless/framed packs, quilts, tarps/shelters, clothing, etc.

There are diverse opinions from people who participate on this forum.
The perception of UL is different for different people.
Some wouldn't consider carrying a pack or shelter that is heavier than 1 lb, but there are many that scream bloody murder that is too extreme and unsafe. They will only carry a 5lb pack and/or shelter made by the typical car camping suppliers.

So I can see why you'd want to include those reviews. The issue I have is you can find hundreds of reviews of the big name car camping gear on the internet, but very few serious reviews of what I consider UL gear.

Readers,

Most of the suggestions I've been reading in this thread are great (some were terrible but I'm an opinionated guy, what can I say?) But in all seriousness since we're a small company each member of which has multiple job descriptions our editorial content is mostly contract work. I urge those of you amongst us who have a knack for the written word or those of you who are analytical and objective to consider submitting proposals for articles to share with the community.

– Sam

ps – thank you for the hilarious Photoshop work of my head!

I cast my vote for both.

BPL reviews of mainstream manufacturer efforts at "lightweight/UL" gear are appreciated by me. Osprey's Exos packs are a case in point.

I see too many "user" reviews on other sites done by people who have little experience or basis of comparison, sometimes reviewing gear that they haven't even taken into the field yet!

Thank you BPL reviewers, you're the best!

good call sam…

"I'm pretty sure Henry Shires' and Ron Moak's customers are quite happy that they haven't commissioned expensive fancy websites and passed the additional costs onto them."

A good web site doesn't necessarily translate to a fancy and expensive one.

True, and I think both the Tarptent and SMD sites are quite good enough for purpose. However, the person I was responding too obviously doesn't.

Whats wrong with their websites? I can get all the info I need from them. Well, maybe there are a few dimensions that are left off, but overall I think that they are good especially when given the size of their companies. (cottage, remember?) I've definitely been on many, many worse sites. Salomon is a HUGE company with 500 million in profit last year (according to their rep) their website sucks- bad- and they have people who design and keep up the site for a living.

Maybe Henry and Ron should stop innovating gear and take a year to dial in their websites… oh wait, that would mean less reviews and you'd cry about that too

Alex, man… of all the folks to tell people to stop crying…

>>Tarptent.com is one of the worst websites I've seen online. With a great product and that crappy company image they have there's no good reason to shoot yourself in the foot like they are. It's their fault they aren't selling more product to customers. This goes ditto for SMD …nice logo GET OFF YOUR WALLET. Marketing works PERIOD.<<

I see tons of Tarptents and SMD stuff on young and old alike- Crappy company image? -yeah, everybody around here HATES Tarptent-

You say marketing works and you hammer SMD for theirs in the same breath.

Lets see your logo and website then, champ…

"True, and I think both the Tarptent and SMD sites are quite good enough for purpose. However, the person I was responding too obviously doesn't."

They're not particularly good web sites. Their organization is poor, a lot of the information on the TarpTent site is in PDF's… in reality, the list is pretty long.

We're tolerant of that sort of thing because we're conditioned to expect bad web sites, and because we like the companies and their products. That doesn't change the fact that they're pretty bad web sites.

Your response however was a complete canard; reality is that a well-designed web site doesn't have to be fancy or expensive, and that neither the Six Moon Designs web site nor the TarpTent web sites are designed particularly well.

The assertion that a better site design would worsen the situation regarding reviews is another canard, it wouldn't — unless either Henry Shires or Ron Moak decided to take the task on themselves. In fact, that's probably why their sites aren't all that good; designing a web site takes a pretty different skill set from designing tents, backpacks, and that sort of thing.

Both companies have a reputation based on word of mouth. That's working for them, and it's working well. I don't know whether or not they want toe expand their target market — it's entirely possible that the answer is "no" — because that would entail growing their business, and therefore possibly taking them away from their backpacking entirely.

So while I'm certain that both companies could have nicely designed web sites at a reasonable cost, I'm not certain that they need them.

@ Rog

@ Jeff

I don't want to jack this thread we can discuss this elsewhere.

I'm just annoyed with people being "cottage" brand fanboys and saying we must support them and give them our business. (Which I do I love Nemo gear) But you make it sound like the cottage manufacturer product range is so much better than anything else out there but the poor guys don't have a shot because Cascade Designs is putting them all out of business.

Why should I>? If they don't have the business sense to hire a designer to redo their site to increase sales and sell more products to ultimately make more money and pass the savings on to the you that's their issue. You don't need to spend 60k on a site to have an effective marketing tool and they sure don't need to vest their own time.

I think if Henry gave me a call and we discussed his marketing needs I would love to help him out with the site and trust me you will not feel the expenses passed on to you. If anything his bottom line would increase or he'd pass the savings on to you.

They have a great product and the UL community is tolerant of their poor marketing because they are going off reputation alone. They will not sell much product to the uninitiated because well… nothing on their sites actually sells their product to "common joe backpacker".

Salomon's site is light years beyond tarptent and is clearly marketed at their target audience.

Jeff, as for your backhanded "let's see what you got" type comment my link is in my profile I don't have anything to hide.

Edit: I can never spell "Salomon" right

I just checked out the Salomon website and imo it's terrible. A good example of web designers running rampant with technology for no valid reason.

I am new, and dont post a lot. But at this time in my year subscription I am fairly dissappointed in the reviews and the store itself. It seems like everything has gone down pretty far since I subscribed. Unless things get better and more worth my money, I probably won't stay a subscriber. Money is tight and moving towards long distance triple crowning is my goal and why I am here. What is going on lately, short of the forums, is not really helping me get where I wanted to be. Plus I feel like the store has lost tons of options it used to have.

Just my 2 cents.

I wouldn't know a good website if it kicked me in the crotch. Last time I paid a guy to do my work website, it was too advanced for my skills and I couldn't update it myself. I'm interested and I'd love to talk about what is a good one vs a bad one. Let me know if you guys start a separate thread on this subject. I'll join in.

I have to Agree with Wallace.

With the exception of some great down jacket reviews and down bag reviews this passsed year offered very little in terms of "expert paid for gear reviews". As it stands now I think the forums are much more valuable than the "Membership" and the forums are free.

Well for my 'backhanded' comment- sorry- got a little riled up.

I just think that for someone, especially a web designer, do hose a small company for a sub-par website is uncalled for. Henry is in the tent making business. He sells what is enough tents to keep him paid enough to earn a living and get to walk in the woods. Maybe he doesn't want to have some huge company and be a 'businessman.'

>>If they don't have the business sense to hire a designer to redo their site to increase…<<

I'm sure he has the business sense, but probably not the capital. You would help him for a couple hundred bucks? Probably not. Does he want/ need to spend >$1000? Prob not. He sells a lot of tents how it is now. Just because a song doesn't que up and there aren't icon flying around when you pull up his website doesn't mean its not effective at selling prods.

Poor ol Tim Marshall put up a website and now has Cuben coming out of his ears. I bet he sometimes wishes he was walking instead of stuffing feathers into a sack.

If you are gonna slam someone for their website- start with Oware:) (sorry, Oware folks)

Your web page IS pretty sweet.

I'm sorry if I put words into Henry or Tim's mouths- I'm just trying to argue points

Edit- >>So while I'm certain that both companies could have nicely designed web sites at a reasonable cost, I'm not certain that they need them<<

My point exactly

>>>If you are gonna slam someone for their website- start with Oware:) (sorry, Oware folks)<<<

I've got to agree with you. And I know the owner posts here and seems like a good guy, but honestly I couldn't even figure out how to get an order placed on Oware last time I tried a couple of years ago.

Other than that example, I find most cottage web sites to be fine, and often much better than the big corporate websites. The big websites often suffer from trying to get too fancy for no reason, and then the info you want (accurate weights, sizes, etc.) is lacking.

Hey Jeff,

Thanks for the compliments I really do appreciate that very much. Thanks. No seriously, thanks.

You know I love dealing with "mom and pop" businesses I work more with them than I do with Microsoft for a reason.

Bottom line is very seldom does a business owner ask themselves "In a perfect world what would you like to have happen here". I think they should. It would help them better organize a business strategy.

Unfortunately, for a $1000 he will have a hard time finding an ethical designer to do a site for him here in the USofA. However, India, Russia, China can all oblige. But then will he be any better than the rest of the people who buy cheaper products overseas? I'm a small business owner in America I don't compete with overseas prices. I work hard and do enough work to pay my bills here in America, pay my taxes and have as much fun as I can outdoors. I have more in common with the "Cottage" industry than most people think that's why I'm very critical of other business owners.

"But you make it sound like the cottage manufacturer product range is so much better than anything else out there"

Care to quote me doing that? I've been critical of some of Henry's design concepts here on BPL and don't think I've "bigged them up" against the mainstream manufacturers. I have noted that others here do however.

"If they don't have the business sense to hire a designer to redo their site to increase sales and sell more products to ultimately make more money and pass the savings on to the you that's their issue."

Correct. It's their business, and I'm sure several factors you may not have considered go into the level they choose to market at, and the backpacking skill level of the target audience they choose to market to.

"I think if Henry gave me a call and we discussed his marketing needs I would love to help him out" – "My link is in my profile"

I can see it now, scantily clad model with "TT" tattoed on her butt entices joe backpacker into her silnylon boudoir.
"Click here to enter"
;-)

John, Thank you for saying in 1 paragraph what I almost said in 2 whole posts:)

I am quite new to UL backpacking. I discovered BPL about a month ago and signed up for a year of membership a week or so ago. From a business point of view, I'd think I am the kind of person BPL would want to attract.. a new convert willing to fork over the money.

From my 'fresh' (and limited month-long) perspective, the most useful aspects of BPL are:

1. The forums for answering specific questions I have
2. The forums for detailed investigations like those by Richard Nisley on insulation of clothing
3. Aspect-of-UL-camping articles : eg. a detailed article on UL clothing in rainy weather, compare all UL cooking options, compare UL footwear .. helps newbies not sure what they are looking for.
4. Articles comparing cross-over lightweight / UL gear by mainstream companies (eg. Osprey Exos, MSR Carbon Reflex, Nemo tents etc) AND products by companies like TarpTent, SMD etc. This gives me perspective — comparing familiar (Osprey, MSR etc) with what's unknown to me.
5. Simply spotlighting (and maybe reviewing) UL gear I might not have heard of from mainly shopping at REI, Backcountry.com etc. For eg: I thought good rain jackets weighed 20 oz until I came here..

Least/less useful for newbies like me:
1. Reviews of heavy mainstream products.. like Osprey Aether etc. I've read a 1000 elsewhere. Sure the UL perspective is new but has predictable things to say about a 4.5 lb backpack. And this is usually stuff I want to sell from my present gear collection..

Simple suggestion: Can older forum material that's repeatedly asked about be archived as easy-to-read articles without having to search and piece it together? Eg: Nisley's insulation guide etc..

We'd be paying for not having search over and over again.. I'd pay $25 / year for that. Since most people agree the forums rock, the least BPL could do it provide a value-added service by organizing the information into articles periodically.. like a user-generated guide?

Let's all be honest here if there was a bikini clad model asking any of us here to crawl in to a bivy we'd probably start taking off our boots. lol

But actually you make a good point about knowing your target audience. I don't know Henry but I know he knows you guys well and knows the UL market. He knows how to sell to you guys he just doesn't have anyone to properly execute it and convert it in to sales for "the rest of us" as well. I think a scenic product shot on his site will do much better than a hot chick on a Ducati (which does actually help sell me my Ducati) ;)

"Let's all be honest here if there was a bikini clad model asking any of us here to crawl in to a bivy we'd probably start taking off our boots. lol"

I was thinking 0.35oz Cuben Fiber poncho tarp myself. :)

As Steve Evans said, it's not just the initial outlay, but also the upkeep. If the proprietor is going to update the site, he'll need a content management system he can get to grips with, and that doesn't come cheap or easy.

I've been in the business 10 years myself, I'm currently migrating a University departmental website from a bespoke CMS (which the original programmer half finished before leaving it undocumented for another job) to Mod-X and updating/reorganising the content.

"As Steve Evans said, it's not just the initial outlay, but also the upkeep. If the proprietor is going to update the site, he'll need a content management system he can get to grips with, and that doesn't come cheap or easy."

Agreed — you can get a cheap CMS or you can get a good one :)

So far, I've been pretty pleased with the CMS backing my new web site; it's hosted on WordPress, and the designer I hired set up the CMS using one that she was already familiar with. It's pretty easy to work with, and meets my needs pretty well. I also have no idea as to how much setup went into it, since my designer took care of all that.

"Let's all be honest here if there was a bikini clad model asking any of us here to crawl in to a bivy we'd probably start taking off our boots. lol"

I can arrange that… and I can even make sure that the prettiest models get paired with the "cottage" shelters, as long as I have access to the shelters ;)

I'm planning to set up my Scarp1 on a bluff somewhere and plunk a cute model inside at some point anyway, because it would be fun to do. And I have an "ultralight" studio light, so I might as well take advantage of it. The reason for choosing to this with a Scarp1 is that I have one. I'll probably arrange a similar shot with a tarp when I get my Grace Duo ;)