When I hear or read ads that offend my intelligence and disregard I have common sense, the manufacturer or retailer of the product has immediately and greatly diminished my interest, and possibly lost my patronage. My final decision (purchase) corresponds with how outrageous the claim(s) is/are, and whether or not it is clear that the product quality and performance is sufficient for my requirement regardless of claim(s).
If the representative claims of the product are not realistic, practical, or unmistakably contradicts and/or exaggerates fact, I am suspect of the company's over-all integrity (trouble and warranty service) and quality control.
The bottom line is; manufacturers and retailers stand to lose business when they try to cram "chump tickets" down the throats of consumers. If I purchase an item knowing full well that the product is low on the scale of quality and performance, and the product breaks, malfunctions, or does not perform well, I have nothing to complain about. On the other hand, if the product does not meet the claims as advertised, I will not buy the product again, I will not recommend the product, and I will describe why I personally do not recommend the product.
Today, I was researching the alleged quality and performance of a particular broadhead target. The target appears to be one that will perform sufficiently well, however,
some of the manufacturer's claims are,
in my personal opinion, ridiculous and improbable. The target is constructed of unglued vertical layers of
COMPRESSED foam. Ok, that is practical. However, now comes the pitch to try to sell me some "chump tickets."
In the ad, the manufacturer claims that that the target stops an arrow by the
"squeezing" of the shaft. An attempt to visually support this claim (squeezing) is done by an illustrated drawing of a shaft with a field point, and the target. The illustration depicts that the arrow has precisely hit the seam between two of the
COMPRESSED layers of foam, and that the
COMPRESSED layers have precisely and neatly parted the entire length of the of the shaft's penetration, and that the shaft has not veered off course while traveling perfectly through the seam of the
COMPRESSED layers of foam.
Then, as though the illustration was not sufficient enough to defy your intelligence, possibility, there is a colored photo showing a
2-blade broadhead having precisely entered the seam between two
COMPRESSED layers of foam. The layers have neatly parted out of the way of the broadhead and the blades are perfectly vertical and in line with the seam. The colored photo is to support a claim, that when shooting from a tree stand the broadheads will enter the vertical seams rather than punch through foam that is layered horizontally.
Do I need to explain what the probability is or is not, for a field point or broadhead to precisely hit a seam and for
COMPRESSED layers of foam to conveniently and precisely part as the shaft penetrates in an accurate path that would put the space shuttle to shame? What about broadheads having more than 2 blades? What about mechanicals?
Though the target might not be able achieve what is alleged, and I personally do not believe it can and I would have to see unquestionable and factual demonstrations before I would change my opinion, in this case the questionable claim(s) does not mean the target does not meet (just) the
standard capabilities of a broadhead target.
"Give me a break!" <img src=icon_smile_dissapprove.gif border=0 align=middle>
Edited by - c903 on 08/05/2002 04:20:16