[PMC the 1st]

This poll is to gauge forum member sentiment regarding Consumer Reports ("CR"). What's important is if there has been any recent changes in your attitude toward CR.

 

[Jesda]

Maytags suck.

 

[Firebird00]

I don't trust any of the review rags. They all have a very obvious agenda and chosen favorite. I would not trust them anymore even if they rated the not so big 3 as number 1 in most tests either. They do not objectively review autos, but usually just give a vehicle high regards just b/c it is product of XYZ company (ex: Tundra). CR and C/D piss me off the most with their idiotic ramblings and most importantly the "gotta have it" ratings. Its pure personal preference as is completely irrelevant as to the actual merits of said vehicle.

 

[esoxlee]

I recently received an email from a Nigerian diplomat by the name of Muntimbo Gunta asking for my assistance to help him leech funds out of the country electronically. He needed my banking info to transfer the funds and promised me $400,000 for my help. I trust Mr. Gunta more than Consumer Reports.

Needless to say, I declined the offer.

 

[BrickTamland]

I trust them, but not fully. I have some doubts.

 

[ksr]

I don't trust them, but I don't think they're dishonest. I think their methods are flawed.

Sending out surveys only to the people that subscribe to your magazine, and then using whatever is mailed back to you as your data, is not a scientific polling sample. If they really wanted to accurately gauge vehicle quality, they'd do board-based surveys of the car-buying public, not the CR magazine-buying public.

I think the magazine has become nothing but an echo chamber of like-minded people. They send out the same survey to essentially the same group of people - their subscribers - every year and get nearly the same results. Whatever change you see over time from their data, whether it shows an increase or decrease in quality of a brand, if valid at all, probably lags true market conditions by several years because the churn in their subscriber base isn't big enough and doesn't happen fast enough.

Their subscriber base does include a higher percentage of import buyers than exist in the population as a whole. I think this is because there were problems with domestic cars in the past, and a lot of those buyers turned towards CR for car buying advice. From that advice, they bought an import, typcially Japanese, that was of high quality. These people have continued to subscribe and continue to give the same answers every year.

I've been buying cars since the '80s, but I've never had any issues with my cars, which have all been domestic. I've never felt a need to look for advice from a source like CR; I still don't. So, I think people like me, satisified domestic buyers, don't buy CR magainze (though I'll occassionlly page through them at the supermarket). This skews their subscriber base towards import buyers. Satisifed domestic buyers like myself don't subscribe and therefore don't answer their surveys.

CR does have this high-and-mighty attitude about how unbiased they are because they don't take advertising. Well, if they really want to do unbiased research, they need to start asking for opinions from more than just the people who are paying them for their magazine.

 

[mikmak]

You forgot an extra option:
"I don't give a rats arse about Consumer Reports and have no opinion in regard to their validity". :tick:

 

[Old Dood]

I trust them, but not fully. I have some doubts.

Same here. I especially trust them more then some bias ass people I have read on forums...

 

[SirRaven]

ksr posts I think really gets down to the core of the problem.

Basically CR wants to be unbiased and scientific, but fail to do so. They need to hire a good statistician to review their procedures and fix their methods.

 

[AMERICA 123]

Nobody sensible should trust them - CR points out they accept no advertising - yet they never have and still do not disclose where they receive their 160,000,000 $ plus budget from.

Tellingly, they also ignore all requests to do so.

Now, why would they a 'non profit', do all that - if it isn't a big negative somehow ?

*****************************************************************

I'm composing a documented letter, and I sure as hell hope somebody is at GM.

That letter will suggest an expansion of these kinds of investigations concerning every single possible 'relationship' between GM - Toyota and amongst many others including Forbes, Automotive News, and Consumer Reports.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080713/ap_on_bi_ge/sec_probe;_ylt=AgEKFzBTiAklkJ_qEcgqOE8T5LIF

SEC opens probe to prevent spread of false info

By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer Sun Jul 13, 3:22 PM ET

WASHINGTON - The Securities and Exchange Commission said Sunday it is immediately opening a probe to prevent the spread of false information used to manipulate securities prices.


SEC Chairman Christopher Cox said the investigation is aimed at "ensuring that investors continue to get reliable, accurate information about public companies in the marketplace."

The probe comes amid a new bout of turmoil that has gripped investors. Questions have been swirling about the financial health of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as well as Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.

Earlier this year, a run on Bear Stearns pushed the investment bank to the brink of bankruptcy and into a takeover by JPMorgan Chase. Bear officials blamed market rumors for the run.

The investigation will be conducted by the SEC's Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations as well as the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and New York Stock Exchange Regulation Inc.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080714/bs_nm/sec_examination_dc;_ylt=AmYtHZYjSyZ5y4cqKG0MG.oT5LIF

SEC says expanding rumor crackdown

By Rachelle Younglai Sun Jul 13, 8:15 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. securities regulators are boosting efforts to stop the spread of false rumors that threaten financial institutions, after a week that saw steep slides in the shares of Fannie Mae (FNM.N), Freddie Mac (FRE.N) and Lehman Brothers (LEH.N).


In an unusual weekend statement, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission warned on Sunday that regulators would immediately examine whether broker-dealers and investment advisers have controls in place to prevent market manipulation.

Examiners from the SEC, New York Stock Exchange Regulation and the broker-dealer watchdog, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, will see if the controls are designed to prevent the intentional creation or spreading of false information.

Securities officials said the timing of the announcement was aimed at getting word of the crackdown out before Asian markets open on Monday, the first to trade globally.

.

Also, many individuals - including active posters and Forums on the internet.

The jist of the letter will be that there is has been and continues to be an orchestrated effort against GM's products, services, stock, bonds and everything else including the ability to borrow if needed.

Conversely, there is a demonstrated effort to do exactly the opposite concerning Toyota.

I will also point out where and how the two appear to be related.

 

[eurohazard]

CR and C/D piss me off the most with their idiotic ramblings and most importantly the "gotta have it" ratings. Its pure personal preference as is completely irrelevant as to the actual merits of said vehicle.

BUT, do you know what? I will not defend CR....but I will Car and Driver. At least they SHOW you how they rate the vehicles with a comprehensive breakdown! If you disagree with the "gotta have it factor", then you can recalculate the results and find your personal "special" winner. It's that easy.

Another thing is, even between C/D own editors, there are disagreements about such things. But the hard data is very relevant. I trust C/D performance numbers over any magazine....especially CR.

p.s. I didn't vote because there isn't a category that fits. I used to trust them, but realized on my own (before I knew PMC) they were a bit shady. Things like rating a 2006 Armada poor in reliability when 2004 and early 2005 had problematic brakes. But it goes further back, like recommending the Mazda MX-6, but not the Ford Probe (built at the same factory). Or liking the Corolla, but not the Geo Prism etc.

 

[PMC the 1st]

I used to trust them, but realized on my own they were shady. Things like rating a 2006 Armada poor in reliability when 2004 and early 2005 had problematic brakes.

This letter is a good example why CR has to pander to the imports. Read what Eurohazard wrote above. In it, Eurohazard's suspicion toward CR is aroused when his Nissan Armada is critisized by CR. Imagine what would happen to CR's subscriber base (Toyota/Honda owners) if CR started rating GM's Lamda crossovers higher than the Pilot or Highlander. Yep! A mass-exodus of subscription revenue.

 

[PMC the 1st]

No one here cares to hear what I have to say about Consumer Reports? Am I like the only one? I only got one vote, you know. And that was myself voting.

 

[vcs2600]

Your voting options suck, so no votes from me.

 

[2001civic]

I trust them about 50%... the other 50% is my own preferences. In other words, if I'm clueless about buying something new, I look at the for a general guideline, but I have to do my own researches before considering a purchase.

 

[XP300]

I look at the history of Consumers Union, the parent of Consumer Reports, you will find it was begun by some well educated individuals who distrusted corporations and believed that all the products of corporations should be regulated. They were largely socialists.

Many, if not all of it's board members are well educated people who believe that the average person is not intelligent enough to make good decisions on his/her own. Most of the Consumer Reports people have graduated college and immediately gone into 501C3 (not for profit) organizations or into government.

Some of the famous CR board members include Ralph Nader, Joan Claybrook, Jack Gillis and Clarence Ditlow (Spelling?). Claybrook was head of the US DOT under Jimmy Carter, Gillis was turned down by GM for cars to test when he authored the first issue of the "Car Book" and Ditlow is another rich man's son who hates US corporations. We all know Nader, who is the King of 501C3 corporations. They all believe that this country would be a better place if it was run by them.

I don't hate CR, but I don't trust their reviews of most anything, because they let their personal distaste for capitalism color their reviews.

Maybe we should have a thread on "What kind of car would CR build", if they could build a car?

 

[Beelzebubba]

I've always taken any subjective review or opinion with the proverbial "grain of salt". I do find 'hard' data such as repair history and recalls to be useful. Even more useful, particularly from CR, are their acceleration tests and real-world fuel economy numbers. These tend to be much more representative of what the average driver can expect compared to tests conducted by automotive websites and other media.

Even that information, which I trust to be accurate, I still make my own decisions based on personal experience and observation. Just because CR rates a model poorly or finds certain faults, if I am at all interested in that car- I go to the dealer and form my own opinions.