DiecastXchange Forum banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,816 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
G

·
Well they lost all hopes of credibility with me as soon as I read this about the AUTOart Alex Job Racing Porsche

This rendition of the 2003 GT class winner at Sebring is yet another perfect example from AUTOart of their ability to create a model which rivals models costing a hundred dollars more. AUTOart has simply perfected a knack for creating highly detailed, quality pieces. This piece is certainly no exception. Being a fan of the American Le Mans Series and Alex Job Racing, once I spotted this car I quickly purchased one for my collection. AUTOart has done a magnificent job of this first class presentation.
We already hae enough this type of leg humping going on - certainly don't need another magazine to mislead collectors any more than what is already available.

Its these types of features that really burn my arse up :pullhair

Not only do this author state the model is is accurate relating to graphics, sponsors and colors - they then post a picture of the 2003 car and it look nothing like this model - either he got his pictures wrong, or he's no different from any of the other diecast magazine prophets.

Gotta be kidding me.

Sorry, but it needed to be said.
 
G

·
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right]
From the looks of that article it certainly looks like it.

I surely hope I am wrong as we surely could use all the press we can get for this hobby - however, any and all press isn't good press.

If the Alex Job Porsche rivals models costing $100 more - then we are in trouble.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,514 Posts
I read the article about GMP and from my experience, GMP has superb customer service and their product quality is excellent. However, I agree with Darrick, this magazine reads like another leg-humper.

In describing GMP's models, this magazine uses phrases such as "exceptionally rare finds", "hold and increase their value" and "occasionally be found on ebay". These words appear right above pics of their 1/12 Ford GT 40 #2 and several of their 1/18 Lola T70's.

So much for their credibility! :kick

Don't get me wrong, I am in no way criticizing GMP. But this mag is leg-humping (love that phrase!).

GMP 1/12 MSRP is routinely $499. You can find these MIB on ebay every day for $320 up. The 1/18 Lola T70s are easily available on ebay MIB for $60+.

From their very begining, this mag has, in my opinion, clearly demonstrated that it values the advertisers' revenues more than it values the subscriber's trust! :my2cents
 
G

·
I wrote them a letter and they published it on their site.

Me:

Hi,

Allow me to welcome and congratulate you on your first issue relating to diecast models and the hobby. This hobby can certainly needs some print and exposure in an effort to elevate it into the mainstream. Therefore, I commend you on your effort. I'm not one to knock your work as I presume you have put a lot of time into launching this magazine, however, after reading the first few reviews - I couldn't help but come to the conclusion that I was reading a "paid advertisement" and the first thing that came to my mind was "oh great, another industry whore".

Your reviews on the AUTOart Porsche' - Carrera GT and Alex Job Racing Porsche really left me scratching my head. You do realize the CGT has mismatched paint from bumper- to body, a inaccurate carpeted front boot and in all honesty isn't that much better than the $10 Maisto Carrera GT. I've read non-biased reviews which prove this fact. As for the Alex Job Racing Porsche, that you so eloquently described as accurate, detailed and better than most $100 models. Well either AUTOart got it wrong or AJR got their 1:1 car wrong as the model looks nothing like the pictures you have posted to compliment the review. Not to mention this model is a GT3 R but is suppose to be designated as a GT3 RS. AUTOart just screwed that entire line up of 911 racers up - inaccurate sponsors, wrong race numbers and incorrect designations on the wrong cars. I wrote them a letter about this and their reasoning is they have limited research time and in some cases are not able to see the actual car with the exception of a few pics. How comforting is that for collectors who are paying big money for a inaccurate product?

As I commended you earlier on your effort for creating an online magazine for collectors to use as a informational resource. I plead with you to travel the road less traveled. We already have enough resources which feature articles on diecast models that are nothing more than a company leg humping session. These articles indicate every model is great, every model is a must have and the company who provided them the model for the review is the greatest thing besides the air we breath. These authors have no credibility and are nothing more than a "Famous Nobody" because they are less than truthful about the articles they write for their fellow collectors to read. Its a terrible state of affairs when someone goes out and buys a model based on one of these reviews only to get the model home to find the author and his article have misled them with false propaganda. I truly hope that your venture will be one in which collectors can come to know and trust as a credible solid resource for model information and entertainment. Anything less will certainly be a waste of your time as collectors are getting smart errand catching on to the company men posing as collectors selling them a pipe dream of a model. I look forward to reading the next issue - hoping for a good read and not some cheap "paid advertising skit".

-- Darrick P

Forum Founder/ Owner DiecastXchange.com
Magazine:
Dear Darrick,

You have taken time to write us and we certainly appreciate it. I guess I have to plead guilty on some of the valid points you have made in your letter. As I'm sure you can imagine it has been nothing short of a nightmare to get some of these die-cast manufacturers to participate in DCM. This including submitting product for review.

I wanted to be more of a nice guy on our first issue to try and get companies comfortable with us, and to entice others to take part in our monthly publication. But, I did feel that I had been truthful. I was impressed for example that the Carrera GT model even featured a fabric boot and wasn't just plain molded plastic.

AUTOart was a company that surprised me because they could have easily blew our editorial request off. Especially being a corporate giant. But AUTOart (AUTOart) actually went out of their way to help us get started by loading us up with far more items to review then any of the other few manufacturer's that had. But, I honestly have to say that I was really impressed with AUTOart's product's. Especially for the money. I do have other AUTOart model's in my collection that I had prior in my collection and I still really think they offer collector's a great value in their products.

Although nobody likes criticism, I know your letter has raised a very valid point and will be taken into consideration with future DCM issues and reviews. It goes back to that point that we didn't want to insult anyone with our first issue and wanted to encourage other companies to participate. But, we do owe our reader's, and have a duty to them to a truthful and un bias review. You obviously have a few more facts on the AUTOart line of 911's then we do. The only 911 we've seen from Porsche is the Alex Job Racing example.

Your input is certainly creditable and will reflect on future reviews. Truly the last thing we want to do is to have one of our reader's make a purchase based on our reviews and be unhappy with the product. I do believe wholeheartedly that AUTOart offers a truly exceptional value to collector's. Maybe I should in fact become a salesman for them, because I really am a big fan of their products. I have a particular love of road racing and for instance, the Alex Job Racing car (I'm a big AJR fan) that was reviewed was one I had purchased last year for my own collection and was not one submitted by AUTOart. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that many of my favorite cars in racing would not be available as scale models to enjoy and collect if it weren't for AUTOart.

I did get to speak with the folks at Alex Job Racing about AUTOart's version and they seemed to be very pleased with the recreation of their Porsche. As far as I can see and know, the markings on the scale model were accurate. However, please be assured that if I do catch something that I'm going to point it out and be truthful about it.

In closing, I am familiar with your organization and have great respect for both you and DiecastXchange. I appreciate your writing us and please know that your letter has been a considerable benefit and your advice has been taken to heart and this has been a learning experience.
Seems like a nice guy at the controls - I hope he steers that ship right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,816 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Darrick, Thanks for that well written letter you sent them! :cheers And I am glad that the editor took the time to write back and better explain himself.

I see that he will try to put the interestt of the collectors/readers first and foremost.

There is an article on GMP that I liked and I learned some tidbits about them.

http://www.diecastmonthly.com/gmpstory.htm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,424 Posts
Well, looks likethe captain is aware that the ship has some leaks. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and wait and see if the editorial line becomes more down to earth.

The only thing that I find wierd is that the guy sounds like before anything else he was a collector. And as a collector, doesn't he research or try to know something about his models? :confused If that's the case, why was he "totally satisfied" with the AJR Porsche? It is a nice model, no doubt, but it's more of a fantasy racer then an accurate replica.
 
G

·
Al,

It was a pleasure. I am actually rooting for this guy to provide collectors with a solid and credible resource to turn to monthly. I'm truly hoping he won't disappoint.

Luc,

We have all been there before - a model that appeals to us, we buy it with great enthusiasm without knowing every thing there is to know about the 1:1. I know I am guilty of this as well.

Its his first month at the helm, his learning curve just went flat so lets see what he offers us next month.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,545 Posts
It's nice that he wrote back a curteous letter. I can see his point of view, but what's the point of producing a diecast mag where you can't be truthful about the products?
I know that DiecastX Magazine has never seemed to find a model they don't like. I still find some of their articles informative.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,714 Posts
Well, Diecast Monthly surely has a great atitude behin it and that should help quite a bit.
The one thing that strikes a chord is that if the people behind the magazine are collectors, then why not review their own cars? Why is the need to be involved with the Mfg's supplying the models so great? I fully understand the deadlines and their restrictions on what a magazine can do but its not like these cars have a short shelf life. They are around and on the market for a long time and the interest in the AJR Porsche bears this out. A fully independent review where there is no worry that the flow of model will dry up (aka gravy train) if you dare to point out the good with the bad in a review.

I am not saying this is the case here but the thing that has alway bothered me about car magazines and even diecast/model magazines id the fact that the largest paid advertisements are by the mfg's. that produce the product being reviewed! Open up Motor trend or whatever and count the ads placed by the car makers. How much sway does the editorial content have over the sales department? How much can it have?

Didn't GM just pull a large amount of its advertising from a California newspaper for what it viewd as a bad review or some sort of reporting?

I know that it would take more than the easter bunny to bring a magazine to the hobby that didn't need to gain a large part of its ad revenue from the industry itself and one that seemingly doesn't need the industry to supply a stream of review samples but it would be nice to read reviews that discuss the merits of the car in question and one that does not sound like it was a paid advertisement.

I am willing to give a pass on the first round from DM as the letter they wrote to Darrick did explain the thought process pretty well and the hope for a more selective approach the next time.
I hope things work out.

No one wants to see a bashfest but the sugarcoating and buckets O' praise have about the same effect. Simple balanced reporting goes a long way without the "Greatest company in the history of the world" hysterics by the author.
 
G

·
Not sure if any of you have taken the time to read Issue No2 of Diecast Monthly - But I would personally recommed this issue.

Quite a turn of events since my comments I wrote to the editor last month.

With the exception of the review on the Welly Camaro - I believe someone needs to get off their knees and wipe their mouth on that one - I found the commentary to be genuine, forthcoming and inviting to read. And they didn't even have to bash a model in the process.

I think the Editor did a great job in righting that ship, so congrats to them for delivering the collectors something that doesn't appear to be a dang on commercial of advertisements.

I told you I was rooting for them :yahoo

BTW, I did follow up last months email with a congratulatory email as it was the right thing to do.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top