Model Boat Mayhem - Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: 30% extra thrust?  (Read 6970 times)

toesupwa

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 938
  • USA'd ex Brit
  • Location: Back in California, USA
Re: 30% extra thrust?
« Reply #25 on: August 29, 2007, 02:11:17 AM »


However under trading standards a claim must also be verifyable.

But if they could publish results as in an anonymous table as below.

Boat     Nozzle A   Nozzle B  Our Nozzle

Boat A     10kg       10.3 kg    13kg
Boat B      10.2kg       -          12.9kg

So Mobile Marine Models, if you are reading, there are people who are intersted in the results. If you have over-egged the pudding the truth will out with this lot. If not don't hide the test results. This could be a PR boob if you are not careful.

Thats exactly how i replied to MMM's email Tigertiger.. asking for at least some comparison results (not on specific models) but comparing nozzle A, B, C etc and their 'claimed' increased thrust nozzle.

I shall report back here when i have received a reply...
Logged

Roger in France

  • Guest
Re: 30% extra thrust?
« Reply #26 on: August 29, 2007, 06:39:56 AM »

Please do not set yourselves up as barrack room lawyers!

As a former Trading Standards Officer let me put you straight:
 1. It is not illegal to make and publish comparisons which are accurate.
 2. It is not for someone accused of making misleading or false claims to provide verification of their claims, it is necessary for the prosecutor (a Trading Standards Officer) to prove the claims are misleading or false.

The latter may seem like pedantry but I assure you it is not and makes a significant difference. The "burden of proof" (as it is known in law) means that the investigator must do all the research and the accused need do nothing. Of course he could volunteer the evidence for his claims, if he is confident in it.

Roger in France.
Logged

toesupwa

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 938
  • USA'd ex Brit
  • Location: Back in California, USA
Re: 30% extra thrust?
« Reply #27 on: August 29, 2007, 07:03:36 AM »

Of course he could volunteer the evidence for his claims, if he is confident in it.

Thanks for that clarification Roger.

There are comparisons on MMM's site, but they dont say (accuratly) what they are comparing their product with.

If MMM are confident in their product, i hope they will volunteer some evidence to back up their claims...

Logged

tigertiger

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,929
  • Location: Kunming, city of eternal springtime, SW China.
Re: 30% extra thrust?
« Reply #28 on: August 29, 2007, 07:51:45 AM »

Hi Roger

Thanks for theclarification;

but I thought it was illegal to make comparisons in advertisements.
Which is why sopa powder and soft drinks adds never do this in the UK
The Cola wars in the US is cited as an example of how UK advertising and US advertising differs.

I should have been more specific in specifying advertising.


I also remeber a case where my father was threatened with legal action for publishing comparisons in price between himself and one of his competitors.
This was hand written posters in the form.

HAVE YOU BEEN DONE??
Product xxxxxx  His price xxxxx       My pricexxxx

No names were used and my father obviosly only printed the prices in his favour.
Promt visit from lawyers.
LOL

Logged
The only stupid question is the one I didn't ask

Roger in France

  • Guest
Re: 30% extra thrust?
« Reply #29 on: August 30, 2007, 06:23:41 AM »

I may be getting a little rusty as it is a long time since I retired but I repeat, as far as I am aware there is no legal prohibition on comparisons.

However, when it comes to advertising there are other considerations. As well as the law which applies to all forms of trading there is the Advertising Code of Practice. This is not the law but a Code applied by the advertising industry which is very effective because no publication will accept an advert which does not comply with the Code.

It may also be true that some  publications will not accept advertisements or comparisons which denigrate other "would be money paying" advertisers.

Roger in France.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up