Did Marcus buy Trailer Life?

[Seattle_Lion]

I've noticed that aside from the enormous amount of Good Sam and Camping World advertising in Trailer Life, the editorial strongly slants their way too. To me, the magazine is starting to look more like a brochure than an unbiased editorial product.

Has Marcus bought it?

[lanerd]

fla-gypsy wrote:

lanerd wrote:

fly gypsy wrote:
CR has been proven more than once to be completely dishonest and rigging their results. You should be a little more open to reality

You know this to be a fact, or are you just repeating something someone else said? What would be their purpose in being dishonest and rigging their results? They have absolutely no financial interest in ANYTHING they test and provide results on so that consumers will have some sort of an idea of the quality of the product they are thinking about buying.

Your statement is, with all due respect, untrue. I think YOU should be a little more open to reality.

Ron

Perhaps you would dare to Google it then? I'm not going to waste my time educating the CU faithful. You will find interesting reading concerning the Suzuki roll over test, the oil tests conclusions, the supposed side impact results of infant car seats at 38 mph and questionable results and practices in their car ratings survey approach which makes them statistical nonsense. No advertising does not=No bias

Yes, I agree that there have been a few instances where CR has goofed either by not using the correct wording to describe the test results or have used an outside lab that did not use correct procedures in the tests....but none have been proven to contain outright bias and malicious reporting. You have to remember that CR does thousands and thousands of tests on just about every common product made. Are they going to be absolutely perfect on each and every test? Probably not, but they do a LOT more good than bad.

I only brought up Consumers Reports magazine after one of the replies to the original post said: "Really? Do you think that any magazine doesn't slant their articles to support their advertisers?" My answer was Consumer Reports because they DON'T HAVE ANY ADVERTISERS. You, on the other hand, came back with your defaming opinion of the magazine which was not inline with the question...or my answer.

So, we are waaaaay off of the original subject.....I apologize to the OP for high jacking your post.

Ron

[hotbyte]

Seattle Lion wrote:
I am a fairly new subscriber to Trailer Life. I am not talking about ads here, nor about Good Sam club inserts. The base editorial, more often than not, points readers to Camping World. There is no reason to do this. A neutral editorial policy would point readers to the manufacturer's website and let the reader find a dealer.

If Marcus didn't buy Trailer Life, his advertising dollars are corrupting their editorial policy. This isn't unusual. "Do-it-yourself" magazines frequently write editorial to support advertisers. After all, subscriptions do not pay for a magazine (I used to publish them). Advertising dollars are what keeps a magazine alive.

In any case, I think that Trailer Life has become such a blatant huckster for CW, I am losing interest in the magazine.

Perhaps I'm wrong here but I think you have missed what several replies (not about CU) here have stated. There was ALREADY an affiliation between Good Sam/Camping World's holding company Affinity Group and Trailer Life. Marcus "bought" and/or became CEO of Affinity Group. Basically, Yes, he bought Trailer Life when he originally bought Affinity Group because it was already owned by the company he bought.

Again, I say all that based on the replies I've read here and Google/Wikipedia which are never, ever wrong 🙂 🙂 🙂

[Dog_Folks]

Us out West wrote:

SCVJeff wrote:
Well it didn't take long for this thread to take a 90 degree turn

No kidding!! :R

Thread subject: Did Marcus buy Trailer Life?

Doesn't surprise me.

The original question has been answered, correctly, many times in the three pages here.

How many times can it be said?

[ol_Bombero-JC]

lanerd wrote:
No, CR does not receive one penny for advertisement. Plus it reports on common every day items that you and I use extensively. They don't report on jets or yachts due to the fact that the common person never uses them. And maybe, just maybe controversial items are best left to those controversial magazines that sell them. CR doesn't sell anything, except subscriptions to their magazine which is a benefit to the common purchaser.

Ron

Can you say.....topic creep?

Or should that be..... Topic Creeps?

Maybe the thread title/subject should be changed to....

Does Marcus own Consumer Reports??..:R

~

[Seattle_Lion]

I am a fairly new subscriber to Trailer Life. I am not talking about ads here, nor about Good Sam club inserts. The base editorial, more often than not, points readers to Camping World. There is no reason to do this. A neutral editorial policy would point readers to the manufacturer's website and let the reader find a dealer.

If Marcus didn't buy Trailer Life, his advertising dollars are corrupting their editorial policy. This isn't unusual. "Do-it-yourself" magazines frequently write editorial to support advertisers. After all, subscriptions do not pay for a magazine (I used to publish them). Advertising dollars are what keeps a magazine alive.

In any case, I think that Trailer Life has become such a blatant huckster for CW, I am losing interest in the magazine.

[dewey02]

Maybe Consumer Reports should do a rating of some of this forum's members ability to stay on the topic of the thread. I'd bet they'd give it an unsatisfactory and not recommended.

After getting Trailer Life for probably 8 years, I am letting my subscription lapse this month. I have now retired, and have to watch where my dollars go. I will read it at the library. I think it is a good magazine, with some important info in each issue. I wish them continued success. I understand the continual references to CW and some of their bias, but knowing it is all one company, I take that in stride.

[Us_out_West]

SCVJeff wrote:
Well it didn't take long for this thread to take a 90 degree turn

No kidding!! :R

Thread subject: Did Marcus buy Trailer Life?

[RECVEH2005]

I have subscribed to Consumer Reports (CU) for several decades. While it is true that they have made a mistake on occasion, they own up to it. It is also obvious that most folks who don't like CU are upset that CU doesn't support their preconceived notions on a particular subject! Automobiles seem to be the prime example of this.

Mike

[fla-gypsy]

lanerd wrote:

fly gypsy wrote:
CR has been proven more than once to be completely dishonest and rigging their results. You should be a little more open to reality

You know this to be a fact, or are you just repeating something someone else said? What would be their purpose in being dishonest and rigging their results? They have absolutely no financial interest in ANYTHING they test and provide results on so that consumers will have some sort of an idea of the quality of the product they are thinking about buying.

Your statement is, with all due respect, untrue. I think YOU should be a little more open to reality.

Ron

Perhaps you would dare to Google it then? I'm not going to waste my time educating the CU faithful. You will find interesting reading concerning the Suzuki roll over test, the oil tests conclusions, the supposed side impact results of infant car seats at 38 mph and questionable results and practices in their car ratings survey approach which makes them statistical nonsense. No advertising does not=No bias

[lanerd]

fly gypsy wrote:
CR has been proven more than once to be completely dishonest and rigging their results. You should be a little more open to reality

You know this to be a fact, or are you just repeating something someone else said? What would be their purpose in being dishonest and rigging their results? They have absolutely no financial interest in ANYTHING they test and provide results on so that consumers will have some sort of an idea of the quality of the product they are thinking about buying.

Your statement is, with all due respect, untrue. I think YOU should be a little more open to reality.

Ron

[tatest]

No. Trailer Life and the Good Sam brands were linked long before Marcus "bought" the Affinity group. Maybe even before Marcus was born.

[lawnspecialties]

I've always been a huge Trailer Life fan. Especially where people could write in for help with problems or they could complain or praise how a company treated them. Trailer Life seemed to be quite open to publishing those company's names without fear of retribution from said company.

Hope things don't change.

[Turbo_Diesel_Du]

Decided to subscribe to Consumer Reports in July. Paid my subscription via check in August. Got two "nasty grams" up to and including last week at which time I canceled my subscription due to them not being able to keep up. Just irked me to no end! JMHO

[Dick_A]

Trailer Life, Motorhome magazine and the original Good Sam Club were all started by Art Rouse. Art subsequently sold his product lines to Stephen Adams who owned Affinity group. Camping world, Woodall's and Trailer Life directories, Affinity bank and other lines were merged including the original rallies starting about ten years ago.

Facts are somewhat sketchy but it appears Stephen Adams who was very rich and getting up in years brokered some sort of some or all the company to Marcus Lemonis. I was once told Stephen Adams spends most of his time in France tending to his special vintner grapes.

[Seattle_Lion]

SCVJeff wrote:
Well it didn't take long for this thread to take a 90 degree turn

Wow. How did that happen?