The Energon Pub

Rated X wrote:

Gauntlet101010 wrote:Ok, let's just get something out of the way:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sponsor?s=ts

a person, firm, organization, etc., that finances and buys the time to broadcast a radio or television program so as to advertise a product, a political party, etc.

So, right away we've already established that sponsorship, by very definition, means he's being paid to advertise BBTS. Likely with, you know, money (and not just free toys). BBTS is buying that spot you see before his review. That is the definition of sponsorship. That spot at the beginning? That's what BBTS is buying.

I don't really care about intuition and paranoia. You've essentially concocted fanfiction and I'm not here to talk about fanfics involving the secret conspiracies behind TF reviews. I don't care if BBTS sent him every single toy he's ever reviewed for free - it's irrelevant. What we're talking about is whether he's lying about a product's quality. Show me reviews that demonstrate that his reviews are full of ****. So far you've linked to one you think shows that.

One.

One review by one guy. I'm still waiting for more.

We don't know if any of them are getting money to do this. We only know they are getting free toys.

You are being over dramatic by adding words like "paranoia" and "conspiracies". Obviously your one of those guys that only sees things in black and white. You want a signed confession lol. They're not going to admit it on camera if they are biased. It all boils down to opinions on figures that are known pieces of ****. I cant accuse these guys of over-glorifying figures that I also love. That alone knocks out 80% of the 3rd party figures in my collection. Ill try to focus my attention on reviews of figures from companies that are known to have a bad rap.

Ive shown you that the motive is there. That doesn't mean they are being biased, it simply means if they were, they have probable cause to justify it. I take it you really have faith in these reviewers which naturally makes you pessimistic about my beliefs. It's just not in your nature to ask "what if?"

The world is full of "what if's" that have probable cause but no definitive black and white answer because people choose to stay silent...

What if OJ did it ?

What if Michael Jackson really was a pedophile ?

What if Saddam did have WMD in his possession ?

There's only so much proof you can obtain when the truth is hidden in someone's mind rather than in a physical form. That's when intuitions and the logic behind them start coming into play. I've offered plenty of motive to justify the possibility if it did indeed exist. Do you care to offer any motive the reviewers might have to maintain 100% integrity? Other than "innocent until proven guilty" you have even less evidence than me to back up your counter-argument. At least I've established a motive. All you've established is you trust their integrity.

I'm a guy who likes proof over "intuition". If sponsored reviews are biased; if Optobotimus is just shilling for products it should be easy to prove. The fact that you've only posted one review tells me that either you can't be bothered to search for more or that you can't find any outside of the one. And if you can't find any unreliable reviews, well, ... your arguing for nothing.

Being sponsored means he's getting paid. That's the literal definition. If you're arguing he's getting paid, well, he is. It's not hidden or a secret. What matters is the bottom line: if he's reliable. So far the only answer you're giving is "yes" with a healthy dose of "but I don't like that he's being paid and I don't trust him as a person."

Gauntlet101010 wrote:

Rated X wrote:

Gauntlet101010 wrote:Ok, let's just get something out of the way:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sponsor?s=ts

a person, firm, organization, etc., that finances and buys the time to broadcast a radio or television program so as to advertise a product, a political party, etc.

So, right away we've already established that sponsorship, by very definition, means he's being paid to advertise BBTS. Likely with, you know, money (and not just free toys). BBTS is buying that spot you see before his review. That is the definition of sponsorship. That spot at the beginning? That's what BBTS is buying.

I don't really care about intuition and paranoia. You've essentially concocted fanfiction and I'm not here to talk about fanfics involving the secret conspiracies behind TF reviews. I don't care if BBTS sent him every single toy he's ever reviewed for free - it's irrelevant. What we're talking about is whether he's lying about a product's quality. Show me reviews that demonstrate that his reviews are full of ****. So far you've linked to one you think shows that.

One.

One review by one guy. I'm still waiting for more.

We don't know if any of them are getting money to do this. We only know they are getting free toys.

You are being over dramatic by adding words like "paranoia" and "conspiracies". Obviously your one of those guys that only sees things in black and white. You want a signed confession lol. They're not going to admit it on camera if they are biased. It all boils down to opinions on figures that are known pieces of ****. I cant accuse these guys of over-glorifying figures that I also love. That alone knocks out 80% of the 3rd party figures in my collection. Ill try to focus my attention on reviews of figures from companies that are known to have a bad rap.

Ive shown you that the motive is there. That doesn't mean they are being biased, it simply means if they were, they have probable cause to justify it. I take it you really have faith in these reviewers which naturally makes you pessimistic about my beliefs. It's just not in your nature to ask "what if?"

The world is full of "what if's" that have probable cause but no definitive black and white answer because people choose to stay silent...

What if OJ did it ?

What if Michael Jackson really was a pedophile ?

What if Saddam did have WMD in his possession ?

There's only so much proof you can obtain when the truth is hidden in someone's mind rather than in a physical form. That's when intuitions and the logic behind them start coming into play. I've offered plenty of motive to justify the possibility if it did indeed exist. Do you care to offer any motive the reviewers might have to maintain 100% integrity? Other than "innocent until proven guilty" you have even less evidence than me to back up your counter-argument. At least I've established a motive. All you've established is you trust their integrity.

I'm a guy who likes proof over "intuition". If sponsored reviews are biased; if Optobotimus is just shilling for products it should be easy to prove. The fact that you've only posted one review tells me that either you can't be bothered to search for more or that you can't find any outside of the one. And if you can't find any unreliable reviews, well, ... your arguing for nothing.

Being sponsored means he's getting paid. That's the literal definition. If you're arguing he's getting paid, well, he is. It's not hidden or a secret. What matters is the bottom line: if he's reliable. So far the only answer you're giving is "yes" with a healthy dose of "but I don't like that he's being paid and I don't trust him as a person."

Well you mentioned money in your last post. What I established is that the “payment” consists of toys, although it might not be limited to just toys. There’s also the possibility of unwanted toys going right up on e-bay after the video is recorded. That is cash equivalent, so payment for their services is confirmed in one form or another.

My question is why does every sponsored reviewer glorify EVERY figure? where are the duds ? We found one. But with all the criticism both official and 3rd party figures take from us fans, why is every figure getting a B+ or higher by the reviewers?

The fact that I’m not finding many negative reviews is the whole basis of my argument. What I do find is a lot of smooth talking, sugarcoating, and tons of plugs for BBTS and TF Source. They all do it so smoothly that your average newbie buyer wouldn’t even consider that they were watching a paid mouthpiece. It takes a savvy person to pick up on the tone of voice, stuttering, or hesitation they show when speaking about the figure. To make it even harder, we don’t get to see facial expressions which often give away deceit to the trained eye. We just hear a voice. Embarrassments like the Kronos video are very rare. The figure broke on camera live and he wasn’t going to get a replacement to shoot a retake. Most of these guys practice the transformation at least once because they almost never start the review in the mode the figure comes packaged in. Don’t expect tons of video bloopers. If I find them I will indeed post them. But there is this little thing called editing. Pay less attention to what you see with your eyes and pay greater attention to what they say and how they say it. That’s when reality will start to sink in. That’s when you’ll realize they aren’t speaking from the heart, they’re just acting and not so good at it.

Just to get it out in the open - I dislike it when reviewers show themselves. They are not why I'm tuning in. I'm tuning in for the Transformer. I'm not here for gags, a story, a gimmick, or "humor", just the figure.

http://youtu.be/E8-bwivGP50 - Here's a dud.
http://youtu.be/gJE08q3ILlQ - Here's another dud.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O87ikvevhSM - Another dud.

I'm not even really trying.

Yeah, so ... right now I just think you dislike Optibotimus' style and are just finding reasons to dislike him. Maybe he goes too easy on figures, but I don't see corruption at work here.

So, who's next? Who else is so terribly corrupt that sponsorship is ruining the system?

Gauntlet101010 wrote:Just to get it out in the open - I dislike it when reviewers show themselves. They are not why I'm tuning in. I'm tuning in for the Transformer. I'm not here for gags, a story, a gimmick, or "humor", just the figure.

http://youtu.be/E8-bwivGP50 - Here's a dud.
http://youtu.be/gJE08q3ILlQ - Here's another dud.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O87ikvevhSM - Another dud.

I'm not even really trying.

Yeah, so ... right now I just think you dislike Optibotimus' style and are just finding reasons to dislike him. Maybe he goes too easy on figures, but I don't see corruption at work here.

So, who's next? Who else is so terribly corrupt that sponsorship is ruining the system?

Well I love Scoop so I really cant comment his lack of enthusiasm in that review. As it was said earlier, different strokes for different folks. And yes the mini-con assault team really does suck, I agree. I might focus on that figure to see if other reviewers attempt to glorify it.

But what you actually found is fine examples of sugarcoating. When I said a "dud" I meant a review where the reviewer almost bends over backwards to diss the figure. I not talking about just having a "meh" attitude or making a few pot jokes about the character's relevance and need for a figure. I'm looking for them to basically say "You don't need this figure in your collection". I really didn't see that in your examples. I just saw a big pile of "meh".

Rated X wrote:

Gauntlet101010 wrote:Just to get it out in the open - I dislike it when reviewers show themselves. They are not why I'm tuning in. I'm tuning in for the Transformer. I'm not here for gags, a story, a gimmick, or "humor", just the figure.

http://youtu.be/E8-bwivGP50 - Here's a dud.
http://youtu.be/gJE08q3ILlQ - Here's another dud.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O87ikvevhSM - Another dud.

I'm not even really trying.

Yeah, so ... right now I just think you dislike Optibotimus' style and are just finding reasons to dislike him. Maybe he goes too easy on figures, but I don't see corruption at work here.

So, who's next? Who else is so terribly corrupt that sponsorship is ruining the system?

Well I love Scoop so I really cant comment his lack of enthusiasm in that review. As it was said earlier, different strokes for different folks. And yes the mini-con assault team really does suck, I agree. I might focus on that figure to see if other reviewers attempt to glorify it.

But what you actually found is fine examples of sugarcoating. When I said a "dud" I meant a review where the reviewer almost bends over backwards to diss the figure. I not talking about just having a "meh" attitude or making a few pot jokes about the character's relevance and need for a figure. I'm looking for them to basically say "You don't need this figure in your collection". I really didn't see that in your examples. I just saw a big pile of "meh".

He said Scoop felt like a knockoff and that you don't need the Minicon team and that Tankor was a pass.

For the record I also dislike Scoop.

It looks like you dislike him for not really ripping into the figures. Which isn't really proving your argument at all. It just proves that you think Optibotomus is too "nice" for your tastes. Which is, you know, your tastes.

But this isn't just an Optibotimus thread. You said the entire thing doesn't work. So go on, Name more names. Let's see if they hold up as well (or don't as the case may be) as Optibotomus.

You do know every review that I review is ten minutes of my life Ill never get back...


Moving on to the god of Transformers himself...the almighty Peaugh

I actually found him to be a bit tougher on figures to the point where I felt he was speaking as a fan rather than on behalf of TF Source.

But after scouring through his youtube channel I found this:



He admits his friend in California found them in a store and sent them to him. He said they cost 3 bucks each in the store. But that didn't stop him from adding a TF Source plug to the video even though they were not free samples. Now if that isn't a "company guy" than what is ?

On a side note, was this review even necessary ? He has several reviews for rescue bots and other kiddie stuff. How many parents buy their toddlers 3 dollar toys from TF Source and are in need of a review to make a decision ? This is pure overkill.

Then I scrolled down further through his uploads and found this...



Why does this video even exist ? Fine I admit this video has no TF Source plug. But it is proof that Peaugh will review any piece of crap he can get his hands on for free. That doesn't say much for someone people claim is providing a service to the fandom. This guy would try to sell ice cubes to eskimos.

Remember when I said in the KFC Transistor thread that the reviewer community is becoming a circus ? These videos are a perfect example.

And for the record, I'm not stating that these particular videos show Peaugh as being untrustworthy or biased. They just set the tone for an opinion I wouldn't even bother to even listen to.

look ill be the first to admit I've been lucky and in the few years I've been collecting I've only received one dud and that was scalpel from the rotf line. having said that OF COURSE THESE PEOPLE ARE PAID SPONSORS but lets be real about this. at the beginning of many of their videos there isn't just an add for tfsource or bbts or captured prey. there are car ads, movie trailers, toy commercials, insurance ads etc.; this is the result of having a popular channel(we the fandom did that). they also have bills to pay like us. lest we forget A3U who also do reviews and exclusives for FP and a few others with links to buy from them. I see no issue with them wanting their cut of the pie .

while they may be advertising product and telling you to get it at (insert online store name here) we as collectors are ultimately responsible for what we get and can choose to get it ANYWHERE else. they have no guarantees that well just click the link and buy because anyone looking to spend close to $200 on a third party MP sky fire is going to do their research and find a good price. anyone who went in on kronos and got burned and there are a lot of them out there took a risk regardless if it was a hastak or 3rd party offering we take the risk getting a crappy product.(im only referencing this due to the video link posted earlier.)

for me personally I watch peaugh because he takes the time to show the whole transformation and do use him as a reference. at the end of the day they wont be able to trick or mislead(I don't believe they are) a fandom that is educated and not naïve about the reality of business.
vangelus and a few others if I want to be slightly entertained. as for the rest ill only watch if they have a product that hasn't been seen before.

Rated X wrote:You do know every review that I review is ten minutes of my life Ill never get back...


Moving on to the god of Transformers himself...the almighty Peaugh

I actually found him to be a bit tougher on figures to the point where I felt he was speaking as a fan rather than on behalf of TF Source.

But after scouring through his youtube channel I found this:



He admits his friend in California found them in a store and sent them to him. He said they cost 3 bucks each in the store. But that didn't stop him from adding a TF Source plug to the video even though they were not free samples. Now if that isn't a "company guy" than what is ?

On a side note, was this review even necessary ? He has several reviews for rescue bots and other kiddie stuff. How many parents buy their toddlers 3 dollar toys from TF Source and are in need of a review to make a decision ? This is pure overkill.

Then I scrolled down further through his uploads and found this...



Why does this video even exist ? Fine I admit this video has no TF Source plug. But it is proof that Peaugh will review any piece of crap he can get his hands on for free. That doesn't say much for someone people claim is providing a service to the fandom. This guy would try to sell ice cubes to eskimos.

Remember when I said in the KFC Transistor thread that the reviewer community is becoming a circus ? These videos are a perfect example.

And for the record, I'm not stating that these particular videos show Peaugh as being untrustworthy or biased. They just set the tone for an opinion I wouldn't even bother to even listen to.

Geez, who made you the god of Transformers reviews, deciding who should post what on their own channel?

Like I said BBTS / TFSource / whoever is buying advertising space at the beginning of his reviews and a link. That doesn't mean he gets that toy for free. That means he, more than likely, gets money. That's what sponsorship is. Being paid to post advertising. It's not "review the toys we give you" (although he most likely will because he's into reviews).

Why can't he just upload what he wants to? He's not a corporation. He's a guy with a popular channel who got lucky. By posting these two videos you're just showing that he can post what he likes and not necessarily any free thing he's given. If just accepting money for advertising makes you a "company man" then your criteria for that is very low. That's like saying the owner of a builder works for Lexus because they post an ad on a billboard on top of his building. Or that a site works for Google because they use Google's adsense on their site.

And that still doesn't prove he's lying to shill product. You still haven't proven that his reviews aren't trustworthy.

So far we have:
- Optibotomus just being too easy on TF for your liking and
- Preaugh posting two reviews of toys he wasn't given for free (thusly demonstrating that he doesn't just review things he's given).

So far I am less than impressed with the body of evidence presented here. Who else is there to discuss?

This is a very silly argument. But that's kind of why I like it.



I doubt reviewers routinely get "free" figures from sponsors as compensation. When peaugh receives those "unexpected" figures or sets in the mail, it is often implied that they came directly from the manufacturer. He just seems to have built some good relationships with the 3Ps. I'd be hard pressed to find the exact videos, but Optibotimus has said in a few of his reviews that he pays for his figures.

I'm inclined to think that these guys get compensated in a way that is proportional to the traffic they drive to their respective sponsor sites. That could be a small discount at the sponsor's store, or payment per click of the sponsor's link in the video description.

X, the term you're looking for here is conflict of interest. You think that payments, in whatever form they're made, are causing a conflict of interest when reviewers give, in your opinion, an unrealistically rosy view of certain products so that the sponsorship, and payments continue.

That's a mindset you probably cannot prove.

Not being jaded and all but a review of a G1 TF KO set was released a few years ago in youtube. Given that the reviewer in question is more or less a veteran in the business (not a newbee reviewer).When you review the KO, shouldn't by any chance also review the original in comparison with the KO and tell your viewers what to and not to expect?

Well the review of the product was just about the KO.

If I were the "reviewer", I wouldn't put out a review unless I have a comparison piece with the original set. I did post on the review site that those tiny details were not mentioned btw.

What would you guys do if you were in the same situation? Regardless whether it was a sponsored release or not (heck, the KO gestalt sets are equally expensive) so either it came from his own pocket or was a sample for review but imho, the should have been a comparison with the original.

The reviewer btw WAS NOT Optibotimus. So feel free to guess who it was.........

Not that I'm too dependent on them (word of mouth aside from the reviewers) help me in chosing. Warden for instance, well the online review and the posters in seibertron plus my "desire" for the fig help me decide (and thank Primus it was not for naught) as the fig, Warden IS worth it's price.

FP, well, already biased towards them. No need to convince me to get their product (cash on hand IS the factor in this regard)

If I were a reviewer I'd review a KO without a companion piece. Something you can't afford it,.

But I'd make a pretty poor reviewer. I'm pretty easy on figures and my thoughts don't run much deeper than "it's good. I like it."

Gauntlet101010 wrote:If I were a reviewer I'd review a KO without a companion piece. Something you can't afford it,.

But I'd make a pretty poor reviewer. I'm pretty easy on figures and my thoughts don't run much deeper than "it's good. I like it."

That's my point Gauntlet as a given I'm sure the reviewer would have had connections in the collector TF community to maybe borrow a sample?

That being said, maybe I'm a bit OCD , if I've risen to the point of being an uber reviewer like those guys we have had discussions on, it would have gone further to help collectors avoid getting shafted with those KOs. I'd buy a KO so long as I know it's one. Not the other way around.

The hobby is expensive as it is, kind of a pain that your hard earned cash is wasted on a KO.

fenrir72 wrote:

Gauntlet101010 wrote:If I were a reviewer I'd review a KO without a companion piece. Something you can't afford it,.

But I'd make a pretty poor reviewer. I'm pretty easy on figures and my thoughts don't run much deeper than "it's good. I like it."

That's my point Gauntlet as a given I'm sure the reviewer would have had connections in the collector TF community to maybe borrow a sample?

That being said, maybe I'm a bit OCD , if I've risen to the point of being an uber reviewer like those guys we have had discussions on, it would have gone further to help collectors avoid getting shafted with those KOs. I'd buy a KO so long as I know it's one. Not the other way around.

The hobby is expensive as it is, kind of a pain that your hard earned cash is wasted on a KO.

Well, that's a different kind of thing: telling people how to spot a KO.

On one hand I can see what you're saying. I'd want to know how a KO holds next to the original too. But, on the other hand, do you really need the original to judge something based on it's own merits? You don't need the original to tell if something has shoddy joints, subpar plastic, and terrible paint apps. And if it holds up on it's own merits then that's how it is.

I'll grant you the review would be more complete with a comparison. But it doesn't have to have one IMO.

megatronus wrote:This is a very silly argument. But that's kind of why I like it.



I doubt reviewers routinely get "free" figures from sponsors as compensation. When peaugh receives those "unexpected" figures or sets in the mail, it is often implied that they came directly from the manufacturer. He just seems to have built some good relationships with the 3Ps. I'd be hard pressed to find the exact videos, but Optibotimus has said in a few of his reviews that he pays for his figures.

I'm inclined to think that these guys get compensated in a way that is proportional to the traffic they drive to their respective sponsor sites. That could be a small discount at the sponsor's store, or payment per click of the sponsor's link in the video description.

X, the term you're looking for here is conflict of interest. You think that payments, in whatever form they're made, are causing a conflict of interest when reviewers give, in your opinion, an unrealistically rosy view of certain products so that the sponsorship, and payments continue.

That's a mindset you probably cannot prove.

You are 100% correct on where I stand. Its conflict of interest. Im only going of instinct by the way they speak. Seeing facial gestures as they speak would be of great help, lol. I know I cant really prove it without an actual confession which will never happen. But I think ive made a good case that the motive is there.

Gauntlet101010 wrote:

Rated X wrote:You do know every review that I review is ten minutes of my life Ill never get back...


Moving on to the god of Transformers himself...the almighty Peaugh

I actually found him to be a bit tougher on figures to the point where I felt he was speaking as a fan rather than on behalf of TF Source.

But after scouring through his youtube channel I found this:



He admits his friend in California found them in a store and sent them to him. He said they cost 3 bucks each in the store. But that didn't stop him from adding a TF Source plug to the video even though they were not free samples. Now if that isn't a "company guy" than what is ?

On a side note, was this review even necessary ? He has several reviews for rescue bots and other kiddie stuff. How many parents buy their toddlers 3 dollar toys from TF Source and are in need of a review to make a decision ? This is pure overkill.

Then I scrolled down further through his uploads and found this...



Why does this video even exist ? Fine I admit this video has no TF Source plug. But it is proof that Peaugh will review any piece of crap he can get his hands on for free. That doesn't say much for someone people claim is providing a service to the fandom. This guy would try to sell ice cubes to eskimos.

Remember when I said in the KFC Transistor thread that the reviewer community is becoming a circus ? These videos are a perfect example.

And for the record, I'm not stating that these particular videos show Peaugh as being untrustworthy or biased. They just set the tone for an opinion I wouldn't even bother to even listen to.

Geez, who made you the god of Transformers reviews, deciding who should post what on their own channel?

Like I said BBTS / TFSource / whoever is buying advertising space at the beginning of his reviews and a link. That doesn't mean he gets that toy for free. That means he, more than likely, gets money. That's what sponsorship is. Being paid to post advertising. It's not "review the toys we give you" (although he most likely will because he's into reviews).

Why can't he just upload what he wants to? He's not a corporation. He's a guy with a popular channel who got lucky. By posting these two videos you're just showing that he can post what he likes and not necessarily any free thing he's given. If just accepting money for advertising makes you a "company man" then your criteria for that is very low. That's like saying the owner of a builder works for Lexus because they post an ad on a billboard on top of his building. Or that a site works for Google because they use Google's adsense on their site.

And that still doesn't prove he's lying to shill product. You still haven't proven that his reviews aren't trustworthy.

So far we have:
- Optibotomus just being too easy on TF for your liking and
- Preaugh posting two reviews of toys he wasn't given for free (thusly demonstrating that he doesn't just review things he's given).

So far I am less than impressed with the body of evidence presented here. Who else is there to discuss?

Im not gonna be able to contribute much to this thread all week from my work where YouTube videos are blocked from streaming plus Im busy as hell anyways.

But honestly, I believe we see things from two totally different perspectives. You say innocent until proven guilty and I say the writings on the wall. Other than a rare blooper like the kronos video, I cant prove malicious intent to you because youre not thinking on the same mindset as I am. You want me to find physical proof when the majority of the proof out there is non tangible and based on the veiwers interpretation of the reviewers dialect. Or in lamens terms, I cant yank their thoughts out of their heads and splatter them on the wall for you to see. As we move foward Ill do my best to keep this thread alive with examples. I will also point out other things I dislike about sponsored reviewers that I believe take away from their credibility. Some will be d on my personal opinions which may differ from others here. Some people will trust the talking pillow pet. Some peolle will have faith in the guy who brags openly about having an outdoor shed full of toys he cant remember. At the end of the day its up to the viewer to decide how seriously to take these guys. Im only offering a possible scenario. Megatronus nailed it when he said "conflict of interest" is what im referring to.

Why not just go to the source by emailing or messaging some of these Video Reviewers and ask them some questions. They are a honest, friendly bunch and will be truthful with their answers.

X, I'm not asking you to be a mind reader, I'm asking you to show me videos where reviewers are going easy on sucky toys. Just show me the goods! If the reviewers are so biased it should be easy to find, but it's the one thing you haven't done.

Is it a conflict of interest? Maybe a bit, but since you can't show me that reviewers are going easy on their figures I can't say that it's a problem.

Edit:
I mean, if you're having such a hard time finding an example to show me then I don't think there's a problem at all. You're just suspicious. If there's a problem with the system then it should be easy to find, so despite it making you queasy I think you just have a personal problem with things being affiliated with corporations in general.

Rated X wrote:You do know every review that I review is ten minutes of my life Ill never get back...


Moving on to the god of Transformers himself...the almighty Peaugh

I actually found him to be a bit tougher on figures to the point where I felt he was speaking as a fan rather than on behalf of TF Source.

But after scouring through his youtube channel I found this:



He admits his friend in California found them in a store and sent them to him. He said they cost 3 bucks each in the store. But that didn't stop him from adding a TF Source plug to the video even though they were not free samples. Now if that isn't a "company guy" than what is ?

On a side note, was this review even necessary ? He has several reviews for rescue bots and other kiddie stuff. How many parents buy their toddlers 3 dollar toys from TF Source and are in need of a review to make a decision ? This is pure overkill.

Then I scrolled down further through his uploads and found this...



Why does this video even exist ? Fine I admit this video has no TF Source plug. But it is proof that Peaugh will review any piece of crap he can get his hands on for free. That doesn't say much for someone people claim is providing a service to the fandom. This guy would try to sell ice cubes to eskimos.

Remember when I said in the KFC Transistor thread that the reviewer community is becoming a circus ? These videos are a perfect example.

And for the record, I'm not stating that these particular videos show Peaugh as being untrustworthy or biased. They just set the tone for an opinion I wouldn't even bother to even listen to.

you may hate this X but thanks for the link as I didn't even know he did a review of them and yes I wanted to see how they transformed to see if they would be a good fit for my 2yr old nephew and guess what I bought at least 4 of them. I guess in a way collectors do go online for reviews for some of these oddities

Here's some evidence of contrasting reviews, firstly Generations Springer by Peaugh

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_U3-hd1kMg

"there are some gaps in the front but thats OK" No Peaugh its not, its not OK when parts that are designed to tab together dont tab together.

And here Generations Springer by Optibotimus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8ABNJt3HuI

Optibotimus (as far as I can see) is the only you tube reviewer to highlight this anoyance, now I know this was only in issue in some items but its quite clear that Peaugh's copy had the same fault yet he just skims over it.

Had I watched Optobotimus's review I may not have payed full price for the figure, as it stands I bought this based on Peahug's review which resulted in me reciving a Springer that refused to tab together fresh out of the box.

My advice is watch as many reviews as you can sponserd or other wise that way you will get a pretty rounded opinion.

Some of the ones I rely on are:

optibotimus: Chronos review aside he is generally on the level.

emgo316: Generally on the level and has a nice tounge in cheek style.

Benscollectable: Probably the most honest out the, not afraid to call a figure a POS, he does some good KO reviews too.

baltmatrix: Again pretty honest, highlighted the Springer problem, but put it down to him being "sucky" at the transformation, I think he's being a little generous there but he highlights issue all the same.

Well, at least you have a video to support your assertion.

Not sure if it's the best example. He does gloss over the problem ... in a figure widely loved and praised. Still, at least it's something to support the assertion that he, at least, goes easy on problems.

Of course that's just one video from him.

Personally I don't care if a reviewer is sponsored or not.

I like to find reviewers for anything (movies, figures, whatever) that seem to like what I like most of the time.

I'll watch reviews for stuff I own just to see if the reviewer generally thinks the same as I did about it. If so, then that is a reviewer I'll go back to when I am trying to decide on a purchase.

Gauntlet101010 wrote:Well, at least you have a video to support your assertion.

Not sure if it's the best example. He does gloss over the problem ... in a figure widely loved and praised. Still, at least it's something to support the assertion that he, at least, goes easy on problems.

Of course that's just one video from him.

It is just one video but it's kind of representative of his style, problems are generally ignored. Whereas optibotimus devotes quite bit of attention to problems, even in the Kronos review, he shows obvious flaws and in good detail.

leakin' lubricant wrote:

Gauntlet101010 wrote:Well, at least you have a video to support your assertion.

Not sure if it's the best example. He does gloss over the problem ... in a figure widely loved and praised. Still, at least it's something to support the assertion that he, at least, goes easy on problems.

Of course that's just one video from him.

It is just one video but it's kind of representative of his style, problems are generally ignored. Whereas optibotimus devotes quite bit of attention to problems, even in the Kronos review, he shows obvious flaws and in good detail.

Optibotimus and ballmatrix (the former I praised in his youtube video for the Daca Skyfire) and the latter, convinced me about Warden. Sponsored but excellent reviewers.

You got peaugh's "glossing over" that little "detail" right on the money. It's like not seeing the elephant in the room.

One video isn't a pattern, however. And, more to the point, if he goes too easy on vids it may just be because he himself is an easy reviewer and not because he's sponsored and feels the need to please his sponsor by selling toys (which is what X asserts).

Still, I'll put his Springer review in the "proof" column.

All I know is, no one has ever offered me free toys for my reviews! (Although, personally, I doubt any of the big stores such as BBTS or TFSource know I exist, beyond being a potential customer.) But, in a strange world where I did suddenly start receiving free stuff in the mail:

-If it wasn't a Transformer or related third party toy, I'd thank the company that sent it, but inform them that it wasn't something that would fit in with the theme of my review website
-I'd be happy to plug which ever specific retailer sent me the toy, but...
-If I think it is crap, I'll say so. I'd still say, "but if you disagree, and think you might like it, buy it at such and such! Thanks to them for making this review possible!" But you'd know if I think that that particular figure is crap!

Of course, I'm sure someone might find cause to then accuse me of selling out or having bias. Selling out? Sure, why not? I'll shill a store that sends me free toys. (As long, that is, that I feel it a reputable store!) But the only bias I'd ever have is, "Is this a figure I like?"

So... Anyone want to send me free figures?