|
I am posting this link not because it is an informative article, but because it is so UNinformative, AND wrong. In fact this is one of the MOST USELESS articles I've ever seen on mattresses. Check it out (it's short!): http://shopping.yahoo.com/articles/yshoppingarticles/361/8-mattress-mysteries/ They're still going with the "it'll last 8 - 10 years" myth. Yeah, right... I always felt CR was very spotty in their info. They never seem to do a good job of covering ALL the major brands when they do a review and I always wondered if there might be some kind of politics or payola involved as to why some manufacturers who have great products don't get included in their reviews. This article is exactly why I take everything they say with a grain of salt. Yet, admittedly, I do occasionally go to them for their opinions anyway. This message was modified Apr 23, 2010 by jimsocal
|
I didn't find the article completely useless, but definitely agree that more in-depth would have been better, and one can only dream about a full-fledged expose'... I personally gave up my CR subscription when two of the major kitchen appliances I purchased for my remodel, upon CR's recommendation, turned out to be really disappointing (I've learned that it's nearly impossible to find an affordable dishwasher that's motor/pump aren't mostly plastic!) I don't think anything made by any large corp. is made to last - it's all crap nowadays. Such an expensive waste of our resources.  |
|
eagle2 wrote: Hi Jim and Sandman: I was a subscriber to Consumers Reports for well over 40 years. I finally let the disgust, that had been building up for at least a decade, over come me and I canceled my subscription. The final straw was an article they did on very expensive ( hundred thousand dollar plus) automobiles. I wrote the managing director of the company and ask him what he thought he was doing with money that subscribers were donating to them to investigate things that were really important to said subscribers. Needless to say his response was totally inadequate. So I quit. Jim's, and your remarks Sandman, are indicative of what is wrong with this once fine organization. Like I just said I subscribed for over 40 years and felt that they were a very valuable asset to someone living on a limited income. But they went south, like so many companies do. |
|
jimsocal wrote: While I, too, agree - I am also a former longtime subscriber - I want to point out how much the internet has changed such things. When I first subscribed to CR back in the 80s we did not have a wealth of information at our fingertips. Nearly everything published in a CR article was eye opening, valuable information hard to find elsewhere. Now the bar has been raised. It is possible that the quality of the research is nearly the same but we are so spoiled by information that it just no longer seems like much. Linda |
|
I've read articles pointing out discrepancies in Consumer Reports' ratings. They will give a product a low rating, and then a month or two later, the rating for that exact same model will jump significantly. Could it be the low rating is to get the manufacturer's attention, and then the rating changes based on something that CU receives in return? Of course, those articles provide no proof of such graft, but CU also fails to give any alternate explaination themselves. Personally, I now ignore them based on the fact that I've been burned on a number of purchases made on their recommendations. True, these could be anomalies, but if they are batting less than 50%, why should I continue to listen to them? |
|
Since this is a mattress forum I will make this final contribution to this thread. Many, many, years ago Consumers Reports had really excellent in-depth reports on the quality of merchandise. I remember the last really good report on mattress that they did. They really went after the mattresses. They had a huge motorized roller that they used to exercise the mattresses for an extended period of time. Then they would cut the mattress open and see what had occurred within the mattress. This roller was to simulate many years of normal usage. When you finished with this article you really felt like their ratings were correct. You felt like you could go out and purchase their top-rated mattresses with confidence. This is no longer so. Now they act like they are afraid to do this kind of research for fear of being criticized. As has been stated in this thread, the bar has been raised, now people can come to "what's the best mattress.com" and read other people's actual experiences and compare and contrast those experiences with articles from Consumers Reports. I'm not sure what kind of corporate culture exists within CR now, but needless to say I don't think they want to compete, like so many companies they just want to "sell". I'll make this final comment. For many years I defended Consumers Reports as I really felt they were a fine organization. Many other people told about getting disgusted with them and quitting for various reasons. I always felt like these folks were to critical. Now I have joined their ranks. After 40+ years of being a subscriber I must confess it makes me sad. They had become such a regular part of my life ( I kept old issues for many years so that I could go back and find articles) that when I left it kind of felt like losing a member of the family. This thread has brought back many old memories. This message was modified Apr 24, 2010 by eagle2
|
|
Wow, a lot of CR bashing in this thread so I'll offer a contrasting opinion. I too have had a subscription for over 25 years and still look forward to the issues. As far as selling reviews, it's hard to make that complaint stick since they don't take advertising, always buy all the products on the open market anonymously, and will sue advertisers who reference the reviews. Quality of the reviews is debateable, and the need for CR has certainly changed with the internet. I love the factual information in CR, but I'd probably put more weight on the results of a product with 25+ reviews on Amazon. My main complaint about CR would be their left leaning editorial.
|
|
CR's statement that mattresses still last 8-10 years shows how irrelevant their opinion is. It's like they're just recycling info from years ago instead of actually doing any current testing or research. There is NO WAY the average S Co. mattress will last more than 4-5 years, especially if it's a pillow top which I'd guess the vast majority are. So many people are buying pillowtops and hating them after only a few months, so their "mild" warning about pillowtops compressing is not enough warning imho. This is why I had to start this thread. It's just absolute BS and it shows the CR did not do any real homework for this article on mattresses, but rather, just regurgitated the old party line from years ago. Not to even mention latex as an option is doing a disservice to their subscribers and readers of the article. I am not pro-100%-latex mattresses myself, I prefer latex or HR or whatever over springs. However, not to even mention Latex as an alternative shows that they are behind the times. |
|
You're right, CR tested memory foam, but not latex - what's with that? Also they had 50 staff people try the beds, but they might have been changing them so frequently that people didn't have time to evauluate them. They also casually mentioned 'depressions' with thick pillow tops and that manufactures have changed designs so beds aren't flipped any more -- but these statements should have been with HUGE warnings & they should have blasted the manufacturers for significantly shortening the life of mattresses. One useful thing about the article was their readers survey of satisfaction with the various manufacturers. I wish we'd known that S&F was at the bottom of the list before we bought our last bed. |