Monta price drop

[dnslater]

I personally didn't write a biased review and Ginault never asked me to do anything but an "honest review".
There was absolutely zero pressure to be more favorable in exchange for the discount.

I understand, I just think there would be inherent bias if something is received at half off.

[Ryeguy]

I knew bringing up Ginault as a comparison was probably a bad move on my part.

My intention was to point out the observation of how "brand A" introduced their model at a highly discounted price in order to gain market acceptance versus "brand B" introducing their model at a premium price despite being largely unknown. Discounting for early adopters seems like an ultimately better strategy than discounting unsold stock.

As for marketing, I think both brands were highly suspect in their ad copy.

Finally, while the idea of a review for a discount thing may seem distasteful, I was never asked for a positive review and was never pressured to even give one. I bet I could've blown it off with no recourse.

Personally, I find much of the current micro / blogger relationships to be too insidious. I'm also a cynical SOB who reads nearly every review with a big grain of salt. The old forum "pump and dump" strategy leads me to look at nearly every review with an eye toward bias. No one wants to call a watch they just received (either at retail, discount, or free) a turd.

[JP Chestnut]

Ginault:http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/1 ... .1050.0400
Monta: http://www8.gsb.columbia.edu/researchar ... icles/3918

One realized they're a social network (eg watch forums) based product. The other thought they were a real brand. Both of their pricing policies make sense given those assumptions.