False Advertizing?

[stiltman]

Do you think this is false advertizing?

An online retailer is promoting some media that is Pioneer certified.
The media has 3-4 different media codes and 2 different rated speeds (4X and 8X)

They have a link to the certification document that was issued by Pioneer (Nov. 2002) on each of the media pages (4X and 8X), so if you go to the 8X media page, click on the link to the certificate, it takes you to the same document the 4X pages links have. All links go to a document certifying 4X media only and a specific disc number.

I myself consider this to be false advertizing to say the 8X media is certified by Pioneer. What do you think?


I emailed the retailer a couple of times, but never heard back from them.

[Bodyslide]

Seems the retailer should either update the statement to include the new media, or just have the 4x media listed as being Pioneer Certified, but not have the 8x rating going to an inacurrate document.

[888888]

Hmmm... I wonder which retailer this is?

Probably the same one that doesn't tell you how much shipping costs until after you have figured out what you want to buy and are less likely to be discouraged by a high shipping rate.

Anyway, the date of issue by Pioneer I see is October 16, 2003, not 2002.

As for if it is false advertising, no I don't think so. They are saying that the brand Prodisc has had one of their disc types certified by Pioneer, not all their media. If only their 4x DVD-R media was really certified, that media was still made by Prodisc which still lends something to their reputation. Considering that their discs have different codes (MCC) than they did then (ProdiscS03) and considering all the possible factors that could have changed, I would be surprised if even their 4x media is the same that was certified.

Besides, if anyone cares the least bit about this Pioneer certification, they will read it and understand that it might be an exaggeration anyway.

[stiltman]

Hmmm... I wonder which retailer this is?

Probably the same one that doesn't tell you how much shipping costs until after you have figured out what you want to buy and are less likely to be discouraged by a high shipping rate.

Anyway, the date of issue by Pioneer I see is October 16, 2003, not 2002.

As for if it is false advertising, no I don't think so. They are saying that the brand Prodisc has had one of their disc types certified by Pioneer, not all their media. If only their 4x DVD-R media was really certified, that media was still made by Prodisc which still lends something to their reputation. Considering that their discs have different codes (MCC) than they did then (ProdiscS03) and considering all the possible factors that could have changed, I would be surprised if even their 4x media is the same that was certified.

Besides, if anyone cares the least bit about this Pioneer certification, they will read it and understand that it might be an exaggeration anyway.

Guess your the only one.
Personally, I think it should only be listed for the 4X media since that is what the document refers too. Then on the 8X media the can say the 4X media has been certified by Pioneer.

BTW, you're right about the issuing date, I was looking at the document date at the very bottom

[chas0039]

I spoke with Pioneer quality control early on when Prodisc started playing fast and loose with their shipment codes. They said they would look into it and so far they appear to have done nothing. Apparently Pioneer Certification is a little less reputible than the Good Housekeeping Seal. Either that or the standards are low enough so that anything they have shipped so far meets the cut. In any case I only order TY now. As the guys at Rima said, "no surprises".

[lordsmurf]

I don't think Pioneer does "ratings" anymore, anyway.

[Capmaster]

It sounds like they're trying to "dazzle with bullshit" :P