Vespertine Vesp Reflective Mini-Waistcoat

nbrus wrote:

Yes, these things are subjective and not empirical. Maybe, giving readers the ability to assign ratings would help, as when averaged out you reach a common consensus that will more accurately reflect a products true value for most users. Personal opinion would then become an insignificant factor in the ratings.

Why don't they just stop getting any products in to review and let a bunch of people who have never seen/felt/used them to rate them on the basis of a couple of images on a website?!

As for your other assertions that Rapha or Porsche could never be good value, all you've shown is that you're too blinkered to ever think that anybody else could have a different (yet valid) view to yours. How many Porsches have you driven? How many Rapha products have you used? What's your disposable income level and how inclined are you to spend it on luxury items for yourself? What right do you have to pass judgement on how others spend their cash?

How about you tell us what your 'thing' is so we can pick holes in your choices? Posh wine? Nice suits? Hi-fi? Good steak? Enthusiasts of anything will find small but satisfying reasons to buy/use nice stuff, and it's really not your place to decide whether, for example, I can tell (and indeed appreciate) the difference between a M&S suit, and a Ted Baker suit.

notfastenough wrote:

Why don't they just stop getting any products in to review and let a bunch of people who have never seen/felt/used them to rate them on the basis of a couple of images on a website?!

Do you think the reviewer rated the item referred to here based on how it looks on her having used it? It seems more likely to have been rated based on a couple of images on a website. It's also still valid to rate an item without having seen/felt/used it ... I am pretty certain that I would look daft wearing a pair of yellow underpants on my head, and don't believe I need to see/feel/use said item to give a valid rating. Being more sensible, reading a review and looking at the pictures provides quite a lot of information ... more than enough to form an opinion. In fact, this is the very purpose of a review ... to help potential buyers (whom have never seen/felt/used a product) form an opinion on whether a product meets their expectations.

notfastenough wrote:

As for your other assertions that Rapha or Porsche could never be good value, all you've shown is that you're too blinkered to ever think that anybody else could have a different (yet valid) view to yours. How many Porsches have you driven? How many Rapha products have you used? What's your disposable income level and how inclined are you to spend it on luxury items for yourself? What right do you have to pass judgement on how others spend their cash?

Firstly, all views are valid, though I doubt you would find most people would agree with your opinion that Rapha or Porsche are good value brands. Their target customers are relatively well off and value is not a primary concern. Maybe you are just making a token point here? I could care less for how you choose to spend your cash. I like Porsche, and would consider buying one if I was affluent enough. Rapha make one or two items I quite like, but I'm not sure I would buy them, even if I could justify the cost.

notfastenough wrote:

How about you tell us what your 'thing' is so we can pick holes in your choices? Posh wine? Nice suits? Hi-fi? Good steak? Enthusiasts of anything will find small but satisfying reasons to buy/use nice stuff, and it's really not your place to decide whether, for example, I can tell (and indeed appreciate) the difference between a M&S suit, and a Ted Baker suit.

Ok, my 'thing' is this Vespertine Hi-Viz vest ... lets see you pick holes in it. If you have an opinion you are free to share it ... if you don't agree with my opinion you are free to share yours ... everyone has an opinion, and you are free to ignore someone elses if you so choose. The thing is, most of us like to have other peoples opinion to balance our own, and I am happy to hear yours. If you like wearing Ted Baker suits, then fine ... doesn't mean I have to like Ted Baker suits.

People will always decide their own price point, but people want to know how good it is to the person whose price point it has met.

You make the comment about elitist costs. Lets take a waterproof jacket: they are the most technical of items. It has a very specific job, to keep the rider dry in wet conditions. Cheaper brands will make a cheap version - most likely it will not have breathable qualities and the rider will boil in the bag, and may not have other functions that cause water to invade over time. It will most likely score lowly because it does not meet its functional use. The manufacturer will likely have other products which are progressively better, perhaps scoring 8/10. They may even have created one which is stylish too (maybe scoring highly).
But here is where the elitist brand comes in, they will also create products which they believe are stylish with a low price point, hoping to entice people who will maybe offset the technical aspects of a better jacket (cheaper brand), and their 'more stylish' product. This cheap version may score poorly because it doesn't meet the technical aspects, but unlikely to be any better than the cheaper brand at their low price point. The point being that the technical aspects are similar and so it's the individuals price point that makes their decision. The review lets people know how much that product met expectation.
Of course their are always intangible (non-technical) elements about the way an item may make you feel, which are more likely on less technical items, such as jerseys. Though usually a higher price means better fit and shape, and better finishing. Though every now and again an expensive brand will produce a product which easily falls apart, and a cheaper brand will create something iconic and useful at a remarkable price, but each manufacturer knows the market they are aiming for.
This isn't to make the 'elistist' brand happy, but common sense. But as its a subjective process one man's 5/10 maybe another ones 7/10. Plus of course you may end up getting the garment/bike/tool that chooses to spontaneously combust. It's just a means of a guide, as these things are subjective and not empirical.

Dave Atkinson wrote:

no. i'm not saying that. i'm saying that the more expensive something is relative to the other products available, the less value is a factor in your decision to buy it. so something cheap can get a good mark, and something expensive can get a good mark. really. it's not that hard.

if you just want to look at some stars and get the thing with the most stars, and not actually read the reviews, then there's plenty of places you can go. that's not really the purpose of this site.

Last question... so if I am reading a review of two jackets one cheaper than the other, the cheaper one is better in every way, both get identical ratings ... how can I tell that the cheaper jacket is the best one to buy and not waste my cash on the other?

Dave Atkinson wrote:

the more expensive something is relative to the other products available, the less value is a factor in your decision to buy it. so it's ridiculous to mark down, for example, an £8k Viner bike that Mat thought was the best thing he's ever ridden, just because the majority of people couldn't afford it.

you think it looks silly. it isn't designed to appeal to you, and clearly it doesn't. but your views on what it looks like are largely irrelevant, since you're not the target buyer.

I take your point Dave. Just to be clear, are you saying that the review ratings are to be taken in isolation and not to be used to compare similar products for the purpose of informing buying decisions?

nbrus wrote:

Shouldn't review ratings reflect the expected opinion of the majority of users?

Not really, the whole point of a review, whether it be online, in a magazine, on tv or asking a mate down the pub is to get the opinion of someone who has used said product to assist with making your own decision.

Leonie has tested this, she'd happily pay 45 quid for it and she has said why in her review.

If you were thinking of buying it hopefully the review has helped you make your decision either way. If you weren't, well what difference does it make

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

Poor Leonie is not a natural clothes horse, but this outfit does nothing for her (except improve visibility - not something she should wish for while wearing this garment).

I checked out the website and can't for the life of me see where their market comes from. There aren't too many rich, blind, and fashion foolish cyclists out there.....

Perhaps I'm reading it wrong, but there seems something slightly hurtful towards the author about this comment?

Wasn't meant to be hurtful, but to say that this does not look good on Leonie - she's not a 5ft 11in lollipop favoured by the fashion magazines. The website that this is marketed on does not show it in any better light.

Leonie's body (or indeed that of the model wearing it for the photo) is simply not up for discussion here Colin. Keep your unpleasant opinions to yourself. If you find the garment unattractive, that's another matter altogether.

Unless of course you fancy sending in a Lycra clad pic of yourself for our critical appraisal?

Sarah Barth wrote:

Leonie's body (or indeed that of the model wearing it for the photo) is simply not up for discussion here Colin. Keep your unpleasant opinions to yourself. If you find the garment unattractive, that's another matter altogether.

Unless of course you fancy sending in a Lycra clad pic of yourself for our critical appraisal?

You really wouldn't want to see it.

BigDummy wrote:

£20 for a fluo vest, or £45 for a fashion-forward sexy traffic-warden outfit?

Taken in that context, this garment doesn't seem so bad, though its still a bit pricey. Maybe a review of the matching knickers is next up.

Wesselwookie wrote:

£45 for a high vis vest you are kidding

I had to check the calendar to see if it was April 1