The Good, The Bad & The Ugly (knives that is)

I've been away for a couple of days, and do appreciate the response to my post. I cannot speak for the other mags, only for KI, but I feel the other editors just may agree with some of what I will now say. I do not produce articles on any custom maker or factory on the basis that they will advertise with us. Period. I do not purchase articles from freelance writers if they only evaluate knives that are produced by advertisers. We feature a wide variety of knives, and hope the makers/factories will advertise in the future. Example: I ran a MicroTech knife on the cover of a special we produced almost two years ago, and featured their knives in an article. Dexter Ewing is doing some tests for me right now on other MicroTech knives. Tony has NOT agreed to give us one inch of advertising. So much for whoring ourselves.

Every magazine only has so many editorial pages to work with. I believe all of us in the cutlery publishing business do our best to bring our readers the latest and best in cutlery, all the time. Some of you people seem to think factories and custom makers flood us with knives for evaluation purposes. You're wrong. Normally, we have to ask for knives. In the custom camp knife articles we ran, as explained, we tortured some high-dollar knives and told it like it was. Some guys didn't like it. Tough! Only one has advertised since then, of about 12 that were tested.

We (editors) can't hold everyone's hands and guide them through life. Myself, I will not test a knife that's a failure, and give the guy a couple pages of "ink" just to tell the reader the knife is a disaster. On the other hand, if a knife gets dull fast, I'll say so. If the handle is too slippery, I'll express this opinion, too. And so on. But, what some of you people don't understand, if a publisher permits someone to knock a product, even if what the writer says is true, we can face a very expensive lawsuit because what we had to say is our viewpoint, our opinion, and not necessarily the truth in a court of law. Again, consumers have to take some responsibility, too. Magazines only have so much editorial space, and I am sure all editors feel it's best used to publicize knives that are worthy of being published. Now if some people can't handle that, then there's nothing more I can add to this subject. In closing, like I've said before, I make knives every once in awhile, and I've visited many of the knife factories, including Boker in Germany and Klotzli in Switzerland, so I'll have that much more knowledge about knives and how they're made, just so I may become a better reporter. Bud

 

[Drew]

Bud et al,

I feel badly if my comments have been misconstrued. I don't imply that you bow down to your advertisers, but recognize your need to continue to have them in your magazines & there is some degree of conflict there (direct or indirect). I certaintly don't want you to waste valuable print space to review a bad or inferior knife. All I would ask is a simple 2 line, 1 column listing (perhaps quarterly) of each knife received & returned as not worthy of review & why (inferior workmanship, poor edge, poor materials, lousy fit & finish etc.). This would greatly help us your readers (all 30,000 of us!) to better evaluate our next purchase.

Thanks for your consideration.

 

[Strider]

Drew has a pretty good idea. A hit list so that we at least have some prior knowledge and can then make the final decision as to the worth of a piece one might be interested in purchasing. Just another bit of good info to have.
Bob

 

Drew & Bob (Strider Knives), Thanks for the reply. I don't want to drag this on, and please do not think I'm hammering on anyone for their opionions. This is why I stated earlier to take what I may say with a grain of salt (but not in an open wound). It's difficult to say things in writing, because words are expressionless. Speaking for KI, we don't have a lot of knives pouring in for evaluation. Dexter Ewing, for example, doesn't have an open invitation to evaluate all the knives he would like to for us. He tells me which knives he has an opportunity to evaluate, and I say yes or no, on the basis of who the person/company is and whether they've been featured recently. By this I mean if one company has already had a knife or two evaluated in the current issue, I won't want something on them again for awhile. It's not too often that we have to return knives that are of poor construction, etc. I formerly edited a couple of firearms magazines, and I was testing a copy of the 1911 Colt, and the new gun was so loose smoke leaked out of every gap upon firing. I returned it and never heard from the people again. Again, had I listed the gun as of poor quality, we could have been sued. Let's face it, juries believe in the "deep pockets" policy, and award damages to the people who can't take care of themselves. I stopped smoking when I was 16 (back in 1946), and I called cigarettes "cancer sticks" and "coffin nails" then, as did Tennessee Ernie Ford in a famous song. Yet people have been suing, and winning, against the tobacco people. What I am trying to say is this, most people who make junk knives don't offer them to magazine writers. They sell their stuff in hardware and sporting goods stores, not cutlery shops. In closing, as much as I would like to inform readers of poor knives, we don't have that much of an opportunity. I will pass your opinions on to the writers who do write for me, and remember them myself and take them to heart. I don't ignore readers, especially those who want to see better articles in magazines. Bud

 

[Strider]

Bud
Thanks for the reply. I just want to clarify that although I use the monicker Strider I am not the same gentleman who makes the knives. Just wanted to clear that up.
Bob

 

[Drew]

Bud,

Thanks. 'nuff said I agree. An interesting & enlightening forum, all the better for it.