Coverage?

How do they work out the "this tin will cover xxx sq/mtrs "?

Presumably done by a marketing graduate who has never used the product?

Treated my 'stage one' small deck with Wilkinson's Decking Oil & Protector which claimed to cover "up to 28 sq/mtrs".

Only just covered a 2.1 x 4.2 deck. Which I make 8.8 sq/mtrs. Less than one third of the coverage claimed.

Same thing happens with paint dunnit?

Also. Has anyone else noticed this "up to 100%" bollox on cosmetics & hair product adverts?

"Up to 100% dandruff removed". "Up to 100% grey coverage".

Reply to
The Medway Handyman
Loading thread data ...

Except that a lot of these claims are written using that strange new-fangled "word", upto. Especially when see instore.

Reply to
polygonum

They paint a non-porous surface as thinly as humanly possible. You are unlikely to be able to reproduce that coverage outside a laboratory.

Colin Bignell

Reply to
Nightjar

What's this new-fangled word "instore"?

Reply to
GB

Like poxy ADSL "upto 8 Meg" provided broadband;(..

About time the ASA or Ofcock did something about that!..

Reply to
tony sayer

Ah yes, the problem is the up to of course. the same can be said of broadband, where up to seems to be a prerequisite in almost every speed category.

I see the EU is making all car manufacturers say that the mpl figure may not be attainable in normal use. To me this seems to be completely daft, as if they are all done under the best possible conditions, where is the point of quoting it at all?

Brian

Reply to
Brian Gaff

well they are allegedly.

But the art of being a media man is to create an impression without (usually*) actually lying.

*political parties and lobby groups and religious organisations are allowed to lie, however. Beleifs and opinions unsubstantiated by facts are perfectly legal. As a trip to any religious or green energy LOBBY site will reveal.
Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

It's to allow you to compare one car to another. It isn't possible to say what an individual car will do MPG wise as it depends on the way it is driven, traffic and weather conditions, etc.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

I had my car fail an MOT from a Garage which had just been bought by Halfords. Failed because the headlights weren't bright enough and easily solved.

But 3 months earlier I had just changed the bulbs for Halford's "super Brilliance" 72% more brilliant bulbs. They offered a range of "extra brilliance", "super brilliance", "ultra brilliance". I thought that maybe the ultra might dazzle other drivers. Turns out that halfords own standards fail their own bulbs.

Moral of the story is this new fangled word "brilliance" it has no scientific meaning and says nothing. "brightness" on the other hand can be proven and the vendor sued if the claims are not accurate.

Ever wondered how chicken and mushroom "flavour" pot noodle is suitable for vegetarians?

Reply to
hewhowalksamongus

To give you a comparison between measurements made under consistent condition.

MBQ

Reply to
Man at B&Q

You mean the same tin will only cover one wall when applied by brush, but 3 walls, the floor and the cat when it's dropped from a ladder?

Owain

Reply to
Owain

As far as I know, the intensity isn't tested. Only the beam setting and pattern to make sure they don't dazzle. However, a faulty bulb or reflector can cause the pattern to be wrong resulting in a fail.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

60% of customers recommend this product (sample size 3)
Reply to
alan

On 19/04/2013 11:29, hewhowalksamongus wrote: ...

No reason to wonder if you know that 'X flavour' on a foodstuff simply means it tastes like X, whereas 'X flavoured' means that it must contain X.

Colin Bignell

Reply to
Nightjar

But the comparison is only valid in respect of the test. That would not matter if the test was a valid proxy for real world conditions. But the manufacturer optimises the performance for the test even though that may result in a worse performance outside of test conditions.

Reply to
djc

Commercial pressures mean that they more or less *have* to go all out to optimise for the test as set (well, depending in the market they're aiming at). To not try would hurt their sales when buyers inevitably end up comparing carbon emissions, road tax etc.

Tim

Reply to
Tim+

If they all do that, it still makes for a valid comparison. Or at least between similar cars.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

That one really winds me up! A 'survey' of less that 150 people - who were probably pre chosen - and asked leading questions.

Grrrrrr!

Reply to
The Medway Handyman

My ISP have changed the claims in their adverts, supposedly to comply with the new rules, something like if they say "up to X mbps" then Y% of customers have to be able to get Z% of the quoted figure, can't remember what X and Y are set at though ...

Reply to
Andy Burns

These samples quoted on (normally) beauty / shampoo / cosmetics ads are piss poor really, especially when you realise that they are taken from replies to questionaires in beauty magazines....only those hoping to win something are likely to reply and have probably never even tried half the products mentioned but tick 'brilliant' to everything, the ones who have actually tried it and ticked 's**te' say far more than the rest

Reply to
Phil L

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.