James Huang is Heading to Substack

[ltwtsculler91]

Originally Posted by .RJ

And then how does he pay for his house? Good grief nothing is good enough for some people.

If you like his stuff and find value in the writing then send him a few bucks, otherwise dont. I pay for a few things that are similar and I think its a great model to get impartial viewpoints and money that goes to the writers and not to an advertising budget.

I'm one who's sets up many of these reviews in my own industry, and what I appreciate about James Huang is that he tends to look at products and how they'd fit the target audience. I've read a few of his reviews where it's clear that he isn't the biggest fan of the product for his use, but he uses some empathy and experience to examine who may appreciate it's merits. To me that's the mark of a good reviewer and why his content has value beyond him just getting free gear to try.

[.RJ]

Originally Posted by ltwtsculler91

I'm one who's sets up many of these reviews in my own industry, and what I appreciate about James Huang is that he tends to look at products and how they'd fit the target audience. I've read a few of his reviews where it's clear that he isn't the biggest fan of the product for his use, but he uses some empathy and experience to examine who may appreciate it's merits. To me that's the mark of a good reviewer and why his content has value beyond him just getting free gear to try.

I think thats a good take.

There's very few truly bad bike products available these days, and just about everyone in the bike industry making bike stuff is really passionate about bike riding, and the stuff they are making. Some stuff may miss the mark but he's usually pretty clear about why and what other stuff may be better for what he sees the intended use.

[NHAero]

I miss his writing on Escape, and I signed up for free at his Substack. However, the proliferation of Substacks could start to add up in monthly cost, and time spent too.

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by jimoots

I.e the hand that is feeding him is the reader.

Not entirely.

Bikes, and cycling products these days are ridiculously expensive. If someone wants to review a large volume of bikes and bike stuff, those products need to come to the reviewer either free or very low cost.

Trips to mfg's headquarters, proving grounds, product launches etc. in Mallorca, Colorado, and other exotic locations are generally comped these days to "influencers" and reviewers. The world has changed. Big marketing budgets are not necessarily spent on pro sponsorships, TV commercials, billboards and the like, some of that budget is shifted to getting clicks on Instagram, youtube, and getting product in the hands of people who get eyeballs.

I'm not saying anything whatsoever about James himself, it's just my general sentiment.

For example: some shoetubers recently got invited to Adidas HQ in Germany to run the Berlin Marathon in not-yet-released Adidas supershoes.

After Adidas foot the bill to fly them to Germany, put them up in a hotel, let them use the hospitatility tent at the marathon, gave them brand new supershoes ahead of the market - are they really going to trash the shoe if it sucks? Are they really going to say, no-thanks, I'm more comfortable over the 26.2 in my Asics supershoes?

No f-n way am I convinced you get a true unbiased review under those conditions, whether they admit it to us or themsellves, there is bias baked in there.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

No f-n way am I convinced you get a true unbiased review under those conditions, whether they admit it to us or themsellves, there is bias baked in there.

I'm sure there's some bias involved, though at least in the past, Mr. Huang has shown himself capable of being pretty harsh in his reviews when deserving. https://escapecollective.com/the-sup...t-a-good-bike/

But ultimately, I think it's less important that the reviewer be unbiased than the reviewer be informative. I tend to look at bike reviews the same way I look at other pieces of opinion journalism, with two key questions. 1) did the writer demonstrate that he or she had done any meaningful research in putting the piece together? 2) even if I don't agree with the opinion, did I still learn something?

If I can answer yes to both of those questions, it's worth my time, even with any biases.

[.RJ]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

After Adidas foot the bill to fly them to Germany, put them up in a hotel, let them use the hospitatility tent at the marathon, gave them brand new supershoes ahead of the market - are they really going to trash the shoe if it sucks?

I'll flip this one around.

Are there any products out there getting glowing reviews from these free products, promos and trips that arent deserving of it? I'm not saying we shouldnt all be deeply skeptical of media and reviews and where the money is coming from, but, this seems like an awful cynical take that everyone in the media is being paid to write nice things.

[November Dave]

This forum loves to use the words marketing and lying interchangeably, with which I take great exception as a marketing director, but my own misgivings aside this situation shows the error in conflating the two.

James has spent some decades building up a brand. His brand is about his brusqueness ("Angry Asian"), but more importantly it's about his knowledge and honesty. He's just like us, but he's got years of paying close attention to these things, knows the broad market, has access to product managers and others who can explain why and how various decisions got made, and has access to the products to be able to give them a thorough first hand going through. He's always been known as thorough, and willing to question or critique things others might not.

Brand is about a lot of things, but one of its most important roles is letting you know what to expect and then delivering that - aka credibility. It's also vulnerability to failing on that first role. Credibility is hard won and easily lost. James has built a brand that may lead a critical number of people to believe that he's an effective advocate for them. If he does it all well, he can provide value by directing people to products that fit their needs really well, and avoid the monetary and opportunity cost and hassle of buying things which aren't well suited to them.

There's unquestionably not enough money in this for James to buy product at retail.

It's definitely worth saying that at least at one point during his tenure at EC, he was working part time at Whole Foods. This got mentioned during a podcast where he had brought the snacks. None of this bike stuff is anything resembling lucrative.

[unterhausen]

I think the people that get paid because of substack have to maintain a presence on free social media. I see this all the time on twitter. Those people are probably working at Trader Joe's though.

[Xrslug]

I’ll add that another thing I appreciate about James and that differentiates him for me from others in the space is that he has formal higher education in an area of engineering that is relevant to modern cycling products (I believe materials engineering?). To my mind it gives him a leg up when talking to a company’s product designers, engineers, etc. about carbon this or that, whereas most reviewers will just parrot “high modulus blah blah” and have no idea what any of it means beyond what I already know from a Google search.

[litcrazy]

I think he has a niche for sure. He's famous for skewering products he thinks are bad and really praising what he believes in.

Because of his establihsed reputation, I imagine brands will continue to send him product to review because of the high upside.

I imagine it would be hard to replicate his place in the industry. For a long time now, it has felt like Outside Magazine only posted positive reviews. I imagine they just didn't review a lot of weaker products to protect their reputation, but it still made it hard to take their reviews and product guides as seriously.

To the question of citing positive reviews of bad products, I do think that the old review model and new influencer model definitely feels aimed at exagerating the need for the new, often a micro levels. Surely 32mm tires feel a lot better than 23s, but when they argue about 1mm or tire or rim width and how it's revolutionized their experience, I do find myself suspicious.
Much press feels like a hype machine focused more on products than experiences. Surely, I indulge in reading it way too much.

Originally Posted by November Dave

This forum loves to use the words marketing and lying interchangeably, with which I take great exception as a marketing director, but my own misgivings aside this situation shows the error in conflating the two.

James has spent some decades building up a brand. His brand is about his brusqueness ("Angry Asian"), but more importantly it's about his knowledge and honesty. He's just like us, but he's got years of paying close attention to these things, knows the broad market, has access to product managers and others who can explain why and how various decisions got made, and has access to the products to be able to give them a thorough first hand going through. He's always been known as thorough, and willing to question or critique things others might not.

Brand is about a lot of things, but one of its most important roles is letting you know what to expect and then delivering that - aka credibility. It's also vulnerability to failing on that first role. Credibility is hard won and easily lost. James has built a brand that may lead a critical number of people to believe that he's an effective advocate for them. If he does it all well, he can provide value by directing people to products that fit their needs really well, and avoid the monetary and opportunity cost and hassle of buying things which aren't well suited to them.

There's unquestionably not enough money in this for James to buy product at retail.

It's definitely worth saying that at least at one point during his tenure at EC, he was working part time at Whole Foods. This got mentioned during a podcast where he had brought the snacks. None of this bike stuff is anything resembling lucrative.

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by litcrazy

it has felt like Outside Magazine only posted positive reviews. .

Thread drift, but Outside has become little more than a People magazine at this point.

On their instagram today they had an article on which coffee mug is best at keeping liquids hot.

What a joke. Remember when they would send journalist on epic adventures to the corners of the world? Yea, now they test coffee mugs for clicky content.

[mstateglfr]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

Not entirely.

Bikes, and cycling products these days are ridiculously expensive. If someone wants to review a large volume of bikes and bike stuff, those products need to come to the reviewer either free or very low cost.

Trips to mfg's headquarters, proving grounds, product launches etc. in Mallorca, Colorado, and other exotic locations are generally comped these days to "influencers" and reviewers. The world has changed. Big marketing budgets are not necessarily spent on pro sponsorships, TV commercials, billboards and the like, some of that budget is shifted to getting clicks on Instagram, youtube, and getting product in the hands of people who get eyeballs.

I'm not saying anything whatsoever about James himself, it's just my general sentiment.

For example: some shoetubers recently got invited to Adidas HQ in Germany to run the Berlin Marathon in not-yet-released Adidas supershoes.

After Adidas foot the bill to fly them to Germany, put them up in a hotel, let them use the hospitatility tent at the marathon, gave them brand new supershoes ahead of the market - are they really going to trash the shoe if it sucks? Are they really going to say, no-thanks, I'm more comfortable over the 26.2 in my Asics supershoes?

No f-n way am I convinced you get a true unbiased review under those conditions, whether they admit it to us or themsellves, there is bias baked in there.

And yet Huang has ripped on various new products, models, features, etc for decades now.
He has consistently trashed sunglasses, helmets, bikes, bike design, wheels, tires, shoes, tools and more, when he has seen fit to do so.

Maybe there is still some bias baked in, despite his willingness to criticize.
...maybe there is some bias baked into your view too.

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by mstateglfr

...maybe there is some bias baked into your view too.

never claimed otherwise!

[jimoots]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

Not entirely.

Bikes, and cycling products these days are ridiculously expensive. If someone wants to review a large volume of bikes and bike stuff, those products need to come to the reviewer either free or very low cost.

Trips to mfg's headquarters, proving grounds, product launches etc. in Mallorca, Colorado, and other exotic locations are generally comped these days to "influencers" and reviewers. The world has changed. Big marketing budgets are not necessarily spent on pro sponsorships, TV commercials, billboards and the like, some of that budget is shifted to getting clicks on Instagram, youtube, and getting product in the hands of people who get eyeballs.

I'm not saying anything whatsoever about James himself, it's just my general sentiment.

For example: some shoetubers recently got invited to Adidas HQ in Germany to run the Berlin Marathon in not-yet-released Adidas supershoes.

After Adidas foot the bill to fly them to Germany, put them up in a hotel, let them use the hospitatility tent at the marathon, gave them brand new supershoes ahead of the market - are they really going to trash the shoe if it sucks? Are they really going to say, no-thanks, I'm more comfortable over the 26.2 in my Asics supershoes?

No f-n way am I convinced you get a true unbiased review under those conditions, whether they admit it to us or themsellves, there is bias baked in there.

Maybe you are right... but are you familiar with James Huang's work?

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by jimoots

Maybe you are right... but are you familiar with James Huang's work?

Not at all. For sure I do not want to cast shade on James in any way. Just a general observation.