Rule 1: The Chief is always right. Rule 3: in the improbable event that you disagree with the Chief, see rule 1. Secret handshake stuff!
We are talking about an archery company here, one that is trying to protect it's business interests. First off, it ain't that important, because well, it is about shooting a darn bow. Second, it is Matthew's right to protect it's business interests and it sounds like the small town company didn't understand the potential ramifications of sanctioning a bow testing and evaluation test.
Well, none of the other bow companies pulled his contract for participating in the comparison trials as far as has been revealed here. One important thing to note is that the review wasn't a review and comparison of companies entire product lines but the flagship bows alone. My Hoyt Element G3 is far from the highest rated IBO bow out there or that even Hoyt sells but it's their flagship bow. This dealer in no way said that Mathews, as a company or their entire line, was collectively in last place behind all the others. Had this dealer done such a review and placed Mathews on top overall....would Mathews still be upset...no, they would have been ecstatic and badmouthing any company that pulled their dealership from this store, lol. Yes they had every right to pull their own products from a dealer, their product, their prerogative. I still think it was petty and poorly played from any standpoint..moral, business or otherwise.
Dan is spot on. As someone that has spent years working at a bow shop, unless you have been in the business you don't know what's on the dealer agreement. They can pull the dealership at any point. You also don't know what else was going on between this dealer and Mathews previous to this test. Maybe when you walk in the store there are two Mathews bows on the shelf, and 50 BowTechs. Maybe the shops sales have suffered for a period of time already and have fallen short for other similar sized markets. Maybe there were problems with credit terms between the dealer and Mathews and bills weren't being paid. Maybe there is a dealer that is the same size just down the road that wants to focus on Mathews specifically and would kill for the chance to get the dealership. I'd be absolutely shocked if this dealer was moving a ton of Mathews with no issues and they let him go. Typically manufacturers really take care of their shops that move product and Mathews is among the best when it comes to taking care of their dealers. Quite frankly - none of us here know what really happened, but it's pretty common in the archery business for a manufacturer to pull a protected dealer territory if the dealer isn't producing. That's just business and when you provide a dealer with a protected territory they need to produce or you move on. For what it's worth, I've been on BowTech's Corporate Staff and Pro Staff for several years. If anyone was going to be biased on something like this it would be me. I still don't see that Mathews did anything wrong here and also feel it's really unprofessional for this shop to publicize this........it comes across as sour grapes. Something else was going on here and there is only one side to the story. I'm shocked more people haven't assumed this.
Mathews is free to give a press release any time they feel like doing so.... It's no big deal, Mathews is happy...the shop has no shortage of great bows to sell. I'm not going to assume the shop dealer was doing anything wrong like not paying bills. Obviously he felt it was unjustified to pull the license so he did what he did and Mathews did what they did. He can go and sell bows that ranked in the top of his tests and Mathews can go back to making bows with ugly waffle iron crosshatch patterns that underperform compared to others, lol.
I dislike their waffle iron patterns yes...that's my opinion. The underperforming part is per the experts test results and conclusion so take it for what it's worth. It's worth about as much as a Mathews owners biased opinion in favor of the company they prefer. My opinion in this matter isn't skewed at all, I shoot what I prefer. Mathews makes fine bows as far as I'm concerned as do about every other company out there today and I have stated that in multiple posts since I joined this forum. That doesn't mean I like the aesthetics of their designs, performance wise...I'll leave up to the experts to review and elaborate upon.
Maybe the small town bow company wasn't offloading that many Matthews bows and wanted a little press for itself before it started going into business with another bow company.
I don't see why Mathews would care what is posted here or AT. These forums are frequented by such a small percentage of archers, maybe 2% if that. Just because you come here every day doesn't mean the majority of archers do. A few months ago I asked all the bow hunters I knew (maybe 15) if they go to an archery form. NOT ONE said they did. No one heard of AT or here. We (the forum users) are a minority by far as it goes to archers. And most of us are brand loyal and would not change. Just read any thread here. Someone will post "My brand is best". Or "Your brand is outdated". I makes me wonder when I read...."I read in the internet that *********** so I will never buy one of their brand". It is a bad as the people who will not even give a product a try because "it doesn't look cool". With that said, I think Hoyts Carbon bows are ugly. BUT, when i was looking for a new bow I shot one anyway.
Oh I doubt Mathews cares what is posted here for the most part, I don't think they are too worried about this issue to even give a statement, I never said they should...I said they could. I said that in regards to what was said earlier about folks should assume there is more to the story...I'm sure there is and if at such time Mathews deems pertinent to elaborate on their side of it they are free to do so. But when I hear Mathews make a claim about listening to feedback in every aspect of their business I'll always think back to this affair. Aesthetics is a funny part of human nature, some of us like different Genras of music, art, etc...product design is no different. I think the G3's are innovative and beautiful but that's my personal opinion...I can see why someone would have the opposite opinion and that's their right. Personally what others find attractive doesn't matter to me but what I like. I have shot and did shoot Mathews bows before buying my G3 too, what I found visually appealing was the last of my concerns but was one of my concerns, as it always is to anyone. I have shot Mathews both ofthe last two times I bought a new bow and found elements I didn't think were up to par with the others, to a point I decided against them. My latest purchase came down to being between the G3, Spyder Turbo and the Bowtech Experience, Assassin, Mathews MR5 MR6, Monster Safari(couldn't shoot this one) and the PSE Omen...PSE was ruled out first, Mathews was ruled out second for me due to vibration, noise and draw cycle at the draw weight I wanted followed by the BT Assassin. Came down to the G3, Spyder Turbo and the BT Experience. I couldn't tell any difference between the G3 and Spyder and the Experience to be honest, they all felt the same pretty much but I happened to like the carbon riser design so I went there.
Don't you go and start making all sorts of sense ...you will ruin my opinion of you :D I am shocked by the liberal mindset of some of you ... Go Mathews! Go Bowtech! Go Hoyt! Go all companies that allow other business to exist and in some cases, make their owners very wealthy ...
While I don't like what happened, business is business, and sometimes you gotta give a little to get a little. Props to the dealer for being honest, but it cost him a profitable deal. This is why society is pretty cut throat now. Instead of standing by your word, companies now just eliminate the naysayers. lol
