Ever since TTAC launched its campaign re: fair disclosure for automotive press junkets and cars, the autoblogosphere’s been pretty good about revealing car manufacturers’ contributions to their cause. Of course, we’d like the sites to be more forthcoming about the exact goodies disbursed. Edmunds attended a manufacturer-sponsored event, to which selected members of the press were invited, to facilitate this report” is both condescending and vague (hotels? meals? flights? accommodations?). But hey, at least our colleagues have stepped-up, uh, towards the plate. Unfortunately, today’s Autoblog Toyota Landcruiser vs. Hummer H2 comparo leaves that particular ethical space blank. We tried reading between the lines… “In this blogger’s version of the debrief after a Moons Over My Hammy [ED: by who?], the finding was that the H2 and the Landcruiser will go anywhere you point them. Period. Anyone who says otherwise is, quite simply, incorrect. The only difference is in how they do it.” I’m thinking HUMMER paid the freight, with Autoblog being nice to Toyota ’cause it’s the better rock climber and Autoblog can’t say that. But I could be wrong. So c’mon Autoblog. You did the mucho macho rock climbing thing. Now man-up to who paid the bills, and what they covered.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
It sounds like ToMoCo and HUMMER each provided at least the vehicle + insurance, since the authors keep apologizing for damage.
“Because the ‘Cruiser is really sold for road duty, the running boards took a beating on the rocks (sorry, Toyota)..”
Not a word on travel, fuel, meals, number of $$ slid under the table per kind word written, etc.
I like the line about “off roader for idiots” though.
sean362880
:I like the line about “off roader for idiots” though
Why?
RF, With no facts you are just “assuming” it was Hummer?? Really? Why?
The facts are, they both did well, which is backed up by many other tests. Why the bias?
“I can feel my sperm count rising already. I think I’ll go impregnate my wife.”
Gold!
Isn’t the real question who cares about those vehicles? They are, and will be for some time, unsaleable.
Juniper:
I don’t think Toyota would bother putting a HUMMER up against a Land Cruiser. But HUMMER sure as Hell has something to prove.
Also, the way the article’s written just doesn’t pass the HUMMER is as good as Toyota (or vice versa) smell test. Again. I could be wrong. Of course, that possibility always exists…
Does anybody really desert crawl with a 50 grand rig, or are they like me with a $4000 10 yr old Jeep?
What’s up TTAC universe? Long time listener, first time caller. This is John Neff, the guy who runs Autoblog. I had to use my #2’s account to comment since my registration confirmation email did not arrive in a timely fashion. Just sent this email to Mr. Farago…
Mr. Farago,
The time you spend reporting on what Autoblog is doing rather than actually reporting on the auto industry is truly amazing to me, but TTAC is your website to do with as you please. We certainly don’t mind the fact that you’ve mentioned Autoblog and AutoblogGreen four times today alone (it’s 2:45 PM EST as I write this, so there’s a lot of day left), as well as the nine posts you published on our participation in the Audi Mileage Marathon over the past week. Who would complain about more inbound links? Maybe your readers who care less about what Autoblog is doing rather than staying on top of automotive news, but certainly not I.
I’m truly puzzled, however, about your latest post questioning who sponsored our comparison between the Toyota Land Cruiser and HUMMER H2. As you no doubt have noticed since you read Autoblog with a fine toothed comb, when we attend an event that’s sponsored by an automaker, we try to make it perfectly clear when we’ve accepted travel and/or lodging accommodations from an automaker. We certainly agree with you that readers should know when this takes place. I’m not going to claim we haven’t forgotten to add that qualification at the end of some posts in the past, but thankfully you’re there to remind us when we’ve missed it. (I just went back over all our posts for the Audi Mileage Marathon to make sure this was made clear in each one.)
In this case, however, your assumption that an automaker was involved in this comparison beyond supplying the two media vehicles for review is just plain wrong. Mr. Ramsey went on a camping trip with friends using the two media vehicles as transportation. Autoblog itself paid for the gas, Mr. Ramsey’s Moons Over My Hammy and any other camping food that was consumed by his party. The damage each vehicle suffered will likely be paid by each automaker’s insurance company, as is standard practice with most vehicles loaned to journalists. No automaker provided lodging, travel expenses, food or sponsored the weekend away in any other manner. I’m entirely baffled over what led you to believe this was the case and then compelled you to devote an entire post to your baseless assumption.
But hey, people make mistakes, and while you’ve never extended the courtesy to us, we’re happy to forgive you on this one.
Keep fighting the “good” fight.
John Neff
Editor in Chief | Autoblog.com
I’ve commented before that the reporting on Autoblog here is getting out of hand. I don’t go to Autoblog to begin with (nothing unique on there that I can’t read elsewhere on the billions of other autoblogging sites), but end up reading it by proxy from TTAC anyway…
While I guess it’s the nature of a Truth About Cars site to have some level of consistent watchdogging over information on other articles, it’s definitly overly-directed at Autoblog than any other source.
m-e-o-w !
Also, the way the article’s written just doesn’t pass the HUMMER is as good as Toyota (or vice versa) smell test.
I didn’t get this vibe. The writer complained about the Cruiser’s light steering and mentioned several times that it was built more for the highways than the HUMMER. The Cruiser was also the only vehicle to get stuck (briefly) in the sand, and neither could make it through the narrow rocky gultch. Honestly, from reading it, I thought the H2 would be declared the winner.
Should have stuck a G-wagen in the comparo…it’s a bit more narrow and just as tough. Hell, the AMG with side pipes may have moved some rocks too.
Quoth Homer: “D’oh!”
I love autoblog. I love this site too. Both should co-exist and play nice in the sandbox.
I would like to propose a “Camel Trophy” style competition each year for any SUV sold on the consumer market today. Divide them into classes of course and encourage them to be bone stock aside from tires and winches.
I’d probably also create a requirement that 10K of them be sold to be considered real production vehicles.
Then we’d figure out how true the statement that the Landcruiser is a road cruiser more than the Hummer which I would peg more of a road touring vehicle.
Yeah, let’s not spend too much time bashing the other auto-blogs, magazines aside from the times that these other news sources fail to offer objective information i.e. not a rehash of the manufacturer’s promotion materials…
Is the car news that slow lately that this is all there is to talk about?
Thanks for replying John.
I had to use my #2’s account to comment since my registration confirmation email did not arrive in a timely fashion.
Registration at TTAC is instantaneous. No confirmation email involved. Once you’re registered, just log in.
Who would complain about more inbound links?
I’m happy that you’re happy with our coverage of your site. We’re happy to provide it. Meta-blogging is a large part of what we do here at TTAC. Watching the defectives– I mean detectives. Just kidding. I admire and appreciate the hard work that you and your team do on an hourly basis.
Maybe your readers who care less about what Autoblog is doing rather than staying on top of automotive news, but certainly not I.
I beg to differ. First, our readers are interested in Autoblog. And Jalopnik. And Car and Driver. And others. A lot of our posts are “Inside Baseball” type stuff. Again, it’s a part of who we are and what we do.
Second, as careful readers will attest, TTAC stays right on top of the auto news. Despite our smaller staff and relatively limited resources, in many cases, we scoop AB by as much as a day. But again, I know how difficult it is feeding the insatiable internet maw.
In this case, however, your assumption that an automaker was involved in this comparison beyond supplying the two media vehicles for review is just plain wrong. Mr. Ramsey went on a camping trip with friends using the two media vehicles as transportation.
So now we know: the vehicles used to create this piece were provided by Toyota and HUMMER. This is the key fact omitted by your writer. I only hope that you will add it to the blog entry.
The damage each vehicle suffered will likely be paid by each automaker’s insurance company, as is standard practice with most vehicles loaned to journalists.
Thank you for illustrating the reason why we always include insurance in the list of manufacturer’s contributions. It can be a significant expense. And it influences the way a car is driven.
Given these previously undisclosed facts, I’m a little mystified how you reached the conclusion that “we got it wrong.”
In the interests of mutual respect, admiration and discussion, let me clarify our position on these matters.
TTAC believes that all publications should disclose any and all manufacturer’s contribution to a story, in a statement accompanying the relevant text. As opposed to, say, in the comments section of a rival publication.
No automaker provided lodging, travel expenses, food or sponsored the weekend away in any other manner. I’m entirely baffled over what led you to believe this was the case and then compelled you to devote an entire post to your baseless assumption.
I apologize for giving the impression that any manufacturer-related expenses may have been involved; you know, other than the vehicles themselves and their insurance. Of course, if you’d gone over my blog entry with a fine tooth comb, you’ll find I made no such allegation. I simply asked who sponsored the outing and what expenses were involved.
But hey, people make mistakes, and while you’ve never extended the courtesy to us, we’re happy to forgive you on this one.
What do you mean by “never extended the courtesy to us?” Are you trying to say we don’t cut AB any slack for its mistakes? Perhaps so. But then the question arises: why should we? I believe we are all better journalists for having our mistakes brought to our attention.
In that sense, I welcome your contribution here and look forward to debating these issues with you in the future. Or not, as you please.
I’ll add one more thing. If you are going to give Autoblog shit about how they get their cars, you should grow a pair and say how you get your cars and more importantly how many miles you put on the car.
Moons over My Hammy is a Denny’s sandwich.
indi500fan- Hummer owners do.
I’m not sure it matters how any blog gets its cars. I know they don’t go out and buy them. Only Consumer Reports does that. Doubt TTAC or AB has millions of dollars to throw around for cars.
Boston :
All TTAC asks is that journalists disclose manufacturers’ contributions to their editorial. Period.
We are not against manufacturers providing test cars, or publications that use them. BUT we do believe the information is vital to the readers’ ability to judge the fairness of the review.
FYI: We accept press cars, have a deal with CarMax, rely on friends and family and take dealer test drives. While I understand your desire to know the number of miles driven, I believe that the information is not important enough to warrant another box. But I will discuss it with the editors.
Juniper –
Because I’m pretty sure you’d have to be an idiot to buy a new one, or at least have too much money and poor judgement. Let’s review: $50k, great off-road, but no better than a $30k Jeep. $50k, loads of space on-road, but not as much as a $25k minivan, or nearly as comfortable. $50k, can tow a boat, but not as efficiently as a $25k pickup or with as much interior room as a $40k Suburban. $50k, 12 MPG, $4 gas. There’s a reason GM canceled the brand.
RF –
Speaking of which, when do we get a HUMMER review on TTAC? One last hump-of-your leg before the old dog gets sent to the vet for his last shot?
How do I get a couple SUV’s for my next camping trip? I’ll glady write a puff piece afterwards.
sean
I notice you had to use 4 different vehicles to compare to what a Hummer can do.
Plus not everyone with money is an idiot. Most are quite bright and worked their asses off to get it. It is a low volume specialty vehicle. Why can’t someone buy one without being called an idiot. Are Porsche owners idiots? I know most never use it for off road. but that doesn’t mean you can criticize the vehicle because of it.
No problem, Rob.
I’m happy that you’re happy with our coverage of your site.
I was being sarcastic.
I admire and appreciate the hard work that you and your team do on an hourly basis.
Do you honestly think we at Autoblog would get that impression given the way you treat us in your posts, which we honestly feel goes beyond merely policing the autoblogosphere and becomes self-aggrandizing at our expense?
As careful readers will attest, TTAC stays right on top of the auto news. Despite our smaller staff and relatively limited resources, in many cases, we scoop AB by as much as a day.
You could boast about scooping us even more if you took the time spent writing about Autoblog and used it to write more posts about the industry itself.
So now we know: the vehicles used to create this piece were provided by Toyota and HUMMER. This is the key fact omitted by your writer. I only hope that you will add it to the blog entry.
Media vehicles are usually referred to as such in our reviews, or “test vehicles” or “review vehicles”. We credit the reader with a powerful enough intellect to deduce from this that we don’t own them and they were loaned to us.
Thank you for illustrating the reason why we always include insurance in the list of manufacturer’s contribution. It can be a significant expense. And it influences the way a car is driven.
Where we differ here is in exactly how much information we believe our readers care to know and how explicit that information needs to be. We’re not trying to hide the fact that vehicles we review are loaned to us, and are surprised you’d think readers need that spelled out for them.
Given these previously undisclosed fact, I’m a little mystified how you reached the conclusion that “we got it wrong.”
You’ve changed the post since it was originally published, but the first draft only mentioned hotels, meals, flights and accommodations when criticizing Edmunds’ disclosure practice. Naturally, it appeared as if you were asking Autoblog to disclose whether HUMMER of Toyota provided any of these things for our comparison. You made no mention of disclosing that these vehicles were loaned to us and their insurance paid for by the manufacturers. Hence, from our perspective based on the original post you published, you got it wrong.
TTAC believes that all publications should disclose any and all manufacturer’s contribution to a story, in a statement accompanying the relevant text. As opposed to, say, in the comments section of a rival publication.
So are we and your readers to assume that either you or Jonny Lieberman own a 2009 Lamborghini Gallardo LP560-4? Because I see no text accompanying his review that explaining where he got it and therefore am left to question the objectivity of the review itself. https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009-lamborghini-gallardo-lp560-4-review/
I apologize for giving the impression that any other expenses were involved
Apology accepted.
I believe we are all better journalists for having our mistakes brought to our attention.
It’s not the fact that you bring mistakes to our attention that bothers us and apparently many of your readers, it’s the vigor with with you single out Autoblog and the tone in which you express them.
John Neff
Editor-in-Chief | Autoblog.com
Just received this email from Mr. Farago…
See? You /do /know how to be nasty! How about using a little of that /animus /on your own website for a change?
As for this evasive attempt at a rebuttal, please see the comment under yours. .
RF
Since this discussion has been out in the open so far, I’ll keep it that way and respond here.
Is your constant badgering of Autoblog an attempt to make us more “nasty” in our writing like you? If you don’t like our writing, then don’t read us. It’s a decision your readers seem perfectly capable of making, which they often remind you of in the comments of the many posts you publish taking Autoblog to task.
John Neff
Editor-in-Chief | Autoblog.com
John,
Thanks again for responding.
I was being sarcastic.
See? You DO know how to be nasty! How about using a little of that animus on your own website for a change?
Oh wait, I already wrote that. Well, anyway, I’ve learned not trust you with private communications. So be it. I stand by my assertion: Autoblog needs to grow a set. IMHO.
Do you honestly think we at Autoblog would get that impression [that I respect your hard work] given the way you treat us in your posts, which we honestly feel goes beyond merely policing the autoblogosphere and becomes self-aggrandizing at our expense?
Point taken. But it is true: I respect the hard work of all automotive journalists, from the sharpest Doberman to the meekest lap dog. If you catch my drift.
You could boast about scooping us even more if you took the time spent writing about Autoblog and used it to write more posts about the industry itself.
Again, point taken. In fact, if TTAC had AB’s resources, we’d spend a lot more time investigating actual honest-to-God news and less time regurgitating other people’s cheer leading and milquetoast PR re-writes. One day…
That said, when a piece of meat is tender, skewering it doesn’t tend to take too much time or effort. If you know what I mean.
Media vehicles are usually referred to as such in our reviews, or “test vehicles” or “review vehicles”. We credit the reader with a powerful enough intellect to deduce from this that we don’t own them and they were loaned to us.
Fair disclosure means stating a manufacturers’ contribution in plain sight. Or, in your case, plain site. (Sorry, coffee just kicked-in.) FYI: the words “test vehicle” and “review vehicle” appeared exactly no times in the article.
We’re not trying to hide the fact that vehicles we review are loaned to us, and are surprised you’d think readers need that spelled out for them.
What’s the big deal? Just a simple line at the bottom would suffice: “Test vehicles and insurance provided by Toyota and HUMMER.” Done. You’ve done it before. Why not in this case?
You’ve changed the post since it was originally published, but the first draft only mentioned hotels, meals, flights and accommodations when criticizing Edmunds’ disclosure practice.
This part of the post was not changed. (In fact, I don’t think any of it was.) You drew the inference, mistakenly.
So are we and your readers to assume that either you or Jonny Lieberman own a 2009 Lamborghini Gallardo LP560-4?
Oops! See what I mean about intra-site criticism strengthening us all? The appropriate disclaimer has been added.
It’s not the fact that you bring mistakes to our attention that bothers us and apparently many of your readers, it’s the vigor with with you single out Autoblog and the tone in which you express them.
It’s interesting that you believe our posts about Autoblog highlight “mistakes.” It’s not Autoblog’s facts that we question, but your singular inability to identify and/or confront the PR spin and general bullshit surrounding these facts. Not to put too fine a point on it, Autoblog consistently fails to report the truth.
TTAC’s editorial tone reflects our passion for telling the truth about cars, and our dismay at those websites comfortable perpetuating lies, disinformation and evasion, whether through malevolence, malfeasance or a general willingness to kow-tow to the conductors of the manufacturer-sponsored gravy train upon which they ride.
The funny thing is, I’d like to live in AB’s Pollyanna paradise, where nobody in Detroit’s trying to screw anyone and all cars are great. Where I can ring up Toyota and GM and summon a pair of SUVs for a test where they both win. But I don’t.
BTW: welcome to MY world.
Anyone else feel like they’re in the back seat, listening to mom and dad on Hour 43 of the Yearly Family Road Trip?
Incidentally, John, while it’s very refreshing to see AB get a little aggressive (SOMEone got a set of glowing TruckNutz!), posting a private communication to an open message board is a tactic generally reserved for ninth-grade girls on MySpace. If we’re really going to dive to that level, shouldn’t we take this to LiveJournal?
I’m not sure that I see who provided the cars or insurance on 5 of the 6 reviews on the TTAC home page.
Am I missing this info for the clubman, hilux, Carrera, Challenger or Traverse/Flex reviews?
Just saying.
JuniorMint :
Quit your bitching. Your Mom and I are just trying to have a little talk.
jbyrne :
We only put a statement up for press cars.
The funny thing is, I’d like to live in AB’s Pollyanna paradise, where nobody in Detroit’s trying to screw anyone and all cars are great.
Technically, all Detroit is trying to do is make money. Their failure to do so is only screwing them. :p
Where I can ring up Toyota and GM and summon a pair of SUVs for a test where they both win. But I don’t.
To be honest, Mr. Farago, you’re sort of sounding like a jealous child. So Autoblog and TTAC have different editorial aims; they’re different websites, so that’s okay. TTAC’s lack of major funding from a media conglomerate obsessed with ad revenue is part of what allows it to be what it is. Nothing on the internet has ever been solved via pissing contest, so why not be the bigger man and make amends?
Campisi:
Nothing on the internet has ever been solved via pissing contest, so why not be the bigger man and make amends?
Make amends for what?
Make amends for what?
I suppose “amends” was a poor choice of words. I simply meant that it’d be mighty fine of you to extend the olive branch to Autoblog so the both of you could put this impasse behind you and get back to your respective occupations.
Campisi :
I simply meant that it’d be mighty fine of you to extend the olive branch to Autoblog so the both of you could put this impasse behind you and get back to your respective occupations.
Problem: holding their feet to the fire is my occupation.
Problem: holding their feet to the fire is my occupation.
Oh; I thought the site aimed to focus on cars and car companies. Carry on then, I suppose.
RF > JN. That thing with “I’m posting something private publicly” was offensive. I was offended.
Comparing the Toyota and [non-caps] Hummer was stupid as no prospective buyer would ever do that.
Here is something else to argue about: why 560 > 430.
???
PS: Stop typing it as “HUMMER”. Seriously, stop that.
HUMMER still exists. It wasn’t canceled by GM
The problem with the internet is that nobody knows if you are a dog.
Campisi :
Oh; I thought the site aimed to focus on cars and car companies. Carry on then, I suppose.
Where on earth did you get that impression? TTAC is, and always has been, an industry watchdog, keeping a close eye on the other players in the internet-car-info business…and speaking up if it feels they are straying from the truth about cars. No one on this website has made suggestions to the contrary, and I cannot imagine how you came to your conclusion.
Now that you have realistic expectations about this website, I trust you won’t have any more objections…?
Where on earth did you get that impression?
The site is called The Truth About Cars. Forgive me for not assuming that gives license to have needless pissing contests between car sites. I’ll keep it in mind in the future.
Now that you have realistic expectations about this website, I trust you won’t have any more objections?
I wasn’t objecting. I was suggesting an end to the pointless arguing.
Robert,
I generally agree with your request for disclosure among publications. Not because I think it will reveal anything particularly interesting, but because it lets uninformed consumers know exactly what’s going on.
That said, the stuff that would be disclosed isn’t all that amazing to begin with. So what if the automaker pays for a journalist’s flight or accommodations? If the car company wasn’t picking up the bill, the writer’s employer would. So in the end, it makes little or no difference to the person who is writing the article, and therefore little or no difference to the article’s tone, content, and conclusions.
I’m sure there have been many instances of favorable articles written to appease a particular automaker, but it wasn’t because someone’s $200 flight got paid for. In the cases of biased reporting, that comes from the top down. In other words, the executives running the publication are meddling in the editorial side of things to keep big advertisers happy.
Maybe in the past journalists were showered with gifts and enjoyed exotic spa sessions in South Africa, but it’s definitely not like that today. I think it’s safe to say most full-time auto writers are rushing from event to event trying to meet deadlines and maintain their livelihood. Sleep depravation and hectic schedules are the norm. These guys are hardly living the easy life just because they’re not paying out of pocket for flights or gas. And like I said, if the car companies weren’t paying, you can be sure either the publications would pick up the tab, or the writers would be requiring higher pay to offset these costs.
In the end, it all cancels out.
like a kite:
I am agree with you on Hummer in all caps being obnoxious. I have never seen Cadillac written out in script when people mention it in articles.
I am enjoying the back and forth though. Never heard of Autoblog until I started following this site religiously for the past few months and never even bothered to look at it until about thirty seconds from now. My two cents added. Continue…
npbheights :
We follow the manufacturers’ typeface choices. HUMMER uses HUMMER not Hummer. BMW calls their brand MINI not Mini.
If you think HUMMER’s obnoxious, it’s not our fault. Nor is it a surprise.
The nice thing about TTAC is that it is RF’s site. Not some big corporation that is “guiding” him in what to say or how many readers/hits he needs to gather in a day.
RF can say or do as he pleases, and while he does greatly value the opinion of the B&B…you can also screw yourself if you so please.
AB is great for reading headlines, as I don’t have a subscription to Automotive News. But like Left Lane News, the comments are extremely immature and should be edited for content or have users banned for too much flaming (as is policy here).
Robert:
Lol, yea your right. I wasn’t blaming you, I was just expressing my animosity at the whole “HUMMER” concept. Wish I could edit my comments when using my iPhone though (not your fault either browser issue… I told you I was a religious reader) … Wanted to take out that extra “am” … wasn’t impressed by my first impression of autoblog.com by the way…
Well, good work irritating your apparent web-nemesis into responding on your site. I still think this whole, “Let’s get AB!” thing is unbelievably lame and not worth my time.
I have respect for what AB does and I appreciate the amount of content they provide. I don’t expect them to dig deep into Detroit’s systemic problems any more than I expect Nickelodeon to have an hourlong special on the credit crisis. They provide a different service to readers, it’s fluffier, to be sure, but it’s all car info for people who love cars.
I come to TTAC for incisive reviews, good commentary and business analysis. I go to AB when I want to see lots of pictures and read reviews of cars that TTAC hasn’t had a chance to drive yet. I go to Edmunds for videos and glossy-mag type features/shootouts. I go to Jalopnik for silliness and fun. All the main outlets offer something, and it’s irritating to see all this cross-blog sniping. Nobody expects PBS-level journalistic integrity and disclosure from AB, nor should we; it’s a different site. TTAC has established an admirable credo that RF and his crew must stick to, but there’s no reason to expect other sites to hold themselves to the same standard.
AB shouldn’t be immune from the questions TTAC asks of all the mainstream automotive news outlets, but I often find the constant digs (the whole “Make fun of AB’s coverage of the Audi Mileage Marathon” series, for example) to be completely overdone and rather unprofessional. There’s no reason to continue to beat them up just because they run a different site from TTAC.
TEXN3: Actually a large profit-focused company does own this site… not RF. But yeah, he does a good job of keeping it in line with his vision. That said, things have come a long way since his aversion to advertising of kind.
I guess I should have read the legal nonsense…still it’s not AOL.
Be it politicians or media outlets, John Stewart’s “The Daily Show” puts people who should know better in the spotlight when they need/deserve it. Their take on a local TV station’s attack on other local TV stations’ weather reporting had me in stitches.
So I ask, why not have a check like that for automotive media?
Believe it or not, there is more to the truth about cars (lower case) than the businesses, factories and finished goods.
So what if the automaker pays for a journalist’s flight or accommodations? If the car company wasn’t picking up the bill, the writer’s employer would. So in the end, it makes little or no difference to the person who is writing the article, and therefore little or no difference to the article’s tone, content, and conclusions.
There is a huge difference. My company limits the size of gifts and entertainment expenses that I receive to $100 or less. I am in a position to award tens of millions of dollars worth of contracts a year. The concern is that the gifts may influence my decision to award the contract to a particular vendor/consultant/contractor.
If you have a strong professional work ethic, then you would not be swayed by such gifts. I am one such person. However, there are many people who do not share the same ethical strength as I.
There is a huge difference. My company limits the size of gifts and entertainment expenses that I receive to $100 or less. I am in a position to award tens of millions of dollars worth of contracts a year. The concern is that the gifts may influence my decision to award the contract to a particular vendor/consultant/contractor.
I agree and my company has the same dollar limit. In my case, I am in no position to award anything. I am an engineer, but have no “decision making” power at any high level. I still cannot accept gifts over $100 without permission from corporate and they will want details.
The Hummer H2 is an SUV and SUT manufactured by General Motors under the Hummer brand. The Hummer H2 has a massive truck frame and has a wider-than-average track firm that may offer stability against overturning.
Hummer H2