[ams6110]

Well? What's wrong with Consumer Reports? Sign up, pay for it, done.

Why does valuable information that takes a lot of time and expense to produce need to be free? That attitude is the root of most of what's wrong with the web today.

s/internet/web/

[derefr]

Most people are only going to ever buy one or two things that are important enough to them to need to be thoroughly comparison-shopped. If there was a Consumer Reports-alike where I could pay "per report" (like paying for investment news "per report"), I'd pay. But I wouldn't subscribe.

[jperras]

> If there was a Consumer Reports-alike where I could pay "per report" (like paying for investment news "per report"), I'd pay. But I wouldn't subscribe.

I subscribed to CR for a month when I was shopping for a new dishwasher. After I found what I wanted, I unsubscribed. That seems functionally equivalent to what you want, at least when applied to large ticket items where the cost of a month of subscription is a small percentage of the total cost of the purchase being made.

[justin66]

> If there was a Consumer Reports-alike where I could pay "per report" (like paying for investment news "per report"), I'd pay. But I wouldn't subscribe.

This is a strange comparison. I'm amazed there are any worthwhile investment news items available to purchase for less than the cost of an annual CR Digital subscription ($35). It's so cheap it's hardly worth worrying about if you're going to use it at all.

[joegahona]

Does Consumer Reports provide any value over Wirecutter? The latter is free and has negligible display advertising.

[onethree]

I stopped trusting the wire cutter after they shifted from recommending a $40 knife to a $145 as their best chefs knife for most people

[TeMPOraL]

As a layman in the space of knives, why did that cause you to stop trusting them?

In other areas, I found that up until a point, the price is generally correlated with quality. I had great success in avoiding frustration and waste by following the saw "I'm too poor to buy cheap".

[michaelt]

Sure, up until a point. If you read a review of the best SUVs and it said the $200k Bentley Bentayga was better than the $27k Toyota RAV4 you would probably say "Well, I'm sure it has its benefits, but I doubt it's better value for money"

As someone who uses a $20 knife, I feel the same way about a $145 knife.

[crankylinuxuser]

One of the most dangerous things in a kitchen is a dull knife. (And mandolins without guards!)

Dull knives require multiple times of stress, and sawing motion to abrade through the thing. And with more power means accidents are easier and more damaging.

A proper chefs knife (I prefer santokus) should be professionally sharpened, honed before each use, and will be razor sharp. I only need to lay the knife on a steak and pull, and it cuts right through. The cheap $20 knives are usually serrated (nigh unsharpenable) and double as hacksaws.

[TheShrug]

I agree with the GP in that the average at home chef doesn't need anything more expensive than a $45 Victorinox 8" chef knife. With moderate to proper care, you can keep a cheaper knife very sharp.

While you may be statistically correct, anecdotally my family has hurt themselves way more often with sharp knives than we have with dull knives. It's probably due to being used to a dull knife before switching to a sharp one, but I still can't stand by that adage from our history of personal use at home!

[ekovarski]

I think AmazonBasic sells a set for $30ish and its more than adequate for most home users or beginners. Does it compare to my Wusthof set? No but paired with a good knife sharpener it will last you a very long time. Unless cooking is a passion of yours, I wouldn't recommend anyone go out and spend hundreds of dollars on a set of high end knifes --- the knives won't turn you into a Michelin starred chef.

[ekovarski]

After nearly 20 hours of research, checking reviews across two years, and consulting with numerous culinary professionals and chefs, I agree with you.

Their electronic reviews are fine but their other categories leave a lot to be desired. The whole point of a good review site is to find the low/medium priced item that is more than adequate for the task. Recommending a Mac or Wusthof knife is a safe bet that most won't challenge - I want them to find me the needle in the hay stack.

[joegahona]

"Shifting" from cheap to expensive could be nefarious for sure... that said, I have a $150 Global chef knife and don't regret it one bit! (Bought on a recommendation from a culinary friend, not Wirecutter...)

[michaelt]

There are claims [1] that Wirecutter prefers things they can get kickbacks/affiliate links for [1].

Of course, wirecutter claims that's not the case.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16729408

[ABCLAW]

I don't have an issue with consumer reports. I used to browse their material occasionally.

However, most of the time, I spend very little and make few purchases. The ones that are low-value - lets say vegetable peelers and compressed air canisters - I don't need ratings for. The large ones (Appliances, Misc Electronics, Suits, Cars, etc.) I research online anyways.

So if I'm not using their product 95% of the time, their subscription business model doesn't line up with my expected use-case. So I don't use it. I would love to pay for better rating data and don't mind shelling out for information, but I do need to pay for it when I'm consuming it, not in a prophylactic manner.

[TylerE]

Consumer Reports tends to rate heavily on things I don't much care about, like initial reliability (which for most modern products is more than fine) while almost ignoring things like ACTUAL performance and ergonomics.

[bluedino]

They're also biased. If they generally give the winning nod to brand X, even if brand Y comes ou with a superior product, they'll still give brand X the nod.

It works the same way when brand X has sub-par releases.

[ekovarski]

Many libraries subscribe to Consumer Reports and even offer free access via their portal to it. I've used it countless of times to find reviews online.

[MagicPropmaker]

Consumer reports is good; the problem is even the people on HN don't want to pay for any content anywhere.

[kiba]

I have a problem with being nickeled and dimed with every subscription service.

[jhall1468]

The whole reason it's subscription is to avoid advertisers. CR doesn't have to answer to manufacturers so their reviews are very reliable.

[ams6110]

CR is $7.95 a month. Sign up for a month when you're making a major purchase. If it saves even 10 minutes of research time, that's value enough for me.

[URSpider94]

Subscription fees are literally the only source of income for Consumer’s Union, the parent company of Consumer Reports. They don’t take ads, they don’t take payments for reviews, and they don’t sell rights to use their ratings in advertising (they sue companies who reference their CR ratings in any kind of marketing material).