Man, I don't know where to start with this one. What a jerk! And this comment got me laughing:

Quote:
the reason they get good reviews is because magazines like stereophile are paid to give favorable reveiws.
Having followed these sorts of magazines over the years, I can tell you they don't automatically give great reviews to advertisers. And even if they did, Quad and Focal both advertise and have been reviewed in the same mags! What a stupid statement.

I'm not sure how the salesman could have thought this was a very good sales strategy. As gonk noted, you don't try to woo a prospective cutomer to your product line by bad mouthing what they already own.

First, being both a former high-end audio salesman and a fellow Outlaw, I can tell you first-hand that their gear is absolutely great for the money.

Second, your story remind me of a time a guy I worked with had a customer who came in armed with Consumer Reports magazine. Unforuntately, CR's conclusion was all the gear pretty much sounded the same and to focus on features. They also focused exclusively on cheap, big-box-store gear. None of which we carried.

You could see the frustration level rising between the salesman and the customer. Finally, our sales guy points at the magazine and says "this is all junk!" At which point the customer turned on his heel and stormed out the door.

Frankly, I could not blame him.
_________________________
Outlaw 970
McCormack DNA-125 (mains), Emotiva LPA-1 (surrounds)
Quad 11L (F&C) Wharfedale (R) LFM1 (Sub) w/ SMS-1
Squeezebox -> Behringer SRC2496 -> Musiland MD10 DAC
Sota Sapphire; Marantz 10B;
Video: Hitachi 42HDS52A; Oppo 971H
System Pics