Good thing the new product(s) are good enough to warrant extensive marketing and comparison tests. :dblthumb2:
-Got to dig sometimes to find out exactly who was entrusted to bring products
to consumers/customers via marketing/comparison tests.
-It seems that successful new product introductions would require marketers and sellers
to work together prior to products' launch.
-Marketers knows that specificity sells.
But sellers need much more than "features comparison" to be successful in having/(luring?)
consumers/customers to purchase these products over their competitors.
-Sellers, when "pitching" a product at launch-time, needs to have any
"audits" in-hand/at-the-ready then, more then any other time.
How is the consumer to know what entity is providing diagnostic-assessment-tools (d.a.t.

) to products' sellers?
Can there be true transparency in this auditing-process?
-Wouldn't a transparent-auditing-process, itself, build relationships that would keep the focus where it belongs:
On the consumer/customer...and not solely on the marketing-process of products?
-Instead of all the
"huff&fluff" of marketing and stating of comparison testing...
Couldn't the above actually be what sellers need from marketers?
This truer product image would surely then be more passable to potential consumers/cutomers.
-It may be what makes all the difference between a new product's smashing success...
Or its descent into obscurity.
-Some say it's grand to be a consumer in today's World-Wide economy.
Most marketers tend to agree.
Where sellers
"fit" as part of this equation often becomes the more controversial issue...IMHO.
NOTE:
Wait a minute
Nick...Did I agree, or disagree, with your above post?
:dunno:
Bob