Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: ASA is investigating 'Waters And Stanton PLC' and AirNav RadarBox Advertising

  1. #1
    Captain
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    FR24 Feeder
    Posts
    1,232

    Exclamation ASA is investigating 'Waters And Stanton PLC' and AirNav RadarBox Advertising

    ASA is investigating many complaint(s) about 'Waters And Stanton PLC' ( WSPLC ) AirNav RadarBox Advertising.

    The ASA has launched a formal investigation into the Waters And Stanton PLC AirNav RadarBox Advertising and will publish our findings.

    "The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is the UK's independent regulator of advertising across all media, including marketing on websites.
    We work to ensure ads are legal, decent, honest and truthful by applying the Advertising Codes".
    http://www.asa.org.uk/

    [Read more here]
    Re: What Makes AirNav Systems the Market Leader?
    http://radarspotters.eu/forum/index....41148#msg41148

    Waters & Stanton WSPLC Blog: http://blog.wsplc.com/?p=362

    Quote from: Anmer on June 23, 2011
    I must admit this Waters & Stanton advert on the back of Airliners World made me smile. I suspect it didn't do the same for the other virual radar suppliers who may want to speak to Essex Trading Standards.

    "Now Recognized as the Leader in Desktop Radar" By whom?

    1. "The competition fades away". There's never been so much competition as there is now!

    2. "RadarBox becomes the leader". Leader in what and how is the "lead" measured?

    3. "Now being used by the BBC". "Now" or 3 years ago? And even AirNav didn't claim it was the BBC - "AirNav were recently approached by a production company working for the BBC"

    4. "Canadian Space Authorities". It was a college project at the Royal Military College of Canada and "space" didn't even come into it.

    5. "Recently Boeing adapted it for their Dream Liner project". Not true. It was used by Goodrich Aerospace Corporation not Boeing and "recently" was 12 months ago.

    The worrying thing is that anyone who isn't aware of the tendency of both AirNav and W&S to "embellish" will be duped by these unsubstantiated claims.

    Even more worrying the adverts states that "The Pro version includes....connection to the AirNav server for live world tracking".

    Last time I checked, "live" data was an additional subscription of €15 a month. Now that is very naughty.

    After this advert appeared in the July edition of Airliner World I, personally, referred it to the UK's Advertising Standards Authority since it was highly misleading and could entice someone to buy a RadarBox on the basis of the misleading claims. I'd do the same if Kinetic or any other virtual radar supplier issued a misleading advert. Reporting an advert is very easy, just fill out an online complaint form in one single step.
    Hope ASA is keeping an eye on AirNav ShipTrax AIS advertisements
    Last edited by SoCalBrian; 2011-11-14 at 08:04.

  2. #2
    Captain Anmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,383
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalBrian View Post
    ASA is investigating many complaints from 'Waters And Stanton PLC' and AirNav RadarBox Advertising.

    The ASA has launched a formal investigation into the AirNav RadarBox Advertising and will publish our findings.
    Where did you find a reference to the "ASA is investigating many complaints from 'Waters And Stanton PLC' and AirNav RadarBox Advertising"?

    And where did you find the quote "The ASA has launched a formal investigation into the AirNav RadarBox Advertising and will publish our findings."?

    Maybe you should get your facts straight before you comment on and redistribute posts from another forum?

    The ASA is investigating a personal complaint that I made about what I consider to be a misleading advert placed by Waters & Stanton in Airliner World and we await the ASA's published report. That's the current, factual position.
    Mike


    www.radarspotting.com

    Radarspotting since 2005

  3. #3
    Captain
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    FR24 Feeder
    Posts
    1,232

    Arrow

    Waters & Stanton PLC WSPLC - Facebook.
    http://www.facebook.com/notes/waters...50767770760333
    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Waters...C/115562076704

    Radarspotters Moderator Biased?
    by Waters & Stanton PLC on Thursday, August 25, 2011 at 3:22am
    Radarspotters is a forum supporting virtual radar and their moderator recently bombarded the ASA with complaints about advertising claims made by Waters & Stanton on behalf of AirNav Systems USA, the manufacturers of RadarBox. Now if the complaints had related to the product’s performance or its operating system, that might make sense. But no, the complaints related to whether or not the list of international companies using RadarBox was indeed correct. Why would the moderator want to do that? Was he acting on behalf of the membership? The only reason we can think of is that he was acting on behalf of a competitor! Hardly a suitable person, you might think, to mediate over a forum that one would expect to have no commercial bias. Whether or not he chooses to explain himself, time will tell. In the meantime there has to be a question mark over the mediator’s ability to moderate!
    Michael Daniels -
    The ASA receives all sorts of silly complaints, sad, as it means complaints that need to be investigated take longer. There should be a criminal offence of "Wasting ASA time"
    August 25 at 7:20am
    Last edited by SoCalBrian; 2011-11-14 at 08:02.

  4. #4
    Captain
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    FR24 Feeder
    Posts
    1,232

    Exclamation

    Update:

    September 22nd, 2011 at 10:35 am
    Peter Waters Says:
    Today, the ASA rejected almost half of the complaints made by RadarSpotters and upheld RadarBox defence. RadarBox marches on!

    http://blog.wsplc.com/?p=362

    Anmer Says:
    "The report will be published on the ASA website, www.asa.org.uk, on Wednesday 5 October and we ask you, and the advertisers, to treat it as confidential until then."
    A visit to the ASA website on 5 October will reveal all.


    Bethsalem Says:
    So they're more than happy that over half the complaints were upheld then! It doesn't bother them that the ASA believes that there is inaccurate information on the adverts?

    http://radarspotters.eu/forum/index....42178#msg42178



    Just waiting to see what Waters And Stanton PLC WSPLC will write up for the AirNav ShipTrax advertising later this year/next.
    Last edited by SoCalBrian; 2011-11-14 at 08:03.

  5. #5
    Captain Anmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,383
    The Advertising Standards Authority is "the UK's independent regulator of advertising across all media, including marketing on websites. We work to ensure ads are legal, decent, honest and truthful by applying the Advertising Codes". Basically, the ASA is there to prevent consumers being misled by advertising.

    Anyone can complain about an advert which is then investigated by the ASA to see if it breaches the Advertising Codes. Recommendations are then submitted to the ASA Council which makes an adjudication. In this case, the adjudication has been made and will be puiblished on 5 October 2011. Both I and Waters & Stanton have been informed of the adjudication and were asked to keep it confidential until 5 October. I will respect the ASA's request.

    Not only has Waters & Stanton ignored the ASA's request for confidentiality, it has publicly attacked me for reporting its advert to the ASA. It ignores the fact that it breached the Advertising Codes in the first place. If it doesn't like me or anyone else complaining about its adverts, it should abide by the Codes.

    As the ASA website states:

    The ASA is here to make sure all advertisements are legal, decent, honest and truthful.

    We are independent of both the Government and the advertising industry and we are recognised by the Government, the courts and other regulators such as the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) and Ofcom as the body to deal with complaints about advertising.

    Our work includes acting on and investigating complaints as well as proactively monitoring and taking action against misleading, harmful or offensive advertisements, sales promotions and direct marketing.

    Just one complaint can lead to an ad being withdrawn and we’ve made sure the complaints procedure is as quick and easy as possible. If we uphold a complaint about an ad, the advertiser must withdraw or amend the ad and not use the advertising approach again.


    Maybe Waters & Stanton should pay more attention to the Advertising Codes in future?
    Mike


    www.radarspotting.com

    Radarspotting since 2005

  6. #6
    Captain
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    FR24 Feeder
    Posts
    1,232

    Exclamation ASA Adjudication on Waters & Stanton plc WSPLC

    RELEASED: ASA Adjudication on Waters & Stanton plc WSPLC
    http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Adj...DJ_163834.aspx

    *******************************
    Waters & Stanton plc WSPLC
    Spa House
    22 Main Road
    Hockley Essex SS5 4QS

    Date: 5 October 2011
    Media: Magazine
    Sector: Retail
    Number of complaints: 1
    Complaint Ref: A11-163834

    Ad

    A magazine ad for a radar system, in the July edition of Airliner World, was headlined “AirNav RadarBox-3D Now Recognised As The Leader in ‘Desktop Radar’”. Text stated “The Pro version includes ... live local traffic up to 150 miles ...”. A paragraph entitled “Recent news” stated “AirNav RadarBox Pro becomes the leader in ‘Desktop Radar’ with its world 2D map system. Upgrade to the 3D Google Map version and you get so much realism & map detail, it is breathtaking”. Other features were also described. Text continued “Both systems are now being used by the BBC, the Canadian Space Authorities and airlines, for monitoring incoming and outgoing traffic. Recently Boeing adopted it for their Dream Liner project”.

    Issue

    The complainant, a moderator of Radarspotters, an independent forum for virtual radar receivers, challenged whether the claims:

    1. “Now recognised as the leader in ‘Desktop Radar” and “AirNav RadarBox Pro becomes the leader in ‘Desktop Radar’” was misleading and could be substantiated;

    2. “Now being used by the BBC” was misleading and could be substantiated, because he believed the AirNav were simply approached by a production company working for the BBC around three years ago;

    3. “Now being used by the Canadian Space Authorities” was misleading and could be substantiated, because he believed AirNav was used only by the Royal Military College of Canada for a college project and by not the Canadian Space Agency; and

    4. "Recently Boeing adapted it for their Dream Liner project" was misleading and could be substantiated, because he believed it was used by Goodrich Aerospace, not Boeing, 12 months previously.

    CAP Code (Edition 12)
    3.1 3.3 3.7


    Response

    1. Waters & Stanton, who distributed AirNav in the UK, provided comments from AirNav. AirNav stated that Martin Lynch of ML&S, who sold and distributed a range of products, had endorsed the AirNav RadarBox. They stated that he had previously claimed that SBS, a competitor, was the leader, but stated that it was now changing from SBS to RadarBox.

    2. They provided a link to a forum posting on their website, dated June 2008, in which they had commented that AirNav had been approached by a production company working for the BBC, to assist with a documentary TV programme called "Britain from Above". The posting stated that AirNav had provided 48 hours of XML Network data that would display a 3D view of air traffic over Britain. It also provided a link to the BBC programme’s webpage.

    3. They provided a link to a forum posting dated May 2009, in which they had commented that, in cooperation with a Canadian University, AirNav Systems was providing the hardware and software for their program entitled "Flying Laboratory for Observation of ADS-B Transmissions". They said the system was being integrated by the Physics and Space Science Department and the test balloon launch was scheduled for launch in late May 2009. The posting carried updates of the project’s progress throughout 2009.

    4. They said that Boeing used several contractors and one contractor (Goodrich) used the RadarBox on their 787 project. They provided a link to a forum posting dated June 2010, which stated that Goodrich Aerospace Corporation had selected the AirNav RadarBox 3D as the real-time flight tracking solution used on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner project. It included a quote from Goodrich about the use of the product.

    Assessment

    1. Upheld

    The ASA understood that the advertisers maintained that Martin Lynch of ML&S, who sold and distributed a range of products, including desktop radars, had endorsed the claim that RadarBox was the “leader”, but also noted that we had not seen any documentation to support the ML&S endorsement. We considered that “leading” claims were usually interpreted to mean that the product was the best-selling in its field, but noted that, in this case, the claim was placed in the context of claims about the features and improvements offered by the product, such as “AirNav RadarBox Pro becomes the leader in ‘Desktop Radar’ with its world 2D map system. Upgrade to the 3D Google Map version and you get so much realism & map detail, it is breathtaking” and considered that most readers would interpret the claim “the leader in Desktop Radar” to mean that the RadarBox-3D was the leader in terms of technological innovation.

    Although we noted that the advertisers maintained that a distributor had claimed that RadarBox was becoming the leader, over a competitor, we noted that we had not seen supporting evidence for that claim or seen any other documentation setting out how the RadarBox-3D was the leader in terms of technological innovation. We therefore concluded that the ad was misleading.

    On that point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1, 3.3 (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 (Substantiation).

    2. Upheld

    We noted that the full claim, in context, was “Both systems are now being used by the BBC, the Canadian Space Authorities and airlines, for monitoring incoming and outgoing traffic”. We understood that AirNav had been credited as a contributor of footage on a BBC TV series which had been broadcast in 2008, but did not consider that that was clear from the claim and context and considered that some readers might understand that the BBC had purchased the product and were using it on a continuous basis.

    Because we had not received supporting evidence to show it was being used on a continuous basis, as the ad implied, we concluded that the claim was misleading.

    On that point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1, 3.3 (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 (Substantiation).

    3. Upheld

    We considered that the claim “Now being used by the Canadian Space Authorities” suggested that the RadarBox was currently being used by the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) or an affiliated agency or body working directly for the CSA. We understood that the advertisers had provided material for a university program in 2009, but noted we had not seen information that showed how that project was intregral to the work of the CSA or that the product in question was currently being used by the CSA. We therefore considered that the claim was misleading.

    On that point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1, 3.3 (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 (Substantiation).

    4. Not upheld

    We understood that some work on the 787 Dreamliner project had been contracted to Goodrich by Boeing and understood that the RadarBox was being used by Goodrich for that Boeing project. We therefore considered that, because the product had been used for a Boeing project, albeit via a contractor, the claim “Boeing adapted it for their Dream Liner project" was unlikely to mislead. We also understood that the project had begun in the summer of 2010. We considered that work in a field such as air industry innovation and development was not generally short-term work, that many projects were likely to take some time to complete and could be ongoing for a long period of time. Therefore, in the context of a claim related to air industry development, we did not consider that it was misleading to state that work which had taken place 12 months previously was “recent”. We therefore concluded that the claim "Recently Boeing adapted it for their Dream Liner project" was not misleading.

    On that point, we investigated the ad under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1, 3.3 (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 (Substantiation), but did not find it in breach.

    Action

    The ad must not appear again in its current form.


    ************************************************** ************************************

    Tip to Waters & Stanton plc WSPLC.... Pay more attention with AirNav ShipTrax Advertising! Don't go down the same route as you did with AirNav RadarBox Advertising
    Last edited by SoCalBrian; 2011-11-14 at 08:01.

  7. #7
    Captain
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    FR24 Feeder
    Posts
    1,232

    Exclamation ASA upholds claim against Waters and Stanton WSPLC for misleading claims

    [From kinetic-avionics.com main page]

    08 November 2011 - ASA upholds claim against Waters and Stanton WSPLC for misleading claims

    The Advertising Standards Authority upheld a number of complaints against Waters and Stanton, distributors for AirNav Systems, related to their misleading advertising of the AirNav RadarBox. Despite the ruling a month ago, Waters and Stanton continue to run misleading claims on their website related to the AirNav product.

    Kinetic have for a long time challenged the false claims that both AirNav Systems and Waters and Stanton make and can only direct customers to read the adjudication for themselves. Hopefully, customers will be the catalyst the companies need to commit to honest advertising and remove the misleading claims from their websites.
    Customers should be aware and undertake independent research before committing to purchasing products.
    Read the adjudication here.

    Source: http://www.kinetic-avionics.com/
    Last edited by SoCalBrian; 2011-11-14 at 08:00.

  8. #8
    Captain
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    FR24 Feeder
    Posts
    1,232
    Looking at some online Reviews / Feedback about Waters & Stanton PLC WSPLC store.

    eBay Feedback profile for watersstanton -
    1 month - 6 months - 12 months
    Positive 123 - 1089 - 2339
    Neutral 2 - 8 - 14
    Negative 2 - 6 - 6
    http://feedback.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayIS...ab=AllFeedback
    Last edited by SoCalBrian; 2011-11-14 at 07:59.

  9. #9
    Captain Birdie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Changi Airport
    Posts
    645
    It reminds me of a company in Torrance California called Telemobile Inc - who made similar dubious claims in their products.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •