Brian from Fortress stated ..
1. The Rocna anchor did not "win" the West Marine test, the results of which were reported in Sail, Yachting Monthly, and Power & MotorYacht magazines which Rocna has been falsely claiming since October 2006.
2. The Rocna anchor did not have "40% greater holding power than the next best anchor" in this test as they have falsely claimed since then as well.
3. Rocna falsely claimed that they possessed RINA certifications for their anchors which they clearly did not.
4. Craig Smith of Rocna purchased the domain name of a deceased competitor (Alain Poiraud) and this domain name is now pointed to a web site where this deceased competitor's product (Spade) is being denigrated.
Based on the above, and with these facts known, why anyone would consider purchasing the product of a company with so little integrity, or would even attempt to defend them, is incomprehensible.......no matter how great their product might be.
A very serious issue now has yet to be resolved, and that is the composition of the steel material that Rocna is using for their Chinese anchors. Despite Rocna's claims, which people have trouble believing for obvious reasons, there is a great concern that this Chinese steel material is inferior to the steel used previously with the NZ and Canadian made anchors.
1. Did Rocna really claim to have "won" this battle or did they merely claim that the test showed that Rocna had gained the highest average holding power - maximum before release ?
2. In that test did the report say that Rocna had an average holding power of 40% higher than nearest rival ?
3. It seems this may be the case but is it black and white ?
4. Is this true or was the domain purchased well before Alain Poiraud's death ? Who actually now owns this domain, Craig Smith or Peter Smith ?
Brian, you offered to post the real Sail results. Please do so. A version of the Sail report was on the Rocna web site but has apparently been removed. I'd also like to see Sail's comments on the supposed Rocna falsification.
My quote is merely part of Brian's original post which can be found in the Crib Notes thread.
Rocna crib notes
Isn't it true that no proof has been offered as to Rocna using inferior grade metal ? The original claimant "Whalebone" has been outed as a disgruntled ex Rocna employee and has been strangely silent in offering his claimed proof.
Is it fair to claim that Rocna "falsified test results and certifications" and if so why ?
The questions raised are quite damning of Rocna and of Craig Smith. I think its fair that we get the answers even if those answers do in fact damn Rocna and/or CS.