This industry needs an independent certification body

[BeanAnimal]

So…don’t do that? It’s not like malevolence inevitably happens, people just keep choosing to ignore it, excuse it, or even justify it. I admit to being a bit flabbergasted by the amount of victim blaming I’m seeing, where some seem to feel like people deserve whatever happens to them if someone takes advantage of them.

I am not blaming victims of dishonest marketing, but caveat emptor holds great weight in logic.

You lament trusting a "company" selling products. Understandable! But you want to trust a "certification body" inherently, simply because it is a "certification body." That ignores several real world issues I’ve already mentioned, as well as those brought up by Randy and others. These “certifications” are, more often than not, no more trustworthy than the vendors themselves. Which, brings us back to community and caveat emptor.

This hobby is tiny. There is not a lot of money in it, contextually. Who pays for this even if it would work. But let’s expand to where there is money…

Take organizations like J.D. Power and Associates, Gartner Magic Quadrant, Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. 5000, even the BBB. Are they truly trustworthy sources of “certification,” or are they pay-to-play or “check-the-boxes-to-be-promoted” businesses that have very little, if anything, to do with consumer protection, and everything to do with revenue generation?

 

[Doctor Derp]

Full of **** then. got it. Move along if you have nothing concrete to add to the matter.

 

[TankYouVeryMuch]

I am not blaming victims of dishonest marketing, but caveat emptor holds great weight in logic.

You lament trusting a "company" selling products. Understandable! But you want to trust a "certification body" inherently, simply because it is a "certification body." That ignores several real world issues I’ve already mentioned, as well as those brought up by Randy and others. These “certifications” are, more often than not, no more trustworthy than the vendors themselves. Which, brings us back to community and caveat emptor.

This hobby is tiny. There is not a lot of money in it, contextually. Who pays for this even if it would work. But let’s expand to where there is money…

Take organizations like J.D. Power and Associates, Gartner Magic Quadrant, Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. 5000, even the BBB. Are they truly trustworthy sources of “certification,” or are they pay-to-play or “check-the-boxes-to-be-promoted” businesses that have very little, if anything, to do with consumer protection, and everything to do with revenue generation?

> The global reef aquarium market was valued at USD 6.47 billion in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 7.12 billion in 2024, growing to USD 15.47 billion by 2032, exhibiting a CAGR of 10.17% during the forecast period [2024-2032]

https://www.globalgrowthinsights.com/market-reports/reef-aquarium-market-103722
It’s not huge, but it’s ain’t nothing to sneeze at.

I appreciate the frustration with organizations compromising their ethics over time due to market pressures, but this is usually clamor by investors for profits. Almost all of the organizations you named are for profit entities barring the BBB. They are a good case model for what to try and avoid.

Maybe I should clarify—I’m not saying “it would be great if a certification body already existed,” I’m saying “I wish someone would start one.” Doing that with the proper intentions and organizational structure could minimize risk of these concerns occurring. The people forming the organization would get to decide how certifications would work.

Maybe I was being too optimistic for believing that people, particularly in this hobby, are smart enough to problem solve this as opposed to throwing up their hands and saying “it’s too complex, it can’t be done.” I guess when I created the thread I was hoping for discussion about “This aspect could be a problem, but here’s a possible solution,” and it would go from there.

 

[TankYouVeryMuch]

Full of **** then. got it. Move along if you have nothing concrete to add to the matter.

I am choosing not to spend my time interacting with people who are rude for no reason. I’ll use the Ignore option so we don’t have to cross paths again.

 

[TankYouVeryMuch]

BRS made a huge leap in my opinion of their reviews when they said in a video about things reefers should start and stop doing, to not buy the expensive ozone generator and instead by a cheap one of Amazon and replace it every two to three years. I’m not saying their reviewed are completely independent but they are not blatant product pushes either. There is good info in their reviews.

I think you are confusing BRS with Ryan's current venture. I don't think BRS has ever or would ever tell customers not to purchase products they sell and instead purchase other products provided by other suppliers.

Ryan is great, and I have a lot of respect for him. BRS is an excellent resource, but I’m a bit cautious of their product recommendations. I don’t think I’ve ever heard them say a specific product is bad. I often hear them say that a more expensive product is better, which may be true but is certainly something they also benefit from.

 

[rtparty]

> The global reef aquarium market was valued at USD 6.47 billion in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 7.12 billion in 2024, growing to USD 15.47 billion by 2032, exhibiting a CAGR of 10.17% during the forecast period [2024-2032]

https://www.globalgrowthinsights.com/market-reports/reef-aquarium-market-103722
It’s not huge, but it’s ain’t nothing to sneeze at.

I appreciate the frustration with organizations compromising their ethics over time due to market pressures, but this is usually clamor by investors for profits. Almost all of the organizations you named are for profit entities barring the BBB. They are a good case model for what to try and avoid.

Maybe I should clarify—I’m not saying “it would be great if a certification body already existed,” I’m saying “I wish someone would start one.” Doing that with the proper intentions and organizational structure could minimize risk of these concerns occurring. The people forming the organization would get to decide how certifications would work.

Maybe I was being too optimistic for believing that people, particularly in this hobby, are smart enough to problem solve this as opposed to throwing up their hands and saying “it’s too complex, it can’t be done.” I guess when I created the thread I was hoping for discussion about “This aspect could be a problem, but here’s a possible solution,” and it would go from there.

I would bet those estimates aren’t even remotely close

I would be interested to see how they come up with those estimates since I don’t know of a single vendor in this hobby that shares sales, revenue, or other financials. None of them are publicly traded to my knowledge.

 

[Dom]

I’m tired of reading about products that are misrepresented and products which poison tanks. With the amount of money in this industry, someone should start a non-profit certification organization which has standards that have to be met to allow products to be a certification mark. Kind of like UL listing, but for marine aquarium products. It could include:
- Requiring manufacturers to submit periodic third party chemical or biological assays which validate their products contain what they claim and don’t contain known toxic contaminants.
- Independent panel review of marketing claims to ensure that the manufacturer is making legitimate product claims (in other words, is the product capable of doing what they say it will or does it mislead the customer and offer false security)?
- Certified products could be subject to ongoing review based on consumer reports, so if patterns of adverse effects or inconsistencies arise in hobbyist reviews the product may be re-examined.
- Assay reports and other certifications should be publicly searchable, excluding information which might violate proprietary IP.

There could be advanced certifications for things like “long term safe for reef biome” or “ethical and sustainably produced” or whatever.

Consumers would know immediately if they pick up a product that bears the mark that it meets some minimum standard for safety and efficacy. Manufacturers would not have to submit every product for certification (so if a company knows some of their products are nothing more than marketing hype they can just submit the ones that aren’t).

It sounds to me like you want to have a "Consumer Reports" for the aquarium hobby.

As I see it, the problem would be getting volunteers to participate. They couldn't be paid and they couldn't take advertisement dollars. This is important to make sure their feedback is unbiased.

Also, manufacturers must be willing to donate their products for evaluation. More expensive items like the
A3 Apex Pro Aquarium Controller System ($1000.00) or Trident - Marine Aquarium Water Analyzer ($700.00) May be difficult to secure for testing at no charge.

 

[Dom]

Good idea, but who's gonna pay for this? The general consumer wants things cheap.

I think the idea is that it be an independent group who would "certify" the claims made by manufacturers. Something like this can't involve money.

 

[Dom]

I don't see why it needs to be non profit. Vendors can pay for the test and the endorsement, like UL.

Because the vendors paying would expect positive reviews.

 

[Dom]

Ever heard of a little company called bulk reef supply? They pretty much review anything you could want from the industry.

Yes, and they make money from selling these products, so why would they provide anything but a positive spin?

 

[mjw011689]

Perhaps you’re not familiar with the fact that BRS is owned by Aperture which owns Neptune, AI, Ecotech among others. You can’t trust their reviews for anything.

Well aware of that. Like I said, they’re about as close as you’re gonna get to what OP was asking for. They have multiple videos that blatantly say “this product might not be for you”. I personally have never purchased a thing from them, but they do a great job of at least pointing you in the right direction. Do they lean towards the more expensive brands? Of course. But they also reference other products for much less that also work. They’ve even tested the black box lights and show the results of them and come right out and state “this light will grow coral just fine” or whatever it is.

As far as retailers go, if they are willing to admit to public that a cheapo light will grow coral just fine, when they don’t even sell that light… I’m not sure where you get they can’t be trusted at all. Grain of salt, yes, untrustworthy? No