Nonsense to this innuendo. Phonak is displaying an inane level of corporate petulance.
The hearing aid industry (manufacturers and audiologists) want to keep the status quo.
Judge for yourself:
Phonak’s media relations people put us in touch with the Virto B90 product manager.
The Virto B90 product manager said Phonak would participate in the review.
Then, suddenly, upper management stepped in. They said no.
Based on initial research I’d done, I was confident the Phonak product would win the review.
To change Phonak’s mind about participating, I replied to Phonak’s sudden change of heart with the following:
At this point, we have three alternatives:
A. Review the Virto B90 that you supply, and it wins the review.
B. Review a different, less capable Phonak/Sonova device (Several Phonak device wearers have already offered to act as testers). A Siemens/Sivantos/Signia device will likely win the review in this case.
C. Declare in the review that Phonak/Sonova refused to participate.
If you participate in the review, the Virto B90 device will certainly win the review. And we’ll characterize the
Virto B90 as smart, fast, durable, comfortable and effective.
We then did the review without Phonak’s formal (willing) participation.
Phonak Virto B70, not B90, customers were our testers in the review.
The Phonak devices did NOT fare as well in the review as I had thought they would.
Finally, every statement in the review is true and accurate.