Shopping on line can be easy, simple and save you lots of money. It can also take a lot of your time, frustrate you, and result in unwanted purchases. Now the same can be said for regular high street shopping, but with the vast opportunity presented by the Internet it will pay you to spend a few minutes reading this and understanding how to better optimize your Consumer Reports shopping experience:

1. Compare - without doubt the biggest advantage that the Consumer Reports offers shoppers today is the ability to compare thousands of Consumer Reports at a time. This is a great thing, but not necessarily all the time! Too much can be daunting at times so take advantage of the great comparison sites and where possible let them do the hard work for you.

2. Research - if it has been said it will be on the internet. Ignorance is no longer a justifiable reason for buying the wrong thing. Take the time to research in detail everything that you could possible want to know about

3. Testimonials - don't know anybody that has bought a Consumer Reports? Wrong! If the Consumer Reports is good the internet will let you know. Use the Internet as a friend and get testimonials before you buy.

4. Questions - Got a question about Consumer Reports then search the Forums, FAQ's, Blogs etc. Don't be afraid to ask .....

5. Reputation - Never heard of the company selling Consumer Reports? Don't worry, no reason why you should know every company in the world, but you know someone that does! Use the internet to find out what people are saying about Consumer Reports and build up a picture of their reputation for sales, returns, customer service, delivery etc.

6. Returns - still worried that even after all of the above your Consumer Reports wont be what you want? Check out the returns policy. There is so much competition now that someone, somewhere is bound to offer the terms that you are comfortable with.

7. Feedback - happy with your Consumer Reports then let people know, after all you are depending on others people input in your buying decision, so why not give a little back.

8. Security - check for the yellow padlock on the Consumer Reports site before you buy, and the s after http:/ /i.e. https:// = a secure site

9. Contact - got a question about Consumer Reports, or want to leave a comment then check out the sites contact page. Reputable companies have them and respond.

10. Payment - ready to pay for your Consumer Reports, then use your credit card or PayPal! Be aware of companies that don't accept them, there may be genuine reasons but given the huge amount of choice you have when buying online there is no reason at all not to buy via credit card or PayPal.

{{Infobox Magazine| title = Consumer Reports| image_file = Consumer_Reports_cover.jpg| image_size = 200px| image_caption = Consumer Reports cover dated November 2005| editor = Kevin McKean| company =| publisher = [Consumers Union| country = | language = [English language| website = consumerreports.org| issn = 0010-7174-->Consumer Reports is an United States magazine published monthly by Consumers Union. It publishes reviews and comparisons of consumer products and services based on reporting and results from its in-house testing laboratory. It has approximately 4 million subscribers{{cite web| title= Our Mission| publisher= Consumer Reports| accessdate=2006-06-20| url=http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/aboutus/mission/overview/index.htm

--> and an annual testing budget of approximately $21 million U.S.{{cite web| title= Consumers Union shopping and testing| publisher= Consumer Reports| accessdate=2006-06-20| url=http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cu-press-room/pressroom/shoppingtesting/index.htm-->The annual Consumer Reports new car issue, released every April, is typically the magazine's best-selling issue and is thought to influence millions of automobile purchases.

Objectivity Consumer Reports stands behind its objectivity and freedom from bias, although a few companies have challenged this in court .

Consumer Reports does not print outside advertising or permit the commercial use of its reviews for selling products, and it states that this eliminates one possible source of bias.

Consumer Reports states that all tested products are purchased at retail by its staff, that no free samples are accepted from manufacturers and that this avoids the possibility of bias from bribery or from being given "better than average" samples.

Ancillary publications ConsumerReports.org, the related website, claims more paid subscribers than any other publication-based Web site. Most of its information is available only to paid subscribers.

With short life-cycle products such as electronics, the reviewed product has often been replaced or discontinued prior to publication. ConsumerReports.org provides updates on product availability, and adds new products to previously published test results.

Furthermore, for copies distributed in Canada, there is a small four page supplement explaining how the magazine's findings apply to that country and lists the examined items available there.

In 2002, Consumers Union launched the grant-funded project Consumer Reports WebWatch, which aims to improve the credibility of Web sites through investigative reporting, publicizing best-practices standards, and publishing a list of sites that comply with the standards. WebWatch has worked with the Stanford Web Credibility Project, Harvard University's Berkman Center, The Annenberg School of Communications at the University of Pennsylvania, and others. WebWatch is a member of ICANN, the W3C and the Internet Society. Its content is free.

In 2005 Consumers Union launched the service Consumer Reports Best Buy Drugs, which takes publicly available (but difficult to comprehend) studies on pharmaceutical effectiveness and combines them with pricing information in an easy-to-read format.

Also in 2005 Consumers Union launched the service Greener Choices, which is meant to "inform, engage, and empower consumers about environmentally-friendly products and practices." It contains information about conservation, electronics recycling and conservation with the goal or providing an "accessible, reliable, and practical source of information on buying “greener” products that have minimal environmental impact and meet personal needs."

Lawsuits vs. Consumers Union In 1981 the Bose Corporation sued Consumer Reports (CR) magazine for libel. CR reported in a review that the sound from the system that they reviewed "tended to wander about the room". The District Court found that CR "had published the false statement with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of its truth or falsity". The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's ruling, and the United States Supreme Court affirmed in Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc., finding that that CR's statement was made without New York Times v. Sullivan, which was the standard in cases where the First Amendment to the United States Constitution was involved; and therefore was not libelous. Commentary on libel cases in general giving a specific example of Bose Corp. v. Consumer's Union of United States. Opinion of the United States Supreme Court NY Times editorial on the Supreme Court's ruling

In 1996, Consumers Union (CU) published a report indicating that the 1995-96 Isuzu Trooper sport utility vehicle had demonstrated a "tendency to roll over in certain situations" in its tests, and that it had determined that this was "not acceptable". In a press conference, it called on Isuzu to discontinue sales and recall Troopers already sold, and continued to issue warnings about the Trooper, advising the public not to buy the vehicle, and suggesting that federal officials should launch an investigation into possible product defects. Isuzu filed a lawsuit against CU as a result of the article; the court ruled that CR had made "numerous false statements" and had put the Isuzu through tests that competitors were not subjected to, but though eight of ten jurors wanted to assign punitive damages, they did not find enough evidence of malicious intent and did not assign Isuzu cash damages. The Car Connection

In December 1997, however, the Trooper distributor in Puerto Rico sued CU, alleging that it had lost sales as a result of CU's disparagement of the Trooper. But the trial court granted CU's motion for summary judgment, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed the favorable judgment, on the grounds that CU had mentioned only Isuzu and the Trooper, not the distributor specifically; since the challenged statements were not "of and concerning" the distributor, they would be precluded from suing for any injuries suffered as a result of the statements. Legal Watch Defamation Claim Arising from Consumer Report Dismissed

Related to this suit, in 1988, CU published that the Suzuki Samurai had demonstrated the same tendency to roll and deemed it "not acceptable." In July 2004, this suit was settled and dismissed with no money changing hands.http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/suzuki-and-consumers-union-agree-on-dismissal-of-lawsuit-704/index.htmhttp://www.projectsamurai.com/suzuki-cu_agreement.html

In 2003, Sharper Image sued CR in California for product disparagement, over negative reviews of its Ionic Breeze Quadra air purifier. CR moved for dismissal on October 31, 2003, under California's Anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) law, and the case was dismissed in November 2004, on the grounds that the Sharper Image "has not shown that the test protocol used by Consumers Union was scientifically, or otherwise, invalid," and had not "demonstrated a reasonable probability that any of the challenged statements were false." The decision also awarded CU $525,000 in legal fees and costs. Quackwatch article InfomercialWatch article

Controversy over child safety seats The February 2007 issue of Consumer Reports stated that only two of the child safety seats it tested for that issue passed the magazine's side impact tests. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which subsequently retested the seats, found that all those seats passed the corresponding NHTSA tests at the speeds described in the magazine report. The CR article reported that the tests simulated the effects of collisions at 38.5 mph. However, the tests that were completed in fact simulated collisions at 70 mph. Detroit News CR stated in a letter from its president Jim Guest to its subscribers that it would retest the seats. The magazine issue with erroneous findings has not been recalled, but the letter states that after the seats are retested, the results of that test will be published. The article was removed from the CR website, and on January 18 2007 the organization posted a note on its home page about the misleading tests. Subscribers were also sent a postcard apologizing for the error.

On January 28, 2007, Joan Claybrook, who served on the board of CU from 1982 to 2006 (and was the head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration from 1977 to 1981), discussed the sequence of events leading to the publishing of the erroneous information. The magazine contracted with Calspan to do the actual testing; due to miscommunication, the tests were conducted (using test sleds) at an actual speed of 38 miles per hour. In fact, since automobiles in a crash continue to move after the crash—rather than absorbing all the energy of impact as a test sled does—a test sled impact of 38 miles per hour is considered equivalent to an automobile crash of 70 miles per hour; to replicate an automobile crash of 38 miles per hour, as was intended, the test sled crash should have been carried out at 20 miles per hour.

Claybrook admitted that the magazine should have been motivated to double-check the surprising results; however, she also pointed out that CR was attempting to execute what should have been NHTSA's work. "Consumer Reports does not conduct crash tests save for low-speed bumper-impact tests," she stated. "It has limited expertise in designing such tests." She further noted that in 2000 Congress had mandated NHTSA to define a set of tests and issue a set of safety standards for child restraints within two years, but that NHTSA still had not yet done so, "though it took less than ten days to evaluate Consumer Reports’ testing and find the error."{{cite news| first = | last = | authorlink = | author = Joan Claybrook | coauthors = | title = Crash Test Dummies | url = http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/opinion/28claybrook.html?_r=1&n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fContributors&oref=slogin | format = | work = | publisher = [The New York Times | id = | pages = | page = | date = 2007-01-28 | accessdate = 2007-01-29 | language = | quote = How the testing mistake was made is instructive not only for ''Consumer Reports'' but for everyone who cares about public safety. -->

Other errors or issues In 2006, Consumer Reports said six hybrid vehicles would probably not save owners money. The magazine later discovered that they had miscalculated depreciation, and released an update saying that four of the seven vehicles would save the buyer money, if the vehicle was kept for five years (including the federal tax credit for hybrid vehicles, which expires after each manufacturer sells 60,000 hybrid vehicles).{{cite web | last = | first = | authorlink = | coauthors = | title = Update: This is a revised report on "The dollars and sense of hybrids" | work = | publisher = Consumers Union | year = 2006 | month = September | url = http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/high-cost-of-hybrid-vehicles-406/a-note-about-this-report/index.htm | format = | doi = | accessdate = 2007-01-29-->

In February 1998, the magazine tested pet food and claimed that Iams dog food was nutritionally deficient. They later retracted the report claiming that there had been "a systemic error in the measurements of various minerals we tested – potassium, calcium and magnesium." They stated they would conduct the study again and publish the results but have yet to do so. {{cite web]s in a fleet of taxi cabs. In their article, they noted that "Big-city cabs don't see many cold start-ups or long periods of high speed driving in extreme heat. But our test results relate to the most common type of severe service - stop-and-go city driving." They were unable to see a "meaningful" difference between any brands of oil which carried the Motor oil#American Petroleum Institute, but suggested that synthetic oil is "worth considering for extreme driving conditions high ambient temperatures and high engine load or very cold temperatures." This research was criticized by some because most engine damage appears to be caused by cold starts, and their research method may not have included enough cold starts to be representative of personal vehicle use.{{cite web| title = Statistical problems of Consumer Reports auto ratings | journal = allpar.com | url = http://www.allpar.com/cr.html | language = English | accessdate = 2007-04-08-->

In the July, 1978 issue, Consumer Reports rated the Dodge Omni car "not acceptable", the first cars it had judged such since the AMC Ambassador, in 1968. In its testing they found the possibility of these models developing an oscillatory yaw as a result of a sudden violent input to the steering; the manufacturer claimed that "Some do, some don't" show this behavior, but it has no "validity in the real world of driving". Storm over the Omni Horizon, Time Magazine, Jun 26, 1978 Nevertheless, the next year, Car handling#Cars with unusual handling problems; Consumer Reports reported that the previous instability was no longer present.

See also

References



External links

{{Infobox Magazine| title = Consumer Reports| image_file = Consumer_Reports_cover.jpg| image_size = 200px| image_caption = Consumer Reports cover dated November 2005| editor = Kevin McKean| company =| publisher = [Consumers Union| country = | language = [English language| website = consumerreports.org| issn = 0010-7174-->Consumer Reports is an United States magazine published monthly by Consumers Union. It publishes reviews and comparisons of consumer products and services based on reporting and results from its in-house testing laboratory. It has approximately 4 million subscribers{{cite web| title= Our Mission| publisher= Consumer Reports| accessdate=2006-06-20| url=http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/aboutus/mission/overview/index.htm

--> and an annual testing budget of approximately $21 million U.S.{{cite web| title= Consumers Union shopping and testing| publisher= Consumer Reports| accessdate=2006-06-20| url=http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cu-press-room/pressroom/shoppingtesting/index.htm-->The annual Consumer Reports new car issue, released every April, is typically the magazine's best-selling issue and is thought to influence millions of automobile purchases.

Objectivity Consumer Reports stands behind its objectivity and freedom from bias, although a few companies have challenged this in court .

Consumer Reports does not print outside advertising or permit the commercial use of its reviews for selling products, and it states that this eliminates one possible source of bias.

Consumer Reports states that all tested products are purchased at retail by its staff, that no free samples are accepted from manufacturers and that this avoids the possibility of bias from bribery or from being given "better than average" samples.

Ancillary publications ConsumerReports.org, the related website, claims more paid subscribers than any other publication-based Web site. Most of its information is available only to paid subscribers.

With short life-cycle products such as electronics, the reviewed product has often been replaced or discontinued prior to publication. ConsumerReports.org provides updates on product availability, and adds new products to previously published test results.

Furthermore, for copies distributed in Canada, there is a small four page supplement explaining how the magazine's findings apply to that country and lists the examined items available there.

In 2002, Consumers Union launched the grant-funded project Consumer Reports WebWatch, which aims to improve the credibility of Web sites through investigative reporting, publicizing best-practices standards, and publishing a list of sites that comply with the standards. WebWatch has worked with the Stanford Web Credibility Project, Harvard University's Berkman Center, The Annenberg School of Communications at the University of Pennsylvania, and others. WebWatch is a member of ICANN, the W3C and the Internet Society. Its content is free.

In 2005 Consumers Union launched the service Consumer Reports Best Buy Drugs, which takes publicly available (but difficult to comprehend) studies on pharmaceutical effectiveness and combines them with pricing information in an easy-to-read format.

Also in 2005 Consumers Union launched the service Greener Choices, which is meant to "inform, engage, and empower consumers about environmentally-friendly products and practices." It contains information about conservation, electronics recycling and conservation with the goal or providing an "accessible, reliable, and practical source of information on buying “greener” products that have minimal environmental impact and meet personal needs."

Lawsuits vs. Consumers Union In 1981 the Bose Corporation sued Consumer Reports (CR) magazine for libel. CR reported in a review that the sound from the system that they reviewed "tended to wander about the room". The District Court found that CR "had published the false statement with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of its truth or falsity". The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's ruling, and the United States Supreme Court affirmed in Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc., finding that that CR's statement was made without New York Times v. Sullivan, which was the standard in cases where the First Amendment to the United States Constitution was involved; and therefore was not libelous. Commentary on libel cases in general giving a specific example of Bose Corp. v. Consumer's Union of United States. Opinion of the United States Supreme Court NY Times editorial on the Supreme Court's ruling

In 1996, Consumers Union (CU) published a report indicating that the 1995-96 Isuzu Trooper sport utility vehicle had demonstrated a "tendency to roll over in certain situations" in its tests, and that it had determined that this was "not acceptable". In a press conference, it called on Isuzu to discontinue sales and recall Troopers already sold, and continued to issue warnings about the Trooper, advising the public not to buy the vehicle, and suggesting that federal officials should launch an investigation into possible product defects. Isuzu filed a lawsuit against CU as a result of the article; the court ruled that CR had made "numerous false statements" and had put the Isuzu through tests that competitors were not subjected to, but though eight of ten jurors wanted to assign punitive damages, they did not find enough evidence of malicious intent and did not assign Isuzu cash damages. The Car Connection

In December 1997, however, the Trooper distributor in Puerto Rico sued CU, alleging that it had lost sales as a result of CU's disparagement of the Trooper. But the trial court granted CU's motion for summary judgment, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed the favorable judgment, on the grounds that CU had mentioned only Isuzu and the Trooper, not the distributor specifically; since the challenged statements were not "of and concerning" the distributor, they would be precluded from suing for any injuries suffered as a result of the statements. Legal Watch Defamation Claim Arising from Consumer Report Dismissed

Related to this suit, in 1988, CU published that the Suzuki Samurai had demonstrated the same tendency to roll and deemed it "not acceptable." In July 2004, this suit was settled and dismissed with no money changing hands.http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/suzuki-and-consumers-union-agree-on-dismissal-of-lawsuit-704/index.htmhttp://www.projectsamurai.com/suzuki-cu_agreement.html

In 2003, Sharper Image sued CR in California for product disparagement, over negative reviews of its Ionic Breeze Quadra air purifier. CR moved for dismissal on October 31, 2003, under California's Anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) law, and the case was dismissed in November 2004, on the grounds that the Sharper Image "has not shown that the test protocol used by Consumers Union was scientifically, or otherwise, invalid," and had not "demonstrated a reasonable probability that any of the challenged statements were false." The decision also awarded CU $525,000 in legal fees and costs. Quackwatch article InfomercialWatch article

Controversy over child safety seats The February 2007 issue of Consumer Reports stated that only two of the child safety seats it tested for that issue passed the magazine's side impact tests. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which subsequently retested the seats, found that all those seats passed the corresponding NHTSA tests at the speeds described in the magazine report. The CR article reported that the tests simulated the effects of collisions at 38.5 mph. However, the tests that were completed in fact simulated collisions at 70 mph. Detroit News CR stated in a letter from its president Jim Guest to its subscribers that it would retest the seats. The magazine issue with erroneous findings has not been recalled, but the letter states that after the seats are retested, the results of that test will be published. The article was removed from the CR website, and on January 18 2007 the organization posted a note on its home page about the misleading tests. Subscribers were also sent a postcard apologizing for the error.

On January 28, 2007, Joan Claybrook, who served on the board of CU from 1982 to 2006 (and was the head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration from 1977 to 1981), discussed the sequence of events leading to the publishing of the erroneous information. The magazine contracted with Calspan to do the actual testing; due to miscommunication, the tests were conducted (using test sleds) at an actual speed of 38 miles per hour. In fact, since automobiles in a crash continue to move after the crash—rather than absorbing all the energy of impact as a test sled does—a test sled impact of 38 miles per hour is considered equivalent to an automobile crash of 70 miles per hour; to replicate an automobile crash of 38 miles per hour, as was intended, the test sled crash should have been carried out at 20 miles per hour.

Claybrook admitted that the magazine should have been motivated to double-check the surprising results; however, she also pointed out that CR was attempting to execute what should have been NHTSA's work. "Consumer Reports does not conduct crash tests save for low-speed bumper-impact tests," she stated. "It has limited expertise in designing such tests." She further noted that in 2000 Congress had mandated NHTSA to define a set of tests and issue a set of safety standards for child restraints within two years, but that NHTSA still had not yet done so, "though it took less than ten days to evaluate Consumer Reports’ testing and find the error."{{cite news| first = | last = | authorlink = | author = Joan Claybrook | coauthors = | title = Crash Test Dummies | url = http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/opinion/28claybrook.html?_r=1&n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fContributors&oref=slogin | format = | work = | publisher = [The New York Times | id = | pages = | page = | date = 2007-01-28 | accessdate = 2007-01-29 | language = | quote = How the testing mistake was made is instructive not only for ''Consumer Reports'' but for everyone who cares about public safety. -->

Other errors or issues In 2006, Consumer Reports said six hybrid vehicles would probably not save owners money. The magazine later discovered that they had miscalculated depreciation, and released an update saying that four of the seven vehicles would save the buyer money, if the vehicle was kept for five years (including the federal tax credit for hybrid vehicles, which expires after each manufacturer sells 60,000 hybrid vehicles).{{cite web | last = | first = | authorlink = | coauthors = | title = Update: This is a revised report on "The dollars and sense of hybrids" | work = | publisher = Consumers Union | year = 2006 | month = September | url = http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/high-cost-of-hybrid-vehicles-406/a-note-about-this-report/index.htm | format = | doi = | accessdate = 2007-01-29-->

In February 1998, the magazine tested pet food and claimed that Iams dog food was nutritionally deficient. They later retracted the report claiming that there had been "a systemic error in the measurements of various minerals we tested – potassium, calcium and magnesium." They stated they would conduct the study again and publish the results but have yet to do so. {{cite web]s in a fleet of taxi cabs. In their article, they noted that "Big-city cabs don't see many cold start-ups or long periods of high speed driving in extreme heat. But our test results relate to the most common type of severe service - stop-and-go city driving." They were unable to see a "meaningful" difference between any brands of oil which carried the Motor oil#American Petroleum Institute, but suggested that synthetic oil is "worth considering for extreme driving conditions high ambient temperatures and high engine load or very cold temperatures." This research was criticized by some because most engine damage appears to be caused by cold starts, and their research method may not have included enough cold starts to be representative of personal vehicle use.{{cite web| title = Statistical problems of Consumer Reports auto ratings | journal = allpar.com | url = http://www.allpar.com/cr.html | language = English | accessdate = 2007-04-08-->

In the July, 1978 issue, Consumer Reports rated the Dodge Omni car "not acceptable", the first cars it had judged such since the AMC Ambassador, in 1968. In its testing they found the possibility of these models developing an oscillatory yaw as a result of a sudden violent input to the steering; the manufacturer claimed that "Some do, some don't" show this behavior, but it has no "validity in the real world of driving". Storm over the Omni Horizon, Time Magazine, Jun 26, 1978 Nevertheless, the next year, Car handling#Cars with unusual handling problems; Consumer Reports reported that the previous instability was no longer present.

See also

References



External links



ConsumerReports.org - Find Product Reviews and Ratings from Consumer ...
Product reviews and Ratings on cars, appliances, electronics and more from Consumer Reports. ... Consumer Blogs Cars Downsizing, carpooling, and other fuel-saving tips. Money

ConsumerReports.org - Car reviews and ratings from Consumer Reports
Consumer Reports presents expert car reviews and ratings, for new and used cars, with performance, pricing, and reliability data.

Consumer Reports Electronics Blog
TVs, digital cameras, laptops, and other electronics gear that have been returned to a retailer or manufacturer, supposedly restored to good-as-new condition, and then re-sold at ...

Consumer Reports Cars Blog
Green and alternative-fuel vehicles are starting to become a large part of the automotive market and with gas prices continuing to rise, some are beginning to justify their higher ...

About Consumer Reports WebWatch
Consumers WebWatch, a project of Consumers Union, publishes research and journalism on credibility issues that matter to consumers, and recommends Web-wide guidelines to address ...

Creditsafe - consumer reports
What are creditsafe consumer reports? Creditsafe customer credit reports provides the information you require in order to assess the likelihood of your customer being able to ...

Consumer Reports - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Consumer Reports is an American magazine published monthly by Consumers Union. It publishes reviews and comparisons of consumer products and services based on reporting and results ...

Consumer Reports
Scientific tests and ratings of thousands of products every year. More than 100 experts working in 7 major areas: Appliances; Cars; Baby & Kids; Electronics; Foods; Health & Family ...

Consumer Reports RSS Feeds
Welcome to Consumer Reports RSS Feeds Receiving the latest news, product Ratings and reviews, buying advice, and much more from Consumer Reports has never been easier.

Consumer Reports
Looking for reliable products you know are a good value? Visit www.ConsumerReports.org today.

 

Consumer Reports



 
Copyright © 2008 Hintcenter.com - All rights reserved.
Home | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
All Trademarks belong to their repective owners. Many aspects of this page are used under
commercial commons license from Yahoo!