LawOfMD wrote:heh. you'll enjoy this: Here's a snapshot of his latest review. Love this guy's honesty
"Cornelius & Anthony is a solid cigar company. It is a mystery to me how they let this new revised blend fly off the rails. Is this why there are no reviews of this cigar? Is everyone afraid of pissing off C&A? I’m not. But of course, I will burn another bridge by being truthful.
Manufacturers are very sensitive about what is written about them. The slightest critical comments doom the writer to be taken off their reviewer’s list. So be it. I am beholden to my readers, not the manufacturer.
https://kohnhed.com/2017/03/06/cornelius-anthony-meridian-2016-cigar-reviews-by-the-katman/
I know of no other cigar reviewer that appears more loyal to his readers than this.
Had to look at this just to see... cause I'm curious like that.
I have to call bs on this guy and do not find him credible.
He rated an LFD Andalusian Bull sub-par saying that it might just be that he's not a fan of DR tobacco.
Then he goes and rates all the latest and greatest AVOs at 95 (DR tobacco if I remember right), but the Davidoffs get little love in the 70s. Padrons, forget about it, he's not giving up a good review for a $20+ MSRP cigar... period.
And in between his cigar reviews, he hammers out weed reviews left and right (I'm guessing this guy is stoned a lot).
Anyway, the only pattern I can see is that if he can get the smokes cheap on cbid, he gives it a great review. If it costs him as much as a gram of weed, then he kicks the s#17 out of it into the dirt.
So, I would say if you want to get fair reviews, you would have to use a sliding scale. For cheap yard gars you can get cheap on cbid, your sliding scale rating for a good cigar would be between 90 and 95 where anything less is trash.
If it's a premium smoke with a $10 to $15, then your scale is 85 to 92.
If it's an ultra-premium, you would use the scale 75 to 85.
Edit:
Ok, read a few more, I was wrong, he seems to be a boutique fan.