Where is Whiz's review

[Nator]

I checked his site too

[DennisLinkletter]

These are Whiz's numbers

Although this charcoal turned out to be better than the other extruded on the market, it is NOT up to KOmodo standards which must be simply the best.

That's why I slashed the price to blow it out and start again. There is nothing wrong with this charcoal, it has the second longest burn time from the extruded imported and has the clean coconut profile that makes it unique. This quality charcoal will never be marketed for this price again.

These are Whiz's numbers.

[TheNakedWhiz]

When I found out that the charcoal manufacturer and pulled a fast one on Komodo Kamado, I stopped the review. I don't have the time or inclination to do a full review on this stuff since once it is gone, it will be replaced by the higher quality charcoal that will be continued to be sold under the Komodo Sustainable name.

If you want my impression, vs. a review, then this charcoal is better than any of the charcoal sold by KAmado except, obviously, for that initial Philippine charcoal. It should do a good job of tiding folks over until KOmodo can straighten out the manufacturer. Once I have a sample of the charcoal that was supposed to be provided by this manufacturer, I'll do the full review.

[jdbower]

I guess that's one of the horrible consequences of being open about issues and having a history of rectifying things - reviewers tend to cut you a little slack when things go wrong even when your mistake is still among the best currently available on the market

[primeats]

I'm not sure Doug cut Dennis any slack, he actually performed an honest assessment and put the numbers out there straight. GeeWhiz(pun intended) two guys acting and being professional, what's this world coming to?

[TheNakedWhiz]

This is definitely not a matter of cutting Komodo Sustainable charcoal some slack. It just doesn't make sense to do a formal review of something that in essence was a mistake. If Ford asked me to publish a review of a Mustang and what showed up was a Focus, I wouldn't publish the review. It became clear that the manufacturer had pulled a switch on Komodo Sustainable (for whatever reason) so a review was pointless. Komodo Sustainable has explained what happened and offerred to "make it right", so I wouldn't be providing anything useful with a review. Not to mention that I would have had to completely re-do it later.

This was not the case in all the previous reviews of coconut charcoal from KAmado. KAmado made claims about how great these charcoals were, that they were made using the same formula as the Philippine charcoal, etc. etc. etc., so there was every reason to review all those charcoals. We all had high hopes that we would see a return of the quality coconut charcoal that was originally sold, and I think everyone had every right to know whether or not this was the case. That I did those reviews certainly wasn't a matter of whether or not KAmado has a good or bad reputation. They were selling products and I reviewed them. When the reviews showed that the products were not very good, KAmado didn't claim that it was a mistake. Instead they denied that my results were accurate. They continued to claim their charcoal was the highest quality charcoal available. If KAmado had told me there had been a mistake and that I should have held off or redone a review, I would have done so. But they chose to stand by their product as sold, so I stood by my reviews.

I can assure you that once KOmodo Sustainable has the correct product available, I will do a formal review at that time.

P.S. I'm not picking on you, jd. I just want to be clear about what happened in this situation.

[trish]

I think it also should be noted that Dennis spend a great deal of time (about a year as I recall) trying to locate the best product before adding charcoal to his offering. He clearly stated he wanted the best, and when he found the product sent it to Whiz for an opinion.

Whiz is correct about the Kompetitor's Klump. When informed the Klump was not the quality of the original batch, RJ attacked the messenger (Whiz and the Kustomers) instead of making things right to his Kustomers

I don't think it compromises the review process at all, but I think it demonstrates Dennis' committment to be honest and to offer the best.

[jiarby]

I too was wondering what was up when Dougs report was AWOL. There was so much hype about the charcoal I expected the review to be awesome and quickly broadcast in every bbq forum around... When time went by and there was nothing I had a feeling something was up and I called up a friend that I knew had impeccable integrity and reputation for thoroughness and asked him to test the new stuff. He had a supply of the 2003, 2007, and the new KK and was able to do a side by side test to compare ash weight and burn time.

His determination was that the KK coco lump was NOT 3% as originally intended, but actually was closer to 10%. Even so, his opinion was that the KK charcoal still performed well and was FAR superior to the current drek being peddled by the "other" guys the last 3 years.

The KK charcoal is STILL the best available lump in the states that we have been able to find. With Dennis lowering the price it is especially a good value and well worth the price of admission. I will be buying a pallet of it myself.

I especially appreciate the openness of Dennis to admit that the charcoal was different than originally thought and to make it right for the people that bought it. He obviously has a commitment to making the best product possible (as evidenced in the evolution in the cookers ovet the last few years)... and I know that he only wants to bring in the best charcoal available anywhere in the world.

I hope (for our own selfish sake) that Dennis stays in the charcoal buisness for years to come and we have a steady supply of nuclear fuel rods for our cookers.

Glenn Butler

"jiarby"