Not really... there's varying degrees of potential marketing income on various product lines. All I'm saying is they'd be shooting themselves in the foot by not at least sugarcoating some shortcomings of various items they get for review.
Do you think this thing really is a 10? That it's as good as amps come these days?
I'm not saying it's not a nice amp. But a 10, at that price?
I'm not saying that I believe it should or shouldn't be a 10/10. Without any personal hands-on it would be impossible for me to formulate an opinion. And, yes, I think a certain degree of sugar-coating takes place. But 10/10 is more like throwing flowers at their feet. I believe they also dished out a 10/10 for the Bluguitar Amp1, who, being a tiny company, would have been unlikely to offer the magazine any "incentives" for a favourable review. I know it's easy to be cynical, and I'm as guilty as most in that respect, but there has to be a fair amount of credence to the review as 10/10 is one hell of a bold statement. Mind you, Guitarist Magazine were also waxing lyrical about the 2015 Gibson range, and look how that turned out 
Agreed.
Mostly about this
but there has to be a fair amount of credence to the review as 10/10 is one hell of a bold statement.
And especially about this 
Mind you, Guitarist Magazine were also waxing lyrical about the 2015 Gibson range, and look how that turned out
