Review: Stylish Danny P. Leather Wallet Holds iPhone 6/6s Plus, Cards and Cash

[DipDog3]

It has to be paid. Nobody would ever spend that much time on a wallet UNLESS the wallet WAS the phone, the credit card, etc. A piece of leather doesn't require this much of an in-depth look.

The Pad & Quill articles are the worst, they are always so glowingly positive that you almost think Pad & Quill wrote them.

It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't painfully obvious to everyone that these products are terribly designed & way overpriced, but the reviews are always positive.

The FTC has guidelines on how to properly provide disclosures for products reviews, if anyone is interested: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/bus...tcs-endorsement-guides-what-people-are-asking

 

[Bubba Satori]

EDIT: $30 for materials, $100 for Danny P.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Go Danny!

That's right up there with Apple'$ iMargin$.
I need to invent an adapter for it.

 

[C DM]

The article clearly states that you were sent a product for review. Why doesn't that require a disclaimer? Because it was only $130?

How does that influence the review? And if the article attached to the review states that isn't that disclaiming that information already?
[doublepost=1454195975][/doublepost]

It has to be paid. Nobody would ever spend that much time on a wallet UNLESS the wallet WAS the phone, the credit card, etc. A piece of leather doesn't require this much of an in-depth look. It's just like those "sponsored" articles on actual news websites you see. if you don't look closely, you get fooled into thinking they are real. I guess with everyone using adblockers, tracking blockers, script blockers, flash blockers, they have to do this. But I still don't like it.

Because you can't imagine the reasoning means that no other reasoning other than what you think could reasonably apply?

 

[furi0usbee]

Because you can't imagine the reasoning means that no other reasoning other than what you think could reasonably apply?

It's not that I don't imagine the reasoning behind it. The reasoning is simple, to sell a wallet. Reason aside, it's a solution for a problem that exists, just this is the wrong solution IMO. If anything, this gives some weight to the necessity of an Apple 4" iPhone!!!!

 

[Timmy D]

I have been using this iPhone wallet for maybe 8 months now. I find it to be pretty great. I should say I never use any sort of protective case for any of my iPhones. As Danny P says on his website, the feel and look of the iPhone is too great to cover with some sort of protective case. I find the wallet to be truly perfect for my usage.

 

[WildCowboy]

As a number of posters have pointed out, this is not a sponsored/paid post. Yes, we were provided with a wallet to review as is common and which we mentioned...that's the extent of it. We have never accepted payment for reviews.

This product certainly won't appeal to everyone, whether due to price, style, or other factors, but it is notable in part because Apple has decided to carry it in its online store. That was a significant factor in our decision to review it.

 

[Wahlstrm]

-For the one who really likes to have all the eggs in one basket.

 

[4jasontv]

If it was paid for it would have a disclaimer.

Are news stories really advertising in disguise?

That's cool, but I can't seem to find how the unit that was reviewed was acquired. Who did MacRumors pay to get their hands on the consumer packaged unit that was tested? The review says it can be purchased at Apple or through their website, but doesn't go so far as to say it was purchased. Was the unit provided for free for the purposes of the review? If so when will you be making available for readers to win. I mean, if a MacRumors employee keeps it then the case was provided as the form of payment and the article should be updated as you stated.

 

[OllyW]

That's cool, but I can't seem to find how the unit that was reviewed was acquired. Who did MacRumors pay to get their hands on the consumer packaged unit that was tested? The review says it can be purchased at Apple or through their website, but doesn't go so far as to say it was purchased. Was the unit provided for free for the purposes of the review? If so when will you be making available for readers to win. I mean, if a MacRumors employee keeps it then the case was provided as the form of payment and the article should be updated as you stated.

I've no idea, the front page content is nothing to do with the moderators. Try asking @WildCowboy or one of the other editors.

 

[WildCowboy]

The case was provided free of charge by Danny P., and I've added a note to the post indicating that, as well as making clear that no other compensation was received.

We'll try to remember to add similar statements to all other reviews as applicable.

 

[prowlmedia]

Where do you see the "clearly paid for" part? I know us plebes will never reach your level of sophistication, but please enlighten us for the future.

Well that's the point isn't it. They have not clearly marked it* - You might want to eat that chip on your shoulder by the way.

MacRumors is always transparent about any partnerships. If the review was that boring and lacking in information, it would be a terrible review. I suppose that's why you don't write for one of the most successful tech blogs on the Internet.

You suppose right, I don't work for one of the most successful tech blogs on the internet, I have worked in advertising and have been a director for 23 years so I know how to sell something. And now matter how you wash it it's an 'advertorial'. Very little reason in a 1700 word review of a bit of leather - especially the way this is written, But that is fine. Macrumors can do what they want. My point was they had not put a disclaimer up there.

*I see now that they have added a disclaimer - free wallet, no compensation. So make your own mind up.

 

[npmacuser5]

We have had really good luck with Bellroy Wallets for iPhones. Well made, good looking, functional, waterproof leather and zipper, competitively priced. I looked at this type of wallet and decided a zippered was safer for all items. Have to say this one for a non-zippered looks good.

 

[macduke]

You suppose right, I don't work for one of the most successful tech blogs on the internet, I have worked in advertising and have been a director for 23 years so I know how to sell something. And now matter how you wash it it's an 'advertorial'. Very little reason in a 1700 word review of a bit of leather - especially the way this is written, But that is fine. Macrumors can do what they want. My point was they had not put a disclaimer up there.

*I see now that they have added a disclaimer - free wallet, no compensation. So make your own mind up.

I wrote for 9to5Mac for a little while several years back. IMO they're second only to MacRumors for Apple coverage, although they often get more scoops. I quit because I got super busy my senior year of college—a BFA in design, minor in marketing and minor in photography. I also couldn't compete with megabloggers like Gurman who was a little bit of a diva sometimes (although I think he was still in high school back then, haha). I currently work as a member of a marketing and communications team. So I understand how these paid things work and you have to be really careful to be super transparent with your readers or you can lose a ton of credibility. Furthermore, you often have to plump up your review posts to make them a better read. Anyone can write a boring review! I lurked for years before joining MacRumors, and have had several chats with arn on here and on Twitter. He's not the type of guy to allow that sort of under the table crap. He's a stand up guy. They're always transparent when it comes to keeping the integrity of their content. So yeah, we members who have been here a long time just get irritated when people keep bringing this up over and over when it's not true.

 

[Denzo]

If it was paid for it would have a disclaimer.

Are news stories really advertising in disguise?

That's not necessarily true at all.

I personally have a friend who works for a high profile auto magazine and he is not allowed to say what he wants about cars he reviews. He has to be positive about some cars, more than others, but he always needs to follow the guidelines set out by his employer. No disclaimer anywhere ever.

Please don't be so gullible.

 

[OllyW]

That's not necessarily true at all.

I personally have a friend who works for a high profile auto magazine and he is not allowed to say what he wants about cars he reviews. He has to be positive about some cars, more than others, but he always needs to follow the guidelines set out by his employer. No disclaimer anywhere ever.

Please don't be so gullible.

The Editor in Chief has confirmed that the review sample was provided free of charge but MacRumors were not paid to publish the review so I believe my post to be true.

As a number of posters have pointed out, this is not a sponsored/paid post. Yes, we were provided with a wallet to review as is common and which we mentioned...that's the extent of it. We have never accepted payment for reviews.

This product certainly won't appeal to everyone, whether due to price, style, or other factors, but it is notable in part because Apple has decided to carry it in its online store. That was a significant factor in our decision to review it.

The case was provided free of charge by Danny P., and I've added a note to the post indicating that, as well as making clear that no other compensation was received.

We'll try to remember to add similar statements to all other reviews as applicable.

 

[C DM]

That's not necessarily true at all.

I personally have a friend who works for a high profile auto magazine and he is not allowed to say what he wants about cars he reviews. He has to be positive about some cars, more than others, but he always needs to follow the guidelines set out by his employer. No disclaimer anywhere ever.

Please don't be so gullible.

So because of a friend somewhere it has something to do with how things are done somewhere else?

 

[Thunderhawks]

I may be "not getting" something here. With due respect to the makers for the quality materials and style, I see two big problems with this that would prevent a lot of people from getting it. The first is the inherent problem with wallet cases -- lose it, and you've lost everything important in your world in one fell swoop. That's something Danny P et al aren't going to fix, but its just a concern should you every accidentally lose your iPhone or get robbed.

The second problem here is particular to this design: it renders your iPhone essentially useless. Pulling the iPhone out of that tight-fitting pocket will take time and effort, and people would want to do that a few dozen to a few hundred times a day, so that becomes an issue. Maybe an Apple Watch user wouldn't be as affected (I'm one, and it's true that I don't have to take out my iPhone anywhere near as much as I used to), but for many that will be a showstopper, particularly as it won't fit the iPhone that has a case on it.

Why are you being realistic here?
Agreed this is not well thought out and the price.....bruaaaahhhhahahahahah
[doublepost=1454426508][/doublepost]

It's not that I don't imagine the reasoning behind it. The reasoning is simple, to sell a wallet. Reason aside, it's a solution for a problem that exists, just this is the wrong solution IMO. If anything, this gives some weight to the necessity of an Apple 4" iPhone!!!!

And, everybody adapting Apple Pay, so we don't need ANY creditcards in a wallet!

 

[radus]

a more technical question is if a strong radio sender and a batterie next to the credi-cards / whatever-cards are a good idea ?