Abstract
The article focuses on the authors' comments on marketing of consumer information. Authors are somewhat distressed as their original article was severely misinterpreted by researcher Dan Sarel. Two main criticisms of the authors' model and methodology offered by Sarel are that the methodology cannot produce useful guidelines for three reasons: the criteria used in the methodology are inappropriate, the product is of a special nature and other important considerations have been omitted. Acceptance of the authors' approach could cause an undesirable shift in research efforts away from central issues and toward resolution of methodological problems within the model. The first condition is implicitly rejected by authors' discussion of why Sarel's substantive criticism of the model is invalid. Regarding the second condition, authors can find no evidence that their proposal has generated any research whatsoever in the three years since its publication. Sarel questions the appropriateness of considering actual usage of information by consumers as an important criterion in the design of an information program.