BD isn't a bad processor from a price/performance standpoint. It is comparable on both counts. Unfortunately, it is far, far behind in terms of power consumption performance in comparison to current gen Intel offerings. Again, AMD fanboys can argue how it is scaling appropriately due to number of cores. Again, that is a stupid argument, especially given that the 2500K with comparable performance, price, and over clock, achieves this with a substantially lower power consumption on load.
Are you seriously trying to compare a new gen CPU to a last gen CPU? It is common knowledge that Nehalem was hugely power hungry and an issue Intel succeeded in addressing with Sandy Bridge. Nehalem was also the most powerful processor upon release, so the performance crown justified the higher power consumption from an enthusiast standpoint. BD has not seized any performance crowns, while having a much greater power consumption level. Short of being a blatant AMD fanboy, there is little justification for recommending a BD build unless you are simply upgrading the CPU, of which you may need to upgrade your PSU as well.
I do agree with him that the power consumption is blown out of proportion. Yes, they promised better efficiency, and it did not deliver as much as Intel's chips did or as much as expected, but many people are making comments like "OMG I WILL NEED A NEW PSU!!" which is just flat out not true. Also, the way different review sites calculated power draw adds to the confusion, as some measured at the wall for the whole system, some accounted for PSU efficiency, some tried to isolate the CPU's power draw, etc, giving a huge range of numbers that most people have no clue what to do with. It is sub par compared to what was promised/expected, but it is not as big as some people make it out to be.