Rusty is correct. These scopes did receive the "best value" award, and the Nikon Gold received top honors.
Keep in mind, however, that these tests should be taken with a grain of salt. Why? Well, yes, the testers did use these scopes on rifles to test things such as trackability, etc. However, keep in mind that the Outdoor Life "tests" are very, very short term tests. That, of course, holds true for even the Nikon Gold. As such, who knows how well the scope you are talking about (or even the Nikon Gold - for that matter) will hope up in the long run.
I really don't think that the Nikon Gold will fall apart. I have several Nikon Monarchs (and pre-monarchs) and they have help up VERY WELL over the years. As such, although the Gold is new, it still has somewhat of a track record with the rest of the Nikon line, and the Gold is supposed to be better (better, in part, due to it's 30mm tube which increases the strength of the tube, and also allows for more internal adjustments).
The same thing goes for the leupold. Maybe a new model, but Leupold has an EXCELLENT track record - one of the best in the business.
The scope you are talking about, however, has no real track record. We are not just taking about a new model, but rather a new manufacturer. As such, I have some reservations about that.
The Sightron, on the other hand, has somewhat of a track record. I'm not necessarily endorsing it, but I have heard from several people that use them that they are very happy with them.
It's just that there are so many good and well known scopes out there, that I, personally, would not take the risk of buying the newcomers.
That's one of the many benefits of this site - many people can tell you of their experiences, and recommendations, of various products. Apparently, at least so far, no one really knows anything about these scopes, do you really want to take the chance?
Zachary
