| Author |
Topic |
n/a |
 Posted - 01/07/2008 : 10:59:33
|
Warning: Dan Kennedy "Phenomenon"
Although I'm a huge Dan Kennedy fan, I had a bad experience ordering his "phenomenon" downloadable video.
I was disappointed to see 2 unauthorized $49.97 charges from "Glazer-Kennedy INN" in Dec 07 and Jan 08 following my $14.97 purchase of Dan Kennedy's "The Phenomenon". Both charges came as a bad surprise.
I *carefully* studied the order form prior to ordering, including all terms/conditions, and Nowhere did it disclose a forced continuity $49.97 charge that I'd be hit with every month.
This morning I spoke with Cary Chestnut at Glazer's office and she said they'd been getting a lot of calls about it. I'm rather pissed off.
She said that the (hidden) continuity was inside the "bonuses" they mailed to me, that in there somewhere was a sheet of paper saying that I would be automatically enrolled in Dan's "Gold Elite Plus" at $49.97 unless I responded by a certain date, and since I didn't, I got charged, after ordering the $14.97 downloadable video.
I didnt' ever even get such a piece of paper, and I certainly didn't sign up for continuity charges, which under FTC law must be disclosed at time of purchase.
I just called my bank to dispute the charges, and left a voicemail for Bill Glazer, asking him to call and explain.
I am also about to contact the FTC and file a complaint - if it was anybody but Dan, I would have already done so. But I'm giving Bill an opportunity to respond first.
It's quite disappointing to see a hidden forced continuity like this. I have lost a lot of respect for Dan and Bill because of this, and will cease recommending them to anybody. Hiding the "your credit card will now be whacked for $49.97 unless you call to cancel it - surprise!" inside a physical mailing that I hadn't asked for (nor received) is clearly an FTC violation.
I am not somebody to screw with - I DO contact alphabet agencies and have companies fined and/or shut down over crap like this, and I do take legal action for more serious things.
Anybody want to weigh in on this? It's not clever marketing, it's deceptive forced continuity, and I'm beyond pissed at Dan and Bill over it.
-Ken
Here's screencaps of the 2 unauthorized charges:
http://www.copywritinguniversity.com/glazerkennedyunauthorizedcharge.gif
http://www.copywritinguniversity.com/glazerkennedyunauthorizedcharge.gif
I'd signed up for a 1-time $14.97 download, NOT a $600/year forced continuity. There was nothing about this in the salesletter, it was allegedly included in "bonus" letters that were mailed to me (which I did not receive). Bad marketing. Disappointed. |
|
Jason Moffatt |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 11:07:04
|
Ken,
I'd think of all the kick ass things you learned from
Dan and focus on that.
Sure, this episode may not be to your liking, and you
may be in the right. However, your attitude about it
may be a bit dramatic.
Also keep in mind it may be totally on Bill and not Dan
since I think he's running much of the operation now
(I could be wrong though).
Still, considering the decades of knowledge I know you've
consumed from Dan I think it's a pretty low blow to start
talking about 3 letter alphabet agencies over something
like this.
Give it some time and let the steam blow off.
Being mad a Dan is going to do nothing good for you.
And I imagine that sometime in the near future you are going
to read something Dan wrote and make a huge pile of money
from it, and say... "Thanks Dan".
I'd rather chime in with this type of attitude cuz I can
just see this thread spiraling out of control and Warriors
freaking out with 4 pages of ranting, when what they should
be doing is going to the store and buying Dan's cheap books. |
 |
|
Keith Boisvert |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 11:11:05
|
Not to be a "lttle black raincloud", but I have to agree with Jason.
I would be pissed as well, understandably so. But I would wait until I got the whole story before going off half cocked. there may be a reasonable explanation, and chances have it there is.
If it were some no-name marketer than I would be less patient, but I think at least Dan has built up enough of a great reputation to at least give him the benefit of the doubt for right now?
Just my opinion. There's always more than one way to approach things.
keith |
|
|
n/a |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 11:11:57
|
Good point, Jason - I agree.. it's hard to see the forest for the trees though, big picture like I should do, when all I can see is RED over this. Thanks guys for the 'calm down' note, you're right, big picture. But it's like I just got slapped in the face. Sure I should blow it off and not make a big deal of it I guess. But still, it's a slap nonetheless, and I lost respect for these guys over it.
I'll go work on DVDs I'm editing and try to calm down.. thanks.. :p
Think about it- it's like if you bought a DVD from me, after I got your credit card number, and unbeknownst to you at time of purchase, I snuck in a piece of paper I mailed to you and said "by the way, congratulations you're in my ___ of the month club and you'll automatically be billed $50/month unless you call this number (123) 456-7890 by (2 weeks from today) to cancel it. Same thing.
It's squarely in the unethical marketing bin imho - and it's disappointing to see a role model of mine stoop to this. I left a 2nd voicemail for Bill Glazer just now, hopefully he'll get back to me soon before I contact the FTC (which I will, if a solid explanation isn't forthcoming, and an apology and a responsible solution).
Hitting people's credit cards without their permission is not ethical, and I've decided to totally stop recommending Dan and his products because of this. It's an infraction of "you're fired" magnitude.
I guess the IM lesson learned is: at least "tell people" or clearly ask permission before you whack their credit cards... otherwise you'll get a lot of angry customers... and for some of us who Do take action (in a retaliatory way against infringements), that is bad for business. Play honest. Keep things straight. It counts.
Ken
p.s. in my voicemail to Bill Glazer, I asked him to forward it to Dan, too, so they can get back to me. I was on the cover of Dan's March 2006 (?) gold newsletter as a testimonial I provided even, and have spoken with both guys personally over the years. It's disappointing to be slapped by a role model. |
|
|
Jason Moffatt |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 11:19:09
|
Ken,
I know exactly how you feel (the red and all) as I know
your character very well.
Which is why I posted what I did before the thread started
to spiral out of control.
I also know how much you really do like and appreciate Dan.
Therefore, I'd just try to cool off and not dismiss something
that is a great asset to you and those you recommend to him.
You and I both know that Dan rules.
However, he can be very aggressive and is going to make mistakes
like the rest of us.
|
|
|
n/a |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 11:22:34
|
Right, Jason. Thanks for helping me keep cool :p
A quick call from Bill saying "sorry Ken we made a mistake I'll make it right" would go a long ways.
It's just that I model Dan's stuff so closely, to such great effect, in my online businesses, making such great sales, it's disappointing (like seeing a role model you look up to, do something bad like kick a dog or whatever)...to see this come from their company. And from their person who has said she's gotten a lot of calls over it, I'm not alone. But you're right. I'll take a deep breath and chant "this too shall pass".. (^_^).
-ken |
|
|
Rod Cortez |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 11:22:39
|
Several well known TV informercial companies have been fined for doing something similar. They either neglected the "forced continuity" wording or hid it so well that the governing government agency fined them for it.
I understand you're pissed off Ken, as well you should be. But I'm with Jason on this one. I'd see how the company responds first and see how they handle it. There have been times in the past when something like this has happened and when I ultimately contacted the founder of the program they were not even aware this was going on. Let's face it, sometimes when you outsource you aren't aware of all the minute details. Even so, people are going to blame whoever's name is on it.
I'd still stay proactive by trying to work it out first and give them an opportunity to fix this. I'd also try and contact Dan and make him aware of this since his name is on it.
Rod "I-Have-Forced-Continuity-Coffee-Beans!" Cortez
|
|
|
Scott Ames |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 11:25:01
|
No matter how much you make... and Ken makes a goodly amount.. the feeling of being cheated stings. Everyone (most everyone) here can take a $100 hit without worrying about it. Its not going to take food off the table, but that's not the point.
Dan Kennedy may have no idea this was done. It may have been done as a marketing test, but it was a bonehead way to extract money. I don't know about anyone else, but I want to approve expenditures before someone dips into my bank account and takes money.
Just because of who it is I would say let them explain. They will most likely make it right. If they are smart they will explain and apologize and send you a nice gift. If this happened to me from an unknown marketer I would be having Gueto pay them a visit. |
|
|
Trump |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 11:36:52
|
| I agree with Ken on this one. It's completely unethical and probably illegal. Think of all the people that DON'T notice the extra charges. |
|
|
n/a |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 11:48:26
|
Right, Trump - I didn't notice it til the 2nd billing myself, just this past weekend. That's a $600/year unauthorized upsell on a $14.97 one-time buy if I hadn't caught it. Bad.
And I carefully studied the salesletter, (and kept a copy of it on my hard drive), all the mouseprint/terms/conditions and Nowhere did it say anything about continuity or $49.97 monthly charges.
I will be forwarding this original salesletter (pdf) to the FTC as supporting evidence in a complaint unless I get a solid explanation from them. A phone call from them saying "we f'd up and we're really sorry and we'll make it right" would be great. Though I may still contact the ftc on gp/general principle.
-ken |
|
|
Alan Petersen |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 11:49:17
|
Seems like forced continuity is becoming very popular with A-list marketers. There have been several threads in the past few months about this. Folks ordering a "free" CD (giving up their cc for S/H charges) but not noticing the free month to their CD club or whatever which automatically re-bills every month for around $50. Usually it takes folks two re-bills before they notice it on their statement.
In those cases it was in small print towards the bottom of the sales page. Those other marketers doing this are also respected so it's disappointing to see them all jumping on this. I don't like forced continuity myself. Must be because I have a few CD's I didn't want from Columbia house from 15 years ago...I forgot to return the "no thanks" postcard.  |
|
|
Ken Preuss |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 11:50:43
|
I've been a Glazer-Kennedy customer for several years and have purchased well over $20K of stuff from them. Maybe it's that we share the same name, but I'm aligned with Ken Calhoun on this. However it's for deeper reasons.
The reality is that forced continuity is, by its very nature, inauthentic. Particularly if it's not done properly. As a strategy for delivering real value to a customer who might not otherwise 'move' to get that value, forced continuity certainly has power. No question.
However, to not disclose the forced continuity with the commitment that every single customer who buys understands the forced continutiy exists is entirely void of a commitment to quality. It's also entirely void of a commitment to each and every customer. Period.
There's no "whole story" to get here....Glazer-Kennedy's rep said it himself: the forced continuity was tucked/hidden into one of the bonuses. Nevermind that the disclosure didn't exist in the package Ken received. Even if it had been there, the business practice of hiding forced continuity from ANY percentage of customers is despicable.
For an organization as large and successful as Glazer-Kennedy to stoop to the level of so many other shyster operations is, in my opinion, shameful.
Nuff said.
Ken
|
|
|
Christopher R Everson |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 11:59:39
|
Wait!
Before you send that off to the FTC, for the love of god double check everything in there to make sure you haven't made a mistake somewhere along the line. Maybe the notice was not mailed to you. That sounds convienent for Dan to make more money, but mistakes do happen. Do everything within your power to make sure you didn't miss something.
Just calling the FTC up like that could potentially end his career as we know it. I've recently done a lot of research on the FTCs increasing involvement with internet sales, and without getting into a legal thread, the FTC can easily destroy a marketer. Even if the rest of his business is completely legit, and even if this occurence was a mistake, that simple move you are about to make could be insanely devastating.
I'm not agreeing with anything illegal, or immoral, or the integrity or nature in which you do this, but I think you should consider some of the advice here, especially Jason's, and wait for a response, and double check everything you've recieved to make sure the continuity charges were disclaimed anywhere.
Sorry to hear about this occurence though. |
|
|
Trump |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 12:02:15
|
quote : Originally posted by Christopher R Everson
Wait!
Before you send that off to the FTC, for the love of god double check everything in there to make sure you haven't made a mistake somewhere along the line. Maybe the notice was not mailed to you. That sounds convienent for Dan to make more money, but mistakes do happen. Do everything within your power to make sure you didn't miss something.
Just calling the FTC up like that could potentially end his career as we know it. I've recently done a lot of research on the FTCs increasing involvement with internet sales, and without getting into a legal thread, the FTC can easily destroy a marketer. Even if the rest of his business is completely legit, and even if this occurence was a mistake, that simple move you are about to make could be insanely devastating.
I'm not agreeing with anything illegal, or immoral, or the integrity or nature in which you do this, but I think you should consider some of the advice here, especially Jason's, and wait for a response, and double check everything you've recieved to make sure the continuity charges were disclaimed anywhere.
Sorry to hear about this occurence though.
It's definitely not a mistake, they already said that they chose to put (HIDE) the disclosure in some bonus, which is not right. |
|
|
n/a |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 12:05:23
|
Hi - yes I've checked everything quite carefully - nowhere on the sales page nor order form that I bought from ("point of sale" to use FTC terminology) was a forced continuity nor monthly billing option disclosed. I carefully checked and rechecked all mouseprint, both at time of ordering and last week.
Nothing about continuity was mentioned in the salesletter nor site at point of sale. I have the original salesletter on my hard drive as evidence.
It was apparently hidden in a follow up "free bonus" physical mail that was allegedly sent to me (which I did not get). Clearly an FTC violation on this one ("non disclosure at point of purchase for additional charges that would be made to the customer", to use complaint terminology).
I will however give them a chance to respond, I'd contacted them initially last week about it, and am awaiting a response. I wish that people would simply be more ethical. Doing bad things to your customers doesn't help your business. More disturbing is simply the fact that a role model of mine let me down.
I completely agree w/the other Ken's post, too -- that's how I feel about customer quality, care of customer issues -- taking care of people without deception, delivering solid value (so that you can then legitimately sell backends) is a great business proposition. Hiding or in this case completely not disclosing further charges at point of sale is really bad marketing and is *clearly* a violation of trade law (I know the subject + complaint rulings for similar issues that infomercial marketers have been fined for recently etc).
-k |
|
|
Christopher R Everson |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 12:06:10
|
Again trump, I'm not siding with anyone doing anything negative, just I now understand how the FTC can blindly ruin a legit marketers career, let alone someone with even just one slip up.
"She said that the (hidden) continuity was inside the "bonuses" they mailed to me, that in there somewhere was a sheet of paper saying that I would be automatically enrolled in Dan's "Gold Elite Plus" at $49.97 unless I responded by a certain date, and since I didn't, I got charged, after ordering the $14.97 downloadable video."
Like I said, it might have been a slip up somewhere along the line. |
|
|
Christopher R Everson |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 12:07:27
|
Well I guess the term point of sale certainly hammers in the legalities of this one.
Take this as a lesson learned. |
|
|
Hendry Lee |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 12:07:31
|
May be they are just testing on different marketing tactics to use and certainly in this case I am surprised that they would have predicted that it would fail miserably without any test. But anyway..
I agree with Ken as to the point where he will do what it takes to take his money back and let us know about this particular practice.
A few years ago, I was too in the same shoes. I was charged for a continuity payment for a service. I did register for it but surprisingly when I emailed to discontinue the service, seems like they intentionally delayed replying for a few days until another month passed by.
I was charged two times before I was able to *get* out of it. It was just a $19.95/mo payments so I didn't bother too much.I didn't know how to respond with such case back then so I made a promise to be careful next time and moved forward.
But I have to agree with Jason that you don't have to take it too far. All of us surely have times when we made mistakes and so far Dan has been a great resource to a lot of members here, not to mention the amount of fun I had while learning new things from him.
If I were you, I will wait and see how they are going to handle this before taking further steps. Perhaps if they didn't respond you should blog about it and let the community judge. Perhaps by then they will chime in and take appropriate actions.
|
|
|
Jason Lewis |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 12:20:09
|
I was stung by this also Ken.
Like many others here I've been a long time fan of Dan Kennedy's stuff, (bought about 5 books, copywriting seminar, loads of cassettes, manuals etc. over the years), but the underhand way they took my payment wasn't the only thing that pissed me off.
Like you Ken, I was automatically put on the continuity as some form of unannounced bonus, yeah right!
Anyway, I didn't want the newsletter because I never knowingly ordered it. So I contacted the Phenomenon support desk to explain and request a refund. All very politely at that stage.
Then the nightmare began...
They took about 5 days to respond, then said I'd have to call their other support desk, because they had nothing to do with the newsletter, even though my original order was with that site, and I never authorised any more payments.
I explained that I lived in the UK, and thought it was terrible that they expected me to call overseas, to get a refund on an unauthorised payment.
It took about 5 or more lengthy support request to get the Phenomenon support to take responsibility, and chase up my refund with Dan's other support team. Had to wait about 2 weeks in all to get my refund confirmation.
It was easily my most frustrating buying experience online, and definitely my most disappointing, mainly because of my previous respect for Dan and his products.
The only reason I didn't report them to the FTC, was because of my past good experiences with Dan's products. If the support nightmare carried on much longer I probably would have.
Jason
|
|
|
Trump |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 12:27:26
|
| So it looks like it already happened to someone else (before Ken) and they did NOT change the process. They refund the ones who *catch* it but keep doing it to the rest? |
|
|
LB |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 12:32:13
|
Yep, I got hit with this too.
I went back and scoured the site and there is no mention of this anywhere.
Quite pissed when I got billed for this when it was not on the salespage or checkout anywhere that I could find. If it was "hidden" in there somewhere then it was hidden way too well.
|
|
|
Shaun OReilly |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 12:34:42
|
I purchased the Phenomenon offer but cancelled the
continuity program in time so I wasn't charged for
that.
I've got most of Dan Kennedy's works and I'm familiar
with his business model so I expected there to be a
forced continuity element. In fact, I'd be surprised
if there wasn't one as he preaches it often enough!
However, what I detested was the the stealth 'method' of
the continuity program instead of being open and honest.
If anyone, including DK, tries to force me into a continuity
program I resist. If they try to do it deceptively then
I resist - vehemently.
One of the rules I operate my business by is the Golden Rule:
Treat others as you'd like to be treated.
To me, this means treating my prospects and customers as
intelligent human beings with respect and not trying to
treat them as fools by doing anything deceptive.
I cancelled my continuity program without hassle by
sending an e-mail to support@in12months.com . It took a
while for them to get back to me (like days) but they did
cancel as per my instruction.
Best wishes,
Shaun
|
|
|
n/a |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 12:36:32
|
Did you all see the great movie "Pulp Fiction"?
(It's one of my favorites, along with "Kill Bill" and "Goldfinger".)
Well anyways, remember the scene at the start, where Jules says to the punk, "Is your name Mrs. Marcellus? Because the only person who gets to f--k Mr. Marcellus, is Mrs. Marcellus. And from where I'm sitting, you don't look like Mrs. Marcellus to me".
I don't like being f'd on transactions. When I pull triggers, it's to alphabet agencies, because I don't like being f'd. It's not right.
I have given them one chance to respond honestly. It would be wise if they contacted me to set things right. I did leave 2 vms for Glazer, with my home number and email add, so they have an opportunity to set things straight.
What we can all take out of this is, simply, the GOLDEN RULE. Don't f'k with people like me - just treat people HONESTLY and ethically.
Why is that so f'ing hard to do? I'd rather EARN the respect of my customers, and keep them for years, as I do, than resort to underhanded hidden continuity/deceptive practices. That's no way to run a business.
The good news is, if you respond to your customers and treat them well, you'll stand above your competition. That's a key to my success, and I encourage you all to listen to the voice inside too, to always "take the high road" and do it right - it's the only way. That's why I've been around for a decade+ online making Ms, is simply treating customers right. It should be easy, I'd think.
-k
(thx Shaun for the email address, I'll send an email to them too, as I'd never gotten that. Interesting about the Golden Rule, I was writing this as you were, agree 110%. It's the only way to survive, and should be 2nd nature. With forums and emails and web20/blogs etc, word gets out if you don't treat people well. It also gets out if you DO - which is how to win and prosper at IM. It needs to be honest.). |
|
|
Christopher R Everson |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 12:41:38
|
"When I pull triggers, it's to alphabet agencies, because I don't like being f'd"
Oh man I like that line :)
Again, everyone can take this as a lesson learned regarding the impact customer service has on your business! |
|
|
Kalidasa |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 13:13:52
|
| I had a similar experience with Derek Gehl. They charged me $102 after sending me an email confirming my cancellation. Then tey took over a month to take care of it after being rude and not having the story straight. If I had thought about the FTC I surely would have called them on this one. I really understand the RED aspect. |
|
|
dbarnum |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 13:28:58
|
Bummer situation, Ken.
I just posted a thread about how difficult it is to read all these verification codes on the web today and can relate somewhat to the difficulty in buying online today.
This is a lesson for all of us: to go through our own payment processing and make sure it works properly, especially from the buyer’s eyes. For example, I know for sure one page on my site reads a 'warning' when people click it on and need to adjust code there, so little things can sure affect all IMers today, that's for sure, and we need to keep vigilant and in tune with the check out and processing systems online.
Tip: Do give people a chance to “fix” and make amends, my 2-cents. Especially with holidays just ending (and Jan. 6th was one for many – the 12th day of Christmas, Epiphany, etc. – even my birthday), so allow at least 30 days or whatever your payment processor advises.
|
|
|
Andrew Wilson |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 13:39:14
|
Why should somebody have to 'cool down' because of a previous association?
If somebody did something wrong then they should be pulled up for it.
There will be others being ripped off even as this post is being written, it should be stopped, no ifs, ands or buts. It is the responsibility of the person who knows what has happened to take the steps to ensure that this kind of thing stops.
How good should Ken feel tomorrow when he is nicely 'cooled down' and then he realises that other people have been ripped off while he was busy respecting his guru?
I look at it this way: the most wonderful cup of tea in the world is ruined by the addition of sour milk. Once the sour milk is in the tea the two can not be separated and the tea is forever tainted. |
|
|
Patrick Pretty |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 13:53:06
|
If this was done as a "test" -- and I stress "if" -- well, it's one of those things I don't know if I'll ever be able to understand.
Testing an approach such as this is a virtual advertisement that it's about the money and nothing else. What if it tests better, meaning a hidden forced continuity pulls in more cash?
What do you do then? Endorse it as a strategy because it "works?"
So what if it works? You end up alienating people who'd normally be your evangelists. And I don't imagine new customers would be pleased when hidden charges show up -- especially when even longtime customers are showing outrage.
It's one of those things that's lose-lose -- even if the bottom line does get a boost -- like an insurance company that saves a few dollars by denying a claim on technical grounds and later has to deal with a PR nightmare when the person who was denied goes public.
People don't like to be manipulated. Why split-test something that's self-evident unless it's about the money and nothing else?
Patrick Pretty
|
|
|
Scot Standke |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 13:56:51
|
Hmmm,
The more I think about this, the more I agree with you dustybin.
My lawn care guy does a stellar job, I have the greenest grass in the
neighborhood.
One day I see my lawn care pro slip into the side door of my neighbors
house and make off with a laptop and a plasma tv.
Do I call the police in hopes of stopping him before he does this to
someone else?
Wait, who will take care of my great green lawn if I do?
Ridiculous thinking here, Ken do what you think is right, others are
at risk of he same fate until this is brought forth to the right
people and two voice mails have not even made them flinch.
I love Dan Kennedy as much as the other guy, do you think he'd stand
idly by if one of us did something like this to him? Of course not,
Dan has always taught us to take the high road, no matter what.
Scot |
|
|
mmurtha |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 14:02:09
|
Hmm Ken,
That doesn't sound good, especially coming from someone like Dan. I think that's what makes it just so wrong.
I know marketers have been getting worse about stuff like this. It's bound to have happened sooner or later as they try things out to see what is the most effective, and how they can get the most out of their customers.
This being said, I do agree with Jason.
You've known Dan K for how long now?
Sure he's agressive, but I've never known him to do something like this yet.
I'd wait to see if I got a call before I got the FTC involved. At least give him that much. ;)
Anyway, hope you guys get things straightened out soon.
All the best ....
Mary
|
|
|
n/a |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 14:04:44
|
Hi - great points. And absolutely, I will, because it's Dan, give them one opportunity to respond before taking action. It's just disappointing, to see what feels like I've been "pickpocketed" without my consent, coming from a role model whose content is usually so solid.
It looks like several others were also taken in by this, so that's good to hear I'm not alone, that it likely wasn't a test, but their process.. and according to their person they've been getting calls about it, so I'm not alone in this.
I will be patiently waiting for their response. It had better be good.
-k |
|
|
John Ritz |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 14:15:39
|
Good points all around. I didn't pick up the Phenomenon yet, but was planning to do so. Glad I got this heads up about it.
I have been burned on forced continuity before. Many of us have at some points, and it does appear to be getting worse.
I had to cancel a monthly magazine from another well-known marketer after I noticed charges appearing on my CC statements. I buy so many things, and these marketers usually have their company name show up on the charge, so it's not always easy to match up the products with the charges.
But after seeing this charge each month for several months, I had to do a little digging to find out what it was for and why I was getting whacked every month for it.
That irks me to no end, because I have to take time out of my busy schedule to hunt the culprit down, then request a cancellation. The lost money is one thing, but it's more the feeling of "feeling suckered."
And the most important issue for me is really the time I have to spend, time that could be better spent elsewhere.
Like John Carlton and Gary Halbert used to say talking about "Operation Moneysuck."
As John puts it: "If you are the guy who brings in the money into your business, then thats your most important job. Thats your second most important job, your third most important job, and on down the line."
If youre the one who brings in the money, then thats what you need to be doing. Every hour you spend fixing the phones or the copier or dealing with operations issues is an hour that robs you twice: that hour is gone, and youve spent an hour less bringing in the dough.
John
|
|
|
mmurtha |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 14:19:34
|
Yeah, I know Ken, and I do feel badly for you kid!
It's the principle of it all.
BUT, you will be doing the right thing by patiently waiting.
In the mean time, go get busy doing something else to get your mind off of things. It will make time go by faster, and you probably won't stew over it so much. :)
Now don't you have a new product you can be working on?
Hope so ....
Mary |
|
|
n/a |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 14:21:58
|
It's very likely a good idea to get one of those new Discover visa/mc cards that has a rotating/new number to use each transaction, for unknown sites, so that they can't hit you monthly for unauthorized charges.
Heck if I didn't have all my webhosting etc subscriptions on this same card, I'd likely just cancel it and get a new one with a new number, to "clean house" and avoid unauthorized continuity charges once a year (or more often). That's one reason I like using paypal to pay, and avoid entering my cc number into unknown sites, because everything's there and you get emails telling you about monthly charges/receipts etc..
Great point, Mary. That's another "cost" of this type of incident, is the "stew time/energy" spent instead of new product development..
back to work,
-k |
|
|
ExRat |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 15:25:41
|
Hi Ken,
I think it's great that you're willing to speak out about this. From what you say, you could probably afford to lose the money. But by speaking out, you are helping to protect others who might not be able to afford to lose it.
And I'm someone who has had his name in my sig for a year...
While everyone is still cleaning up online, this subject is just another thread in a forum.
But it's wise to realise that if everyone is allowed to run amok online, hiding behind their PC screen and failing to respond to aggrieved customers, then it won't be long before every one of us loses out when big companies like Paypal (for example) are once again FORCED to change the way that transactions are conducted online by the XYZ agency, in order to make it safer for the consumer.
Prevention is better than cure in this scenario, because once it goes wrong - there is no cure. Once online businesses and online transactions come under the microscope from the authorities due to bad behaviour, then many people are going to fall foul of some stupid legislation and find themselves unable to take payments. And we don't want that... |
|
|
Anna Johnson |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 15:49:46
|
| Thanks Ken for sharing this. Hiding a forced continuity program is illegal, unethical and frankly, poor marketing. Marketing is about delivering something the customer wants, right? Forcing them to pay for something they DON'T want is surely not good marketing. Not long term anyway. As for the rotten customer "service" Jason L. mentions above - don't get me started on poor customer service from Internet / direct mail companies. I too am a big fan of Dan Kennedy - let's hope this is an aberration, not a trend. |
|
|
n/a |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 15:58:48
|
Hi, I just got off the phone with Bill, he apologized and acknowledged the error, said that it shouldn't have happened and they'll reverse the charges etc etc. He also said they discontinued the downloadable/streaming version of the video and the prior process, and was very genial, so I suppose I'll just move on and let it pass.
But - given that others had the same thing happen, I believe it was intentional on their part. So it's not right what they did.
It's disappointing that it happened; hopefully this unfortunate case study can provide a decent example of what not to do in marketing, eg forced hidden continuity is a no-no.
Ken
|
|
|
Rob D |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 16:06:41
|
I think there's some incredible restraint in this tread. I like Dan's stuff too, but there is simply no way this is ethical OR legal. I don't buy into the whole "think of all the good stuff dan has done" and I'll tell you why.
Last year I sat on a jury for the first time. It was a rape trial and pretty obvious the guy was guilty. Rather than refute that he arranged a string of character references to say what a wonderful guy he was and how out of character this was for him. What was he expecting? Did he expect the girl to say "Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realize you hadn't raped anyone before. That completely changes the fact you raped me. I drop all charges"?
No - crime is crime, and if you rip someone off all the good you have done before doesn't change the fact you have ripped someone off. I think Ken is being very reasonable in offering the chance he has for an explanation. The number of times the phrase "It would be different if it was some newbie marketer" appears in this thread is disturbing. If it was some newbie marketer he would at least have the excuse of not knowing better. These guys should. |
|
|
DougBarger |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 16:14:09
|
Hi Ken,
I trust that this situation will be handled soon and so very much hope so.
Nothing hurts worse than feeling like you've been violated.
Not to change the subject, but I'm interested:
What comes with the membership for $50/month?
Is it good stuff and actionable material?
Do you have access to it now?
If so, I only ask that because there are probably many who would have bought it anyway if it was presented differently.
"Blessed are the peacemakers" so I hope you guys get this worked out for the best for you and everyone involved.
Doug |
|
|
Andrew Wilson |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 16:16:06
|
It was wrong to have done it and wrong in oversight for the vendor's management to have failed to see the issue. Then compounded by allowing the issue to continue for some time. What would have happened had Ken NOT contacted them and if this thread did not exist?
If all was well back at the vendor's premises then Ken would not have had the problem, it'd have been sorted a while back when it wsa first pointed out by some 'nobody' and THAT makes things worse.
But, on the other hand, done properly I see no problem at all with forced continuity. A useful and valuable tool and one which if NOT implemented would cause folks to get angry when their subscriptions disappeared.
The problem was the deliberate lack of communication, not the tactic itself. |
|
|
| Topic |
|
|
|
Dan Kennedy "Phenomenon" forced continuity - bad
