11 replies
I don't frequent the WSO section often but i like to pop in now and then to peruse the latest offerings.

Most of them evolve the same way:
1) Seller launches WSO
2) Review copies are given out
3) Reviews are left by people who received free copy or by acquaintances
4) People buy WSO
5) Buyers reviews start coming in
6) WSO provides what is advertised or turns out to be a flop

Personally i place zero stock in "review copy" or "friend" reviews, but some people do.
Here's my question:
Should people who leave glowing reviews for a WSO that turns out to be a total sham be held accountable?
#buddy #reviews #wso
  • Profile picture of the author Thomas W
    Yes I totally agree. I get hit up all the time about reviewing WSO's

    Most of time I tell them I have to apply the technique before I can start posting any reviews.

    But I do believe their is a lot of quid pro quo with regards to reviews
    Signature

    Established webmaster since 1998. Bought my first domain name for $70 and had to pay $1000 a month for hosting. It was the good life

    Skype: twool9
    Email me at thomasw9 ((((a)))) G mail

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6861200].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      How many times are we going to have threads on this same topic every month?

      If the reviewer got a free copy or is an affiliate, they are required to disclose that in their review. (It's in the rules. Look.)

      If they didn't buy, they have no business commenting on the product. (It's in the rules. Look.)

      If they're arguing the sales process, those comments should be reported and deleted. (It's in the rules. Look.)

      Arguing about OTOs is not allowed. A paying customer MAY list the OTOs (if any), what they're for, and how much they cost. The sellers don't like that much, but that's too bad. It's part of the buying experience, and relevant to future prospects' decisions. (It's in the rules. Look.)

      Anyone posting the usual generic complaints about the evils of OTOs should understand that their posts WILL be deleted if reported. A customer can list them, without further comment. (It's in the rules. Look.)

      If an OTO is required in order to deliver what was promised for the initial product, report it. We've closed offers for that. If it simply makes the initial promise easier to achieve, that's fine. You may not like it, but that's a personal perspective, not a matter of truth or deception.

      If something in the ad is deceptive, it should be reported to the mods. If you only have a few posts and are assuming there's deception going on, you'd be best off reporting it. Making unsubstantiated claims of impropriety publicly can have unpleasant effects on your status here if you turn out to be wrong. And a large percentage of the time, those assumptions are, in fact, wrong.

      On the flip side, reports to the mods are checked, and if you're wrong, you haven't damaged a seller's reputation unjustly. We don't hassle people for reports that say things like, "This doesn't smell right, and here's where I think the problem is."

      Sellers who report legitimate questions about the front end product should expect to have their leashes shortened substantially. And if you somehow get blind copy approved, reporting those legitimate questions will just get your offer closed. Blind copy is OUT.

      If you report a bad review from a paying customer as "slander" or "libel," you'd bloody well better know what the word means and be using it appropriately. Whoever is teaching people to use those words in reports needs to be cut out of this forum permanently. They're going to end up getting sellers who misuse them banned for malicious reporting of legitimate reviews or questions.

      Yeah. We do that.

      You sellers need to be REALLY careful about the advice you get from some "WSO coaches." A lot of it is downright dangerous, and has gotten more than one offer closed, or seller banned.


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6861292].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GMD
    Banned
    Originally Posted by salegurus View Post

    Should people who leave glowing reviews for a WSO that turns out to be a total sham be held accountable?
    You should leave an honest review.

    If it's the best thing since sliced bread, then one should write that AND list specifics as to why it's the best thing since Christ was a Corporal.

    If it's a total sham then guess what? It's a total sham because of these following specifics. Obviously, around here, a little diplomacy would have to be employed.

    However, if you bought the product, used the product, and are able to come to the conclusion that it's garbage, then you have every right to state that along with supporting specifics.

    If a person is not comfortable doing that, then it's totally fair to write the WSO seller and list your grievances along with a request for a refund.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6861249].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Linkology
    Originally Posted by salegurus View Post

    Should people who leave glowing reviews for a WSO that turns out to be a total sham be held accountable?
    Yes, I believe they should... I feel it is quite misleading.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6861291].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TiffanyLambert
    You can't hold them accountable per se because one person might say it's good while another gets nothing out of it.

    I too gloss over any "review copy" review. It means absolutely nothing and tends to even annoy me when I'm in a grumpy mood.

    Negative reviews are good IF you feel it's negative, but I heard (and I'm not sure if it's true or not), that if the seller refunds you, then your review gets deleted from the WSO thread - so it never feels comfortable going by reviews, period.

    I just go on reputation and if anyone close to me says it's good and what I personally see in the sales copy that appeals to me.

    Tiff
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6861297].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael D Forbes
    I actually find buddy reviews fairly useful, here's why...

    If I see a new product launch and the first page or so is full of friends and affiliate reviews, I take this as a good sign. Think about it... how many people are going to put their name on the line and endorse a garbage product? I know I won't, and I know most serious affiliates won't either. If my own mother released a load of junk product, I can tell you I would not endorse it. (I wouldn't let her do that if I could help it, but I hope you get the point).

    I understand that many affiliates don't even look at the actual product, but more do than you might think. Affiliates that know the product creator, often know enough about that product creator to know they don't have to see or try the product to know it will deliver great value. There are a handful of product creators that I trust like that, and have not been let down yet.

    It may seem strange, but I often give more weight to a well known affiliates opinion, than an unknown stranger that may or may not have the knowledge to accurately judge the merits of the product.

    Turn it around... If no friends or affiliates are willing to post reviews or input on a product, what does that tell you about the quality or value of the product? In my mind, one of two things have happened.

    1) It either got entirely overlooked, which means the product creator has a lot to learn about marketing. or...

    2) It's simply a dud and n one wants to back it.

    Thanks for listening to my 3 cents.

    Michael

    Edit: Per Pauls post, I should add that I assumed that the relationship (review or aff) to the product owner is properly disclosed and understood. I'm NOT talking about blind posts.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6861302].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TiffanyLambert
      Originally Posted by Michael D Forbes View Post

      Think about it... how many people are going to put their name on the line and endorse a garbage product? I know I won't, and I know most serious affiliates won't either.
      I think you're in the minority (along with me - congrats). TONS of big name and new and in between marketers will hop into the back scratching situation without a second thought. My email inbox proves it. You go buy it and scratch your head wondering why in the world they would put their name on the line for that.

      Then a week later the other marketer is mailing for their product, and it all makes sense.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6861322].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
        I heard (and I'm not sure if it's true or not), that if the seller refunds you, then your review gets deleted from the WSO thread
        That is not true, although people who are angry because we refused their efforts to hijack a thread will often claim it. What WILL get deleted is a string of comments (except usually the first one) from the same person, whether they're refunded or not.

        Reviews are fine, good or bad. Thread hijacking is not, and tends to be treated as a deliberate effort to destroy a seller's reputation. Because it usually is.

        Say what you have to say in the first review post. And yes, the seller can rebut it. That doesn't give you the right to jump back in and argue forever. That ain't a discussion section.

        And to the sellers... If your rebuttal includes attacks on the reviewer, expect to get smacked for it. Personal attacks are not allowed in reviews, and the fact that you paid for the thread does not mean you get to break the rule on that. Or anything else, for that matter.

        These are the same comments that have been discussed over and over, seemingly on a weekly basis, and by some of the same people.

        I am not going to waste a beautiful Saturday arguing stuff that's been answered dozens of times already this summer.


        Paul
        Signature
        .
        Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6861372].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author louie6925
    Of course they are accountable, if the product is trash then they have been dishonest!

    Its so popular to see a large group of wso sellers reviewing each others wso's and we are talking some big hitters, unfortunately for them though, if they put their reveiw in and buy the product and it sucks, then thats the last sale they will have from me and if I'm on their list at the time, then I aint no more!
    Signature
    Feel free to chat if you live in the UK I may have something for you!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6861316].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author salegurus
    @Paul
    My apologies i maybe should have posted this in the OT forum?
    I was curious about incentivized reviews for garbage products that may impact a buying decision.
    Anyway sorry
    Signature
    Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.

    ― George Carlin
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6861331].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      Originally Posted by salegurus View Post

      I was curious about incentivized reviews for garbage products that may impact a buying decision.
      That's covered in the rules. If you see an affiliate or free copy recipient posting a review without disclosing those facts, report it, please.


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6861378].message }}

Trending Topics