NYTimes: Today, when reading the dozens of comments about Deco#MyEyes, it is hard to decide which one conveys the most outrage. It is easy, though, to choose the most outrageous. It was written by Mr. Russo/Bolds/Borker himself.
“Hello, My name is Stanley with Deco#MyEyes.com,” the post began. “I just wanted to let you guys know that the more replies you people post, the more business and the more hits and sales I get. My goal is NEGATIVE advertisement.”
It’s all part of a sales strategy, he said. Online chatter about Deco#MyEyes, even furious online chatter, pushed the site higher in Google search results, which led to greater sales. He closed with a sardonic expression of gratitude: “I never had the amount of traffic I have now since my 1st complaint. I am in heaven.”
Would it surprise you that the owner once worked at Lehman Brothers? Much more of interest at the link.
Note that I added the # to block the name, the NYTimes did not.
Note that I added the # to block the name, the NYTimes did not.
You missed one.
Mentioning the real URL in text doesn't help them in Google rankings, but linking to the site does help them, which the NYT is indeed guilty of anyway. According to the last few comments on that article, the guilty site has been removed from Google now, so hopefully that slows the guy down considerably.
Not that you suggested otherwise, but this is a failure of regulation as much as the market. What good are all those laws and regulations against fraud, threats of violence, etc. if they can't even shut this guy down? This is supposed to be a basic function of government. At least the market provides some feedback on this company for those who do a little research before they buy.
Alex,
So what is your libertarian no-government-intervention in the markets response? As a market skeptic, I think that this is just the merest taste of what life would be like in the libertarian paradise. Instead of this sort of outlier we would have this kind of business as the norm.
As you said, this guy is just following the incentives.
I want someone to analyze the incentives that made every pundit cream his or her jeans over this story. It's not bad or anything, but it's not particularly good or interesting yet every commentator has fallen in love with it.
This earlier post seems relevant here.
I can think of a terrific tie-in with one of your earlier posts. Disgruntled customers can hire Ruben from the Cherokee reservation to fly to New York and have an "enounter" with Vitaly Borker. Problem solved.
@Ian– I think we should assume that a framework that allows individuals to assume that the companies they do business with cannot defraud them is valuable. It means that time's value is high enough that if one had to research every company one might make a purchase from, there would be a lot of deadweight loss from individuals refusing to pay the time tax.
This is a business model for people who are disturbed. This guy didn't figure out the link between trolling and profit until AFTER he'd stalked and harassed his first customer.
I think it also says something about how much value people place on a well-designed, professional-looking website.
@Ian
If Ms. Rodriguez needs glasses to function, then the 0.1% probability is marginal, not absolute. Considering she bought the glasses with a credit card, that's probably not a bad first guess.
One added point to my comment above.
You should not always assume that the law is effective, or that the only point of contact between an offender and the injured person should be the locus of correcting a problem, ie, that law only affects the relation and power between the offender and the victim.
In fact, law also creates power as between the injured person and third parties who may exercise more power over the offender than the victim.
In this case, credit card rules giving consumers the right to rescind or withhold payment
give the consumer power; and, since the credit card company can withhold payment to the perpetrator, it is in a stronger position to serve as the consumer's agent, a role that has been assigned to them by law.
"My own view is that there should be a market solution."
Yelp. And Google adding customer reviews.
Google came up with a solution. http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/12/being-bad-…
Comments on this entry are closed.