Comments on: iPhone battery sleeve by FastMac buyer beware

By: doubtisbliss

doubtisbliss — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 05:51:52 +0000

smells just like iphonenow.ca … not nice at all

By: Abbi

Abbi — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:44:08 +0000

@Kyle @Bambi Blue

Sorry for being so sensitive- I didn’t think there are any foul intentions whatsoever but perhaps you would share my concern if you noticed the word “scam” associated with your company. At the same time I don’t think my comment was inflammatory and if came out that way, then I’m sorry, it is a perception issue because all I’m doing is having a dialog with the author & reaching out to his community. You should be able to give your side of the story, no? Both Warner and Kyle have been very accommodative in their responses and this is all going to work out for the good of everybody Better to respond and seek a correction than let it stand as is, don’t you think?

To find the word in question, simply do a search in your browser and you will find it in less than 2 seconds. You can also View Source for the home page and you will see it there.

Thank you!

By: Bambi Blue

Bambi Blue — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:58:37 +0000

I don’t think that ‘buyer beware’ is misleading at all to readers who understand that the poster is not meaning ‘buyer avoid’ - he’s simply stating that the drop down menus are a bit confusing and require product buyers to be aware of this and make sure to choose the correct drop down menu item before continuing through their purchase. I don’t think any foul intentions are at play here and I think that a reaction this inflammatory is much more damaging than any ‘buyer beware’ titling.

Also, I can’t see the word ’scam’ in bold orange either. Not on the homepage or in any of the comments therein.

By: Kyle

Kyle — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:56:52 +0000

@ Abbi

Sorry, still can’t find the word “scam”. If I do eventually find it I’ll change it.

I’m not sure what you meant about “buyer beware”. Should I have put “caveat emptor”?

By: Abbi

Abbi — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:57:38 +0000

@ Kyle

Thank you for calling the iV an amazing product. And thank you for being so responsive As you mention, the majority of the quote is from another blog & I’ve left a comment there as well. I received a reply from the author & he too likes the product and is buying one for himself. I guess from an endorsement viewpoint, one couldn’t ask for anything more when your critics purchase your product Wayne is even willing to post a follow up story to clarify the issue.

The main problem that I have with this incident is that most people don’t bother to read the whole article or notice that you are quoting someone else- they make snap judgements based on headlines and pictures and this type of story can leave the wrong impression. I hope you understand our side of the story & don’t take these comments in the wrong way. You can see how something like this can snowball without anyone actually contacting the company or even reading the website and/ or the press release.

PS: The objectionable word is in bold orange on the home page of your blog. And I should also call out the “buyer beware” headline because it is not accurate and frankly speaking, not your own (as you state above). Thank you very much for your prompt action in this regard and happy to work with you to benefit your readers.

By: Kyle

Kyle — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:29:37 +0000

@ Abbi

I’m trying to find the word “scam” somewhere but I don’t see it. I would obviously take it out if I could find it.

Also, I think your product is amazing. Keep in mind that the majority of this post is just quoting someone else.

Hope we can clear this up.

By: Abbi

Abbi — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:31:13 +0000

I appreciate you calling it a “pricing issue” on your detailed page but to use the word “scam” on your home page is incendiary & irresponsible. There’s no scam: the price of the iV *does* start at $79 and you can still buy it for that price. And it’s not like we tucked the model selection way at the bottom or in fine print- it’s right there below the photograph smack dab in the middle of the store page above the fold.

If you read the press release, you will notice that it talks about introductory pricing. Nobody, including you, reported the wrong price because the 3G version *was* priced at $79 initially and we *did* sell hundreds at that price (I’d be glad to give you references if you like). Once we reached our internal targets, we raised the price to the normal price. I don’t see what we have done that is so outrageous that it warrants the use of the term “scam.” Even at the regular price, the iV has more battery capacity (3100mAH) AND more features (dual charger, flash LED, dock-ability, etc) than any competing product. The fact that you can get 1 model for $79 makes it even better! I wish you would report on that instead of stirring up false controversy Nevertheless, I’d be glad to hook up readers of your blog with a discount coupon if you think that’s a good idea…

Abbi