Funny thing is that it works. 15% CR uplift in the last website where I tested it
Thanks for making the world just a little bit worse :(
38 People are looking at this post right now
81–90 of 196 posts
Re: 38 People are looking at this post right now
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Someone else in that thread asks: > I wonder if they report a lower price to Google as well. Presumably for the little boxes which show up below certain Google ads with price points []. I know that's against Google Ads' policies, but has anyone heard of it happening nonetheless? [] https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2497706
Yes it happened to me, a hotel was priced significantly cheaper on Google and on their site initially. When the price went up I just called the hotel and the higher rate was their standard and only rate that they offered. The initial advertised price was never an actual option.
I work for Google.
You can report fraudulent ads with the form here: https://support.google.com/google-ads/contact/vio_other_aw_p...
Re: 38 People are looking at this post right now
#83A dark pattern implies something that is intentionally misleading. This is just lying. This is not a dark pattern because it’s Worse.
Lying, just like "parallel construction".
Re: 38 People are looking at this post right now
#84And I always assumed they use some sockets to sync that count from server. How dumb to just fake on the client side.
%99.999 of people aren't going to look up the legitimacy of this. Why spend development effort where the likelihood of getting caught is so low. And even when "getting caught" isn't that big a deal.
Because the FTC only needs to look at it once for them to give you a big fine or put you out of business. They take time but they do get around to these things. I was watching an old taped documentary on YouTube, and when I looked up the products in the commercials a good number of them were taken down by the FTC.
Re: 38 People are looking at this post right now
#85A dark pattern implies something that is intentionally misleading. This is just lying. This is not a dark pattern because it’s Worse.
I mean, you can't be sure they're lying. Odds are nonzero that 38 ppl were looking at that flight
Re: 38 People are looking at this post right now
#86Yes, I think it is false advertising, so should be illegal.
It’s not false advertising. That would involve misrepresenting the product, which this does not. It’s unethical, but not illegal.
Re: 38 People are looking at this post right now
#87There's a product I've bought regularly at Amazon, it perpetually has 3 or less left in stock, but never goes out of stock. Also I was buying airline tickets and Delta told me there were just 2 left at this price for ... a plane nearly 70% empty.
For airlines that's probably true. I fly United quite a bit and they have an expert mode where you can choose specific fare classes. Even within "deep discount coach" there are different pricing tiers like K, L, G, S, or T. That doesn't include "discount coach" or award booking or business or full fare coach.
The only potentially troubling aspect is that they don't tell you how much more expensive the next pricing tier will be.
Re: 38 People are looking at this post right now
#88There's a product I've bought regularly at Amazon, it perpetually has 3 or less left in stock, but never goes out of stock. Also I was buying airline tickets and Delta told me there were just 2 left at this price for ... a plane nearly 70% empty.
If this was something that was merchant-fulfilled (not shipped by Amazon), 3rd-party sellers can use one of Amazon’s API to perpetually keep 3 (or however many) items in stock no matter how many they have on hand.
There’s lots of hocus-pocus beliefs out there about the “optimal” number.
Re: 38 People are looking at this post right now
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder about an app that just has phone numbers and a short description of hotels. If there are 50,000 hotels in the US, and you store 1K worth of data, that's only 50M. You could keep that on a phone no problem.
Sadly that list doesn't answer the most important questions - do they have availability for a particular date, and at what price
Roomkey.com has that information for all the major hotel brands, and it’s owned by the hotel brands themselves.
Re: 38 People are looking at this post right now
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes it happened to me, a hotel was priced significantly cheaper on Google and on their site initially. When the price went up I just called the hotel and the higher rate was their standard and only rate that they offered. The initial advertised price was never an actual option.
Isn’t that plain illegal, full stop? If that’s not the textbook definition of false advertising then I don’t know what is.
If the Lanham act applies, possibly[1]. This isn't typical false advertising, though, as it's not claiming their service does a thing it doesn't nor is it defaming a competitor, it's lying about interest in the service.
Looking at the criteria:
> (1) a false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser's own or another person's goods, services, or commercial activity;
I think a fake number of people looking is a false statement of fact about commercial activity.
> (2) the statement either deceives or has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of its targeted audience;
Seems like a false number would deceive anyone who saw it.
> (3) the deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of its audience;
And it would induce them to purchase when they might otherwise hold off the decision.
> (4) the advertising involves goods or services in interstate commerce; and
It's the web, so naturally.
> (5) the deception has either resulted in or is likely to result in injury to the plaintiff.
This is where it gets dicey and you'd need to ask a lawyer, or someone familiar with case law. The source I'm citing goes on to say:
> The injury is usually attributed to money the consumer lost through a purchase that would not have been made had the advertisement not been misleading.
I think if you could show, "I would have shopped for another price if I didn't think this was almost sold out," then you might have a case.
But... I suspect your damages would be the difference in prices between booking.com and some competitor, which are likely to be fairly small. The source has a whole section on remedies that might apply.
[1]: https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/False+Adverti...