Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Scathing review of Scvngr by burned customer

vintank.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 42 posts

Re: Scathing review of Scvngr by burned customer

#31

Post by stickfigure »

I'm pretty confused by this post. Just what did you commit in this "exchange"?

It sounds like you wanted to help an LBS service in the wine industry, and the one you picked turned out not to have a sustainable business. Well, none of the LBSes are making money and when the VC wears off, Foursquare may be in the same boat. This is the risk of being an early adopter... it's a bummer when it doesn't work out but I don't see why you are A) surprised or B) angry.

I don't know anything specific about Scvngr's business, but I spent a good chunk of a year building an LBS (www.mobca.st, fwiw) that really doesn't have any financial future. If you are upset for after "investing" a man-month of thought and a few chats with industry bigwigs over $200 bottles of Merlot, consider a moment the disappointment that the Scvngr team must feel when they set aside the game they've poured their hearts into so they can get to work building a dumb Groupon clone. Your punishment doesn't even register.

When a product goes south, the stringed instrument which plays Ave Maria for you is limited to:

* Founders - Double Bass

* Employees - Cello

* Investors - Viola

* Paying Customers - Violin

* Everyone Else - AM radio, if you can get reception

Re: Scathing review of Scvngr by burned customer

#32

Post by [deleted] »

thesausageking wrote: post #30
parfe wrote: post #22

Was vintank a customer? Were they paying for any services? Edit: the blog comments feel like Astroturf. Edit 2: submitter looks like a sock puppet account.

Abe Froman here. I'm no puppet. I've had this account for a while and had never heard of these guys before I saw this post (I don't even drink wine). With all of the hyperbole and big money around companies like scvgr I thoughtit was interesting to hear theother side

[deleted]

Re: Scathing review of Scvngr by burned customer

#33

Post by SoftwareMaven »

Alex3917 wrote: post #21

"We really believed in them and made a rare mistake betting on their horse. The net net is that we picked a 'dog.'" The real mistake was betting on game mechanics without understanding the underlying psychological principles. The vast majority of 'game mechanics' startups are con artists, and without understanding the academic research on motivational psychology you're just giving your money away.

How in the world is any normal person going to be able to really "understand the underlying psychological principals"? That is really akin to saying you shouldn't buy software without understanding the underlying architecture and design principals.

Re: Scathing review of Scvngr by burned customer

#34

Post by nikcub »

sunchild wrote: post #29
kwis wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I routinely work with vendors who make non-contractual promises, where the only recourse is damage to their reputation and the probable loss of me as a client if they break them. Not everything needs to be a contract or a lawsuit. Sometimes it's fine to take a man at his word, and then simply tell him to walk away if his word is no good.

IAAL, and I do agree with you that contracts are overkill in many cases. However, if you are complaining publicly about another business breaking promises, I think it reflects poorly on you that you didn't get those promises in writing. That's what contracts are for, after all. You don't see Fortune 50 companies griping about shady suppliers on their blogs for a reason...

"contract" in law doesn't mean something written and signed, it is an agreement or implied agreement between two parties. This is a common misconception. The written requirement is only for certain types of binding agreements (land sales, etc.) and varies between jurisdictions. But in most business/service scenarios, oral agreements are just as binding as written agreements.

I was recently involved in a legal dispute where there was no written contract, but the trail of emails and communication was good enough to see judgement in our favor.

Re: Scathing review of Scvngr by burned customer

#35

Post by sunchild »

nikcub wrote: post #34
sunchild wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IAAL, and I do agree with you that contracts are overkill in many cases. However, if you are complaining publicly about another business breaking promises, I think it reflects poorly on you that you didn't get those promises in writing. That's what contracts are for, after all. You don't see Fortune 50 companies griping about shady suppliers on their blogs for a reason...

"contract" in law doesn't mean something written and signed, it is an agreement or implied agreement between two parties. This is a common misconception. The written requirement is only for certain types of binding agreements (land sales, etc.) and varies between jurisdictions. But in most business/service scenarios, oral agreements are just as binding as written agreements. I was recently involved in a legal dispute…

This is 100% correct, but getting it in writing is (almost) always better for enforceability. Also, notice that I never said anything about signatures...

* Since I mentioned that IAAL above, this comment is not legal advice.

Re: Scathing review of Scvngr by burned customer

#36

Post by tejaswiy »

mikeryan wrote: post #26
tejaswiy wrote: post #2

Slightly offtopic to the article, but is it just me or does anyone else think the wine culture and an iPhone app + game mechanics just don't go well together? I mean, the people that enjoy wine seem to be, well, just enjoying it without needing any additional incentive to have more of it? "Sample five wines and you get X points with a 'Wine taster' badge!". Just doesn't sound quite right does it ?

Actually it does, it sounds like you have't spent a weekend in the Sonoma or Napa Valley area (I don't mean this disparagingly). A large part of what you do is drive around a large countryside tasting wines at various family owned and operated winery tasting rooms, interspersed with tasty meals. Many of the best wineries are way off the beaten track and there are many wineries who only sell their wine at their tastin…

I agree with what you're saying, but I don't think iPhone apps driven by game mechanics are the right answer to this problem. It doesn't necessarily go with the relaxed Joie de vivre attitude of wine tasters. I feel it translates the experience from about enjoying wine to a mindless WoW quest like experience where all you want to do is to accomplish a set of objectives to get your reward.

Re: Scathing review of Scvngr by burned customer

#37

Post by Hisoka »

stickfigure wrote: post #31

I'm pretty confused by this post. Just what did you commit in this "exchange"? It sounds like you wanted to help an LBS service in the wine industry, and the one you picked turned out not to have a sustainable business. Well, none of the LBSes are making money and when the VC wears off, Foursquare may be in the same boat. This is the risk of being an early adopter... it's a bummer when it doesn't work out but I don't…

I'm sorry but the attitude in your post really bothers me. Scvngr is a business, if you give them money, you expect to receive the services you promise - case closed. Customers don't care if you're short on cash, stressed out, overworked, or yo-yoing between missions statements and projects. As a customer, I shouldn't care one single bit how the Scnvgr team feels (as a programmer, yes I have empathy, but not as a customer).

Re: Scathing review of Scvngr by burned customer

#38

Post by mattmanser »

asmithmd1 wrote: post #25
jsavimbi wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't even be arsed to spell it the way they want. That's my level of enthusiasm for them. It's branding failure on their part as I live down the street from their office and see their ridiculous vinyl-wrapped Cayenne all the time. On another note, it occurs to me that the complaint levied against Scvngr, albeit illegitimate, is quite common. Normals couldn't be expected to understand what exactly it is they're…

It does seem a little pot calling the kettle black. From VinTank's about us page - They created "entirely new set of optics for the industry. This would build a framework for understanding the possibilities created when wine and technology collide" Wait, what? They built an optical table? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_table More likely they typed up reams of drivel like the above that they sell to wineries

In the drinks industry an optic is the thing that goes under a bottle and measures out a serving. You see them in bars and clubs all the time but mainly on spirits. I'm guessing people don't use them on wine bottles much because you go through a wine bottle a lot faster than a spirits bottle. Or maybe it mucks up the taste. I never asked when I worked as a barman.

If you've ever seen wine served you'll see them often using a metal cylinder which often they wash out. It takes barman time and I'm guessing isn't great for the taste.

So it probably is a real problem they solved.

However I can't find the phrase you're referring to on their about us page, so not sure what the change is.

Re: Scathing review of Scvngr by burned customer

#39

Post by parfe »

thesausageking wrote: post #30
parfe wrote: post #22

Was vintank a customer? Were they paying for any services? Edit: the blog comments feel like Astroturf. Edit 2: submitter looks like a sock puppet account.

Abe Froman here. I'm no puppet. I've had this account for a while and had never heard of these guys before I saw this post (I don't even drink wine). With all of the hyperbole and big money around companies like scvgr I thoughtit was interesting to hear theother side

Ferris Bueller's Age Froman? Your account hasn't been around for a while. It's 7 days old.

Re: Scathing review of Scvngr by burned customer

#40

Post by asmithmd1 »

mattmanser wrote: post #38
asmithmd1 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does seem a little pot calling the kettle black. From VinTank's about us page - They created "entirely new set of optics for the industry. This would build a framework for understanding the possibilities created when wine and technology collide" Wait, what? They built an optical table? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_table More likely they typed up reams of drivel like the above that they sell to wineries

In the drinks industry an optic is the thing that goes under a bottle and measures out a serving. You see them in bars and clubs all the time but mainly on spirits. I'm guessing people don't use them on wine bottles much because you go through a wine bottle a lot faster than a spirits bottle. Or maybe it mucks up the taste. I never asked when I worked as a barman. If you've ever seen wine served you'll see them often…

The phrase is on this page:

http://www.vintank.com/about/

under Our Story

I don't think he is talking about any physical device, he is using optics in place of Paradigm Shift - it is the new meaningless buzz word. Try it out! anytime someone uses optics this way substitute "paradigm shift" and the sentence will still read the same and still convey no information.

Post reply on HN