51–60 of 95 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, it was a scam, but we weren't the victims. I won't shed a tear for the marketing departments they were defrauding. I do feel bad for the small YouTube channels who lost affiliate revenue, though.
You are also a victim if you assume they provide you the best coupons available.
The premise of “trust me; I’ll find you the best coupon codes for that product; don’t look yourself” always rubbed me the wrong way. Sad to hear what they’ve done to the people who trusted them.
I mean, some rando's hobby project on github would pre pretty trustworthy in this space because the incentives are aligned. The dev and the contributors have no financial stake except as users who want to pay less for stuff. The moment it becomes a business that needs to make money it (predictably) falls apart. uBO vs ABP.
is there not an opensource alternative? i mean its webscraping which is very established surely it exists. anyways we should bring them traction if they too arent evil
Once shared, they are presented to other users, who can try and validate them, or indicate they don't work (for single-use coupons or expired promotions). "Bad" coupons get removed, good coupons keep getting presented to users.
That's wild. So they just take the affiliate commission for everything when installed? A lot of people purchase things through affiliate links to knowingly support the affiliate.. But if they have Honey installed it just "steals" the referral..
however they insert themselves in the checkout page and offer measly honey points in the form of cash back as a cut of the commission they'd get.
there are stand down rules in the affiliate marketing space where you're not supposed to show your popup if someone has already claimed attribution of a purchase but i've heard many extensions don't follow these well.
How would you even build a better version of this geared towards consumers? I don’t see the incentives lining up unless you start charging for the service.
The consumer never gets the affiliate cut either way. If there are coupon codes, the consumer wins. If there aren't, the customer only loses a bit of privacy about what they're buying, which most people don't care about anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The consumer never gets the affiliate cut either way. If there are coupon codes, the consumer wins. If there aren't, the customer only loses a bit of privacy about what they're buying, which most people don't care about anyway.
how do you think rakuten cash back works
I feel like this should be up to the affiliate networks to kick Honey out of their programs for TOS violations right? Or Google removing it from the Chrome store?
The Chrome team seems like the one that would be most pissed about this. While some aspects of their management of the extension ecosystem are problematic, they make an effort regarding trust and security. The reason Honey has to be so aggressive in getting you to click a button in that popup window is the browser won't allow it to interact with the page (to swap out the cookies) until the user has affirmatively interacted with the extension on that page. That is intended to prevent extensions from maliciously manipulating third-party sites without user consent.
This has me wondering if this could be cause for a class action lawsuit by influencers affiliated with Honey or by Consumers who installed the extension.
For the most part, it looks like consumers weren't directly harmed aside from the false promises about "finding the best deal," but consumers weren't paying anything to Honey for that promise.
The harmed parties, the referring affiliates whose links were overwritten, would have to argue that Honey, as a third party, tortiously interfered with them and the merchants paying the affiliate commissions. Third-party claims are challenging, especially when the merchants seem complicit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
how do you think rakuten cash back works
I have no idea. I'm entirely unfamiliar with that.
the video explains how honey has the same thing but the cut they give you seems to be tiny - like less than a dollar to users for a $30 commission for them as one example.
i dont know if this is common practice or not but i'm not a user of these extensions personally.
This has me wondering if this could be cause for a class action lawsuit by influencers affiliated with Honey or by Consumers who installed the extension.
This is a messy legal situation… For the most part, it looks like consumers weren't directly harmed aside from the false promises about "finding the best deal," but consumers weren't paying anything to Honey for that promise. The harmed parties, the referring affiliates whose links were overwritten, would have to argue that Honey, as a third party, tortiously interfered with them and the merchants paying the affiliat…