34 ms·

This strikes me as unethical, and probably illegal in the United States. We have a set of consumer protections called Truth in Advertising that probably apply

by ckinnan 18y ago

This strikes me as unethical, and probably illegal in the United States. We have a set of consumer protections called Truth in Advertising that probably apply here. http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/business/adv/bus35.shtm http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/business/adv/bus35.shtm

bprater 18y ago
I don't think he's selling anything. When the visitor arrives on the webpage, he's greeted by a mailing list subscription form.
- ckinnan 18y ago
  He writes: "Our goal is to find out whether customers are interested in your product by offering to give (or even sell) it to them, and then failing to deliver on that promise." Again, this feels unethical. If this practice was widespread it would further undermine trust online. It probably violates AdWords terms of service too.
  - DenisM 18y ago
    Because the ads are paid-for, there is natural limit to amount of this sort of "recon" ads. If it's one out of 20 that I click on, I wouldn't be to upset and I don't see recon ads havng more than 5% of overall advertising budget in the world economy.
  - alex_c 18y ago
    I'm assuming the goal is to see how many people would click on a "Register" or "Buy Now" link, rather than to see how many people would fill in their full credit card and shipping information? The former seems like it would still give some valuable information without being too bad, while the latter does seem questionable.
mechanical_fish 18y ago
Your FTC link is really handy. You should read it more carefully. On that page is a paragraph which directly addresses this situation: Q: Is it okay for a company to "dry test" a product? A:"Dry testing" describes the practice of placing an ad for a product to see if there is sufficient consumer interest before actually going to the expense of manufacturing the item. Although the Mail Order Rule doesn't specifically deal with this situation, the FTC has issued an advisory opinion that such ads must clearly disclose to consumers the fact that the merchandise is only planned and may not ever be shipped. Then it references another FTC publication about the "Mail or Telephone Order Rule" (also known as the "30-day Rule"), available here: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/business/adv/bus02.shtm http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/business/adv/bus02.shtm The page summarizes the Rule as follows: The Rule requires that when you advertise merchandise, you must have a reasonable basis for stating or implying that you can ship within a certain time. If you make no shipment statement, you must have a reasonable basis for believing that you can ship within 30 days. That is why direct marketers sometimes call this the "30-day Rule." And it provides this relevant paragraph: Dry-testing Q: We want to sell by mail or telephone a product that is not yet available. Does the Rule apply? A: It depends. In an advisory opinion, the FTC told a publishing company that it could "dry-test" its merchandise as long as the following conditions were met: > In promoting the merchandise, the merchant can make no suggestion that the merchandise will be shipped or that customers expressing an interest in it will receive it. > In all promotional materials, the merchant must disclose all material aspects of the promotion, including the fact that the merchandise is only planned and may not be shipped. > If any part of the promotion is later dropped, the merchant must notify subscribers of the fact within a reasonable time after soliciting their subscriptions. > If, within a reasonable time after soliciting their subscriptions, the merchant has made no decision to ship the merchandise, it must notify subscribers of this fact and give them the opportunity to cancel and, where payment has been made, make a prompt refund. > The merchant can make no substitutions of any merchandise for that ordered. If these conditions are not met, the Rule applies. So the answer is: This is not against the FTC's rules, so long as you are reasonably up-front about what's going on. It's particularly easy to comply with these rules if you avoid taking orders or money, but it seems as if you could even work around that, assuming that you're honest and timely and issue refunds to everyone on demand. [NOTICE: mechanical_fish is not a lawyer and this is not sound legal advice.]

by ckinnan 18y ago

bprater 18y ago

I don't think he's selling anything. When the visitor arrives on the webpage, he's greeted by a mailing list subscription form.

ckinnan 18y ago
He writes: "Our goal is to find out whether customers are interested in your product by offering to give (or even sell) it to them, and then failing to deliver on that promise." Again, this feels unethical. If this practice was widespread it would further undermine trust online. It probably violates AdWords terms of service too.
- DenisM 18y ago
  Because the ads are paid-for, there is natural limit to amount of this sort of "recon" ads. If it's one out of 20 that I click on, I wouldn't be to upset and I don't see recon ads havng more than 5% of overall advertising budget in the world economy.
- alex_c 18y ago
  I'm assuming the goal is to see how many people would click on a "Register" or "Buy Now" link, rather than to see how many people would fill in their full credit card and shipping information? The former seems like it would still give some valuable information without being too bad, while the latter does seem questionable.

mechanical_fish 18y ago

Your FTC link is really handy. You should read it more carefully. On that page is a paragraph which directly addresses this situation: Q: Is it okay for a company to "dry test" a product? A:"Dry testing" describes the practice of placing an ad for a product to see if there is sufficient consumer interest before actually going to the expense of manufacturing the item. Although the Mail Order Rule doesn't specifically deal with this situation, the FTC has issued an advisory opinion that such ads must clearly disclose to consumers the fact that the merchandise is only planned and may not ever be shipped. Then it references another FTC publication about the "Mail or Telephone Order Rule" (also known as the "30-day Rule"), available here: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/business/adv/bus02.shtm http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/business/adv/bus02.shtm The page summarizes the Rule as follows: The Rule requires that when you advertise merchandise, you must have a reasonable basis for stating or implying that you can ship within a certain time. If you make no shipment statement, you must have a reasonable basis for believing that you can ship within 30 days. That is why direct marketers sometimes call this the "30-day Rule." And it provides this relevant paragraph: Dry-testing Q: We want to sell by mail or telephone a product that is not yet available. Does the Rule apply? A: It depends. In an advisory opinion, the FTC told a publishing company that it could "dry-test" its merchandise as long as the following conditions were met: > In promoting the merchandise, the merchant can make no suggestion that the merchandise will be shipped or that customers expressing an interest in it will receive it. > In all promotional materials, the merchant must disclose all material aspects of the promotion, including the fact that the merchandise is only planned and may not be shipped. > If any part of the promotion is later dropped, the merchant must notify subscribers of the fact within a reasonable time after soliciting their subscriptions. > If, within a reasonable time after soliciting their subscriptions, the merchant has made no decision to ship the merchandise, it must notify subscribers of this fact and give them the opportunity to cancel and, where payment has been made, make a prompt refund. > The merchant can make no substitutions of any merchandise for that ordered. If these conditions are not met, the Rule applies. So the answer is: This is not against the FTC's rules, so long as you are reasonably up-front about what's going on. It's particularly easy to comply with these rules if you avoid taking orders or money, but it seems as if you could even work around that, assuming that you're honest and timely and issue refunds to everyone on demand. [NOTICE: mechanical_fish is not a lawyer and this is not sound legal advice.]