5 ms·
It seems likely this was a mistake, and not the result of dishonesty or malicious intent. That said, such an enormous mistake should have never been made in the
by w1ntermute 14y ago
It seems likely this was a mistake, and not the result of dishonesty or malicious intent. That said, such an enormous mistake should have never been made in the first place, especially by a company such as Facebook.
- spaghetti 14y agoCan we please see some actual numbers! Given the advertiser's "popularity" it's possible they were over-charged something like $4 for a few hundred clicks in which case it's certainly not an enormous mistake.
- nl 14y agoRead the original article - it was around $150 he wants refunded.
- tytso 14y agoThat's incorrect. You're confusing the Limited Run / Limited Pressing story with the Wahanegi story, both of which hit HN very recently. I find the Wahanegi story more interesting since the OP has a much more concrete analysis about what was happening and why Facebook ads aren't as useful to advertisers.
- nl 14y agoSorry, you are right. (And yes, the Wahanegi was much more interesting, which I guess was why the number stuck in my head)
- ForrestN 14y agoErr, I don't think people are up in arms over the damage done to this one company. The story has legs because it implies that this is happening on a larger scale, and that Facebook is making a significant portion of its revenue from valueless clicks. Facebook should have had a system to avoid charging for such clicks, and if it doesn't that's a huge nationwide story. And it wouldn't be because they didn't realize they needed one.
- taligent 14y agoThe problem is that this is no different to Google. It also earns a tonne of revenue through fraudulent clicks many by competitors. It's a big deal and Facebook needs to make attempts to fix it but the problem will never be completely solvable.