5 ms·

Not really, it was pretty clear from the investigation that some youtuber that I can't remember the name of that it wasn't just that. One of the big claim from

Not really, it was pretty clear from the investigation that some youtuber that I can't remember the name of that it wasn't just that. One of the big claim from Honey is that it finds for you the coupons with that make you spend the least amount of money, but that's false if they have an agreement with the seller to only show you certain coupons. So no, it doesn't affect just influencers, it affects also customers and vendors.

rzzzt 2y ago
Is it MegaLag's video that you are referring to? https://youtu.be/vc4yL3YTwWk https://youtu.be/vc4yL3YTwWk
- silvanocerza 2y ago
  Yup yup, him.
oliwarner 2y ago
LTT certainly talked about Honey replacing other discount codes in baskets potentially making a basket more expensive, and injecting their own affiliate code when no discount was available. It was all thoroughly scummy and against the spirit of an affiliate referral. But I don't understand why YouTubers were so surprised. This thing is clearly generating revenue to pay off all the top shelf YouTubers and it's clearly doing that by inserting affiliate codes to generate revenue. There's no ethical explanation as to where this extra saving and Honey's revenue comes from.
- ziml77 2y ago
  How was it clearly doing that? I always assumed Honey's model was to sell detailed shopping information of users.
  - oliwarner 2y ago
    It felt clear to me because that's where the money is. Even if you don't understand that, YouTubers would because that's how they paid from all their sponsored links. I also wouldn't expect PayPal to recoup this huge marketing investment from very partial purchase data. It'd be nothing compared to what VISA and the other big card companies collect.
  - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
    That still comports with OP's statement: > There's no ethical explanation as to where this extra saving and Honey's revenue comes from.
masklinn 2y ago
The point of GP is that some of the people specifically affected (through honey replacing their codes) were influencers / streamers, who thus specifically > could broadcast this to a lot of people.
jahsome 2y ago
They were still getting coupons. Thus, for 99 percent of users, it wasnt a scam; It was just another crappy product. To anyone with a modicum of business savvy, it's not remotely surprising. You literally (don't) get what you literally (don't) pay for.

rzzzt 2y ago

Is it MegaLag's video that you are referring to? https://youtu.be/vc4yL3YTwWk https://youtu.be/vc4yL3YTwWk

silvanocerza 2y ago
Yup yup, him.

oliwarner 2y ago

LTT certainly talked about Honey replacing other discount codes in baskets potentially making a basket more expensive, and injecting their own affiliate code when no discount was available. It was all thoroughly scummy and against the spirit of an affiliate referral. But I don't understand why YouTubers were so surprised. This thing is clearly generating revenue to pay off all the top shelf YouTubers and it's clearly doing that by inserting affiliate codes to generate revenue. There's no ethical explanation as to where this extra saving and Honey's revenue comes from.

ziml77 2y ago
How was it clearly doing that? I always assumed Honey's model was to sell detailed shopping information of users.
- oliwarner 2y ago
  It felt clear to me because that's where the money is. Even if you don't understand that, YouTubers would because that's how they paid from all their sponsored links. I also wouldn't expect PayPal to recoup this huge marketing investment from very partial purchase data. It'd be nothing compared to what VISA and the other big card companies collect.
- ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
  That still comports with OP's statement: > There's no ethical explanation as to where this extra saving and Honey's revenue comes from.

masklinn 2y ago

The point of GP is that some of the people specifically affected (through honey replacing their codes) were influencers / streamers, who thus specifically > could broadcast this to a lot of people.

jahsome 2y ago

They were still getting coupons. Thus, for 99 percent of users, it wasnt a scam; It was just another crappy product. To anyone with a modicum of business savvy, it's not remotely surprising. You literally (don't) get what you literally (don't) pay for.