Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Boards Deals scam

135

Comments

  • #102
    ToadVine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 659 ✭✭✭ToadVine


    Commissioner Gordon wrote: »
    Bracelet Deal
    We've received the following from OwnU, which should answer some of the queries raised in this thread.

    "In answer to your query, we do source products from a variety of different manufacturers and factories. As a consequence, some of the products we import are of a far superior quality and finish than others, which is why it may appear that we offer similar items at different prices, through a selection of our different online stores. The same image may be used to illustrate bracelets of the same design across our different online presences, however the manufacture, quality and finish of the individual range of items sold through our different stores is reflected in the prices."

    This looks like a duck and walks like a duck ...

    Have you independent proof of this "far superior quality" or are you willing to accept OwnU's word? Bearing in mind they use the "same image" and all ...




    /snipped/


  • #103
    --amadeus--
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,096 ✭✭✭--amadeus--


    My first "proper" job was flogging ad space over the phone. It was horrible & I hated every minute of it but one of the places I worked was the customer magazine for a major UK bank / building society. The sales staff saw the magazine readers as a sales pitch and the magazine as the avenue to access that commodity. And that's what we sold and that's what people bought.

    But the bank saw the magazine as an important method of communicating with thier customers and of enhancing thier brand. So every month a marketing rep went through the copy of every single ad due for publication and rejected any that they felt didn't fit the ethos, no matter how valuable the ad was. I lost count of how often I had to phone people who had paid full rate card for a full page and tell them that we would be refunding the money. And I missed plenty of targets because of it.

    What's the point?

    That short term gains can be damaging in the long term. There needs to be someone with no financial or other stake in the process vetting the deals because otherwise poor quality can be passed. I am not getting a sense from any of the "internal" posts that a proper independent review is done, rather that a checklist is signed off on. And anyone with a background in quality knows that signing a checklist and checking the quality aren't the same thing.

    I don't know why but the reply above kind of leaves me feeling a bit cold. A bit "yes yes yes, whatever, we hear you, we won't do it again". It's the response of a business to a customer rather than the response of one community member to another. And that's fine, but as Oryx said it's perhaps not what we expected.

    And 5 - 6 deals from 550 is roughly 1% failure rate (and with 3 in short succession I would suggest that rate is a lot higher recently). With a deal a day 6 days a week 52 weeks of the year you'll be dealing with 3 - 4 storms like this a year. That's possibly one a quarter, each highly visible and ranking well on a google search. Are you happy with that level of QC?


  • #104
    TouchingVirus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,584 ✭✭✭TouchingVirus


    --amadeus-- wrote: »
    And 5 - 6 deals from 550 is roughly 1% failure rate (and with 3 in short succession I would suggest that rate is a lot higher recently). With a deal a day 6 days a week 52 weeks of the year you'll be dealing with 3 - 4 storms like this a year. That's possibly one a quarter, each highly visible and ranking well on a google search. Are you happy with that level of QC?

    Clearly they aren't, Gordon has indicated as much with his post - the QC procedures are being expanded and improved constantly in the face of Boardsdeals-based feedback.


  • #105
    TheZohanS
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,582 ✭✭✭✭TheZohanS


    Commissioner Gordon wrote: »
    Hi Folks,

    Thanks for waiting for me to get back to you on this thread. I'll try to address each issue individually.


    And what does Batman think about all of this?


  • #106
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    Without sounding like an ass, I have two questions.

    1) The Bean Bag offer you were re-assured on. That's all well and good, but how are you so confident they will meet their targets? After all, people to this day on Boards are reporting that they are ignoring emails and are not meeting orders already placed (ie there is a big back log already). I wouldn't say I am fully comfortable with the bracelet clarification tbh, but maybe that is the case. Just feels a little odd.

    2) In regards to the customer service level offered by the staff at Boards Deals. I am unsure where the abuse was leveled at Niamh in particular, I hope that my constructive criticism wasn't seen as over stepping the mark. I felt it was appropriate that I back up my concerns with proof. As I said, there are many examples where she does a fine job but I felt the ball was dropped when things got a little hot under the collar. Why were threads with people complaining ignored and are still ignored, while only posts which were not complaints were being handled? Will these be answered and going forward, will the issue arise again?


  • #107
    Commissioner Gordon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 202 ✭✭Commissioner Gordon


    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    Thanks, Gordon.

    There is a point that I think still needs to be addressed: the announcement of each deal takes the form of a post from Niamh. It is obvious to me that most or all of the content of the post is supplied by the firm offering the deal, but posting their words under Niamh's name takes all of the description and the claims made onto Boards Deal's table. Where a contentious claim is made for a product or service, it can erode trust in the Boards brand.

    Valid point that you make and we ran into a related problem with the Ionic Balance Bands a few weeks ago - where instead of saying that "the manufacturer claims XYZ", we inadvertently made it look like we were making the claims ourselves. We've learnt our lesson on this type of deal when we post it to the deals site, and I'm confident that it won't happen again. When it comes to Boards we've traditionally just copied the content from the deal page into a post, so I can see how it would appear on Boards that we're making claims. This hadn't been raised as an issue before, but I think a way around it may be to simply post the deal title onto Boards, linking to BoardsDeals, and inviting any questions.

    Merchants do occasionally supply us with copy for their deal but we mainly base our creatives from the information from their websites. BoardsDeals serves two groups of people - first and foremost, it strives to offer great value to its members, and it also acts as an advertising platform for businesses. If someone posts an ad onto Adverts.ie or Daft.ie, the majority of people realise that they're looking at an advertising platform, and I'd hope that our members make the same distinction. Point taken on our Boards.ie thread however.
    ToadVine wrote: »
    This looks like a duck and walks like a duck ...

    Have you independent proof of this "far superior quality" or are you willing to accept OwnU's word? Bearing in mind they use the "same image" and all ...




    /snipped/

    We've seen the product that we sold, and are happy that it's a quality item and good value for money. In short, yes, I am willing to accept the merchant's assertion that they offer similar products of varying quality.
    --amadeus-- wrote: »
    My first "proper" job was flogging ad space over the phone. It was horrible & I hated every minute of it but one of the places I worked was the customer magazine for a major UK bank / building society. The sales staff saw the magazine readers as a sales pitch and the magazine as the avenue to access that commodity. And that's what we sold and that's what people bought.

    But the bank saw the magazine as an important method of communicating with thier customers and of enhancing thier brand. So every month a marketing rep went through the copy of every single ad due for publication and rejected any that they felt didn't fit the ethos, no matter how valuable the ad was. I lost count of how often I had to phone people who had paid full rate card for a full page and tell them that we would be refunding the money. And I missed plenty of targets because of it.

    What's the point?

    That short term gains can be damaging in the long term. There needs to be someone with no financial or other stake in the process vetting the deals because otherwise poor quality can be passed. I am not getting a sense from any of the "internal" posts that a proper independent review is done, rather that a checklist is signed off on. And anyone with a background in quality knows that signing a checklist and checking the quality aren't the same thing.

    I don't know why but the reply above kind of leaves me feeling a bit cold. A bit "yes yes yes, whatever, we hear you, we won't do it again". It's the response of a business to a customer rather than the response of one community member to another. And that's fine, but as Oryx said it's perhaps not what we expected.

    And 5 - 6 deals from 550 is roughly 1% failure rate (and with 3 in short succession I would suggest that rate is a lot higher recently). With a deal a day 6 days a week 52 weeks of the year you'll be dealing with 3 - 4 storms like this a year. That's possibly one a quarter, each highly visible and ranking well on a google search. Are you happy with that level of QC?

    We physically see every product which we sell before it goes on site, we talk the merchants fulfilment, shipping etc. We're never going to get everything 100% perfect - I don't know of any company that does - but we do try our best to learn from our mistakes.

    Of course we also understand the different between a short term gain and creating long term value. We turn away probably 15-20 merchants each week because we feel their products/ services/ offerings are unsuitable. However, on the flip side we have to balance that with what BoardsDeals members wish to purchase. You'll notice that we have quite a few merchants who run repeat deals with us; this is for a few reasons - we're fair to deal with, don't promise what we can't deliver, we offer straightforward terms and from the feedback I've received, our sales and customer service team are good to deal with.

    Sorry if you read my post and felt that I was just saying what people want to hear. Having your site/work critiqued in public isn't always pleasant or easy to take, but we genuinely do value any and all feedback and we try our best to learn from mistakes and put in place measures to ensure they don't happen again.

    With regards to the 5-6 deals from 550, firstly I would only view 2-3 as not having worked - primarily because the merchants in question went out of business, but in each case we were able to refund customers who had unredeemed vouchers. The remaining few of these deals had their problems, and maybe frustrated us and our customers, but I wouldn't term them "failures".

    As for the three deals in short succession, I wouldn't count them as failures but I fully acknowledge that there were some valid issues raised with the deals:
    1. Ionic Bands - we listened to the feedback, issued a clarification, offered refunds if people wanted their money back, and the vast majority of people chose to keep the product.
    2. Beanbags - we contacted the merchant re. the concerns raised and received their assurances that there would be no shipping delays. If it turns out that there are problems with shipping we'll contact the people who purchased the deal and offer them a refund.
    3. Bracelets - as I mentioned above, I think the product we offered was good quality and good value considering the price.

    No, I certainly wouldn't be satisfied with a 1% 'failure' rate on all deals that we run and would obviously hope to keep reducing this rate as we run more deals and learn from our mistakes.

    We're heading off for the weekend, but I'll check back in on Monday.

    Thanks again for the feedback. g


  • #108
    Tragedy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,056 ✭✭✭Tragedy


    Commissioner Gordon wrote: »
    Bracelet Deal
    We've received the following from OwnU, which should answer some of the queries raised in this thread.

    "In answer to your query, we do source products from a variety of different manufacturers and factories. As a consequence, some of the products we import are of a far superior quality and finish than others, which is why it may appear that we offer similar items at different prices, through a selection of our different online stores. The same image may be used to illustrate bracelets of the same design across our different online presences, however the manufacture, quality and finish of the individual range of items sold through our different stores is reflected in the prices."
    Few queries:
    1) Do you know of any other business that sells a product which uses the image of a product that costs 25% of the price to advertise it? And fails to note anywhere in the products description that this product is of exceptional quality in some way?
    2)If you checked out ownu.co.uk, how did you not find out that they run seasonsonline.co.uk. Did the website with only a handful of products and no description of who the website represented (i.e. Ownu.co.uk is a trading name of Sifay Interntional Ltd or however you're legally required to phrase it) not make you enquire further?
    3)The product consists of three parts: shamballa beads, hematite beads and macrame cord. There's no precious metal to be of a higher quality/amount, no gem that can be larger/smaller or with a different cut. How can a collection of beads that cost less than $10 to buy in bulk be of a substantially higher quality than a collection of the same beads that cost less than $10 to buy in bulk?
    One other point to note is regarding the beanbags. We originally signed this deal before Christmas, but decided not to run it as we'd run the risk of disappointing people who's purchased it as a Christmas present; at that stage the merchant could not guarantee pre-Christmas delivery. We have been in touch with them since Christmas and they've assured us that the products we've sold will be shipped on time and that they'll provide us with courier tracking numbers for each delivery. If this turns out not to be the case we'll contact purchasers and notify them of the situation. Apparently they sold over 50,000 units before Christmas with another deal site in the UK, which is the main reason why they were overwhelmed.

    Point proven. You didn't research Infurn. If you care to read these three examples of peoples experiences with them, you'll see that tardy shipping and non-existent customer service is a feature rather than an anomaly.
    1. http://www.revark.com/summary/Infurncom/I17334228860297
    2. http://www.trustpilot.co.uk/review/www.infurn.com
    3. http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=619800

    So in summary, a company with a proven track record of letting down customers, a company that many boards.ie users are still waiting to deliver promised goods to, and you don't care because they made you promises. Obviously they made you promises, they want you to make them money.
    Either Boards Deals is naive, gullible, or doesn't care. Take your pick!
    Feedback on Deals
    Finally, whilst we don't mind criticism of a business decision that we make, and whilst we welcome your feedback on any of our deals, Boards doesn't permit or tolerate abuse of any other member. This includes members of any of the teams that make Boards.ie run - ranging from the paid employees here in the office to the Moderators who volunteer their time to make this place what it is. Dav, Emma and I think some of the comments on this thread are out of line; in future we'll act on them as they fall squarely within the "no personal abuse" guidelines. Again we don't mind criticism of our deals, our business decisions and our customer service, but there's no cause to be abusive to anyone to make your point.
    Act on them now. I'm tired of firstly Darragh, and now you speaking out about phantom abuse of the BD team stemming from this thread. Act on it, because I'm tired of insinuations being made that what I said was out of line. If you think it's out of line, report the posts in question and it can be dealt with properly. I fully believe that Niamh's behaviour in that thread was disgraceful, and I fully believe that I have seen her act poorly in a few other threads. Neither of those things constitute abuse, and I've already explained why I believe her behaviour was reprehensible. I'm also happy to furnish more examples of where I believe she acted/handled things poorly if mods find my comments out of line. I'm also happy to link hundreds of other posts on boards of users saying XYZ acted poorly with no moderator involvement.

    I also note that you haven't in any way touched on her claiming competitors products were cheaper and lower quality in an attempt to justify this deal(and not based on any facts or evidence). The fact that you ignore it and don't find it objectionable says a lot about Boards Deals as an organisation. Like Darragh, you instead attack me instead of addressing the issue: Niamh came as close to as making no difference lying about competitors products in order to justify what turned out to be a terrible Boards Deal. You're fine with that.

    Darragh, can you post where people have accused Boards Deals of deliberately perpetrating a scam? Because you said as much earlier in this thread, and I see you repeating the same claim on Twitter.

    Gordon, I'm prepared to spend €20 to buy a "Full Iridescent Crystal Shamballa Style Bracelet". I'm also prepared to get in touch with someone who bought one from the Boards Deal, and to compare the two.

    If I find them to be the same, will you apologise to people on this thread and Boards Deals customers? Will Niamh apologise for lying about competitors products? And most importantly, will you buy a crappy discoball bracelet valued at €70 off me for the low low price of €20?


  • #109
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    Think your going a little overboard there, Tragedy. Gordon & Co have given very detailed responses and I think there are better ways of approaching with your concerns. :)


  • #110
    Tragedy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,056 ✭✭✭Tragedy


    Sully wrote: »
    Think your going a little overboard there, Tragedy. Gordon & Co have given very detailed responses and I think there are better ways of approaching with your concerns. :)

    12th post on this thread:
    To be honest, I'm less interested in ownu.co.uk and whatever shenanigans they get up to than with
    a)Boards Deals apparent lack of care for who they do business with and what 'deals' they sell
    and
    b)Their representatives response to someone raising this issue(and no, not me).

    *Obviously exaggerating

    Part B) hasn't been in any way responded to, and the answer to Part A) didn't really answer much with regard to both Ownu.co.uk and Infurn.

    Unless I'm missing something?

    And unless I'm missing something else, both Gordon and Darragh have insinuated I've been abusing a member of BDs staff without addressing it directly and Darragh has been insinuating I've been accusing BD of knowingly scamming customers.

    I wonder, if was a BD staff member would Dav and Emma consider their comments as abusive and out of line? :rolleyes:


  • #111
    ToadVine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 659 ✭✭✭ToadVine


    Gordon, you say this about the bracelets ...
    Commissioner Gordon wrote: »
    We've seen the product that we sold, and are happy that it's a quality item and good value for money. In short, yes, I am willing to accept the merchant's assertion that they offer similar products of varying quality.

    If that is true, you should have no problem with Tragedy's proposal ...
    Tragedy wrote: »
    Gordon, I'm prepared to spend €20 to buy a "Full Iridescent Crystal Shamballa Style Bracelet". I'm also prepared to get in touch with someone who bought one from the Boards Deal, and to compare the two.

    If I find them to be the same, will you apologise to people on this thread and Boards Deals customers? Will Niamh apologise for lying about competitors products? And most importantly, will you buy a crappy discoball bracelet valued at €70 off me for the low low price of €20?

    Looks like this would be one sure way to sort this out. We could even have a few trusted mods witness the comparison.

    So what do you say Gordon? Are you prepared to back up your words and assertions with actions?


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    darraghdoyle
    Registered Users Posts: 62 ✭✭darraghdoyle


    Tragedy wrote: »
    Like Darragh, you instead attack me instead of addressing the issue:

    A disagreement is not an attack, Tragedy. A request for clarification is not an attack. A simple statement like
    Have you direct links to this? Have you reported these threads? That's a very serious allegation of poor customer service by an agent of a company. I hope you have back up because it's unfair if you don't. I'd hate to see that said about me.

    is not an attack. It's me asking you to show the links because I found what you said to be unfair.

    In my first post to you, I asked you
    OP, what's the best case scenario/solution for you here?

    Instead of replying in a constructive manner, like my post was intended to be, you came back to me claiming I was "Hysterical" and then said
    I'm not allowed to go posting that DarraghDoyle may be a liar. Or may be a boards deal shill. Or may have been in prison for fraud.

    among loads of other things, without answering what the best case scenario/solution for you was.

    I'm sorry that an explanation and a request for clarification is seen as an attack on you.

    Regarding
    Darragh, can you post where people have accused Boards Deals of deliberately perpetrating a scam? Because you said as much earlier in this thread, and I see you repeating the same claim on Twitter.

    Erm, where exactly did I say that?

    and where on twitter did I say it? Was it me saying this

    6034073

    or was it me saying this

    189236.png

    Which is based on the conversations in the first few posts where it seemed to me to be based on the idea that Boards.ie had more to do with this than it actually did, like a phrase like
    Do boards have a responsibility to ensure that a "deal" is a "deal"?

    and similar comments.

    I'm sorry you seem to think you're being attacked.

    I think Gordon and Dav are handling this thread well. I'm sorry you didn't like me responding to you.


  • #113
    darraghdoyle
    Registered Users Posts: 62 ✭✭darraghdoyle


    Tragedy wrote: »
    Darragh have insinuated I've been abusing a member of BDs staff without addressing it directly and Darragh has been insinuating I've been accusing BD of knowingly scamming customers.

    No I haven't. That's your reading of it, Tragedy. Indeed.


  • #114
    darraghdoyle
    Registered Users Posts: 62 ✭✭darraghdoyle


    You know, Tragedy, it bugs me, these statements that you're making where you say you're being attacked.

    More than anything just because if you kept that out of it, pointed out there was a problem and suggested a resolution - which is 80% at least of your posts, you're actually doing a great service to both Boards Deals and its members.

    Instead you're making claims that aren't true.

    I wasn't attacking you. I don't know you. Why would I?

    I'm leaving this here. I hope you get a resolution. Don't worry about responding to me. I'll let people read my posts and read your posts and make up their own mind about who is hysterical.

    Peace

    Darragh


  • #115
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    Tragedy wrote: »
    12th post on this thread:



    Part B) hasn't been in any way responded to, and the answer to Part A) didn't really answer much with regard to both Ownu.co.uk and Infurn.

    Unless I'm missing something?

    A & B) I would have thought Gordon clarification on the deals would have addressed these. He spoke about how the bracelet was approved (they saw it) and what the manufacturer said in response to concern. He believes them, I don't but it would seem a bit silly getting the two and somehow trying to compare them and see if there really is a difference. So I think going forward, they will learn from this. Likewise, he addressed how the Beanbag was approved. I don't like that either. But I just hope lessons were learned and we could very well be proven wrong. If we are right, they will deal with it. End of story.
    And unless I'm missing something else, both Gordon and Darragh have insinuated I've been abusing a member of BDs staff without addressing it directly and Darragh has been insinuating I've been accusing BD of knowingly scamming customers.

    I wonder, if was a BD staff member would Dav and Emma consider their comments as abusive and out of line? :rolleyes:

    Well I read that comment in his post and didn't think it was directed at anyone specifically. Hence why I asked were my posts somehow out of line. So I think its how your reading it tbh.


  • #116
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    Gordon, I'm prepared to spend €20 to buy a "Full Iridescent Crystal Shamballa Style Bracelet". I'm also prepared to get in touch with someone who bought one from the Boards Deal, and to compare the two.

    If I find them to be the same, will you apologise to people on this thread and Boards Deals customers? Will Niamh apologise for lying about competitors products? And most importantly, will you buy a crappy discoball bracelet valued at €70 off me for the low low price of €20?

    The more I read this, the more sickened I am. Especially the apart about Niamh apologizing. Wtf like?

    Without Gordon seeing both products, or Niamh for that matter, its impossible for them to be 100% sure. So they are going on the word of the business. Its the same on all their deals. They will deal with it, I am sure, if an issue arises that proof is there. Refunds, not allowing the retailer do other deals etc.

    Its really not worth getting into a forensic investigation about the two products and making a ruling. Its not worth the time and hassle for you, me, Gordon or Niamh. They made a call on whether to take a chance or dump it. It really isn't worth scrapping the whole deal because of a "possibility" and such a minor issue as well.

    Also, I have seen lazy website owners use the same image for a similar product, even if there are quality differences. Its very common, especially in small businesses.

    Your going way over the top on this dude, there is no need to get so annoyed over such a small issue. BoardsDeals have listened to our Feedback, taken it onboard, and we can only hope that the issues are dealt with. I take their word that it has been and lessons were indeed learned. Otherwise, their brand and their idea will be damaged beyond repair. They know that.


  • #117
    Tragedy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,056 ✭✭✭Tragedy


    darraghdoyle wrote: »
    In my first post to you, I asked you



    Instead of replying in a constructive manner, like my post was intended to be, you came back to me claiming I was "Hysterical" and then said
    As I already said, I thought it was self evident. I also didn't claim you were being hysterical, I claimed you were getting hysterical about what I posted about Niamh.
    Huge difference, please take note and don't twist it.


    among loads of other things, without answering what the best case scenario/solution for you was.
    To show that you aren't allowed to say whatever you like because you appended may to a statement. Something you agree with, but when applied to Niamh's post you rewrite what she said to make it less definitive and then say her belittling competitors products in order to draw attention away from this Boards Deal isn't much of an issue and clear not poor or disgraceful behaviour.
    I'm sorry that an explanation and a request for clarification is seen as an attack on you.
    No, getting hysterical about my comments on Niamh, further more talking about legal issues and legal threats boards receives for similar comments, posting about users(presumably me amongst them) claiming Boards is intentionally posting deals like this. Those are examples of an attack. As is this puerile comment "You know, people often ask me if I miss working on this site. I just point them to threads like this as reply.". The rest of your posts aren't, even if I did find them to be excusing BDs failings in this deal(and the big boy to an extent) moreso than explaining/commenting.



    I think you have to accept that things like this will happen but blaming Boards.ie for it is neither accurate nor constructive.
    Erm, where exactly did I say that?
    See above, it wasn't exactly that though so my apologies. Blame obviously isn't the same as them knowingly perpetrating it, so my mistake.
    and where on twitter did I say it? Was it me saying this

    6034073

    or was it me saying this

    189236.png

    Which is based on the conversations in the first few posts where it seemed to me to be based on the idea that Boards.ie had more to do with this than it actually did, like a phrase like



    and similar comments.
    Can you show a post in this thread where
    Someone implied Boards Deals pushed this deal on customers despite knowing that it wasn't actually a deal
    and
    Where someone abused a Boards(Deals?) member of staff?
    That's why I call it an attack. Make a broad statement and then don't back it up.

    @Sully: I wouldn't have even bothered posting this thread if it wasn't for Niamh claiming the cheaper bracelets were of a lesser quality than the one in the Boards Deal. She owes users and competitors an apology for making that claim considering it wasn't based on fact or evidence. It was based on needing to distract customers. I don't know about others, but I find an employee of a company lying about competitors products to distract customers attention disgraceful behaviour. I found it disgraceful enough that I both researched the company and posted this thread. That issue still has yet to be even touched upon. I accept that it won't be, and Gordon obviously doesn't mind. Fair enough, I certainly won't ever be using Boards Deals again in that case.

    I also don't see why I should be blasé about a comment like this:
    Boards doesn't permit or tolerate abuse of any other member. This includes members of any of the teams that make Boards.ie run - ranging from the paid employees here in the office to the Moderators who volunteer their time to make this place what it is. Dav, Emma and I think some of the comments on this thread are out of line; in future we'll act on them as they fall squarely within the "no personal abuse" guidelines. Again we don't mind criticism of our deals, our business decisions and our customer service, but there's no cause to be abusive to anyone to make your point.


  • #118
    Morag
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,427 ✭✭✭Morag


    ffs sake get a room or take it to pms.


  • #119
    drkpower
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,475 ✭✭✭drkpower


    Tragedy wrote: »
    She owes users and competitors an apology for making that claim considering it wasn't based on fact or evidence.

    Is this really what this thread is about? Making someone wear sackcloth & ashes....?

    Your thread had and has merit; to draw the attention of BoardsDeals and users to a few 'deals' that have obviously slipped through the cracks (gaping cracks in some instances). Rather than leave it at that, and pat yourself rightly on the back for doing us some service, you have continued with what seems like, to be frank, a childish game of one-up-mans-ship.


  • #120
    LoLth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,339 ✭✭✭✭LoLth


    drkpower wrote: »
    Is this really what this thread is about? Making someone wear sackcloth & ashes....?

    Your thread had and has merit; to draw the attention of BoardsDeals and users to a few 'deals' that have obviously slipped through the cracks (gaping cracks in some instances). Rather than leave it at that, and pat yourself rightly on the back for doing us some service, you have continued with what seems like, to be frank, a childish game of one-up-mans-ship.

    this.

    admin begin
    @tragedy:
    seriously, its gone beyond the point of being a word from a concerned citizen and has turned into a crusade. Gordon has been very accomodating in answering questions so far so there is no reason to believe that he is deliberately trying to mislead you. if you feel something has not been addressed there are better ways to bring it to a persons attention than posting accusations and attacks. "discussion" "feedback". Dont post again please until you are clear what these words mean as opposed to "rant" and "crusade". You asked a question and are in the process of getting an answer but somewhere you seem to have gotten the idea that there is some sort of competition here that you can "win" by losing all sense of civility.

    @darraghdoyle:
    heya :)
    I think yourself and Tragedy are at an impasse and it will not be resolved on this thread. the best thing now is to agree to disagree and allow this thread to return to its original topic, that being feedback on and discussion of the recent bracelet deal in particular and boardsdeals handling of deals in general.


    @Tragedy & Darraghdoyle
    If you wish to continue your disagreement please take it to PM or continue it on twitter. Any more "but you said then I said" will be viewed as off topic and will be dealt with as such.

    @all:
    OP question has been responded to by Gordon representing boardsdeals.ie , if there are any additional queries or you feel further clarification is required then this would seem to be the best place to post them but lets try to keep it civil and keep it on topic.

    thanks

    LoLth

    /admin


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    nibtrix
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,305 ✭✭✭nibtrix


    LoLth wrote: »
    @all:
    OP question has been responded to by Gordon representing boardsdeals.ie , if there are any additional queries or you feel further clarification is required then this would seem to be the best place to post them but lets try to keep it civil and keep it on topic.

    As you've invited feedback I'd like to leave some, hopefully constructive, criticism.

    I think that 99% of the time the BoardsDeals staff do a great job. They are generally very helpful and patient, often having to repeat the same information again and again.

    Unfortunately it is the 1% that goes wrong which is most noticeable to viewers of the forum. As was mentioned earlier in the thread, there have been occasions where difficult questions about the value/validity of a deal have not been answered; instead those questions are ignored until the thread drops out of sight. It's clearly not a case that the questions haven't been seen by an employee as other, simpler questions on the thread (like "how do I use my voucher") have been answered. One example was linked to earlier, another would be this thread I was involved in months ago:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=73055165


    Three hours after this deal was posted, members replied questioning the actual value of this deal. Repeated questions over the course of 10 days were ignored. Even when a feedback thread was posted, confirming that the deal was mispriced, there was no explanation from the boardsdeals employees. Even though it was thanked by an employee!! http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=73341674

    I feel what makes boardsdeals different and better than most deal sites out there is the access to the forum, to discuss deals with the employees and, most importantly, to give feedback on the deals. Ignoring this feedback and refusing to answer questions about deals makes the forum almost useless.

    If boardsdeals are going to have a forum on boards, one that is essentially the same as any of the “Talk to…” forums, I think they should agree to answer all queries, even the difficult ones, and within the time frame of the deal if at all possible. Obviously single questions can be missed, but in the situation where several people are querying a deal there is no chance that the employees of boardsdeals could miss it. This is purely a question of professionalism, not answering these questions makes boardsdeals look bad.

    On the subject of professionalism, the overuse of smilies in posts by boardsdeals employees is extremely grating. Statements like the one below, an example of a perfectly professional reply showing excellent communication with the customer. Why the smilie face?
    We will contact xxx today for you, all deals are approved by merchants before they are run so there is perhaps a mix up at xxx about this. I'll get back to you later today :)

    Ok, it’s not that big an issue, but it’s just a tiny thing that makes the forum look a little unprofessional. With regard to that sentence, the smilie makes me think the employee is saying "I'll get back to you later. Maybe. If I feel like it. :)". I'm 100% sure they don't mean it to come across that way, but I bet I'm not the only one who perceives it like this...

    One last thing – in the Boards Deals Experiences forum, why are posts thanked if they have good feedback, but not if they have bad feedback? Surely the bad feedback is just as valuable, or even more so, than the good feedback?

    Apologies for the long post. As I stated at the beginning I think boardsdeals is 99% excellent. I would hate to see it gain a bad reputation for the sake of some very small, easily correctable, issues.


  • #122
    Cardinal Richelieu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,407 ✭✭✭Cardinal Richelieu


    Whats the story with Niamh dumping deals in the DCN the last couple of days? If I want to check out a deal I go to the deal forum:( Is this the start of Boards Deals spamming forums?

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056544223

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056542066


  • #123
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »
    Whats the story with Niamh dumping deals in the DCN the last couple of days? If I want to check out a deal I go to the deal forum:( Is this the start of Boards Deals spamming forums?

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056544223

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056542066

    Because its local to the forum and its only done (usually) with mods permission.


  • #124
    Cardinal Richelieu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,407 ✭✭✭Cardinal Richelieu


    Sully wrote: »
    Because its local to the forum and its only done (usually) with mods permission.

    Should be banned, devalues the regional forums, we already have advertisement on the page do we need more? Since a regional category mod thanked your post whats their view on banning this practice?


  • #125
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »
    Should be banned, devalues the regional forums, we already have advertisement on the page do we need more? Since a regional category mod thanked your post whats their view on banning this practice?

    Perhaps, but at the end of the day;

    1) It pays the bills. You don't have to pay to use Boards, but Boards cant run the service it provides for nothing. Hence, it needs cash.

    2) If the locals are unhappy with deals being posted there, they can inform the moderator and the moderator can request that it be stopped.

    The CMod thanked my post most likely because I gave the correct answer to your question. This practise was discussed amongst all mods before going live, and most of them were happy to let it on their forums once asked before hand.

    :)


  • #126
    RoundyMooney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭RoundyMooney


    Nah, I think it's the thin end of the wedge tbh.

    And I'm not being melodramatic.

    One could argue that pop up ads would pay the bills, that sponsorship would pay the bills etc. But this is new. Commercial entities have not posted outside of their own fora before, and that was cast iron. And now they can?

    edit: Then again, it's not as if they'll be posting outside of the Dublin forums anyway ;)


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    Ken.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,898 ✭✭✭✭Ken.


    RoundyMooney wrote: »
    edit: Then again, it's not as if they'll be posting outside of the Dublin forums anyway ;)
    wrong


  • #128
    Daemos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,645 ✭✭✭Daemos


    And even the college forums haven't escaped the radar:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=68862622


  • #129
    Oryx
    Subscribers Posts: 19,425 ✭✭✭✭Oryx


    This smacks of 'one rule for them, another for us'. I know its a sister company and all that but thats no excuse for allowing practices which no other company would be allowed to do. Individuals are allowed to promote things here under very limited circumstances, and if boardsdeals was subject to the same restrictions, this in all likelihood would not be happening. Mods put a lot of work into preventing spam and now the site itself is promoting a form of it? Welcome to the start of the corporate sell out.


  • #130
    Larianne
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,954 ✭✭✭✭Larianne


    I noticed a deal being posted in the Meath forum for Hip Hop classes today. First thought was "Oh no, are Boardsdeals gonna be spamming all forums now?"

    Edit: I agree totally with the above post.


  • #131
    Mr Magnolia
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,436 Mod ✭✭✭✭Mr Magnolia


    Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »
    Since a regional category mod thanked your post whats their view on banning this practice?

    As a moderator I look at it a couple of ways before I'd permit it. Firstly it must be broadly related to the forum topic. Secondly, and very importantly, it must be of benefit to the user-base. Thirdly, it mustn't appear spammy or there shouldn't be more than one or 2 on a given forum at a given time.

    We've allowed similar threads in F&D where I've felt the user-base would benefit from a specific offer which relates to the forum directly. We haven't allowed Verified Rep's post [advertisments] pertaining to their business openly, that's a different ball game.

    As a CMod, I don't have a problem with it if the forum moderators are happy to permit it and it's within the guidelines outlined above.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    RoundyMooney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭RoundyMooney


    lucyfur09 wrote: »
    wrong

    Thank you.

    I have checked since, and it seems that two postings in a Dublin forum have given rise to this (and these were the only two Dublin deals posted up, out of the vast majority which weren't), as opposed to practically all of the regional deals which were, seven in Cork City alone, for example.

    So this is obviously an attempt to highlight the non-Dublin deals. And has apparently been ongoing for some time.

    In any event, I don't like it.


  • #133
    RoundyMooney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭RoundyMooney


    Mr Magnolia wrote: »
    As a moderator I look at it a couple of ways before I'd permit it. Firstly it must be broadly related to the forum topic. Secondly, and very importantly, it must be of benefit to the user-base. Thirdly, it mustn't appear spammy or there shouldn't be more than one or 2 on a given forum at a given time.

    We've allowed similar threads in F&D where I've felt the user-base would benefit from a specific offer which relates to the forum directly. We haven't allowed Verified Rep's post pertaining to their business openly, that's a different ball game.

    As a CMod, I don't have a problem with it if the forum moderators are happy to permit it and it's within the guidelines outlined above.

    No offence Mr. Mag, but if ESB decided to offer all Cork City customers a discount, could they post it there? Even as it stands, can partner company reps post in a business capacity outside of their fora?

    It seems one and two of your considerations are exclusive to boards deals, and the third is somewhat subjective. As in, can they have one or two on the front page? One or two in a week?

    I'm not putting you on the spot here, this is not your battle, but you seem okay with it.


  • #134
    RoundyMooney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭RoundyMooney


    Oryx wrote: »
    This smacks of 'one rule for them, another for us'. I know its a sister company and all that but thats no excuse for allowing practices which no other company would be allowed to do.

    Adverts never did it. We allowed people like the Campervan people to post in a sticky thread there linking back to adverts.ie, but that was it. It was strictly controlled at all times. The forum mods were invaluable in terms of advice and constructive user restraint.


  • #135
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    Official reps are allowed post in forums with the mods permission. in your esb example, if they sought and got permission, then they would be allowed. the question is, did boardsdeals ask permission? If they did, then fair enough, even if i don't like it myself. if they didn't, then someone needs to have a word.


  • #136
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    Oryx wrote: »
    This smacks of 'one rule for them, another for us'. I know its a sister company and all that but thats no excuse for allowing practices which no other company would be allowed to do. Individuals are allowed to promote things here under very limited circumstances, and if boardsdeals was subject to the same restrictions, this in all likelihood would not be happening. Mods put a lot of work into preventing spam and now the site itself is promoting a form of it? Welcome to the start of the corporate sell out.

    Other companies (Reps) are allowed post, with the mods permission, IIRC.


  • #137
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    Guess whose ignore list I'm on? :)


  • #138
    RoundyMooney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭RoundyMooney


    tbh wrote: »
    Official reps are allowed post in forums with the mods permission. in your esb example, if they sought and got permission, then they would be allowed. the question is, did boardsdeals ask permission? If they did, then fair enough, even if i don't like it myself. if they didn't, then someone needs to have a word.

    I'd imagine they probably did.

    But I don't recall anyone else getting such latitude.

    So, either other partner companies asked and were refused, or else didn't ask at all. Either way, the key point is, it hasn't happened before.

    And now it is.


  • #139
    _blank_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 41,926 ✭✭✭✭_blank_


    RoundyMooney wrote: »
    I'd imagine they probably did.

    But I don't recall anyone else getting such latitude.

    So, either other partner companies asked and were refused, or else didn't ask at all. Either way, the key point is, it hasn't happened before.

    And now it is.

    I've had input into OKing stuff in the past in the Dublin City forum, and in some of the Food & Drink forums which was not from BoardsDeals.

    And also non-OKing stuff, as it happens.

    Do you remember the dude with the review/recommendations website? I can't remember his name now.


  • #140
    RoundyMooney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭RoundyMooney


    I can't Des, tbh. Sorry :)

    They were one offs though, I imagine?


  • #141
    _blank_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 41,926 ✭✭✭✭_blank_


    RoundyMooney wrote: »
    I can't Des, tbh. Sorry :)

    They were one offs though, I imagine?

    If by "one-off" you mean they didn't come back for a second go, then yes, you are correct. But at the time, it was expected that if the offer went well, they'd be back again.


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    RoundyMooney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭RoundyMooney


    I get ya.

    Thanks for the info anyway.


  • #143
    Dav
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,840 ✭✭✭Dav


    OK, so first things first, Niamh *did* ask the mods if she could post the deal. It's not the first time a deal's been posted into a regional forum and indeed it was the sort of thing that was suggested we should do (my members, not management) when Boards Deals started. We don't do it all the time, in fact, we don't even do it 1% of the time for any deals.

    Verified Reps *are* allowed to post outside their own forum to answer direct questions about their company - that's why we have rep accounts for businesses where a Talk To forum wouldn't be appropriate for them. So if Electric Ireland, taking the example above, were to have an offer for residents of Cork a special discount and it was being mentioned on the Cork forum, then one of their reps would be able to post. It is always run past the mods.

    The comparison to Adverts is not the same at all. Every member on this site still has an "Adverts" link under their name, so that can also be considered "one rule for them and one for the rest" and why? Even though Adverts is now owned and managed by an entirely different company to Boards, we're in the same group, so why on Earth wouldn't we have cross-promotion? Similarly you'll see a lot of forums have a sticky as Roundy mentioned where members can list specific items they have for sale to the people who're most likely to be interested. That doesn't work for every forum though and some have their own "For Sale" sections too.

    So with all that said, I would respectfully suggest that if people have issues with any rep posting in their forum, they talk it over with the mods. As Sully mentioned above, we spoke to the mods at length about these things and amde if very clear that they are under no obligation to allow reps into their forums nor under no obligation to allow regional reminders for any deals we have running.

    [edit]
    WhosView is what Des is referring to and, it didn't quite work out, so they didn't come back.


  • #144
    Frank Spencer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,168 ✭✭✭Frank Spencer


    It might be an idea to consolidate all deals into a single thread on any regional forums that they are relevant to rather than an individual thread for each deal. A "Boards Deals in Dublin 15" thread for example. Individual threads for each deal do appear to be a bit "spammy" in my opinion.


  • #145
    Tar.Aldarion
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,104 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tar.Aldarion


    Preface is that I think boardsdeals do a good job in general. A niggling thing is just these few sour deals, and the ignoring of users questions in threads, just answering general deal questions and not a lot of peoples concerns. When boards deals was incepted it was said that if a deal was elsewhere it would not be allowed on boards, I was wondering if that is the case or I remember incorrectly?

    Anyway, my small concern, as well as my girlfriends is that boardsdeals doesn't always check companies out well? Or am i getting the wrong idea?

    From personal experience opening hours have been completely wrong on a pizza deal, reallllly wrong. As well as delivery options. We were turned away. Also they never answered their phones, ever. Somebody complained about this, didnt get a reply. It was only one lad in a kitchen in a hostel it turned out to be.

    For another food deal hours were wrong again, resulting in us wasting a days trip, and transport, as they would not serve us. If the hours had been reported correctly we would not have got the deal as it would have been impossible for us to eat there.

    For a hair deal the company seemed to refuse to answer phones to make bookings, some people got through, and when we finally got through and made a booking they cancelled it when they heard it was a deal. We tried for weeks. We got a refund. We also saw that they had pulled this on another deal site too, before boards offered it. Yet it was still offered. They also did not answer any emails for either deal.

    Then there was the problem with infurn bean bags, and the recent food deal (did not get this one personally) where the menu was much different and people are waiting on answers for two months, with only one user getting a call recently. Two of these deals were offered before on other deal sites and were seen as dodgy, at a quick google we saw we shouldnt get the bean bag or have got the hair one due to that.

    I like having the forum and representatives and keep the good job up, I just think some deals need to be checked out better.


  • #146
    denballs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 837 ✭✭✭denballs


    Tragedy wrote: »
    A boards deal appeared on the 13th of January for "€22 instead of €72 for Full Iridescent Crystal Shamballa Bracelet delivered".

    An hour later, someone posted that this appeared to be a terrible deal and was instead the normal retail price for this product.

    Boards Deals Niamh responds claiming that the products on other sites "may be cheaper, lower quality versions of these bracelets" which is
    A)A terrible thing to claim about other businesses products
    and
    B)A terrible response to people pointing out that this wasn't a deal of any kind.

    Dudara said I should take it to feedback, so I did some digging beforehand.

    1)Ownu.co.uk is in breach of the Companies Act in the UK, as it does not appear to display Company Registration information on any of it's pages
    2)The website was only registered a few months ago
    3)Ownu.co.uk claims to be owned and ran by the same people who own and run seasonsonline.co.uk.

    Look here: http://www.ownu.co.uk/full-iridescent-crystal-shamballa-bracelet.htm
    Now, look here: http://www.seasonsonline.co.uk/bracelets-bangles/full-iridescent-crystal-shamballa-bracelet.html

    Same company, same details, same image, sent from the same location by the same people but one is £14.99 and one is £60.00(but frequently appearing on deal websites for between 14.99 and 19.99).

    Boards Deals:Niamh excuse is that the exact same product from the exact same company "may be cheaper, lower quality versions of these bracelets".

    Ya right.

    This isn't the first time I've noticed incredibly creative accounting on Boards Deals, but it's certainly the worst.
    This is a scam, nothing more and Niamh's response to it was to cast aspersions on companies who don't scam customers and put her fingers in her ears.

    What gives Boards? If i was a private individual doing this on adverts I'd be banned.

    Every boardsdeal is crap.....IMO.....they always have been.


  • #147
    minidazzler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,739 ✭✭✭✭minidazzler


    denballs wrote: »
    Every boardsdeal is crap.....IMO.....they always have been.
    what an interesting and well thought out opinion, formed from a vast experience of the boards deals.


  • #148
    nibtrix
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,305 ✭✭✭nibtrix


    Latest issue with boardsdeals - a deal has been showing all day as expiring at midnight, then midnight hits and it changes to 6 days, 23 hours remaining... what's with that?!?


  • #149
    LoLth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,339 ✭✭✭✭LoLth


    nibtrix wrote: »
    Latest issue with boardsdeals - a deal has been showing all day as expiring at midnight, then midnight hits and it changes to 6 days, 23 hours remaining... what's with that?!?

    at a a guess, either the date for the wrong sunday was entered or, the software doesnt recognise timeframes over a week and when the deal passed its "live" deadline of 11:59:59 sunday night, it realised that it was next sunday it was due to expire and so showed 6:23:59:59 remaining which would be 11:59:59 the following sunday?


  • #150
    nibtrix
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,305 ✭✭✭nibtrix


    LoLth wrote: »
    nibtrix wrote: »
    Latest issue with boardsdeals - a deal has been showing all day as expiring at midnight, then midnight hits and it changes to 6 days, 23 hours remaining... what's with that?!?

    at a a guess, either the date for the wrong sunday was entered or, the software doesnt recognise timeframes over a week and when the deal passed its "live" deadline of 11:59:59 sunday night, it realised that it was next sunday it was due to expire and so showed 6:23:59:59 remaining which would be 11:59:59 the following sunday?

    I understand that it may be a tech issue but either they shouldn't have deals running for over a week to prevent this happening, or if it was an error by the person who posted the deal they should have staff available at weekends to monitor the deals and the forum.

    In this case there was a user asking questions about the deal, who couldn't get answers as there were no staff available. The user decided to purchase the deal, with reservations, because it was due to end at midnight.

    I know that if the queries they had turn out to be problems they can ask for a refund, but they shouldn't really have to go through that process. If a long-running deal is going to go over the system allowed deadline then it should be clearly marked on the deal.

    If this is just a simple error then it's unfortunately very bad timing, coming at a time when boardsdeals are already under fire from boards users...


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    Dav
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,840 ✭✭✭Dav


    I'm afraid it was a bug in the software that made the count-down clock go wrong. The tech team are looking at it now - it's the first time we've ever run into this issue.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement