"$43,792 per violation"
We're used to seeing money quoted to 5 significant figures when there's been a currency conversion but - in the original denomination? It looks odd, OK, it's even but still odd.
US companies ranging from Amazon to Applebee's, Google to Gap, IBM to IHOP, and Microsoft to McDonald's have received warnings from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) about fake reviews and misleading endorsements. The competition and consumer protection regulator says it has fired off "Notice of Penalty Offense" [PDF] letters …
I wondered if it was made up of a number of lesser sums, and searched for the factors (which was unhelpful). However, it did turn out that the COPPA (Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule) act has the same maximum penalty... as does the Credit Practices Rule, and the CAN-SPAM act... somebody liked that number.
Perhaps https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2021/01/ftc-publishes-inflation-adjusted-civil-penalty-amounts-2021 offers a suggestion: inflation adjusted amounts this year, on what looks like previously adjusted amounts. Perhaps the generic fine started at forty grand or so, and grew over the years?
In Jan 2020:
The maximum civil penalty amount has increased from $42,530 to $43,280 for violations of Sections 5(l), 5(m)(1)(A), and 5(m)(1)(B) of the FTC Act, 7A(g)(l) of the Clayton Act and Section 525(b) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act.
(https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2020/01/ftc-publishes-inflation-adjusted-civil-penalty-amounts)
That's a $750 increase in 2020, so the 2021 increase to $43,792 -is $512.
There are no nice round % increases I can see, so it looks a little arbitrary!
If it's related to inflation, it wouldn't be round. There are a few different calculations for inflation, but 1.76% in 2019 and 1.18% in 2020 sounds kind of right. The CPI rate was 1.371% in 2020 and 1.711% in 2019, which isn't the same but close. If so, this year's increase should be quite a bit larger.
I would happily pay 1000‰ of the current price for each issue! Absolute bargain!
When the stock market flotation finally goes ahead, please put me down for 4,000,000 (four MILLION) voting shares at a list price of up to 1000 microfarthings each. I can be reached at mailto://obfuscated@localhost/
"The Register website is quite magnificent. It can justify it's existence on its own. Personally, I think any registration fee to view it, would always be far too low. I would willingly sell my house and all its contents to help the Register."
(slightly paraphrasing NTNON)
"What tremendous value TheRegister is. I wish all the critics would stop whining about it. I would willingly pay £400 a year to support TheRegister."
"£32 for TheRegister, it's far too low. The excellent service TheRegister provides, it should be at least £400"
"TheRegister is quite magnificent. It justifies the fee on it's own. Personally I think the fee is too low. I would willingly sell my house and all its contents to help TheRegister".
(I might have paraphrased a bit.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lzS8yW8INA
But let's hope they preserve these classics:
>especially the gummi bears although leaving some in an open bowl could be interesting in an office.
Open, unwrapped, food is now treated with ultimate suspicion "just in case". Its a bit sad because break rooms have always been the quickest and easiest way of disposing of surplus foodstuffs.
(Over here on the West Coast you also need to be careful accepting random gummies as they're a common way of packaging THC for sale. They are not black market products but properly packaged, complete with nutrition information, health warnings and so on, and they are actually quite tasty. They also contain 5mg or 10mg per piece which doesn't sound like a whole lot until you eat one.)
I note that at least one of the Gummy Bear reviews is a "verified purchase", meaning one of:
They actually bought the product which implies that the review is not completely fictional.
or
The review was from one of those fake-review operations that did buy the product, but shipped it to some unsuspecting person who may have thought "Oooh, free candy". I hope that person read the label.
There are worse things to ingest than sugar.
So... they just need better writers? The reviews should be good but not too good, is what that smells like to me.
Added value benefit of weaponizing good reviews. Shower your competitor with glowing praise, stand back and watch as they suffer a florid demise...
"Samuel Levine, director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in a statement: "Fake reviews and other forms of deceptive endorsements cheat consumers and undercut honest businesses. Advertisers will pay a price if they engage in these deceptive practices."
that kills Yelp's business model.... ;-)
just written to satisfy the nagging retailer
I've always wondered why these aren't automatic 1-stars. For me, I make sure to mention they just written to satisfy the nagging retailer.
For one, it turned out to be a counterfeit OBD-II dongle, and I showed how it was counterfeit using the procedure from the chip manufacturer's website. The seller lost his shit and offered me refunds and other stuff to retract the review. A couple months later I got an email from Amazon saying they had investigated and the product was not counterfeit. So much for that.
All too often the nagging comes complete with links to the review site. These automatically fall foul of my policy never to click on links in unsolicited emails. Instead the offender is apt to receive an email telling them why they've just lost any future business from me.
I've recently been reflecting on the methodology of bank reviews. Which and the CMA have a similar approach: ask a number of actual customers. Sounds fine. But if then have questions such as phone support or branches this is very dependant on the respondent having used that in the last 12 months or whatever the interval has. The ones who have used the bank's service and found it lacking end up on Trustpilot (I do wonder about the Trustpilot reviews along the line of "All the branches screwed me up until Carol of the Much Piddling in the Marsh branch sorted it out, She's a star." Does Carol have friends?).
It seems to me both approaches have selection bias problems of one sort or another. What a pity the CMA don't use their clout to demand audited reports on wait times, time for issues to be closed off to the customers' satisfaction, etc. and things the branch staff are empowered to do.
There is this German saying:
Die kleinen Diebe hängt man die großen lässt man laufen
My guess is that few smaller companies will get fined into bankruptcy (because they wouldn't be able to afford the grease) and the bigger ones will continue business as usual.
Big corporations will be happy there is less competition and regulator will finally be able to buy that condo in the Caribbean.
That's the problem with (especially fixed or capped) fines - If you have enough money it is simply "the cost of doing business".
I have heard tales of England implementing red kerbs to denote "absolutely no parking" where the car will be impounded and destroyed, vice yellow kerb markings that have a fine or "a few hundred quid parking fee".
"falsely claiming an endorsement by a third party; misrepresenting that an endorser is an actual user, a current user, or a recent user; continuing to use an endorsement without good reason to believe that the endorser continues to subscribe to the views presented; misrepresenting that an endorsement represents the experience, views, or opinions of users or purported users; using an endorsement to make deceptive performance claims"
lying, or
"failing to disclose an unexpected material connection with an endorser; and misrepresenting that the experience of endorsers represents consumers' typical or ordinary experience."
cheating.
The Register is a truly amazing website! Its penetrating, insightful, and occasionally irreverent publications have been extremely impactful, not to say fruitful, to our company's engagement with customers and with the developer community. The effect on the bottom line has been palpable.
- Tim Cook
If you know where to look, you can purchase Amazon, eBay and other accounts with loads of positive feedback. Even well established PayPal accounts. The higher the rating, the more they cost.
There have been plenty of exposés on Asian firms that use a wall full of cell phones to post reviews for people on shopping sites. To the shopping portal, those phones look like individuals rather than all funneling to one range of IP addresses.