

Video Professor Tries To Bully Washington Post, Fails - vrobancho
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/11/28/video-professor-washington-post-scamville/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+Techcrunch+(TechCrunch)&utm_content=Google+Reader

======
robotrout
When I watch those commercials, I always assumed the scam was that they were
sending you a "free CD", but charging a good price for it with their "shipping
and handling charge".

I wasn't nearly cynical enough it seems.

~~~
qeorge
Agree. I've seen those ads more times than I can count, and never thought
they'd be sending 30 CDs, and billing me if I didn't return 29 of them.

The ads clearly lead you to think they'll send 1 CD, possibly charging S&H,
and it will prove its merits thereby leading you to purchase further products.
I believe he even says as much.

------
dhimes
Kudos to The WP.

~~~
greyman
I think the main kudos should go to Arrington, since it is basically his
personal fight with scammers - WP only syndicates Techcrunch articles. I'd say
Michael has an advantage that he is a lawyer, so he knows the boundary of what
he can and can't write, so it is hard to intimidate him with letters from
companies lawyers.

------
ShabbyDoo
A few years ago, this company's TV ads said something to the effect of, "You
too can learn to RUN a computer." I always thought the word "run" was odd --
kind of like I was going to learn to run a cement mixer or something. Now, I
wonder if it was an attempt at selection bias; perhaps there's a correlation
between those who respond affirmatively to the notion of "running" a computer
are those least likely to read the fine print or return the CDs on time.

------
mdasen
Well, if they're going to claim they have a good rating from the Better
Business Bureau, hopefully people will start sending complaints there:
<https://odr.bbb.org/odrweb/public/getstarted.aspx?siteID=33>

~~~
dhimes
A little OT, but does anybody here belong to the BBB? Is it worth it, do you
think?

~~~
apowell
I've joined in order to be able to display the seal on my own ecommerce site.
As a single-person company, it isn't terribly expensive (it is priced per
employee).

I don't have any hard evidence (such as an A/B test) to support my decision,
but I'm selling monthly subscriptions to businesses and felt the impression of
credibility was worthwhile.

------
joe_bleau
I like to think that the vermin preying on the gullible elderly today will one
day themselves be old, gullible, and the victims of the next generation of
scammers.

Looking at it from the other side, could it be that some of the current
victims were themselves scammers in their youth, and are only receiving a
little bit of karmic payback?

~~~
rbanffy
I would much rather live in a world without scammers, even if it means the
current ones won't get properly punished.

~~~
Semiapies
Sounds better than hoping that victims did something to deserve it.

------
chrischen
Honestly, it doesn't seem _that_ scammy. I always thought it was quite obvious
it's a trial offer. I guess it depends on whether or not those CDs are good to
justify the price.

~~~
aarongough
Not _that_ scammy? Nowhere on the site are any of the extra charges declared.
If someone bills your credit card without expressly telling you that they're
going to then it's a scam.

Are you seriously trying to tell us that tricking unwary customers is not
scammy?

~~~
chrischen
It does notice users on the site. And people _can_ return the products
afterwards. On their BBB profile it says most of their issues are resolved.

Why is everyone taking Arrington's word for it. It doesn't even seem like he
did any research besides a quick glance at their site.

For all you know video professor makes it's money by tricking people to _try_
, only to have people realize it was worth the 300 dollars.

I don't deny any _tricking_ on their website, but they do have a return and
refund policy that seems satisfiable. It just doesn't add up. How can they
sustain their business if people can refund.

~~~
systemtrigger
The trouble with the Video Professor website is once you drill past the
homepage you don't see anything about the $289.95.

Consider someone who arrives via deep link. To that person it appears as if
all they are risking is $9.95 - even through checkout. They might click _User
Agreement_ during checkout but the only charge that reveals is...$9.95. If the
visitor clicks into _How it Works_ they will see the wrong price: $189.95.
(Check for yourself:
[https://www.videoprofessor.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=shopping...](https://www.videoprofessor.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=shoppingCart.howItWorks)).
Only the skeptical and curious who arrive via deep link can know what happens
after the 10 day trial, and even they will be overcharged by $100.

We can debate whether the product line is worth $289.95 but that is irrelevant
to this issue of checkout fraud.

~~~
chrischen
It says $389.95 on that page you gave the link to.

I don't think there is checkout fraud. You checkout and you are provided
enough information to know that you are purchasing a trial, you will be
charged some fee (what it is is hard to determine) if you don't cancel. I
think that information is provided clearly.

However if they turn out not to honor cancellation requests, that's a whole
other story.

~~~
systemtrigger
> it says $389.95 on that page you gave the link to.

I'm still seeing $189.95. Screencap:
<http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1704650/prof.png>

Let's poll. If you're reading this, visit
[https://www.videoprofessor.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=shopping...](https://www.videoprofessor.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=shoppingCart.howItWorks)
then report the price you see listed on that page over here:
[http://moderator.appspot.com/#15/e=10e098&t=10e099](http://moderator.appspot.com/#15/e=10e098&t=10e099).

~~~
chrischen
That's really weird. I'm still seeing $389. Also that page at one point for me
today said there will be a monthly fee of $20 something dollars instead of
what it says now.

They must be updating their site today or something, but that doesn't explain
why we see different prices.

