unethical business experience *LONG READ*

[calgarywinning]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

It depends a lot on the type of business we are talking about. I don't think any business is probably perfect nor expect them to be. If I'm about to make a big investment, say hiring a general contractor to build a screened in porch, I have to take a big risk in putting $50k+ into it and would like to hear all their customers good and bad stories, and how the contractor dealt with them, because I'm sure it's not going to go smoothly every time, no matter how good he is.

When researching companies, I don't look for 5 star or nothing. 4.5 and aboves seems like it usually going to be a good experience. In industries I know well, I can't think of any business irreparably harmed by one or two bad reviews, but I can think of a few torpedoed because their owner lashed out at customers reviews and accused the customers of not knowing what a good product is. It seems every time that happens, the owner's product didn't really ever have the reputation of being as good as they thought it was.

It doesn't really seem like there's material damage to a business from a bad review if they have 50+ positive reviews, and a bad review with a thoughtful response from the business is usually more positive than negative to a business. So what is the actual damage, just hurt feelings and embarrassment?

Imagine you get along with your significant other 9/10 but when she disagrees with you 1/10 she forgets about the 9 times out of 10 you got along with her. Lol. This is how google works.

However, if you want to counteract her monopoly and make sure she still hangs out with you, you can "bid" for her attention spending thousands on adwords.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

Imagine you get along with your significant other 9/10 but when she disagrees with you 1/10 she forgets about the 9 times out of 10 you got along with her. Lol. This is how google works.

However, if you want to counteract her monopoly and make sure she still hangs out with you, you can "bid" for her attention spending thousands on adwords.

You seem to be talking about rankings more than star reviews though. Although somewhat related, they are different. 1 bad review every 10 probably isn't going to be a great company to deal with, and a low score is warranted. 1 out of 20-30 is going to give a company a good score and not have them fall off the map. I've read also that responding to bad rating can help a score and ranking as well. It seems there is some pay for play in rankings in search results, but you are not convincing me that the scores are intentionally unfair. Keeping an algorithm like that proprietary makes sense as they try to build accurate ratings to keep them trusted and keep people using them.

[calgarywinning]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

You seem to be talking about rankings more than star reviews though. Although somewhat related, they are different. 1 bad review every 10 probably isn't going to be a great company to deal with, and a low score is warranted.

Probably not going to convince you of much. google has changed their algorithm and for small business your ranking is absolutely tied to your search results.

Originally Posted by nfotiu

1 out of 20-30 is going to give a company a good score and not have them fall off the map. I've read also that responding to bad rating can help a score and ranking as well. It seems there is some pay for play in rankings in search results, but you are not convincing me that the scores are intentionally unfair. Keeping an algorithm like that proprietary makes sense as they try to build accurate ratings to keep them trusted and keep people using them.

I don't think it is preposterous that each review left by the customer of the business have equal ranking. Each was a customer with different experiences. Negative reviews are ranked substantially higher. I don't think you'll be convinced of this.

Now how about dealing with reviews that are not warranted or have false claims? People that haven't been to your business, reviews that are personal attacks on employees and hateful in nature.

How about google not promoting activism by the business and the end user to resolve true issues? There is anonymity for the reviewers and even competitors that leave reviews. I think when you are on the end of receiving this brutally unfair system foisted it's a different matter. You seem to not care. So be it.

I.e. Ramen not good here, but here ramen best. 1 star.
i.e. Ramen place didn't like how the guy dressed. 1 star.

I would argue that these social networks are in a lot of serious trouble for their "from the throne" use of their tech in many matters.

[Stampede2TheCup]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Do you believe some businesses deserve five stars if they're to be rated at all?

I do. And I don't give five stars unless five stars is warranted.

But I don't give less. If I get less-than service, I don't rate the business at all. It's literally the golden rule, so it's not like some off-the-wall thing I've come up with.

And the business has all the power?! OMG, what?! Every customer is my boss. Like, if we don't give you want you want, you're not going to pay me. You're out nothing until you're satisfied, but I'm paying materials, labour and overhead up front just to be ready and waiting for you should you decide to do business with me.

I think you secretly HATE small businesses and this is your way of sabotage. Here’s why.

An expectation that small businesses should ideally be rated five stars or not at would effectively be equivalent to Facebook likes.

Example:
Two competitor businesses the same size:
Business A has 1000 five star ratings and Business B has 45 five star ratings. This is exactly the same as 1000 likes vs 45 likes.

Business A has been around forever but they haven’t kept up with the times and their owners are often rude. If every customer rated honestly, they’d be rated a 3/5.

Business B is awesome with amazing owner that has lived in the neighbourhood for ages. They’re new and not making any money yet. They’re just starting out, but they deliver awesomeness. If every single customer was rating honestly they’d be a 4.8/5.

According to your ways Business A will appear at the top of the search and Business B might not even be on the first page. A newer, smaller business will always be at a huge disadvantage just for being new.

A good rating model where ALL customers are free to give valid feedback other than “local business I don’t hate, five stars!”! is actually good for small businesses.

There are other horrendous flaws to what you’re advocating. However, unless you can convince me how your argument doesn’t contradict yourself, I’ll hold off. But otherwise I’m going to have to assume you’re a medium sized business campaigning to sabotage small businesses.

And by the way, not even close to all small businesses operate how you’ve described in the bolded. A good rating system should be the most accurate and useful on the whole, not just for a smaller set of specific scenarios like your own case.

[timun]

I think Sliver's posts in this thread have given us all an interesting window into the feelings businesses have about these ratings.

It makes me think of when I used to get my car serviced at the dealer, and they'd follow up with an email or automated text message asking me to rate the service on a 1-10 scale. I gave them a '9' once, and got an irate phone call from the manager about what the hell kinda nerve I must've had to give them anything less than a '10'. The guy was flying off the handle about how it'll sink their scores, how the ratings all go back to corporate for evaluation and review, etc.

As I understood it, after getting an earful from this chuckle####, the 1-10 scale was essentially in reality a pass-fail: '10' is a 'pass', anything less than '10' is a 'fail'.

I told the guy after being harangued about it if anything I was tempted to score them even lower, for hassling me about their moronic rubric.

Soon after I stopped going there entirely. They lost my business anyway.


I know there are customers out there who are complete pieces of ####, but Sliver's idea that "only give out 5s, and if you're not going to give out a 5 don't give any rating at all" is just as stupid as the car dealership's 10 = good, <10 = bad BS. If everyone gets a 5 then the 5s are pointless, which I presume is really what Sliver and other business owners like him would prefer.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

Probably not going to convince you of much. google has changed their algorithm and for small business your ranking is absolutely tied to your search results.

I don't think it is preposterous that each review left by the customer of the business have equal ranking. Each was a customer with different experiences. Negative reviews are ranked substantially higher. I don't think you'll be convinced of this.

Now how about dealing with reviews that are not warranted or have false claims? People that haven't been to your business, reviews that are personal attacks on employees and hateful in nature.

How about google not promoting activism by the business and the end user to resolve true issues? There is anonymity for the reviewers and even competitors that leave reviews. I think when you are on the end of receiving this brutally unfair system foisted it's a different matter. You seem to not care. So be it.

I.e. Ramen not good here, but here ramen best. 1 star.
i.e. Ramen place didn't like how the guy dressed. 1 star.

I would argue that these social networks are in a lot of serious trouble for their "from the throne" use of their tech in many matters.

Google's policy does theoretically allow for removal of posts by competitors or activist type reviews.

I get what you are saying about search ranking. I suppose that comes into play more for some types of businesses than others, but not something I've ever paid much attention to.

I'm not following your math about the rating number being equal. I think what you are saying is you need 1- 1 star review to move the star rating down .1? And 10-5 stars to make it back up .1? So 9 5 stars and 1-1 star is a 4.9? That doesn't seem particularly unfair to me if I'm unserstanding that right?

Also the reason I am not so convinced that this is a problem in reality is that every local business I am familiar with has a rating at about what I'd expect.

I imagine some of these issues are a much bigger deal though to a small business who has big national competitors, business-business type companies. Because for local customer facing businesses, the local places seem to fair much better in Google's system vs the chains.

[GordonBlue]

here's a recent one star review.

Hippo throws one woman around 'like a rag doll' and rips another's stomach apart leaving her 'holding her own intestines' at South African petting farm: Victim leaves one-star TripAdvisor review!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ting-farm.html

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by timun

I think Sliver's posts in this thread have given us all an interesting window into the feelings businesses have about these ratings.

It makes me think of when I used to get my car serviced at the dealer, and they'd follow up with an email or automated text message asking me to rate the service on a 1-10 scale. I gave them a '9' once, and got an irate phone call from the manager about what the hell kinda nerve I must've had to give them anything less than a '10'. The guy was flying off the handle about how it'll sink their scores, how the ratings all go back to corporate for evaluation and review, etc.

As I understood it, after getting an earful from this chuckle####, the 1-10 scale was essentially in reality a pass-fail: '10' is a 'pass', anything less than '10' is a 'fail'.

I told the guy after being harangued about it if anything I was tempted to score them even lower, for hassling me about their moronic rubric.

Soon after I stopped going there entirely. They lost my business anyway.


I know there are customers out there who are complete pieces of ####, but Sliver's idea that "only give out 5s, and if you're not going to give out a 5 don't give any rating at all" is just as stupid as the car dealership's 10 = good, <10 = bad BS. If everyone gets a 5 then the 5s are pointless, which I presume is really what Sliver and other business owners like him would prefer.

This is the disconnect I'm seeing. Sliver (and businesses) seem to see reviews as pass/fail.

Customers see reviews along the 1-5 scale posted earlier with 1 being a fail, 3 being "met expectations" and 5 being "This place is the awesomest awesome to awesome".

And the 'other side' in each equation thinks they are right and won't change.

[Stampede2TheCup]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

Yes, I monitor one business and log all the reviews and have calculated the .1 of a star system for three years and can predict the total number of reviews required to move the needle.

Points and punishment is very much related to where you will rank and place on the google places map, in search etc. Most notably is the preferential to businesses at 4.5 and above. They do use current reviews as relevancy.

My point is the system is punitive because ONLY people with google accounts may leave a review yet EVERYONE using search will use the rating to make choices and evaluations. Secondly 1 and 2 star reviews are ranked significantly higher then a 5 star review in they're wait on that score.

Specifically google will not telly about their algorithm because they are not weighting reviews fairly. 1 1 star should have the same wait of 1 5 star.

Thanks for sharing, I’m happy I learned about your experience and I commend you for figuring out what you did over three years of work. However, now that I fully understand your views I don’t really agree at all.

Why not make a brand new Google account to use solely for Google reviews? You don’t have to use their creepy email for anything but the reviews. Plenty of websites and apps that rate places like Yelp and TripAdvisor require a simple sign-up to use. There’s no big barrier there as you seem to be saying.

As for the algorithm, I think by only looking from the perspective of one business, your view on how it works is overly narrow and simplistic. You have been watching just one or very few variables. There could be a thousand at play in your rating. Maybe only those few variables seem to be all that matter because they’re the only ones that have changed for your business. Maybe region matters. Maybe when the business first appeared on Google matters. Maybe the variables you’re counting are even counted differently for your direct competition.

I’d be completely shocked if Google didn’t use click-through to telephone numbers and websites as a part of their rankings. Or repeat click-throughs through time. Or the number of searches for the business name directly from someone who previously found them in a search. Or reviews to the business when Google would know just how the user found them. Those are decent ways to measure the customer satisfaction for a search engine. Click throughs, repeat searches, etc.

As for the weighting, I don’t see the issue. This is not a system of voting for a democratic leader that needs to be equal or fair. It’s purpose is to deliver the most useful search results. Weightings usually actually make better rating systems and in fact in some cases they can be crucial.

I don’t know all the ins and outs of Google and it’s algorithms, but I know enough to feel it’s virtually guaranteed the business ratings are FAR more complex than you seem to be saying here. I do know their algorithms being more complex than competitors is what put them on top and they have only leveraged their size and expanding customer base to widen their advantage in search effectiveness since.

[Madman]

Originally Posted by Sliver

And the business has all the power?! OMG, what?! Every customer is my boss. Like, if we don't give you want you want, you're not going to pay me. You're out nothing until you're satisfied, but I'm paying materials, labour and overhead up front just to be ready and waiting for you should you decide to do business with me.

Have you even read the first post in all of this?

[calgarywinning]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

Google's policy does theoretically allow for removal of posts by competitors or activist type reviews.

They don't police this, have protocols. You go into a holding queue and they say we will review.

I'm not following your math about the rating number being equal. I think what you are saying is you need 1- 1 star review to move the star rating down .1? And 10-5 stars to make it back up .1? So 9 5 stars and 1-1 star is a 4.9? That doesn't seem particularly unfair to me if I'm unserstanding that right?

Yes, it's hard to follow. When you start a new business and you get 10 reviews you are 100 percent accurate. When you get into hundreds of reviews, each single review is treated substantially different. You would expect 1 single 1 star review and one single 5 star review to equal 2.5. Thereby equalizing each review.

How the algorithm works is that 1 single 1 star requires 10 single five stars to negate. Other posters are already extrapolating into search results, etc. but the google rating system exists on it's own. This rating system is now a major indicator of who shows up where. Not SEO. etc.

Also the reason I am not so convinced that this is a problem in reality is that every local business I am familiar with has a rating at about what I'd expect.

The soft blanket of big tech. I don't know what to say. I expect fair and honest.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

Yes, it's hard to follow. When you start a new business and you get 10 reviews you are 100 percent accurate. When you get into hundreds of reviews, each single review is treated substantially different. You would expect 1 single 1 star review and one single 5 star review to equal 2.5. Thereby equalizing each review.

How the algorithm works is that 1 single 1 star requires 10 single five stars to negate. Other posters are already extrapolating into search results, etc. but the google rating system exists on it's own. This rating system is now a major indicator of who shows up where. Not SEO. etc.

You are still losing me on this math. If it was just a pure average, then yeah if you have a current 3 star rating, you'd expect a 5 star and 1 star to cancel each other out. But if you're trying to maintain say a 4.7 rating, then it would take 13 fives stars to cancel out a one star. Keeping a 4.9 would need about 40 five star reviews to cancel out a one star. That's not an evil plot, that's just how averages work.

[calumniate]

I think what he's saying is that although they contribute to the averages normally, a 4.9 rating is order of magnitudes better than a 4.6 rating.. so it's amplified in the way they will rank you in google and show your presence.

*didn't quite read your post properly

[Stampede2TheCup]

Originally Posted by calumniate

I think what he's saying is that although they contribute to the averages normally, a 4.9 rating is order of magnitudes better than a 4.6 rating.. so it's amplified in the way they will rank you in google and show your presence.

*didn't quite read your post properly

This makes sense to do when a large proportion of businesses would fall into a tight range of ratings, like say 4.0-4.8.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Stampede2TheCup

This makes sense to do when a large proportion of businesses would fall into a tight range of ratings, like say 4.0-4.8.

That's pretty neat that everything google does when it comes to ratings you are supportive of. They really nailed it for you, huh? Fair for customers, and in spite of every single business owner seeing the inequity in the system - you know, the people who are negatively affected by the system with clearly articulated reasons why - you just happen to know google got it right and business owners are just wrong.

Justifiable complaints? Not on your watch!

[Stampede2TheCup]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

They don't police this, have protocols. You go into a holding queue and they say we will review.



Yes, it's hard to follow. When you start a new business and you get 10 reviews you are 100 percent accurate. When you get into hundreds of reviews, each single review is treated substantially different. You would expect 1 single 1 star review and one single 5 star review to equal 2.5. Thereby equalizing each review.

How the algorithm works is that 1 single 1 star requires 10 single five stars to negate. Other posters are already extrapolating into search results, etc. but the google rating system exists on it's own. This rating system is now a major indicator of who shows up where. Not SEO. etc.


The soft blanket of big tech. I don't know what to say. I expect fair and honest.

It’s as fair and honest as the rest of the world in my opinion. It’s a ratings system meant to accurately rank search results into an order most useful to the person searching. They can’t divulge their algorithm because it’s a core part of their business they’ve spent loads of resources to develop. Saying they should be transparent and divulge the algorithm is no different than saying any software company should be honest make all of their source code openly available for competitors. The algorithm IS the product here, they can’t just give it away.

It’s a business that has done well and become the go-to place for web searches. It’s still a business that wants to profit, not a public charity. I don’t love Google or all their ways myself. I just don’t see any inherent wrong in this ranking algorithm.

Also despite me disagreeing on your conclusions, I believe what you’re saying about how it works and I really do thank you for sharing it. I also totally believe the tracking you’ve done has been useful to your business. I just disagree about the way things are done being so wrong and unfair. It is a flawed system and there will always be some people that lose out, no doubt. I just don’t see anything you’re advocating as an overall improvement.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Are ethics involved when stupidity enters the equation? Should common sense not enter into the mix? Who the #### buys a used hot tub and doesn’t think there is potential for nothing but problems? Maybe look in the mirror before expecting someone else to solve your problem. This is like buying a used car from Farmer Jonez, and complaining it’s a heap of ####. Pay pennies on the dollar and expect pennies on the dollar service and support. You get what you pay for.

[Stampede2TheCup]

Originally Posted by Sliver

That's pretty neat that everything google does when it comes to ratings you are supportive of. They really nailed it for you, huh? Fair for customers, and in spite of every single business owner seeing the inequity in the system - you know, the people who are negatively affected by the system with clearly articulated reasons why - you just happen to know google got it right and business owners are just wrong.

Justifiable complaints? Not on your watch!

I’m not supportive of everything Google does by a mile. Just this ranking algorithm. If you’ve talked to every single business owner in the world, then you should have them sign a petition.

Care to address my reasoning on why I think your idea on how to fix things isn’t better in post 284? You said you appreciate an opposing view when someone explains their reasoning.

[Stampede2TheCup]

To me, getting angry at your ranking is like getting angry that a newspaper or magazine didn’t put you on a tip 10 list. It’s a private business putting out rankings. It may not always be fair or perfect. But it is what it is, and I just don’t see any grand injustice.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Sliver

That's pretty neat that everything google does when it comes to ratings you are supportive of. They really nailed it for you, huh? Fair for customers, and in spite of every single business owner seeing the inequity in the system - you know, the people who are negatively affected by the system with clearly articulated reasons why - you just happen to know google got it right and business owners are just wrong.

Justifiable complaints? Not on your watch!

I don't think every single owner hates the system. I know of some that are perfectly fine with it and use it to make themselves better.

Also, I don't think anyone has clearly articulated what Google is doing that is so inequitable. What are these inequities? Pay for play in rankings seems like a valid complaint, but doesn't seem to be too far off the expensive Yellow page ads showing up first. That doesn't even seem to cover what you are complaining about anyway since there isn't really any evidence Google allow for paying for a better star rating.

These are crowd sourced ratings. They are going to be flawed by their nature. Yelling big tech and monopolies are evil isn't really articulating the problems in the system. I don't see any motivation for Google to do anything but try to make the ratings as accurate as they can. Leaving a negative rating up for years is not inherently wrong. If they removed ratings frequently, it would allow more small sample skewing issues. I don't think that one bad review about an item not in stock 5 years ago with a reply by the owner that we've changed our system so this won't happen again is really seen as the black mark you think it is. I have no idea if the businesses I frequent or business owners I know have a bad review from years ago or not. I'm sure they all probably do.