Should it matter?

Is it unethical for attendees to post a review of our product(s) they got for FREE at a meetup?

No, not necessarily. But when a merchant (whom I will not name) does engage in such behavior along with false product information and price-gouging, and who was able to get negative reviews of his products removed, it is.

In fairness to all, however, the aforementioned merchant is the exception rather than the norm.

Is it unethical for attendees to post a review of our product(s) they got for FREE at a meetup?

No, not necessarily. But when a merchant (whom I will not name) does engage in such behavior along with false product information and price-gouging, and who was able to get negative reviews of his products removed, it is.

In fairness to all, however, the aforementioned merchant is the exception rather than the norm.

Then that would be a different issue than the OP cited.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Is it unethical for attendees to post a review of our product(s) they got for FREE at a meetup?

No, not necessarily. But when a merchant (whom I will not name) does engage in such behavior along with false product information and price-gouging, and who was able to get negative reviews of his products removed, it is.

In fairness to all, however, the aforementioned merchant is the exception rather than the norm.

Let's look at a couple things, though:

First--"price gouging". I have a strong hatred of the use of this phrase in wet shaving. The reason is pretty simple--price gouging, as a marketing practice, typically involves necessities and goods required for survival being priced outrageously during times of specific shortage. Good examples of this are jacking the price of bottled water during a drought or contamination scare. Increasing the price drastically of curative medicines during a disease epidemic or outbreak. Driving the cost of food skywards during a famine.

These are prime examples of actual "price gouging", and it is unethical, immoral, and illegal.

Raising the price on a commodity or luxury item and placing it on the public market is not price gouging. It is retail. No matter how high those prices go, there is no requirement for those products to be purchased. There is a choice. This is not price gouging, it is a free market.

We can sit here and debate the semantics all day, but the bottom line is pretty simple: "price gouging" is specifically being used here to cast a negative and derogatory light on retail practices by merchants of luxury goods. The specific intent is to cast the high price of these products as exorbitant, unnecessary, and wrongful. These are luxury items. Their price is set explicitly by the willingness of the market to spend, NOT driven by the necessity of life. "Price gouging" here, is inaccurate and in poor taste, at best. At worst, it is an attempt to slander the character of retailers selling luxury items for luxury prices.

Advertising falsely, and using inaccurate product ingredients and labeling are all issues to be addressed with the FDA and Better Business Bureau. Those are the folks that control and enforce regulations designed to improve consumer confidence and marketing accuracy.

Reviews on a private website are privately owned. The owner of that website legally has a right to add or remove any piece of data they choose. Reviews fall under that category, and while some might find the practice distasteful, it is very common for major retailers with websites to eliminate negative reviews of products. It happens all over the place...

Well said again, Chris. While I agree that a lot of merchant websites probably do remove negative reviews, I don't think it's right. There have been a couple of sites that I've written negative reviews and they didn't even get posted, which I think is ridiculous. One merchant I will commend for leaving negative reviews up is Stirling. While they are definitely the exception rather than the norm, I think it helps to balance the somewhat pervasive "everything is sunshine and rainbows" type of product reviews we see in this hobby.

Well said again, Chris. While I agree that a lot of merchant websites probably do remove negative reviews, I don't think it's right. There have been a couple of sites that I've written negative reviews and they didn't even get posted, which I think is ridiculous. One merchant I will commend for leaving negative reviews up is Stirling. While they are definitely the exception rather than the norm, I think it helps to balance the somewhat pervasive "everything is sunshine and rainbows" type of product reviews we see in this hobby.

Completely agree!!

I would love to test the Stirling theory of not removing negative reviews, but sadly I don't have any negative things to say about them :/

Here's a question for those that think reviewers should buy all the products. How does a young start up like us get our product in front of the most people possible if we wait for reviewers to get around to buying our stuff?
Is it unethical for attendees to post a review of our product(s) they got for FREE at a meetup?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I don't think anyone is seriously saying they think its evil or unethical for reviewers to review product they've been given for free but rather that its a factor that they consider in weighing the validity of the review itself. Clearly the free product is provided specifically with the intent that it be reviewed. Its provided to individuals that the soap maker perceives to be "market makers" and "influencers" in hopes that their youtube viewers or blog readers (which are all counted) will be influenced to try the product. There is nothing inherently wrong with that but as this thread illustrates, some people won't take a review as seriously as others when they know or suspect that the reviewer is just shilling free product.

To address BadDad 's remark as to would a reviewer favourably review inferior product merely to obtain more inferior product? I believe some would. That sounds crazy you say?? Not really if you look at the psychology of the whole thing, first I think it takes a certain kind of person to want to go online to do reviews. Obviously some do it to deliver information and to be generally helpful and supportive of the wet shaving movement (is it a movement?) but you can't discount the potentially intoxicating effects of having a large number of viewers/hits (which are all counted) on your reviews. You're now a (minor) celebrity, a market maker, influencer. Your opinion "matters". You are "important". A big swinging dick. The getting free product further reinforces this view and fuels the ego. Even inferior product that you're not going to use is evidence of your status in the wet shaving world. Think of the cliche of the restaurant critic who believes they can make or break restaurants with the power of their opinion. Its the same only with shaving stuff.

I think a young startup has to have a solid marketing plan, excellent product, excellent service and lots of energy. Complimentary product for reviews can be part of that plan as can samples at meet ups and included in purchases from select vendors and whatever else a creative young startup can come up with. I think that the marketing world for consumer products in reality can be a lot like sausage making - you might like the final product but you don't want to see it made. There are plenty of examples of inferior products driving out superior ones through marketing (VHS vs Betamax?), the purchasing of shelf space, all the way to the classic intimidation "nice little business you got here, it would be a shame if something were to happen to it."

Be excellent, be honest. Provide great product, great service and great value. Admit your mistakes and make it right if you screw up. Try not to screw up. People will respect you and your business should prosper. Whether you're a startup or an established business, thats how you'll succeed. And always remember, its never too late to blow it.

...To address BadDad 's remark as to would a reviewer favourably review inferior product merely to obtain more inferior product?  I believe some would.  That sounds crazy you say??  Not really if you look at the psychology of the whole thing, first I think it takes a certain kind of person to want to go online to do reviews.  Obviously some do it to deliver information and to be generally helpful and supportive of the wet shaving movement (is it a movement?) but you can't discount the potentially intoxicating effects of having a large number of viewers/hits (which are all counted) on your reviews.  You're now a (minor) celebrity, a market maker, influencer.  Your opinion "matters".  You are "important". A big swinging dick. The getting free product further reinforces this view and fuels the ego.  Even inferior product that you're not going to use is evidence of your status in the wet shaving world.  Think of the cliche of the restaurant critic who believes they can make or break restaurants with the power of their opinion.  Its the same only with shaving stuff. ...

I can see that. Basking in the glow of internet fame, until someone starts realizing how horrible their reviews actually are. In this modern, digital world, I can legitimately see someone desiring that sort of 15-minute spotlight...

Be excellent, be honest. Provide great product, great service and great value.  Admit your mistakes and make it right if you screw up.  Try not to screw up.  People will respect you and your business should prosper.  Whether you're a startup or an established business, thats how you'll succeed.  And always remember, its never too late to blow it.

Excellently stated. A caveat: it's also never too EARLY to blow it. Tread lightly.

Well said again, Chris. While I agree that a lot of merchant websites probably do remove negative reviews, I don't think it's right. There have been a couple of sites that I've written negative reviews and they didn't even get posted, which I think is ridiculous. One merchant I will commend for leaving negative reviews up is Stirling. While they are definitely the exception rather than the norm, I think it helps to balance the somewhat pervasive "everything is sunshine and rainbows" type of product reviews we see in this hobby.

Completely agree!!

I would love to test the Stirling theory of not removing negative reviews, but sadly I don't have any negative things to say about them :/

I would too, but I'm in the same boat as you. The only negatives I can come up with for Stirling would be in regards to scent which we all know is highly subjective. There have been a few I tried that were just awful to my nose.

Price gouging isn't just of needed stuff like food or water. If say a company continues to make product A, but during panic buying people buy lots of it, but they keep trucking along making it, so it's not going run out and the panic will pass. Meanwhile store A jacks the price to 5 times normal for product A to take advantage of the panic. Say tomorrow some politician wants to ban the import of foreign shave stuff, but it never happens cause others won't back it. But people being people rush out and buy any foreign shave soap they can. If a store started charging $100 for a tub of prorasso, that'd be price gouging. To me price gouging is simple to see, if the manufacturer prices the item at $20 and a store sells it for a lot higher then it's probably price gouging l exceptions for stuff brought in from overseas with shipping and import fees. As a gun guy I still remember the days of $20 mags going for $120 despite the manufacturer saying not to. I hope such days never come to shaving.

Also I disagree shave stuff is a luxury item. It's in the same category of toilet paper and deodorant. Lots of people have to shave it's not an option. So I guess if it's a luxury item would depend on the person. To someone like me or you with 30+ soaps I suppose buying another soap is a luxury. To that guy or lady who uses one soap it's not a luxury item. It might be the soap that works for them. I for example could never use canned stuff.

Hate to be disagreeable, but anything more than a $2 puck if Williams is a luxury since it would achieve the basic function.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk