The war to sell you a mattress
fastcompany.com
fastcompany.com
It's a sad state of affairs: We all want unbiased reviews, but we won't pay for them. We all want to know the spread of prices so we can balance service/trust with cheap, but price aggregators are all either blocked out of existence or become affiliate listings.
While so many things have come true, there are still a few internet dreams like free-flow price summaries and wisdom-of-the-honest-crowd which are sadly still just beyond our grasp.
I recently decided to get a Consumer Reports subscription after not having one for 10 years. I used it to find the absolute BEST dishwasher.
But because their rating system is a little strange, and they don't exactly tell you BUY THIS, DONT BUY THAT, I ended up with a Dishwasher I hate. It was the most expensive, and best according to CR, but I cannot express how miserable this piece of junk makes me.
Then I look at the FREE reviews on Amazon, where I see many people who have the exact same issues as me. Why did I pay for Consumer Reports? According to their "tests" this dishwasher might last 20 years or something amazing like that, but for what I care about it sucks, its hard to use, and it doesn't dry dishes AT ALL.
I want to fund unbiased reviews, but I also need Consumer Reports or others to step up their game on providing information that is actually useful and changes my experience as a buyer.
I subscribed to Consumer Reports online, and came up with what I thought was the right brand: GE "Gold". I bought everything in the line: stove, microwave, dishwasher, refrigerator, washer, and dryer. Within 5 years, the washer and dryer had both been replaced, almost all the plastic accessories on the fridge had broken, the stove's convection fan failed, and one of the rails on the storage pan fell off, several screws fell out of the dishwasher before I ever started noticing, and the silverware tray broke, and I couldn't keep microwave lights working.
What I finally figured out was that ALL of the stuff CR is reviewing is made by a few companies, and it's ALL crap. They make it seem like you can buy something "good" by paying twice as much, but even if CR is truly impartial, there's no material difference. I got more years of service out of the second-hand, refurbished, mismatched washer and dryer that I bought from the ratty converted house/shop on 3rd street than I got out of the "higher" end models, and paid 1/4 of the price.
And I'll tell you something else for free: it was damn refreshing to hear the guy who FIXES UP appliances for a living tell me he wouldn't even take my old units off my hands to refurbish -- for free -- because they really were total junk. Talk about salt on the wound! Find a local guy who does this and ask HIM what you should buy; not Consumer Frickin' Reports.
Before I was born, my parents went to Sears, and bought a "good" Kenmore washer and dryer. They lasted almost 30 years, till they couldn't get some replacement part for the dryer. I've concluded that the only way to get this level of quality is to buy "commercial" kit, and pay TEN times as much.
I think that's one misperception. High end anything models aren't high end because they're more reliable - they're high end because they have more features or more expensive finishes, but have more complexity to go wrong. It's true of cars too.. My pet theory is the most reliable model is the highest volume model because the company doesn't want to get eaten by support costs.
I bought a low-end GE twenty years ago and it kept going with fairly easy parts repair on anything that wore out. But it was a very basic washer. I did eventually replace it with a higher end washer from another company - but I had to make my peace that I was getting low-water use and more complexity while likely giving up reliability. My wife and I have fantasized about starting an appliance company that values repairability and reliability without high-end features, but quality materials ...
Sigh, this describes my recent tech purchases to a T. New wireless headphones? More trouble than I had with wired cans in five years, at 3.5x the cost. My first laptop with a dedicated GPU? More glitches than my Intel-only MacBook Air ever had, at 2x the cost. €120 speakers? Their wired "desktop remote" was so dumb that I returned them and bought used €11 speakers on a craigslist clone. (I actually think they sound better.)
I spent at least a day reading reviews for each purchase, too.
On the upside, I will save lots of money by never treating myself to "nice tech" again.
For dishwashers, specifically, I think you have to get a really old one for it to work. One that was made before all the stupid water rationing requirements came out.
This day an age, buying the very cheapest stuff, often turns out to be a pretty good strategy. I got a super cheap Vacuum from target for 30$!! It worked great for 3 years. Of course, the filter is like a zillion dollars, so instead of buying the filter, we just sold the vacuum on letgo for 7$, and then bought another brand new super cheap vacuum for 30$!
Bought a Coffee Machine for 12$ on amazon. it's 9 months later and it still works great!!
Maybe that's the thing: We need reviewers that we "almost know", who aren't faceless, but also aren't as deeply corrupt as most YouTubers? A bit like John Siracusa reviewing toasters in podcasts [1]. At least with simple gadgets, I would rather trust him than Amazon reviews, even though I've only heard him talking for a few hours.
[1] https://www.caseyliss.com/2015/9/10/siracusa-on-toasters
Having been in this boat myself, a few years ago, I decided to simply start fixing my old appliances. Many of which aren't actually old enough to not be efficient (front loading washer from the late 1990's). Its hard when you move houses, but the older appliances (mostly from the 1990's) in my rental are still chugging along. OTOH, the dishwasher, and microwave that got replaced when I lived in it are now on #3 in under 15 years...
Basically, it seems for a lot of things the "quality" seems to have peaked and then due to penny pinching, offshoring, whatever has declined. Of course my mother might say the same thing about her stove from the 1970's, but the current house has a gas stove with electronic igniters built in the 1990's and its also on #3... It seems electronics aren't really a good way to make something last. They might be better at saving some energy here or there, or providing a cool looking interface, but the old mechanical buttons/igniters/etc are often even better.
If you think of a blender, the healthiest person might use it twice a day. At a restaurant, a blender has to last being used all day for a few months.
> but for what I care about it sucks, its hard to use, and it doesn't dry dishes AT ALL.
I'm confused, it sounds like you wish CR had just told you which dishwasher to buy without going into more detail, but you also wish they had gone into more detail about specific strengths and weaknesses so you could make a decision based on what's most important to you.
Did CR just not talk about the things you hate about your dishwasher, or did they talk about it, but only as part of a complicated, confusing review?
I've generally found CR to be a million times more informative than any of the crappy, sleazy affiliate marketing sites peddling "reviews" that clog up the first few pages of Google search results. That said, I haven't really looked at them for a few years, so maybe they've gone downhill. Their business model does seem harder to sustain in the internet-era.
What they talk about is how the dishwasher did, when put through their special "testing program". So apparently this top of the line dishwasher will perform a great number of cycles before breaking. Consumer Reports isn't wrong. The engine is great. They also measured the decibels, so they could say this is "the most quiet" dishwasher.
The information I could have received from Amazon reviews, was that it is hard to adjust the upper rack, meaning you can't easily wash a baking pan. And even on the most extreme drying setting you will still need to dry your dishes by hand.
I agree that Amazon is great for finding what may frustrate you. Scepter when they combine multiple products and reviews into a single page.
Modern dishwashers basically suck except for looks, rack capacity/configurations and quietness. They are now all low water use and you can't get phosphate based dishwasher detergent. God help you if you have hard water or some other issues. I have a kitchenaid top of the line that has multiple cleaning sessions including a fancy auto-detect-dirty dishes pro wash feature that never cleans satisfactorily. I have to run on "tough" mode with extra rinse at high temperature to get anything "clean". And I say "clean" because if the water softener hasn't recharged or it's rained or I don't have cascade platinum, rinse aid, and vinegar then the dishes come out cloudy at best or still dirty. And then you have to run dishwasher cleaner every 2 weeks or so... Wine glasses are basically impossible to clean without streaks or residue. And then like you, drying dishes even on the dry cycle depends on relative humidity.. :) That being said I can't run a dry cycle by itself.. it has to run after a wash no matter what.
Thanks to Energy Star they can't put a heating element in them like they used to. Brand new Samsung dishwasher (why does everyone thing Samsung appliances are great? They are garbage) and it doesn't dry, dishes end up wet, dishwasher ends up stinking, Samsung suggests cracking the door... Went on Lowes website and half the reviews have the same complaints. Junk.
The only appliance I had issues with was the dishwasher. While I had parts for washer, dryer, fridge, stove, and dishwasher. The dishwasher had a gasket just under the pump at the bottom of the unit. Every several months it would rupture due to being cheap plastic. I just grabbed one from my shelf and switched it out.
This model also applied to my family. when recommending a unit with more readily available parts. The repairs were less expensive. Are these the best units, not by a long shot. But I know I can repair it at least.
Quoting from link below:
GrubHub / Seamless owns MenuPages, Allmenus, Restaurants on the Run, DiningIn, and Delivered Dish.
Seamless takes a percentage, not a flat fee, of the total food and beverage amount, even though its involvement is the same whether an order is for $10 or $250. Restaurants can choose from four commission levels (12.5%, 15%, 17.5%, and 20%); the more a restaurant pays, the higher up it will appear in the search results. When you search for restaurants on Seamless, you may have noticed that, in the default view, the results appear to be random, but they’re actually arranged by who paid what.
And unlike with, say, Google search results, there’s no disclaimer.
http://tribecacitizen.com/2016/03/01/why-restaurants-hate-gr...
Then there are the channels that thrive on drama and conflict. One particular guitar reviewer is an older chap, with questionable playing skills and knowledge, but he excels in riling up companies, which in turn leads to more publicity and views for him.
He is well known for taking expensive electronic gear apart and saying things like "I can't believe they charge $2000 for this guitar effects processor when I know the motherboard and DSP chips on here only cost $200... etc.". When the company refutes these claims or tried to explain, he shuts them down with demands for payment to remove his negative reviews etc.
We cannot expect much more though - a whole generation of audience has been trained to seek out such drama and negative energy and latch on to it like a remora to a shark.
According to this link, defamation - written (libelous) or verbal (derogatory) - is a civil matter and not a crime.
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/defamation-law-made-...
[edit] Note that what this YTer is doing would probably not be extortion under California law as long as his claims are truthful, as he has already posted the videos, and is only demanding money to take them down.
The guy posted an opinion. The company weighed the costs of refuting his opinion or paying him to shut up. I don’t think this is blackmail or extortion. How an opinion can be construed as defamatory I fail to see.
Since you’ve brought it up, is it extortion to offer up a negative opinion and then to offer to take down a negative opinion?
The public space is as much yours as mine to say what we will about whatever subject under the sun including each other.
E.g., “I believe zebnyc eats donkey meat for breakfast. I don’t think he should be allowed to do this.” Now, if you were applying for a PETA contract, this opinion of mine could hurt you financially. So if I offered to take down this opinion for money, what illegal act have I committed? My opinion of your eating habits is valuable to you because of your external circumstances namely your PETA contract.
Is this any different from this guy stating that he doesn’t understand why a piece of equipment should cost in the thousands when to make it should cost in the low hundreds. The company could have argued the actual cost teardown or said that they attach their QA and reputation to each piece of equipment sold so that boosts the price or given him money to shut him up. The chose the last option.
Note that I may be wrong about this case being blackmail, since the youtube videos are already posted (thanks to gamblor956 for pointing this out). Whereas "Pay me money or I will make a bad youtube video about you" would be blackmail.
True, but from what I read, this guy had SEO experience and ranked #1 for "Casper Mattress Review" for many years. In other words he was clever at marketing his site which was stuffed with affiliate links along with 1 on 1 agreements with some mattress companies.
Most techies who are coming up with "clever technical solutions" either don't validate a need for their offering, or really suck (add me to this list) at marketing their solutions / online businesses.
... BUT...
He really only started making ad revenue on the site once he stopped maintaining it! People would find his site, then would realize the content was old, but would click on an up-to-date ad instead.
Accidental genius. :)
I try not to play the envy game lest I just self loathe. Luck has always existed. Also, tales like these help keep me humble and I just assume there is a cognitive dissonance and their talents are valuable even if I can't see how.
I think that's the right attitude. Even if you look down upon SEO, there's no denying that the guy learned a skill that took time and effort, plus took some risks that it wouldn't work out.
If you really want to annoy the US mattress industry, set up a review site and review sub-$100 mattresses off Alibaba.
(Personally, I have an air bed which cost about $200.)
[0] - https://www.amazon.com/Zinus-Memory-Green-Mattress-Queen/dp/...
1) Providing rigidity for use on a sparse frame
2) Providing airflow so the underside of the mattress does not stay damp (from sweat etc)
Don't know how much of an issue this still is, but as far as I know it's not just a spacer.
(Personally, I run my website on a shared php host for about $1)
--
Snarkiness aside, it's surprising to see comments like this here.
A web page only needs to be coded once.
But that is work in the sense of energy, if robots are being used for production.
EDIT: Changed phrasing, to not distract from the actual argument.
Foam mattresses don't breathe, they stink (some mattress I've seen are 1+ yr old and continue to stink) and aren't firm enough for me.
Do any online retailers sell standard beds? Or am I a dinosaur?
I can't stand sleeping on the foam mattress for more than a night or two. When I wake up it's like I've sunk into the foam and have been immobilized for hours. People are supposed to be able to move when they sleep.
He's since gotten an air bed for the other room, and I choose that one when I go to visit.
But I absolutely love latex foam. You can move easily during sleep and every position is comfortable. It lasts forever.
The online mattress companies are all built around compressing and using UPS to ship.
I have a chunk of 2 pound, 4" polyurethane that I have been sleeping on for something like 20 years...
Just like TV's, you want to go see one in person. You'll find the big brands are playing model number games so you can't compare the same one between different stores.
2 years later and I have no complaints.
I'm just starting this now and would love to hear personal experiences and tips.
Only problem is the combination is 15cm shorter than a real king mattress, so it's odd on the base. But meh.
Blows their mind.
Not an AdNauseum user myself, but how can we tell this isn't ad industry FUD? They would certainly have a vested interest in discouraging the practice.
If nothing else at least AdNauseum can contribute somewhat to bandwidth and administrative costs.
Bandwidth costs would be a few extra bytes and you would likely only hurt yourself if using a metered connection. There are 0 extra admin costs.
If you don’t like the ads then avoid the site, but if you must still access the content the use an ad blocker because loading ads just to falsely click on them only generates a stronger signal than usual.
At the time it felt fine, but when it arrived I found it nearly impossible to sleep on. I could feel the springs pressing into me as I inevitably rolled around over them. I guess you get what you pay for.
Fortunately a friend of mine whose girlfriend was moving in was giving away a memory foam mattress topper, which has turned it from one of the worse beds I've owned into the best bed I've owned.
It's really hard to anticipate how a mattress will actually feel when you try to sleep on it, and I recommend not skimping on one.
I love that an un-careful reading of this accidentally implies a Rip Van Winkle style experience, where you and your GF fell asleep for a few years.
Essentially just looks like some plastic foam, whether it's worth that price I couldn't say.
This seems like a pretty good article about latex mattresses though (the photo part-way down of tapped rubber trees bummed me out): https://hubpages.com/living/Warnings-Wisdom-on-Buying-a-Late...
Lying about whether a diamonds is a blood diamond is the only move which makes sense, so everyone must assume every diamond is a blood diamond, as it is impossible to prove otherwise.
However, the massive diamond glut means DeBeers has an incentive to buy up conflict diamond using proceeds from regular diamond sales. Which arguably makes all natural diamonds blood diamonds more directly.
Right, but because diamonds can't be tracked, they're indistinguishable from the good liars who want to pass off blood diamonds as good ones.
> However, the massive diamond glut means DeBeers has an incentive to buy up conflict diamond using proceeds from regular diamond sales. Which arguably makes all natural diamonds blood diamonds more directly.
This is also a very good point.
That's a little surprising to me, don't minerals usually have characteristic chemical fingerprints that allow them to be located once the "fingerprint" has been established?
Doing a quick search now, eg https://cen.acs.org/articles/90/i18/Fingerprinting-Conflict-..., suggests I'm right in this assumption?
My knowledge comes from my knowledge of what people have said about Brilliant Earth, which charges a premium based on the notion that its diamonds come from Canada.
https://iwantwhatitsworth.com/blog/brilliant-earth-diamond-s...
> Small problem: Everyone who’s worked in the diamond industry—for more than a week—knows tracking diamonds all the way to the mine is flat out impossible.
The only other info I can find says that diamonds could theoretically be tracked, but not in any way which implies they'd be tracked chemically, just that they could be tracked through a supply chain, in a way ultimately dependent on the goodwill and honesty of the diamond industry
https://www.jckonline.com/editorial-article/brilliant-earth-...
> Second, the video is incorrect when it states baldly, “Diamonds can’t be tracked.” It is true, there is nothing gemologically in a diamond that offers any proof of origin, as there sometimes is with colored stones. But there is no reason that diamonds can’t be tracked. Bananas are tracked. Coffee is tracked.
> If a manufacturer buys directly from a specific mine, establishing a diamond’s origin should be relatively easy. All it has to do is segregate those specific goods and then make its systems open to audit. For an extra 2 to 3 percent, I can’t imagine many manufacturers would have much problem doing that. (There are probably some manufacturers that would eat the diamonds if it meant an extra 2 to 3 percent. But that’s another story.)
> So just because diamonds haven’t been tracked traditionally doesn’t mean that is not possible—or that companies aren’t currently doing it. In addition to Brilliant Earth, the Forevermark, Canadamark, and Rio Tinto’s new Canadian and Australian diamond programs all make provenance claims.
I think I've made my case as to why I doubt this would be sufficient.
We bought moissanite because I absolutely refuse to support the diamond industry in any way. For what its worth, friends of our who are obsessed with image can't tell the difference.
Other companies aren't any better. Casper cheapened the materials used in their mattress, but is still riding on positive reviews for the original model which used latex (more expensive) as a top layer.
It is just businesses competing to sell products - maybe a little too interested in suing, but business nevertheless.
A lot of narrative here in America eventually turns into good vs. evil, and War on X is an example of that. I've heard people attribute this to anything from religion, to the revolutionary origin of the country, to military-industrial conspiracy.
[1]: http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/M/bo3637992...
I don't see how that works - partners dancing together are cooperating to improve the outcome. Those competing in business are (unfortunately, in capitalist systems) almost always trying to profit and destroy their competitors. It's perhaps a bit like moshing?
War fits as a better metaphor for companies under capitalism.
If the companies were helping each other and targeting better products with less profit, that would be more like dance partners.
I think the idea is backwards. We don't use military metaphors for anything competitive, we use words related to competition for describing war, because war is competitive by nature. It goes back and forth from there.
I couldn't give an honest review, if I get more money from B than A. So if they state otherwise, I call it fraud And I know that's what people call marketing in general and there might be some truth in it - but that's why you go to these review site to get a neutral view.
So normally the customer should pay the reviewer, he is doing work for him, because when the company pays the reviewer ...
Some, like credit cards and other financial products, are especially bad since the payments per conversion (i.e. person who looks at the review site and then signs up for the credit card) can be massive. But even seemingly innocent niche markets, like light-weight backpacking equipment, can be full of affiliate marketing.
That said, just because a blog or website is influenced by affiliate marketing doesn't mean they don't have useful information in their reviews. They usually are accurate when describing a product's basic attributes. Where they typically bend the truth is when they're comparing products against each other (the one with higher affiliate payments is almost always better), or they simply won't talk about genuinely better products that don't pay for conversions.
Of course I can just not buy a smart sock. But I pretty much know that at some point I'm going to buy some thing that's almost as useless because it's for the baby.
Or when it so happens, that the boss of the media concern is a golfclub buddy of the senator who is accused of something.
etc. etc.
I will note that for many products, they have recommended items not sold on Amazon, even over competing products that are available for sale on Amazon.
And let's face it: when Amazon sells the majority of goods most people are likely to buy (and that you are likely to review), "affiliate bias" isn't really that big of an issue because it just means you're comparing one Amazon product against another. At that point, the primary bias would be from recommending the most expensive product available on Amazon, thus earning the highest commission. And Wirecutter/Sweethome definitely doesn't do that.
Review sites, in general, are mostly cash cows and 99% of them should be avoided. There's no incentive to give honest and unbiased reviews.
Surely not everyone is only driven by greed?
Greed is somewhat what our race is breeded for in terms of society design. Greed is rewarded by our society.
Full disclosure: I paid nothing to the site, but used it to find a local mattress shop (and manufacturer) and purchased a mid-range queen mattress at a good price. Apparently the shop owner had received quite a few referrals from them, but he never paid them or received any payment from them.
The only downside is, err, it doesn't bounce when you want to bounce, if y' catch my drift.
It feels quite different, definitely warmer (not a problem in UK), took a few days to get used to.
Worth noting that some claim it gets softer after a few weeks.
They're so quiet and way more comfortable (as long as you get the firmness right) that I'd never go back unless forced to.
We buy a $100 foam in the box mattress (at walmart.com), pick it up at nearest store and put it in top of existing one
Then we say to owner your mattress is awful.. We won't review it that way..(they are very appreciative)
Next time we rent there there is a new non-foam mattress
I assume the original company either went bankrupt or received a C&D from somewhere and had to change their name. But this does nothing at all to increase my confidence in these online sellers. Welcome to the Cialis of 2017...
There are some revenue numbers in the Wikipedia page:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestreptalks/2017/07/17/a-y-...
Edited typo.
Multi level marketing (MLM) schemes are situations in which people make money, or are promised money, based on their ability to recruit additional affiliate salespeople. The typical MLM pitch is "if you sell product X, we'll give you a (typically huge) sum of money, and also if you convince someone else to enter into this same agreement, we'll give you a different (usually smaller) sum of money, and what's more you'll get money for every sale that recruit makes, any people they recruit, and any sales they make, recursively on down the tree."
The con is usually in the fact that product X is difficult née impossible to sell, and that entering into such an agreement in the first place requires payment into the scheme. Those factors result in the people towards the "root" of the tree making tons of money simply from the fact that more people are getting recruited and paying in at lower levels. They make money from the tree growing, even though the leaves are not making sales.
This is widely considered unethical (and illegal, in some cases) since its primary profit engine is recruitment under usually-false pretenses. MLM can be practiced ethically between a given two parties, but usually only makes money due to subsequent unethical practices (e.g. one seasoned affiliate marketeer agrees to be a recruit of another such seasoned salesperson in a multilevel scheme, knowing full well the behavior of the scheme; they then both go on to enrich themselves and each other by shilling unsuspecting rubes with the typical "you can work your own hours, get tons of money, and, if you grow your network big enough, rake in the cash while your recruits do all the hard work!" sell concealing the "...for a nominal [signup|monthly|etc] fee" hook).
Edit: removed accidentally repeated repeated words.
>based on their ability to recruit additional affiliate salespeople
If Casper took owership of every outstanding matress review website there is and ever will be (or made some of their own in the pocess and have it high ranked, whichever is the cheapest form of tactics), affiliation would never be an issue. Wouldn't be ethic, but eh...
Also, two brands of internet razor. Podcasts seem to specialize in advertising things that I definitely would want to buy in an actual shop and not the internet.
There are at least a few active forums you can ask about good hosting companies on (which is something the mattress buying process seems to lack), but then you have to deal with astroturfing and companies 'hinting' that you should use their service in every post.
Either way, I think these industries (and many others) are in this situation because the internet has just made good, high quality journalism unprofitable. Along with clickbait and actual lies, it seems affiliate commissions are where the money is in writing nowadays, meaning there's a huge incentive to write pandering crap and an equally large disincentive to care about being a truly helpful source for this information.
I gave up when I felt I reached “risk of prolapse” time. Will finish it in another “sitting”.
That tech is relatively new.
Something is not not right here. Was Derek banned from the Amazon affiliates program? How else does he "lack a direct affiliate relationship" ? I made a viral cat videos site for kicks and was approved by amazon affiliates to link to cat product reviews... so why wouldn't someone like this guy be able to get a direct amazon.com affiliate account?
Everything in the article is probably true, however.