# #tiffanygate - The new ARC scam that is completely against Zon's TOS



## viper9826 (Oct 18, 2012)

I sit in my own little corner and write. I try to stay away from all the drama but this is just totally out of control. Makes me sick why indies just can't pub ethically. 

https://medium.com/legendary-women/a-couple-new-issues-in-the-indie-book-community-f2cdfc5e830


----------



## Laurie Gene (May 31, 2018)

Thanks for the information about ARC and TOS. I'm new at this and have no idea on how one can acquire ARC team.


----------



## Ellie L (Aug 6, 2016)

Wow. I'm totally at a loss for what to say. I'm not devious/sneaky/brazen enough to try stuff like this. My brain doesn't even come up with these kinds of schemes. Probably why I'm not raking in the big bucks. But dang. Just.. wow.


----------



## PermaStudent (Apr 21, 2015)

"Review for a chance to win" isn't new at all, and yes, there are problems with it on many levels. Kboards has a great thread that covers ARC, TOS, and FTC in depth for anyone new and wondering: http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,229468.0.html


----------



## 91831 (Jul 18, 2016)

Is that true about the number of reviews that KU readers can leave a month? (not in KU, but I'm curious).


----------



## GeneDoucette (Oct 14, 2014)

I admit to getting hung up on a headline that reads "a couple new issues" when it should read "a couple of new issues".


----------



## viper9826 (Oct 18, 2012)

Coaxing readers to 'BUY' your book and then leave a review is the 'ONLY' way they can enter this contest to win something from Tiffany's. This is by far the next level. I just don't understand why they don't just write and stop trying to think of unethical ways to cheat the system. It just really pisses me off!



PermaStudent said:


> "Review for a chance to win" isn't new at all, and yes, there are problems with it on many levels. Kboards has a great thread that covers ARC, TOS, and FTC in depth for anyone new and wondering: http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,229468.0.html


----------



## raminar_dixon (Aug 26, 2013)

evdarcy said:


> Is that true about the number of reviews that KU readers can leave a month? (not in KU, but I'm curious).


It was my understanding that it was a glitch or something and Amazon has gone back to allowing book reviews as normal.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

PermaStudent said:


> "Review for a chance to win" isn't new at all, and yes, there are problems with it on many levels. Kboards has a great thread that covers ARC, TOS, and FTC in depth for anyone new and wondering: http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,229468.0.html


Not only is it a problem with TOS and FTC, but it's also a problem in most cases with illegal lotteries.

When I first started publishing and was looking into giveaways, I did quite a bit of research about legalities. The reason so many companies that run giveaways have that "void where prohibited" language is to guard against the possibility of inadvertently violating the law in some state or country. Even most attorneys are not going to be aware of every possible variation. However, there are certain more or less universal principles.

In the US, state laws vary, but all 50 states agree that lotteries are illegal (except for the state-sponsored ones, of course). What constitutes a lottery? If a drawing has cost or other consideration to enter, a prize of value, and a random selection of winners, it's a lottery. The last two would apply to any giveaway. It's adding the third that creates a problem. By requiring people to buy a book in order to enter, the giveaway becomes an illegal lottery. (Hence the usual legalese, "No purchase necessary to enter. Making a purchase will not improve your odds of winning," or something like that.")

Someone doing this would be in legal trouble not only with the FTC (unless the people involved disclosed in the review that they were entered in a drawing for leaving the review), but also with any US state. The regulations may differ in other countries, though when I checked the UK ones, they were practically the same, except that some approved charities could run lotteries.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Bill Hiatt said:


> Not only is it a problem with TOS and FTC, but it's also a problem in most cases with illegal lotteries.
> 
> When I first started publishing and was looking into giveaways, I did quite a bit of research about legalities. The reason so many companies that run giveaways have that "void where prohibited" language is to guard against the possibility of inadvertently violating the law in some state or country. Even most attorneys are not going to be aware of every possible variation. However, there are certain more or less universal principles.
> 
> ...


It appears Amazon is okay with "diamonds for reviews". His book is ranked #94 and has 160 reviews.

His newsletter states (paraphrasing): "Buy the book, review it, then go to my Facebook page with proof of review to enter lottery". It's pretty much right out there in the open (it's not a secret).


----------



## 69959 (May 14, 2013)

GeneDoucette said:


> I admit to getting hung up on a headline that reads "a couple new issues" when it should read "a couple of new issues".


My editor says "couple of" is going out of fashion, for lack of a better word.


----------



## PermaStudent (Apr 21, 2015)

Bill Hiatt said:


> Not only is it a problem with TOS and FTC, but it's also a problem in most cases with illegal lotteries.
> 
> When I first started publishing and was looking into giveaways, I did quite a bit of research about legalities. The reason so many companies that run giveaways have that "void where prohibited" language is to guard against the possibility of inadvertently violating the law in some state or country. Even most attorneys are not going to be aware of every possible variation. However, there are certain more or less universal principles.
> 
> ...


Excellent point. I know I've read that elsewhere as well. I don't know if Amazon is limiting unverified/KU reviews or not, but everything above and in Julie's review thread bears repeating if they are. Too many new authors see these contests and think they're a normal and legit way to get reviews without realizing the possible consequences.


----------



## GeneDoucette (Oct 14, 2014)

StacyC said:


> My editor says "couple of" is going out of fashion, for lack of a better word.


Insane. This makes me more crazy than people who start sentences, "fact is"


----------



## WyandVoidbringer (Jan 19, 2017)

GeneDoucette said:


> Insane. This makes me more crazy than people who start sentences, "fact is"


Fact is, there's a couple issues in this thread.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

WyandVoidbringer said:


> Fact is, there's a couple issues in this thread.


I saw the "diamonds" newsletter a few days ago and wondered if it would hit KB. It's a pretty blatant violation of TOS and Federal laws.

Now that it's hit KB, it's turned into a grammar discussion.

lol.


----------



## Guest (May 31, 2018)

Dpock said:


> It appears Amazon is okay with "diamonds for reviews". His book is ranked #94 and has 160 reviews.


Don't assume Amazon is "okay" with anything. Amazon doesn't do a good job of proactively handling anything. They are a highly reactive company. Unless people report it, Amazon doesn't even KNOW.

This mentality that "Amazon is okay with it" is actually what encourages the behavior. It is the "Well, so-and-so does it, so why can't I?" argument that our parents didn't accept when we were kids.

I encourage anyone that comes across such illegal schemes to report them, not just to Amazon, but to the FTC. You can file a consumer complaint at https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/?utm_source=takeaction#crnt&panel1-1

Select the option for "Scams and Ripoffs" and then go to "Prizes, sweepstakes, or lotteries." Anything that requires a purchase and has no other means of entry is an illegal lottery. Period. Full stop. You can report them.

The FTC can't chase after every single little scammer. But generally what happens is when they get a lot of complaints about the same thing, then they open up an investigation. While I have filed a few dozen complaints over the years, they only ever got back to me on two for additional information. But the fact that they DID ask for additional information twice tells me they do take this stuff seriously.


----------



## notenoughcoffee (May 5, 2018)

Wish the blogger would have stuck to actual writing issues vs going off on some arbitrary rant on what is appropriate for teenagers, as that has nothing to do with ARC reviews, Amazon, etc.  Kinda ruined their credibility to me. Google can police their own apps.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

Whatever you to stamp out or discourage it, the scammers and fraudsters are always one step ahead of you   *sigh*


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> Whatever you to stamp out or discourage it, the scammers and fraudsters are always one step ahead of you  *sigh*


This sort of crap has been going on forever on FB in certain private groups.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

Dpock said:


> It appears Amazon is okay with "diamonds for reviews". His book is ranked #94 and has 160 reviews.
> 
> His newsletter states (paraphrasing): "Buy the book, review it, then go to my Facebook page with proof of review to enter lottery". It's pretty much right out there in the open (it's not a secret).


I agree with Julie on that point. Amazon isn't reading his newsletter and won't assume anything is wrong with the reviews unless a bot is alarmed by them. That's a lot different from saying Amazon is OK with the practice.


----------



## GeneDoucette (Oct 14, 2014)

WyandVoidbringer said:


> Fact is, there's a couple issues in this thread.


I just broke out in hives.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

PermaStudent said:


> Excellent point. I know I've read that elsewhere as well. I don't know if Amazon is limiting unverified/KU reviews or not, but everything above and in Julie's review thread bears repeating if they are. Too many new authors see these contests and think they're a normal and legit way to get reviews without realizing the possible consequences.


Yes, exactly why I brought it up. Many people, particularly newbies, don't realize what constitutes an illegal lottery. They see it being done and may do it themselves without realizing it's problematic.

The point about not compensating reviewers is commonly discussed, so one would hope even newbies get that message. I have occasionally seen illegal lotteries used for other purposes, however. More than once, I've seen that used as a release party gimmick. (Buy the book, email me proof of purchase, and you'll be entered in a drawing to win x.)

There's nothing wrong with doing giveaways if one just makes sure to know enough about the law to stay out of trouble. No purchase required--ever--and it's also worth mentioning that requiring too much work can become a _consideration_ under the law, which would again be in illegal lottery territory. It's OK to ask someone to visit your FB page, for instance, but not OK to ask them to write a 5,000 word guest post on your blog. Entry options should all be relatively easy to fulfill without spending too much time.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Don't assume Amazon is "okay" with anything. Amazon doesn't do a good job of proactively handling anything. They are a highly reactive company. Unless people report it, Amazon doesn't even KNOW.


I was being sarcastic, but not entirely. The book in question is now sitting at #70 storewide with a bestseller badge attached. Amazon received notice of the diamond scheme Tuesday. They are now equipped with knowledge of this scheme, and have been for two days, and have done nothing about it. For now, it would safe though not prudent to assume they are not troubled by FTC violations occurring on their platform (more sarcasm there).


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

Dpock said:


> I was being sarcastic, but not entirely. The book in question is now sitting at #70 storewide with a bestseller badge attached. Amazon received notice of the diamond scheme Tuesday. They are now equipped with knowledge of this scheme, and have been for two days, and have done nothing about it. For now, it would safe though not prudent to assume they are not troubled by FTC violations occurring on their platform (more sarcasm there).


It might have to go through layers of minions before getting to someone who can actually do something about it.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

kw3000 said:


> I'm confused...as per usual.
> 
> If this person was already doing quite well with his books then why do this? Clearly, his writing resonates with readers, and that's more than half the battle right there. I don't get it.


Sorry, kw3000, I'm stepping in to steer the conversation away from this question. Beyond the obvious (he thinks Amazon is restricting non-verified purchase reviews), let's not speculate.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

kw3000 said:


> Alrighty, fair enough. It's for the best really as confusion is my natural state.


There are sub-categories in certain genres that rely on sizable "ARC" teams (200 or more fans) to support new releases. The result is, within twenty-four hours of launching, there may be 100-200 reviews, most of which are five stars. The author falsely assumed ARCs were no longer permitted so he took another route to get reviews.

If Amazon leaves him alone, it's a win-win for him. Instead of giving away hundreds of copies, he's getting borrows and sales--plus the reviews. Pretty clever, unless Amazon pulls the plug.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

This is a new level of skeevy for a group that is already blase about skirting laws and ToS.



Dpock said:


> I was being sarcastic, but not entirely. The book in question is now sitting at #70 storewide with a bestseller badge attached. Amazon received notice of the diamond scheme Tuesday. They are now equipped with knowledge of this scheme, and have been for two days, and have done nothing about it. For now, it would safe though not prudent to assume they are not troubled by FTC violations occurring on their platform (more sarcasm there).


I don't think typically reported stuff actually gets seen. It probably requires escalation. Emailing [email protected] is usually the best way to get eyes on something.


----------



## 41419 (Apr 4, 2011)

I've been covering this in more detail on Facebook and Twitter, with additional screenshots proving further - and more serious - misdeeds. Amazon will have some serious explaining to do if it doesn't take action now:


----------



## PermaStudent (Apr 21, 2015)

Oh my. D:


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

dgaughran said:


> I've been covering this in more detail on Facebook and Twitter, with additional screenshots proving further - and more serious - misdeeds. Amazon will have some serious explaining to do if it doesn't take action now: https://www.facebook.com/david.gaughran/posts/10156322376629330


Wow. Thank's for posting the link. He's really testing the boundaries above and beyond the diamonds for reviews scam. I suspect he's also cracked the window a little wider on "mastermind" FB groups trading reviews and other questionable schemes.

It'll be interesting to follow.


----------



## Phxsundog (Jul 19, 2017)

Chance was here less than a year ago promoting his Bookclicker service. Many were warned then about his sketchy motives and strategies.

The same article linked by Viper covers the newest scheme, the Book Boyfriends App. This is just as important as Tiffanygate. There's been an uproar over this app the past week in romance world. I hope this software never gets off the ground and pulls in unsuspecting romance authors again, as Chance's Bookclicker did for a while.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

dgaughran said:


> I've been covering this in more detail on Facebook and Twitter, with additional screenshots proving further - and more serious - misdeeds. Amazon will have some serious explaining to do if it doesn't take action now: https://www.facebook.com/david.gaughran/posts/10156322376629330


Conflating illegal reviews with stuffing or KU exclusivity rules just confuses things.

But, if it really is true that authors are giving away books that are also in KU, that is something Amazon will actually challenge. And something that get people kicked out of KU pretty fast.

Ask anyone who's ever had a pirated book put up on iBooks. Amazon is serious about KU exclusivity.


----------



## 41419 (Apr 4, 2011)

Crystal_ said:


> Conflating illegal reviews with stuffing or KU exclusivity rules just confuses things.


Conflating would be combining separate things. These aren't separate, it's all part of one system - giving the illusion of success to encourage borrows and max out page read payout by any means:

1. His new release is the book he is incentivizing reviews on. That gives him false social proof to any browsing readers.

2. Books are always 99c to maximize any possible impulse buys, helped by those incentivized reviews.

3. Sales = rank = visibility = borrows.

4. Stuffing increases the page count.

5. Inducements to click or page to the end ensure a max payout.

6. Payout turns into more ghostwritten books which are further stuffed in other new releases and across the catalog.

7. Payout also bankrolls Facebook ads to break exclusivity on those very books stuffed into the new release.

You know what the funny thing is? I downloaded one of his exclusivity breaking freebies. The KU version is stuffed. The free version isn't.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## lilywhite (Sep 25, 2010)

GeneDoucette said:


> Insane. This makes me more crazy than people who start sentences, "fact is"


I feel you-I'm a grammar pedant, too-but we have more important hills to die on. "Literally," for one.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Locking for moderator discussion.

*Edit: *Unlocking, with apologies for the long break. I've made some edits. We'd like to keep the thread focused on the material brought to light by the OP -- the Tiffany's sweepstake and the Book Boyfriend app. We recognize that many see this author's various activities as connected. But threads like this are difficult to manage when their scope expands, and examining limited portions of a larger picture is still useful.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

The book in question has been out a week and now sits at #80 storewide. It's stuffed (I believe the titled book ends at 15%). Within the "Look Inside" are instructions for leaving reviews in exchange for an opportunity to win diamonds (in case you missed his newsletter), and propagating the web are instructions for earning the author maximum KENP revenue:

https://twitter.com/ease_dropper/status/1002001437876944897

The book has been reported to Amazon by numerous concerned parties, yet it remains live on Amazon.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

Dpock said:


> The book in question has been out a week and now sits at #80 storewide. It's stuffed (I believe the titled book ends at 15%). Within the "Look Inside" are instructions for leaving reviews in exchange for an opportunity to win diamonds (in case you missed his newsletter), and propagating the web are instructions for earning the author maximum KENP revenue:
> 
> https://twitter.com/ease_dropper/status/1002001437876944897
> 
> The book has been reported to Amazon by numerous concerned parties, yet it remains live on Amazon.


Perhaps Amazon are waiting for all the money to roll in and then they'll pull the book and stop any payments to the author


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> Perhaps Amazon are waiting for all the money to roll in and then they'll pull the book and stop any payments to the author


It's one possibility. In the meantime, it would mean 1200 sales or borrows a day kept out of the hands of legitimate authors.


----------



## SalomeGolding (Apr 25, 2018)

Wow. This is really disheartening, especially for those who are just trying to make a go at self publishing, aren't raking in big bucks (yet), and are not amoral enough to do this kind of thing. If this is what it takes, I definitely won't make it. It's like a big game and I've always hated games and been bad at them.


----------



## boba1823 (Aug 13, 2017)

Dpock said:


> It's one possibility. In the meantime, it would mean 1200 sales or borrows a day kept out of the hands of legitimate authors.


Eh, I don't know about that. At best, I would assume that a would-be buyer/borrower who could no longer get the _Diamond_ book would opt for something.. similar. Which is probably not exactly the latest by Nora Roberts, if you know what I mean.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

SalomeGolding said:


> Wow. This is really disheartening, especially for those who are just trying to make a go at self publishing, aren't raking in big bucks (yet), and are not amoral enough to do this kind of thing. If this is what it takes, I definitely won't make it. It's like a big game and I've always hated games and been bad at them.


There seem to be a few authors here who do quite well (I'm talking about the ones here who have been able to make 5 and 6 figures, and the like), who are able to do so without resorting to quirky tactics. So don't lose heart.


----------



## Crime fighters (Nov 27, 2013)

if you take a look at the top 100 romance authors on Amazon, you can easily spot which ones were trained by Chance. They all use the same cover designer. They are literally hiding in plain sight. I've giving Amazon a month to sort this out before I make a decision one way or another about KU.

And no, there's no guarantee that a KU reader would simply click on a different book if these books were rightfully ripped from Amazon. However, the visibility (gained from a combination of factors, many against TOC and FTC) takes the spotlight away from honest authors.

He posted in his group that he made a "mistake" and you don't actually have to review to win. I'd encourage everyone to go enter. In a way, it'd almost be karmic justice to steal something back away from him.

This is to say nothing of his behavior when he used to go by the name Abby Weeks. It's taking a lot of willpower to not slip out of bounds. I know we have rules in place that prevent certain discussions from being had about members here. So if I need moderated, I won't object.

_Edited. FYI, the prohibition on name-calling applies broadly, not just to members. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

SalomeGolding said:


> Wow. This is really disheartening, especially for those who are just trying to make a go at self publishing, aren't raking in big bucks (yet), and are not amoral enough to do this kind of thing. If this is what it takes, I definitely won't make it. It's like a big game and I've always hated games and been bad at them.


It does get disheartening, but most of us aren't like that. There are lots of folks here and in other groups just as disgusted, just as hurt by this type of thing, and we all want it to go away. Or at least get knocked down to levels where it's possible to be seen without being nasty people. If you want to see two people who don't use these sorts of tactics, look at Amanda Lee and Sela. And David Graughan, and David Van ****, and loads more I can't even name right now. They are good people.


----------



## Book Cat (Jan 3, 2016)

And yet us little people get hit with page reads scams last month we had nothing to do with, and will likely get hit again this month and terminated. The fact nothing has happened here, and that the big names are radio silent about this, makes me firmly believe there is something scammy and rotten at the top of the indy publishing mountain. They will rage about Cockygate, and not this?

Makes me wonder who was behind the page read scams, why it only hit smaller authors with moderate success, and who it really benefited to remove the competition...

Some people will do anything to keep all their books in the top 100 and not have new competition. They even get in their secret FB groups with other big names to conspire together on how to do it...

And no, I'm not blaming you, or anyone specifically.


----------



## 75814 (Mar 12, 2014)

Instead of complaining that Amazon is letting him get away with it, why don't we take action? If there's a flood of reports against the book, Amazon will take notice. More than that, he's breaking the law and there is a way in which we can report him to the FTC.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Perry Constantine said:


> why don't we take action? If there's a flood of reports against the book, Amazon will take notice.


Many have reported the book to both Zon and the FTC over the past week. This morning the book sits at #90 storewide. The ARC scam is just one of several TOS violations committed by this author so it's hard to believe Amazon hasn't taken the book down.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

Dpock said:


> Many have reported the book to both Zon and the FTC over the past week. This morning the book sits at #90 storewide. The ARC scam is just one of several TOS violations committed by this author so it's hard to believe Amazon hasn't taken the book down.


I share your frustration, but we don't know how many actual, live people are trying to administer this part of the system--my guess would be, not many--or how many complaints they get about different products. It's easy to think Amazon is ignoring complaints, when the reality may be some overworked minion is getting through the pile of 45,000 complaints on other things that came in before that one.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Bill Hiatt said:


> I share your frustration, but we don't know how many actual, live people are trying to administer this part of the system--my guess would be, not many--or how many complaints they get about different products. It's easy to think Amazon is ignoring complaints, when the reality may be some overworked minion is getting through the pile of 45,000 complaints on other things that came in before that one.


All true, which makes it an interesting test case. Tiffygate has been receiving ENORMOUS coverage in the indie community since last Monday. Negative reviews are being posted to the book's product page (citing TOS violations, the book ending at 17%, prompts within the title's text to review for a chance to win diamonds--meaning legitimate negative reviews, not review bombing).

And the book sits at #88 storewide

So, how much negative attention does a single book need to receive for Amazon to respond?


----------



## jasonbladd (Dec 22, 2015)

Laurie Gene said:


> Thanks for the information about ARC and TOS. I'm new at this and have no idea on how one can acquire ARC team.


Laurie, I'm teaching author how to build ARC teams. Links in my sig


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Dpock said:


> Negative reviews are being posted to the book's product page (citing TOS violations, the book ending at 17%, prompts within the title's text to review for a chance to win diamonds--meaning legitimate negative reviews, not review bombing).


I just looked. Those one stars looked pretty review-bomby to me.


----------



## TiffanyTurner (Jun 8, 2009)

For a second, I thought someone had tried to trademark the word "Tiffany". Glad that it was something else.


----------



## 75814 (Mar 12, 2014)

Dpock said:


> Many have reported the book to both Zon and the FTC over the past week. This morning the book sits at #90 storewide. The ARC scam is just one of several TOS violations committed by this author so it's hard to believe Amazon hasn't taken the book down.


Then keep reporting until they have no choice but to take notice. Keep tweeting and retweeting Margaret's article to @AmazonHelp and @AmazonKDP. #CockyGate ended up getting coverage in mainstream publications. If we make as much noise about this, maybe that will happen again. And then let's see Amazon try to justify allowing Carter to ignore the rules the rest of us have to play by.


----------



## Atlantisatheart (Oct 8, 2016)

Amazon have stopped selling it.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Atlantisatheart said:


> Amazon have stopped selling it.


Poor guy. That's really going to screw up his rankings.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Puddleduck said:


> It says it's under review and will be available once they get a corrected file. Looks like they're giving him a chance to change the file and keep selling.


That's the proper way to do it.

If he complies, he'll be left with an eighty-page novella earning $0.30 per read-thru.


----------



## Avery342 (Aug 23, 2016)

Dpock said:


> That's the proper way to do it.
> 
> If he complies, he'll be left with an eighty-page novella earning $0.30 per read-thru.


It's sweet that you think that. My bet is that the new file will be a collection and the only thing changed will be a very slightly different title and cover and no link to a review contest within the text.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Repeat offenders, serial offenders, like this should be removed from the store and banned from opening new accounts.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

Monique said:


> Repeat offenders, serial offenders, like this should be removed from the store and banned from opening new accounts.


Yes, they should be. Doubtful it will happen.

I do like that he gets a chance to fix his file, while so many just get their accounts terminated with no recourse. Way to play fair, eh?


----------



## SuzyQ (Jun 22, 2017)

well, once you are on their radar, it makes it a lot harder to get away with stuff (from what I understand.)

but... i just looked at the categories. sisters? that is a category? i am so confused.


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2018)

Sigh. I never cared about page stuffing (cause it was basically allowed) but there was always other behaviors that had me giving it the side eye.

I am unsurprised by these things coming to light. Anyone subscribed to a certain person's mailing list and seeing the content of the marketing knew that it was walking the line of grody.


----------



## 75814 (Mar 12, 2014)

she-la-ti-da said:


> Yes, they should be. Doubtful it will happen.
> 
> I do like that he gets a chance to fix his file, while so many just get their accounts terminated with no recourse. Way to play fair, eh?


Reminds me of that line from Selina Kyle in The Dark Knight Rises: "The rich don't even go broke the same as the rest of us." If you're a successful author--even if that success is gained through illegitimate means and breaking TOS--Amazon handles you with kid gloves. If you're unsuccessful and Amazon has some suspicion based on the flimsiest of proof, out comes the ban-hammer and then maybe if you're lucky, they might allow you to question their actions later.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

SuzyQ said:


> but... i just looked at the categories. sisters? that is a category? i am so confused.


From what I understand, the listed categories under a book are out of the author's control. The bots find some sort of connection and create the category for it. Or so I've seen it described here on KBoards somewhere.


----------



## Atlantisatheart (Oct 8, 2016)

Perry Constantine said:


> Reminds me of that line from Selina Kyle in The Dark Knight Rises: "The rich don't even go broke the same as the rest of us." If you're a successful author--even if that success is gained through illegitimate means and breaking TOS--Amazon handles you with kid gloves. If you're unsuccessful and Amazon has some suspicion based on the flimsiest of proof, out comes the ban-hammer and then maybe if you're lucky, they might allow you to question their actions later.


But how many of these artificial 'successful' authors are about to become unsuccessful and therefore fodder for amazon's whim? If they aren't stuffing then they won't be getting as much money (all-star bonus) to afford ad spend, huge arcs, and other nefarious things that put them where they are now.


----------



## 41419 (Apr 4, 2011)

Stuffing is the fuel that powers the whole engine of their business model. They will have to change it completely if Amazon does actually enforce.

Chance posted a video to his "diamonds" saying that he will be removing all bonus content from his books, and expects other authors to do likewise. He mentioned maybe doing boxes instead but seemed unsure.


----------



## 41419 (Apr 4, 2011)

OK, I spoke to the mods. They feel me linking to the screenshot of the book that was yanked is inflammatory. I don't agree at all - I'd argue the scamming is what is inflammatory! - but their house, their call.

The quality notice on the book says as follows:

"Item Under Review
This book is currently unavailable because there are significant quality issues with the source file supplied by the publisher.

The publisher has been notified and we will make the book available as soon as we receive a corrected file. As always, we value customer feedback."

Looking at the TOC, he seems to have removed all bonus content, and all mentions of his Tiffany competition.

HOWEVER, his Buy Button is back. I think the book is already back on sale. In the screenshot I can't link to on my Twitter feed, the Buy Button Box was gone. It's now back.

Well, great punishment there Amazon. Huge moral hazard for future cheats.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

> Well, great punishment there Amazon. Huge moral hazard for future cheats.


Well, it's about what was expected. Now to see what new way he and others come up with to get around the rules. It won't take long, I'm sure. But, hey! Maybe they won't get those super payouts and bonuses. This month.


----------



## 41419 (Apr 4, 2011)

she-la-ti-da said:


> Well, it's about what was expected. Now to see what new way he and others come up with to get around the rules. It won't take long, I'm sure. But, hey! Maybe they won't get those super payouts and bonuses. This month.


He only removed the stuffed books from Mister Diamond. The rest of his catalog is still stuffed and still has Click to the End inducements, etc.


----------



## Doglover (Sep 19, 2013)

GeneDoucette said:


> I admit to getting hung up on a headline that reads "a couple new issues" when it should read "a couple of new issues".


Yes, that stopped me as well. Especially significant when on a blog from a 'writing coach'. Material has an interesting spelling as well.

However, I have never heard of a limit to review for people reading via KU or having to have a verified purchase. ARC teams have been hit by Amazon's idea of a minimum spend, but I'm still wondering why authors are so hung up on reviews.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

Doglover said:


> I'm still wondering why authors are so hung up on reviews.


Because Amazon shoves them in the customer's faces every change it gets. Aside from the cover image, author name, and title, the one element that shows up everywhere (product page, search results, AMS ads, etc.) is the review average (complete with little star graphic).

Because at least some readers pay attention. Even some authors on this board have said they won't check out a book that has below an X star rating.

Because a lot of promoters won't take a book that has too few review or too low an average.

This in no way justifies illegal or unethical methods for getting reviews. It is merely an indication of the kind of pressure authors are under. Personally, I'd be perfectly happy if Amazon didn't display reviews for creative products. There are so many subjective factors involved that, unless one knows the reviewer, or the review is extremely long and detailed, it's impossible to know whether the reviewer's taste is the same as the potential buyer's. Sure, a review might point out what everyone would agree is an obvious flaw, but mostly reviews come down to "I liked it," or "I didn't like."

Writers shouldn't be hung up on reviews--but neither should anyone else be. Alas, that's not the case.


----------



## Doglover (Sep 19, 2013)

Bill Hiatt said:


> Because Amazon shoves them in the customer's faces every change it gets. Aside from the cover image, author name, and title, the one element that shows up everywhere (product page, search results, AMS ads, etc.) is the review average (complete with little star graphic).
> 
> Because at least some readers pay attention. Even some authors on this board have said they won't check out a book that has below an X star rating.
> 
> ...


If they are going to do that, shove the stars in readers' faces, they should stop allowing the pathetic 'I haven't read it' or 'I didn't receive it' whines that appear on so many books. Whenever I leave a review, it takes a short while while Amazon 'review' my review, so it's not like they are sneaking in unnoticed. They bring down the star average and have nothing to do with the book.


----------



## GeneDoucette (Oct 14, 2014)

Doglover said:


> If they are going to do that, shove the stars in readers' faces, they should stop allowing the pathetic 'I haven't read it' or 'I didn't receive it' whines that appear on so many books. Whenever I leave a review, it takes a short while while Amazon 'review' my review, so it's not like they are sneaking in unnoticed. They bring down the star average and have nothing to do with the book.


Books that sell really, really well get lots of reviews, so the argument is that it can work the other way around: lots of reviews will make the book sell better. It's the same sort of logic (I think) that governs the chasing-letters argument. (Books that sell a lot make best-seller lists, ergo making a best-seller list will make a book sell lots of copies.) I think Amazon used to push books with a lot of reviews to greater visibility, but I don't know if this still holds.


----------



## anotherpage (Apr 4, 2012)

viper9826 said:


> I sit in my own little corner and write. I try to stay away from all the drama but this is just totally out of control. Makes me sick why indies just can't pub ethically.
> 
> https://medium.com/legendary-women/a-couple-new-issues-in-the-indie-book-community-f2cdfc5e830


About time Amazon came down hard on this nonsense.

Seeing 100 reviews appear online on the first day is a joke. We all know they got it for free and feel obliged to give 5 star. ( that to me is not a truthful review) I wonder if any would do that if they had to pay for it?


----------



## PhoenixS (Apr 5, 2011)

Bill Hiatt said:


> Writers shouldn't be hung up on reviews--but neither should anyone else be. Alas, that's not the case.


I would hazard to guess that certain authors who not only ask for reviews but incentivize them -- or use services that incentivize them -- are doing it to get those reviewers to stay engaged. For instance, the big stuffers/scammers share ARC teams. The same 160 or so reviewers jump on the new releases. It's a reliable pattern.

In addition, the reviewers are asked to buy or borrow the books to be eligible for additional rewards. Many of the current crop of high-ranking stuffers need high-star reviews out the gate to protect against the low-stars the books inevitably begin picking up because of poor-quality writing and formatting, and the stuffing. The social proof is needed as part of the scamming strategy. Hit fast. Rise fast. Get out fast. Rinse. Repeat every 2 weeks.


----------



## BrianDHoward (Jan 31, 2017)

GeneDoucette said:


> I admit to getting hung up on a headline that reads "a couple new issues" when it should read "a couple of new issues".


Another area where the language is evolving. Couple is, I think, increasingly being used more like "a few" than "a pair;" as was the case here.


----------



## 41419 (Apr 4, 2011)

PhoenixS said:


> In addition, the reviewers are asked to buy or borrow the books to be eligible for additional rewards. Many of the current crop of high-ranking stuffers need high-star reviews out the gate to protect against the low-stars the books inevitably begin picking up because of poor-quality writing and formatting, and the stuffing. The social proof is needed as part of the scamming strategy. Hit fast. Rise fast. Get out fast. Rinse. Repeat every 2 weeks.


This. The top stuffers are smart. They know if they flood a new release with 150 5-star reviews it will deter a genuine reviewer wanting to post a negative experience. They don't care about the long tail so they don't care about real reviews coming in a few months down the line (or things like formatting or poor customer experience from stuffed crap or even basic levels of writing ability) because the whole model is about flogging a new release to death and then moving on to the next ghostwritten book, and slathering incentivized reviews all over that.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

PhoenixS said:


> I would hazard to guess that certain authors who not only ask for reviews but incentivize them -- or use services that incentivize them -- are doing it to get those reviewers to stay engaged. For instance, the big stuffers/scammers share ARC teams. The same 160 or so reviewers jump on the new releases. It's a reliable pattern.
> 
> In addition, the reviewers are asked to buy or borrow the books to be eligible for additional rewards. Many of the current crop of high-ranking stuffers need high-star reviews out the gate to protect against the low-stars the books inevitably begin picking up because of poor-quality writing and formatting, and the stuffing. The social proof is needed as part of the scamming strategy. Hit fast. Rise fast. Get out fast. Rinse. Repeat every 2 weeks.


This makes a lot of sense. I know a lot of authors use ARC teams and my opinion on that is 50/50. Not really sure what I think, honestly. But how many times have readers been burned by books that were rated/reviewed well and were not good at all? Some would say 'good' is subjective and I agree. However, scammy publishers and authors make a worse bed for the rest of us. As much as you and D.Gaughran bring these scammers to the light they will never truly go away. It just stinks that people feel the need to cheat readers and their fellow writers. It angers me terribly.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Rose Andrews said:


> This makes a lot of sense. I know a lot of authors use ARC teams and my opinion on that is 50/50. Not really sure what I think, honestly. But how many times have readers been burned by books that were rated/reviewed well and were not good at all? Some would say 'good' is subjective and I agree. However, scammy publishers and authors make a worse bed for the rest of us. As much as you and D.Gaughran bring these scammers to the light they will never truly go away. It just stinks that people feel the need to cheat readers and their fellow writers. It angers me terribly.


Honestly, readers just don't leave reviews. Without ARCs, I'd have no reviews. I have a book that's moved over 60k paid or borrowed units that has 250 US and 50 UK reviews and at least half of those are ARCs. So that's maybe 150 reviews out of 60k units, or a quarter of a percent.

Now, that book probably has my worst review percentage (which is weird, because it's by far my most successful book), but my best review percentage is less than half a percent. Organic reviews don't come at a good clip anymore.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

Crystal_ said:


> Organic reviews don't come at a good clip anymore.


No they don't. I've never used ARCs and suffer for it. One of my novellas sells really well on B&N, pulling good weight on my backlist and has zero reviews even though it's been out for a year. So yeah, that's one reason for ARCs.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

Doglover said:


> If they are going to do that, shove the stars in readers' faces, they should stop allowing the pathetic 'I haven't read it' or 'I didn't receive it' whines that appear on so many books. Whenever I leave a review, it takes a short while while Amazon 'review' my review, so it's not like they are sneaking in unnoticed. They bring down the star average and have nothing to do with the book.


Amen! it's one thing to get a bad review because a reader genuinely didn't like the book. It's quite another to get a review in which the reader makes it clear he or she hasn't read the book.

I once saw a five-star on a book that said, "A gift. Haven't read it.," so occasionally, it works the other way. But mostly, the haven't-read-it crowd goes with the one-star.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

GeneDoucette said:


> Books that sell really, really well get lots of reviews, so the argument is that it can work the other way around: lots of reviews will make the book sell better. It's the same sort of logic (I think) that governs the chasing-letters argument. (Books that sell a lot make best-seller lists, ergo making a best-seller list will make a book sell lots of copies.) I think Amazon used to push books with a lot of reviews to greater visibility, but I don't know if this still holds.


Which came first, the chicken or the egg? We know the book starts out selling well in order to get genuine reviews and/or bestseller status, but an argument could be made that good reviews and/or letters help keep that momentum going.

When Bookbub (which presumably knows what it's doing) advertises books, it often specifically mentions reviews. I've seen lines like, "over a thousand five-star reviews on Goodreads," fairly often. (And I always think, how could anyone get that many?) Trad publishers seldom mention customer reviews that way, but they always exploit the bestseller label. I don't know if it makes a difference or not, but I can see someone looking at all the bestseller banners in trad ads and figure it probably does.


----------



## Used To Be BH (Sep 29, 2016)

Crystal_ said:


> Honestly, readers just don't leave reviews. Without ARCs, I'd have no reviews. I have a book that's moved over 60k paid or borrowed units that has 250 US and 50 UK reviews and at least half of those are ARCs. So that's maybe 150 reviews out of 60k units, or a quarter of a percent.
> 
> Now, that book probably has my worst review percentage (which is weird, because it's by far my most successful book), but my best review percentage is less than half a percent. Organic reviews don't come at a good clip anymore.


Yes, a book has to be selling awfully fast for that quarter of a percent to mean anything.

It's possible to have an ARC team and run it ethically. It's also possible to use a service like Hidden Gems, in which case the reviewers aren't associated with the authors involved. Unfortunately, so many people have pushed the boundaries in the quest for more and better reviews that what could be a perfectly legitimate practice ends up looking shady.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

I usually send out ARCs to people who sign up to be on my ARC team but not this time.

Usually, I ask team members for honest reviews and indicate that reviews are totally voluntary. I would usually get up to 40 ARC reviews in the first week for a new release when using an ARC team of 300+.

This release, I didn't send out ARCs because of all the issues with unverified reviews. I decided to just publish without an ARC team, just to see how many organic reviews I got.

That means people who want to read the book will have to pay for it. *gasp*

So far, 1.5% of my sales left reviews. My review average is 4.7 stars. These reviews were mostly from the pre-order so I know they are eager readers. I'll be sending out a notice to my mailing list about the book being available and I'll see how many of _them_ leave reviews.

Most readers just don't leave reviews. I'm one of them. Even before I became an author, I never left reviews.


----------



## Rose Andrews (Jun 1, 2017)

Also, a lot of readers who leave reviews do so on Goodreads, not necessarily the retailer they purchase the book from. So there's that...


----------



## Doglover (Sep 19, 2013)

Rose Andrews said:


> Also, a lot of readers who leave reviews do so on Goodreads, not necessarily the retailer they purchase the book from. So there's that...


And that pees me off! I have five star reviews on some books on Goodreads, but nothing on Amazon. I had never heard of Goodreads until I started publishing, so I don't expect to get many new readers from it. Since Amazon owns Goodreads, it would be a good idea if they showed those reviews on the product page.


----------



## BellaJames (Sep 8, 2016)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> Whatever you to stamp out or discourage it, the scammers and fraudsters are always one step ahead of you  *sigh*


Agree. I am seeing one author with 2 books in the top 100 main chart this week. There are reviews that point out the problems with her books.

However, there are glowing fake reviews, she has blank pages to make the book appear to be longer, it appears to be one novel but it is a bunch of novellas, the writing is awful and I'm not sure if her books are edited at all.

With this author (CC), I've never understood how he gets so many 5 star reviews.  My 1 star review of his books are on Goodreads and I explained exactly why I gave them a 1 star rating.

The thing is I read two of his earlier books and they were not stuffed and had no links to take you to the end, as far as I remember. So why did he start doing this?


----------



## BellaJames (Sep 8, 2016)

Monique said:


> Repeat offenders, serial offenders, like this should be removed from the store and banned from opening new accounts.


Agree.


----------



## Guest (Jun 5, 2018)

BellaJames said:


> However, there are glowing fake reviews, she has blank pages to make the book appear to be longer, it appears to be one novel but it is a bunch of novellas, the writing is awful and I'm not sure if her books are edited at all.


If you have ever in your life read the reviews on a badly written fanfic, you will know that people will label the worst stuff "amazing!!!!" if it hits some of their buttons.

I doubt those are fake reviews. But then I have a pretty dim view of what it takes to get someone to label something a "five star reading experience."

Maybe... just maybe, the readers of these books just like the way they're written. I know I do. It takes a lot for me to get turned off of a romance novel. I even like the bad ones, with the ridiculous, cookie-cutter plots.


----------



## BellaJames (Sep 8, 2016)

mawnster said:


> If you have ever in your life read the reviews on a badly written fanfic, you will know that people will label the worst stuff "amazing!!!!" if it hits some of their buttons.
> 
> I doubt those are fake reviews. But then I have a pretty dim view of what it takes to get someone to label something a "five star reading experience."
> 
> Maybe... just maybe, the readers of these books just like the way they're written. I know I do. It takes a lot for me to get turned off of a romance novel. I even like the bad ones, with the ridiculous, cookie-cutter plots.


Yeah, I've read some fanfic and wattpad stories. I am not bashing all the writers or readers on wattpad, but when I keep seeing "this is the best book I've ever read", I do wonder about these readers.

Each to their own but when I see reviews like '_At least this book is not just a bunch of sex scenes_' but the book is just that. Or '_this book is the best thing I've read in years_' and I see that repeated 2 or 3 times, I know the reviews are suspicious.


----------



## BellaJames (Sep 8, 2016)

Rose Andrews said:


> Also, a lot of readers who leave reviews do so on Goodreads, not necessarily the retailer they purchase the book from. So there's that...


I think some readers do that so that they can leave a more detailed review and hide spoilers, add pics and gifs and then they can chat and interact with other readers more easily over there.

I have asked Amazon if they could add a spoiler button or something because I hate readers revealing everything on Amazon.


----------



## Doglover (Sep 19, 2013)

BellaJames said:


> Yeah, I've read some fanfic and wattpad stories. I am not bashing all the writers or readers on wattpad, but when I keep seeing "this is the best book I've ever read", I do wonder about these readers.
> 
> Each to their own but when I see reviews like '_At least this book is not just a bunch of sex scenes_' but the book is just that. Or '_this book is the best thing I've read in years_' and I see that repeated 2 or 3 times, I know the reviews are suspicious.


On one of my books I have a review which says: The six books of Holy Poison are among the best I've ever read. It is a genuine review from someone I've never met and is not even on my mailing list, as far as I know.

I know what you mean, but sometimes these OTT reviews are quite sincere.


----------



## BellaJames (Sep 8, 2016)

Doglover said:


> On one of my books I have a review which says: The six books of Holy Poison are among the best I've ever read. It is a genuine review from someone I've never met and is not even on my mailing list, as far as I know.
> 
> I know what you mean, but sometimes these OTT reviews are quite sincere.


No I understand that sometimes a book just gets to you emotionally and you cannot get it out of your head and want to re-read it. Or the book is just so different and entertaining, I felt like that about 'Transcendence' by Shay Savage.

However, many of the stories posted on fanfic sites and wattpad are completely unedited and sometimes it can be difficult to even fully understand the stories because they don't flow.

The author I was pointing out who has two books on the Amazon main chart today, her books are pretty much unedited and the writing does not flow. The plot is thin. The books seem to be written for shock value alone. _This is just my opinion._

So when I see 'this is the best book I've read in ages', I give that review the side eye.

It takes a lot for me to give a book 5 stars and no author is going to convince me to give their books that rating. It takes a certain kind of story that emotionally moves me to give a 5 star rating. Again that's just how I feel personally.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

BellaJames said:


> The author I was pointing out who has two books on the Amazon main chart today, her books are pretty much unedited and the writing does not flow. The plot is thin. The books seem to be written for shock value alone. _This is just my opinion._
> 
> So when I see 'this is the best book I've read in ages', I give that review the side eye.


I haven't seen the book, or author, in question, but you are approaching the idea of a review from the perspective of a writer.

You really think the average reader out there is all that sophisticated? I don't think I could count the number of people I've met who thought some puppet on a string was a great musical artist, and all the guy did was sing into an autotuner. People aren't always sophisticated in their tastes. They just like what they like and if they leave a review or an opinion they will express it that way.

And I've read enough of these romance book reviews to believe that at least some of the gushing ones are actually genuine. The reader actually feels that way. And you look at the LookInside, and it's probably decently written, but it's definitely not Orwell or Dickens.

Maybe a lot of them actually do think the book is 'the best' they have read in ages. Or they just throw out that superlative because it came to their head. Because they actually enjoyed the story.

I'm sure some of them are fake -- I imagine those in the know here on the forum probably are speaking the truth. But there also are a LOT of people who buy ebooks on Amazon, and they aren't all writing-savvy. They just want to be lost in a story, whether well-written or not.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

I'm not totally familiar with the subject of this thread (Tifanygate) but reading the comments on this most recent page regarding over-the-top (OTT) reviews give me a thought or two. Some folks have specifically mentioned reviews on Wattpad, which, unless it's changed significantly in the past few years, seems to have a lot of readers who are young. And from what I can tell, young people seem to have a big penchant for hyperbole. When I hear (or read) "this was the best book I've EVER read," I mentally add the phrase "this week." Because how often have we heard someone say something along the lines of "We just had the best pizza ever," and then hear that person say the same thing a few weeks later. I won't say these people have short attention spans, but most people--of any age-- tend to react _in the moment,_ and not compare their pizza (or book) today with one from six weeks ago, or six months ago, or six years ago.

So to me, OTT, gushing reviews aren't necessarily fake, but can simply be over-eager. As has been mentioned, any book can touch a reader deeply, and recent history has shown us that even poorly-written ones can do exactly that.


----------



## 41419 (Apr 4, 2011)

I don't know what percentage of reviews are genuine and organic. I don't think any of us would be able to tell anyway. What I do know is that these guys routinely engage in review incentivization - this time it was Tiffanygate, but other rewards are much more common. Like dangling gift cards. 

Again, KDP has known about this practice for at least nine months, and has done exactly nothing about it, while honest authors engaging in no shenanigans regularly lose genuine reviews. The double standard is galling.


----------



## BellaJames (Sep 8, 2016)

jb1111 said:


> I haven't seen the book, or author, in question, but you are approaching the idea of a review from the perspective of a writer.
> 
> You really think the average reader out there is all that sophisticated? I don't think I could count the number of people I've met who thought some puppet on a string was a great musical artist, and all the guy did was sing into an autotuner. People aren't always sophisticated in their tastes. They just like what they like and if they leave a review or an opinion they will express it that way.
> 
> ...


I rarely leave reviews and I read books purely as a writer who wants to be entertained. I do not freely give out 5 star reviews and no author is not going to offer me the chance to win a gift in exchange for a 5 star review.

I am not the only reader to say that this particular author seems to have some fake 5 star reviews. Actually many of her books have the same reviews.

Yeah everyone has different tastes. I watched a movie a few days ago and it is below average IMO but there are a couple people on youtube who say it is the best movie they have ever seen. It happens with every type of art form from movies to TV shows to books. I understand that.

*I don't want to take this thread off topic, it is about Tiffanygate *


----------

