# New Amazon review policy? Reviewers must spend at least $50.



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Is this a new thing? The policy seems to be now that you have to have spent $50 in store before they'll let you review anything. Good news or bad news?

https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=201602680


----------



## lilywhite (Sep 25, 2010)

Fairly new, at any rate, because I know for sure 99 cents was enough as of two months ago.

I've lost a few reviews but overall it can only be a good thing, right? Something has to be done about the fake reviews; it's completely out of hand.


----------



## BeMyBookBaby (Apr 18, 2016)

I tried to review a few weeks ago and they said I needed to spend 5 dollars... so pretty new!


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

There are those who have yet to spend $50 at Amazon?!

What manner of creature are these?


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Anarchist said:


> There are those who have yet to spend $50 at Amazon?!
> 
> What manner of creature are these?


I know. It beggars belief.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Anarchist said:


> There are those who have yet to spend $50 at Amazon?!
> 
> What manner of creature are these?


They could raise the requirement exponentially and I'd still be good. 

Betsy


----------



## MMacLeod (Sep 21, 2015)

$50? Like, ever? 

Yeah, I'm good. 

According to Amazon, I've been a customer since 2000 and while I think I can actually go back and review all of my purchases somewhere going back 16 years, I'm going to refrain because I'd rather not look at the total I've spent. Pretty sure they could make that $50 a month and I'd still be covered.


----------



## lilywhite (Sep 25, 2010)

Let me call your attention to this as well:



> In order to preserve the integrity of Customer Reviews, we do not permit artists, authors, developers, manufacturers, publishers, sellers or vendors to write Customer Reviews for their own products or services, to post negative reviews on competing products or services, *or to vote on the helpfulness of reviews*.


(Emphasis mine.)

I've just tested this pretty extensively over a good dozen books in different genres, and it appears I can no longer vote on the helpfulness of reviews from my publisher account. So long, upvote/downvote brigade! Not remotely sorry to see you go.


----------



## lilywhite (Sep 25, 2010)

It occurs to me that my publisher account has probably not spent $50.00 on Amazon. (My personal account has Prime, sooooo....) Maybe it's that instead. Someone else should experiment.


----------



## Guest (Sep 23, 2016)

Yep, guessing to deal with the review farms. It used to read (a few months ago):

"To write a Customer Review, you must have used your account to purchase any item or service on Amazon (free digital content doesn't qualify toward this requirement). We do not permit reviews of the same product from customers in the same household."

So they raised it from purchase anything to a minimum amount. That will likely kill off quite a few of those "buy positive reviews" places. Getting folks to go buy a $1 item or eBook to be able to review is much easier than getting them all to spend $50.


----------



## S.R. (May 19, 2016)

I hope no one ever calculates the total sum I've spent at Amazon.  

I've been a customer since they opened the doors. The first year in business Amazon sent me a mouse pad as a Christmas present with a card thanking me for being a customer. Wish I still had that - undoubtedly a collectors item by now


----------



## Doglover (Sep 19, 2013)

Reviews that are not about the product has been a requirement forever, but it doesn't stop them refusing to remove the 'I didn't read it' or 'I don't like romances' type of rubbish.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

SallyRose said:


> I hope no one ever calculates the total sum I've spent at Amazon.
> 
> I've been a customer since they opened the doors. The first year in business Amazon sent me a mouse pad as a Christmas present with a card thanking me for being a customer. Wish I still had that - undoubtedly a collectors item by now


I got Amazon travel mugs two years in a row in the early days....still have at least one of them.

And Anma beat me to the link to the Wayback Machine, darn it! It was in May 2016.

I'm sorry to see this happen for legitimate people who want to be able to post their first review, but it does seem a necessary step. 

Betsy


----------



## S.R. (May 19, 2016)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I got Amazon travel mugs two years in a row in the early days....still have at least one of them.
> Betsy


Impressive 

I thought there were two years of swag...but can't for the life of me remember what I got the second year - I must not have qualified for a travel mug ::feels less special than minutes ago:: But I think the mouse pad stuck with me because I thought it was a pretty genius investment for them to make in the early internet days...nice way to get every customer to think about Amazon every time we used our computer. Apparently worked for me anyway.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

If anyone's interested in knowing how much they've spent at Amazon, here's a good tutorial describing the process.

It's imperfect. Amazon only archives the last 10 years. And it doesn't include ebook purchases.

It's still fun, though. You may find yourself saying, "_What the... Why the hell did I buy *THAT* in 2006?_"


----------



## Doglover (Sep 19, 2013)

Does this mean Kindle unlimited borrows are not going to be counted?


----------



## jaehaerys (Feb 18, 2016)

This could work out well. Hoping the $50 limit is high enough to keep the scammers and dive bombers at bay. Time will tell.


----------



## lilywhite (Sep 25, 2010)

Doglover said:


> Does this mean Kindle unlimited borrows are not going to be counted?


Well, individual borrows don't cost anything, so I'm not sure how they could count that? But it looks like the subscription cost will count, since they specifically excluded Prime and not KU in the new rules. So 5 months of KU would do it.


----------



## ImaWriter (Aug 12, 2015)

Hmm. 

So would this impact people who don't shop from .com?  As a Canadian, we shopped from .com for years before they opened .ca, so there shouldn't be an issue, as long as that $50 is life long. Where I do see a potential issue is if we have reviewers that are in another country that have never had a .com account. How will this impact them? 

Sorry, I've just thrown the question out there without any real research.  It could be moot.


----------



## lincolnjcole (Mar 15, 2016)

lol, $50? 

If they said $50,000 it might be beyond me.

might...

in fact...probably not...


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

SallyRose said:


> Impressive
> 
> I thought there were two years of swag...but can't for the life of me remember what I got the second year - I must not have qualified for a travel mug ::feels less special than minutes ago:: But I think the mouse pad stuck with me because I thought it was a pretty genius investment for them to make in the early internet days...nice way to get every customer to think about Amazon every time we used our computer. Apparently worked for me anyway.


And see, I was saying to myself, "Hey! I never got a mouse pad!!!" I guess the grass is always greener, yadda, yadda, yadda...

Here are the travel mugs--they weren't anything fancy:









Betsy


----------



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

Anarchist said:


> There are those who have yet to spend $50 at Amazon?!
> 
> What manner of creature are these?


$50 = R700 . At one time Amazon wouldn't post to SA because of our dismal postal system (and theft, I believe) .

There goes the library borrowers being able to review .

But if it stops the fake reviews I wouldn't be against it .


----------



## Marti talbott (Apr 19, 2011)

I'm thrilled! Here's hoping they'll remove a bunch of the old up votes too.


----------



## Decon (Feb 16, 2011)

The problem with this is that some segments of Amazon users will only use kindle for free and low priced books and take forever if at all to reach the $50. For those who have not yet spent $50, and they fail when trying to post a review, then it will likely put them off forever in wanting to waste time posting a review. The higher you price your books, the more likely you will be read by someone who has reached that target. I can only hope that subscriptions for KU count toward that amount as it doesn't mention them, but it does say that Prime subscriptions don't count. It also doesn't mention the period over which you have to have spent the $50, so they can play with that as they wish. Although thinking about it, kindles cost more than $50 to start with, unless they have downloaded a free app for a different device they bought elsewhere.

I foresee a lot of new books taking forever to get just one review if the author say makes the first book free or 99c. It is good to stop the scammers,which I agree with, but it's going to hurt authors when they garner very few, if any reviews.

I'm guessing this will favor the higher priced trad-published books. One bright spot is that those who use kindle only for free books and don't spend elsewhere on Amazon, then 1 stars will be less of a problem when they download out of their comfort zone, just because something is free.

Reviews are hard enough to garner organically, and it just got harder folks.


----------



## Guest (Sep 23, 2016)

On the one hand I really dislike something that punishes people for being poor (as previous poster said, the folks downloading free books because they can't afford to pay for books are essentially silenced). Not to mention, as a Canadian, I've had readers who don't use amazon (they use Kobo) but who went there just to get my book (as it's only available on amazon)...so they can't review either.

On the other hand, the current review system is such a pathetic, absurd, broken joke that hopefully this fixes it. 

What I wonder is whether they'll go back apply this rule to past reviews or leave them there? If the latter, then that's really unfair to new entrants into the market.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

I see both the pros and cons of this ... but mostly the pros.
The "buy anything" threshold didn't dissuade any scammers. The buy $50 will dissuade a lot (but not all) of the scammers. I understand this affects random shoppers who might not have a lot of money. However, if you ever bought a Kindle and several books the odds are you've passed that threshold. Very few people are just coming to Amazon for free books and if they are, well, it's a bummer but something has to be done about the scammers.
What this will hopefully help is the product reviews where people are gifted the projects but don't buy them because those almost invariably are five-star raves by people who just like free things. They earn their reputation by leaving five-star reviews so they can keep getting free things. I'm not just talking about books either. I'm talking about other items. I just got burned (kind of literally) on a face steamer that had a ton of rave reviews. The product was terrible and when I went back to look over the reviews very few were actual verified purchases. The bulk of them also said "i was given this product for free for a review." That's on me for not looking closer. I just looked at the star rating. As for the books, there are a lot of people out there selling review services that are basically scams. If this cuts down on that, I'm all for it. Quite frankly, if you couldn't review something you didn't buy on Amazon, I would be fine with that, too. Other online merchants do that. I would like a "verified purchase" or "verified borrow" tag for everything, quite frankly.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

arieswriting said:


> I haven't reviewed on .com for awhile, but I just noticed for books they ask "How is the author's writing?" and you can choose Poor, Okay, Good and Great, then asks if there's violence (No, Some, Graphic), Sexual Content (No, Some, Explicit), and How is the story narrated (First, Second, Third, Alternating, and I Don't Know). Then there's the star rating and the box to actually write.
> 
> How long have these review options been in place?
> 
> The .ca still has just a star rating and the review, nothing else.


They've been around at least a year I believe.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

My Amazon account shows I first purchased from them in 1997 . . . . but I actually think that's wrong. Or, at least, incomplete . . . we moved back from overseas in 1996, and I know we'd purchased stuff from Amazon even while we were still living in the UK . . . we could have it shipped to a Military PO address. But, of course, it was a different email address. And then when we moved back here we signed up with one ISP and then it got bought out and we switched about a year later. Have had the same one ever since.

I, too, remember getting insulated mugs, no mouse pad, but paper books used to always come with a bookmark. And I have a handful of refrigerator magnets as well. The cups were thank you for shopping with us type gifts the first few years. Got them around the holidays if I remember correctly. There are some at my dad's house still as well. 

I have no problem with the rule about having spent $50 . . . . I suspect most legitimate users won't even notice and those are the only sorts of reviewers you want anyway, I would think. It may be a hardship for a small percentage of folks who mostly get free and 99 cent books, or use KU. But, remember, there's a LOT more for sale on Amazon than books. I bet that there are Very Very Few legitimate, active accounts where the only purchases are ebooks.

I suspect they won't go to the trouble, expense, and time of checking existing reviews -- they'll just have the check on any new attempts to post reviews.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

arieswriting said:


> I haven't reviewed on .com for awhile, but I just noticed for books they ask "How is the author's writing?" and you can choose Poor, Okay, Good and Great, then asks if there's violence (No, Some, Graphic), Sexual Content (No, Some, Explicit), and How is the story narrated (First, Second, Third, Alternating, and I Don't Know). Then there's the star rating and the box to actually write.
> 
> How long have these review options been in place?
> 
> The .ca still has just a star rating and the review, nothing else.


This has been available for a while . . . . I actually find it not very useful. I mean, sure, I can say how I thought the writing was, and probably comment on sex or violence, but I pretty much don't pay any attention to how it's narrated. I'm only likely to notice if it's really bad. And as to the sex and violence, if it was an average book for me, I may not remember unless I Only Just finished it.

I think I saw this when I went one time to improve my recommendations . . . . . actually got bored pretty quickly with trying to remember about books I'd bought/read ages ago.


----------



## S.R. (May 19, 2016)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> And see, I was saying to myself, "Hey! I never got a mouse pad!!!" I guess the grass is always greener, yadda, yadda, yadda...
> 
> Here are the travel mugs--they weren't anything fancy:


Ha! Nice. The mouse pad wasn't anything to write home about either. Lots of shades of brown is about all I remember about it...

Back on the review policy:
I'm completely for getting rid of the scammers...and maybe I don't understand the way they work...but $50 seems like such a random bar. At least it is a bar, I suppose. But, why would Amazon block a review from someone that actually purchased an item - even if it was just one $2.99, or free book?

Amazon knows who has purchased what. With all of the data they collect, some days it feels like they probably know more about me than I know myself.  It seems like if they have good enough data to detect "people I know" reviews with what feels sometimes like the law of six degrees of separation...they should be able to figure out who is an *actual* person, with an *actual* account, who *actually* purchased, and let them leave *one* review. I'm sure the true scammers will figure out a new workaround for the $50. Meanwhile, some actual readers will be locked out. I guess there's no unicorns and rainbows policy that can fix it all...


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

SallyRose said:


> Ha! Nice. The mouse pad wasn't anything to write home about either. Lots of shades of brown is about all I remember about it...
> 
> Back on the review policy:
> I'm completely for getting rid of the scammers...and maybe I don't understand the way they work...but $50 seems like such a random bar. At least it is a bar, I suppose. But, why would Amazon block a review from someone that actually purchased an item - even if it was just one $2.99, or free book?
> ...


The true fix is to only allow people to review items they purchased from Amazon and eradicate the threshold. Until they're willing to do that, though, this is a stopgap that is better than before.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I see both the pros and cons of this ... but mostly the pros.
> The "buy anything" threshold didn't dissuade any scammers. The buy $50 will dissuade a lot (but not all) of the scammers. I understand this affects random shoppers who might not have a lot of money. However, if you ever bought a Kindle and several books the odds are you've passed that threshold. Very few people are just coming to Amazon for free books and if they are, well, it's a bummer but something has to be done about the scammers.
> What this will hopefully help is the product reviews where people are gifted the projects but don't buy them because those almost invariably are five-star raves by people who just like free things. They earn their reputation by leaving five-star reviews so they can keep getting free things. I'm not just talking about books either. I'm talking about other items. I just got burned (kind of literally) on a face steamer that had a ton of rave reviews. The product was terrible and when I went back to look over the reviews very few were actual verified purchases. The bulk of them also said "i was given this product for free for a review." That's on me for not looking closer. I just looked at the star rating. As for the books, there are a lot of people out there selling review services that are basically scams. If this cuts down on that, I'm all for it. Quite frankly, if you couldn't review something you didn't buy on Amazon, I would be fine with that, too. Other online merchants do that. I would like a "verified purchase" or "verified borrow" tag for everything, quite frankly.


This won't effect that unless it is someone who does no shopping at all on Amazon. Here is the part that is about receiving a product to review:

"The sole exception to this rule is when a free or discounted copy of a physical product is provided to a customer up front. In this case, if you offer a free or discounted product in exchange for a review, you must clearly state that you welcome both positive and negative feedback. If you receive a free or discounted product in exchange for your review, you must clearly and conspicuously disclose that fact. "

However, note it says a PHYSICAL PRODUCT which may mean no digital ARCs for reviews.

ETA: I think this change will help, but it isn't a total fix. I suspect eventually they will be forced to go to 'verified purchases' only and frankly I think it will be a good thing. Yes, it may make those first reviews harder to get by not being able to send out ARCs but the benefits would outweigh the disadvantages in my opinion.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

JRTomlin said:


> This won't effect that unless it is someone who does no shopping at all on Amazon. Here is the part that is about receiving a product to review:
> 
> "The sole exception to this rule is when a free or discounted copy of a physical product is provided to a customer up front. In this case, if you offer a free or discounted product in exchange for a review, you must clearly state that you welcome both positive and negative feedback. If you receive a free or discounted product in exchange for your review, you must clearly and conspicuously disclose that fact. "
> 
> However, note it says a PHYSICAL PRODUCT which may mean no digital ARCs for reviews.


I didn't see that. That takes me back to my previous stance, though. I think you should only be able to review if you actually purchased the item on Amazon, lol.


----------



## S.R. (May 19, 2016)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> The true fix is to only allow people to review items they purchased from Amazon and eradicate the threshold. Until they're willing to do that, though, this is a stopgap that is better than before.


Agreed. I'm just surprised they would apply a threshold to the people that did actually purchase from Amazon. Seems some simple Boolean logic in their software could make allowance for that (i.e. if they purchased the item being reviewed, the review is allowed regardless; if they didn't, $50 threshold applies). Still not perfect, but it wouldn't leave as many non-scammers out in the cold.


----------



## Tegan Maher (Aug 22, 2016)

I'm all for revising the system, though I don't know how many of the paid reviews this change will eliminate. Nearly everybody has spent $50 on Amazon. As others have already stated, I'd rather see it revised to state that you have to actually borrow or buy the book and, in the case of digital purchases, read a minimum number of pages (say 10 or 20 pages) to leave a rating or review. That wouldn't stop the scammers but I think it would slow them down better than just a minimum, across-the-board purchase requirement. If nothing else, it would make the haters actually buy or borrow your book before they could slam you.


----------



## MarcyLooWho (Dec 14, 2013)

I get why they'd do it, for sure. I know fake reviews suck, but I do try to give readers credit. Likely they can spot fake reviews. I would hate for one of my readers to not be able to leave a review (good or bad) due to this restriction. So, I say yay and nay.


----------



## H.C. (Jul 28, 2016)

Wow. Good to know.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> They could raise the requirement exponentially and I'd still be good.
> 
> Betsy


I know what you mean. These days it feels like "Hmm, I'm in the mood for a Slurpee....let me see if Amazon carries them"


----------



## boxer44 (Aug 6, 2016)

The problem with requiring reviews only from folks that bought the book from Amazon - well, what about author sales at bookstores, or author signings, or folks that bought at some other outlet that the author supplies (local bookstore?) ? 

It would also negate reviews from author online sales --  I get it, this generally means print, not e-books ... but at the moment, my print book sales are at least twenty-five percent of my overall sales and I don't have huge sales numbers anyway.  So twenty-five percent of readers could never review it, even if the reviews are legit.


----------



## lilywhite (Sep 25, 2010)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> it's a bummer but something has to be done about the scammers.


I think this pretty much sums it up. There are negatives--probably some that we haven't even thought of--but the current situation is just so awful that something had to change.


----------



## katherinef (Dec 13, 2012)

Ugh, Amazon. Never any good news. It's a good thing I don't leave reviews because I'd never spend that much on Amazon. I wonder if returns also count in those $50 spent. I don't think any of that will stop scammers or fake reviews. I got really annoyed when some of the reviewers who got my book through NetGalley bought and returned the book to get the verified purchase tag, but now I see that might not have been the stupidest thing ever, considering those reviews are more likely to stay. It will be a shame if they delete some of the reviews just because the reviewers can't or don't want to buy on Amazon, but they'll leave all the useless, stupid ones.


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Excellent move. 

Laughable that there was not some qualification level of note before. 

And it's a blow to the permafree model. Some say it's a blow against poor people - I doubt that. If they can afford a reading device they can afford to spend $50 on Amazon to qualify. 

The qualifying level looks right to me - pitched low enough for 99% of the population, high enough to cause a problem for some, not all, scammers.


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

katherinef said:


> Ugh, Amazon. Never any good news. It's a good thing I don't leave reviews because I'd never spend that much on Amazon. I wonder if returns also count in those $50 spent. I don't think any of that will stop scammers or fake reviews. I got really annoyed when some of the reviewers who got my book through NetGalley bought and returned the book to get the verified purchase tag, but now I see that might not have been the stupidest thing ever, considering those reviews are more likely to stay. It will be a shame if they delete some of the reviews just because the reviewers can't or don't want to buy on Amazon, but they'll leave all the useless, stupid ones.


I would say I prefer reviews from Zon customers only. It would seem to be a weakness in the review system that you can "import," reviews from non-customers


----------



## scifi365 (Sep 12, 2014)

I think Amanda M.Lee wins this thread. If you buy the product on Amazon, you can review it on Amazon. Seems straightforward enough to me.

$50 may not be a high bar for most of the posters here, but that's still a significant amount of money for many people. Let's say I sold a book to someone in India at 99 Rupees (I think that's around 15 cents). I would like them to be able to review the book, especially if they liked it!!


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

EC said:


> Excellent move.
> 
> Laughable that there was not some qualification level of note before.
> 
> ...


Except that you don't need an eReader, to read Kindle books. There are apps available for a variety of personal devices that are more 'multipurpose' in scope.

I know people who have a phone or tablet and do a LOT of things with it -- they don't necessarily have one of each plus other devices. They have the one device they can afford that does the most for them.

Or, they might read on a phone, laptop, or tablet they have as a condition of employment or good standing as a student -- so, theirs, but not one they paid for and which they could lose access to if conditions change.

Keep in mind this policy isn't ONLY for reviewing books/ebooks . . . . this is a site wide policy . . . . for all the THINGS that Amazon sells. Folks who frequent the cafe, of course, focus on their own products . . . and it may even be that most of the scamming happens in the ebook realm, but I know -- because I've seen -- that there are a plethora of silly reviews on physical items as well.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Keep in mind this policy isn't ONLY for reviewing books/ebooks . . . . this is a site wide policy . . . . for all the THINGS that Amazon sells. Folks who frequent the cafe, of course, focus on their own products . . . and it may even be that most of the scamming happens in the ebook realm, but I know -- because I've seen -- that there are a plethora of silly reviews on physical items as well.


Although I lack proof, I'd be willing to bet that FBA sellers are just as (if not more) likely to use dubious reviews as indie authors.


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Except that you don't need an eReader, to read Kindle books. There are apps available for a variety of personal devices that are more 'multipurpose' in scope.
> 
> I know people who have a phone or tablet and do a LOT of things with it -- they don't necessarily have one of each plus other devices. They have the one device they can afford that does the most for them.
> 
> ...


Yes, but:

That's nitpicking. I don't know any adult that doesn't spend $50 in a year. In fact, I don't know any child that doesn't spend $50 in a year. If they can't be bothered spending it on Amazon then they'll just have to learn to live with not being able to review.


----------



## Ava Glass (Feb 28, 2011)

Amazon is also looking to expand its Vine program next year.

https://www.amazon.jobs/en/jobs/339978



> The mission for Vine is twofold: to make Amazon the best place on earth to find clear, helpful, and unbiased customer reviews on millions of products, and to make Amazon the most attractive site for vendors to launch new products, collect product feedback, and drive consumer purchase decisions. We have only just scratched the surface in this space, and are looking to grow the program by several orders of magnitude in the next year while continuing to aggressively expand our offerings to vendors.


----------



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

EC said:


> Yes, but:
> 
> That's nitpicking. I don't know any adult that doesn't spend $50 in a year. In fact, I don't know any child that doesn't spend $50 in a year. If they can't be bothered spending it on Amazon then they'll just have to learn to live with not being able to review.


There are a lot of countries that have to buy from Amazon.com and the exchange rate makes it extremely costly, especially if you include the shipping costs. I have only bought one print book in the six years I've been on Amazon. I don't have any sort of e-reader, but I have downloaded some free books to read on my computer (not the best reading experience as it feels like work . )


----------



## SomeoneElse (Jan 5, 2016)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> There are a lot of countries that have to buy from Amazon.com and the exchange rate makes it extremely costly, especially if you include the shipping costs. I have only bought one print book in the six years I've been on Amazon. I don't have any sort of e-reader, but I have downloaded some free books to read on my computer (not the best reading experience as it feels like work . )


Absolutely! The shipping! I don't think I've ever bought anything physical from Amazon because I have this policy of, when it can be avoided, not buying things when the shipping costs more than the product.

I doubt I will have made the $50 threshold.

When it comes to books, Book Depository always works out cheaper because of the free shipping.


----------



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

LSMay said:


> When it comes to books, Book Depository always works out cheaper because of the free shipping.


Except when you are buying bulk copies of your own book from CreateSpace. The more you buy the cheaper the shipping per book. I did a comparison with the Book Depository .


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I know what you mean. These days it feels like "Hmm, I'm in the mood for a Slurpee....let me see if Amazon carries them"


LOL! this is me, too. 

Like Ann, I've been buying from Amazon since 1996. Twenty years! 

FYI - The bit about an exception for free review copies relates to the 'no compensation for reviews' rule, NOT to the 'minimum $50 purchase to be able to review' rule.

ETA this is the rule that applies to reviewer compensation, NOT to the minimum $50 purchase rule:



> "The sole exception to this rule is when a free or discounted copy of a physical product is provided to a customer up front. In this case, if you offer a free or discounted product in exchange for a review, you must clearly state that you welcome both positive and negative feedback. If you receive a free or discounted product in exchange for your review, you must clearly and conspicuously disclose that fact. "


----------



## Overrated (Mar 20, 2015)

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I know what you mean. These days it feels like "Hmm, I'm in the mood for a Slurpee....let me see if Amazon carries them"


This is me right here. If I need something, I'll head to Amazon to look at it/price it first.

I have no issues with requiring the spending minimum. I do think it is a challenge if you like free books more than anything else, or 99 cent books, but most people buy other things besides books from Amazon.

You can't help it. It lures you in....


----------



## TromboneAl (Mar 20, 2015)

If I only had all the money I've spent on Amazon. Think of all the things I could buy on Amazon!

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## TheLemontree (Sep 12, 2015)

Jan Hurst-Nicolson and LSMay said what I was going to say. 

Amazon won't even allow me to purchase many of the non book items because they just won't ship to NZ. Physical books are upwards of $25 Just for shipping. Translate that into my currency and that is exorbitant. 

There would be plenty of people in New Zealand and Australia who don't hit that $50 mark. 

Many of my purchasers aren't book readers. They don't own readers (and if they do, they didn't buy them from Amazon because the A won't ship them here). Some don't know about the free kindle apps until I tell them. 

This policy change has just nerfed my entire ARC list. 

On the other hand, fake reviews and down voting are RIFE in non fiction (more than I've seen in fiction) so I'm happy if this puts a choke hold on that. 

Sent from my GT-S7390 using Tapatalk


----------



## AllyWho (May 16, 2015)

EC said:


> If they can't be bothered spending it on Amazon then they'll just have to learn to live with not being able to review.


Amazon shipping is often prohibitive to countries outside the US. For example to ship to NZ costs me as much as the paperback and sometimes more. I simply cannot afford Amazon's shipping Downunder. I buy all my paperbacks from the Book Depository which has free worldwide shipping.


----------



## Awasin (Aug 7, 2015)

It's gone from .99 to $5.00 to $50.00 now

The jump to five bucks added an important kicker: you had to spend it using a valid credit or debit card (so scamps using gift cards to fund their sock-puppets were out of luck).

I'm guessing that everyone who could leave reviews under the earlier rules is grandfathered in, but it's still another move in the right direction . Amazon is all about the customer and that's completely in line with our interests.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

AliceW said:


> I buy all my paperbacks from the Book Depository which has free worldwide shipping.


Amazon owns Book Depository, so purchases there may count.


----------



## Beverly K (Aug 25, 2016)

I've been on Amazon so long, the first year I got a box of chocolate chip cookies from Jeff Bezos. I should have kept his card.  As I formulate a launch team to get some advance reviews, does anyone know how to interpret their rule about family and close friends not reviewing? And how do they know? If they tap into my Facebook friends, does that rule out ALL of them?
"For the same reason, family members or close friends of the person, group, or company selling on Amazon may not write Customer Reviews for those particular items."


----------



## dorihoxa (Feb 12, 2016)

TheLemontree said:


> Jan Hurst-Nicolson and LSMay said what I was going to say.
> 
> Amazon won't even allow me to purchase many of the non book items because they just won't ship to NZ. Physical books are upwards of $25 Just for shipping. Translate that into my currency and that is exorbitant.
> 
> ...


There's worse. I couldn't even buy from Amazon until a couple years ago, because it wouldn't accept my country's cards. I haven't spent $50 on Amazon because there are a lot of things that won't ship here, and others are just too expensive. I can't see how this is any good because scammers are going to pay $50 (if they haven't yet) to be able to scam. It's what they do.


----------



## C. Rysalis (Feb 26, 2015)

Ann in Arlington said:


> I bet that there are Very Very Few legitimate, active accounts where the only purchases are ebooks.


Well, I'm one of the few! I buy ebooks on Amazon and everything else in local stores or on ebay. Ebay tends to be cheaper than Amazon, and I'm poor, so...

I can't be the only one who primarily buys from Ebay.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

CozyScribe said:


> I'm all for revising the system, though I don't know how many of the paid reviews this change will eliminate. Nearly everybody has spent $50 on Amazon. As others have already stated, I'd rather see it revised to state that you have to actually borrow or buy the book and, in the case of digital purchases, read a minimum number of pages (say 10 or 20 pages) to leave a rating or review. That wouldn't stop the scammers but I think it would slow them down better than just a minimum, across-the-board purchase requirement. If nothing else, it would make the haters actually buy or borrow your book before they could slam you.


I think the people it WILL effect are the true review farmers with dozens or even hundreds of fake accounts they sat up with a $5 gift card. Yes, they've spent $50 on their real account, but not on their fakes. I strongly believe this is what this was aimed at and they definitely aren't only in ebook reviews.

$5 each may be cost effective to set up a lot of fake accounts. Amazon is betting that $50 each isn't.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

This is terrible news for me as a seller. I write for teens. Which means that a lot of my ARC readers are too young to shop at Amazon, I already have a built in message that says "if you can not review on Amazon then please leave it on Goodreads" simply because several of them don't even have accounts and get their mothers to download books for them.  Anyway, I see this as wiping away a few more ARC readers from being able to review on Amazon.

As a buyer, it is a different story. I buy literally everything from Amazon, and I don't think I've ever left a review for an item I didnt buy. That system would make total sense.

But yeah, as a seller it is not good news


----------



## Sarah Shaw (Feb 14, 2015)

C. Rysalis said:


> Well, I'm one of the few! I buy ebooks on Amazon and everything else in local stores or on ebay. Ebay tends to be cheaper than Amazon, and I'm poor, so...
> 
> I can't be the only one who primarily buys from Ebay.


I don't buy from Ebay, but I'm another who only buys ebooks- and a very rare print book- on Amazon. I don't even think of them for anything else and am constantly infuriated by their listings of other products cluttering up my book offerings.


----------



## Joseph Malik (Jul 12, 2016)

JRTomlin said:


> I think the people it WILL effect are the true review farmers with dozens or even hundreds of fake accounts they sat up with a $5 gift care. Yes, they've spent $50 on their real account, but not on their fakes. I strongly believe this is what this was aimed at and they definitely aren't only in ebook reviews.
> 
> $5 each may be cost effective to set up a lot of fake accounts. Amazon is betting that $50 each isn't.


As a new author in a competitive genre, I have no problem with this. It is ****ing HARD for an emerging author to get a first novel reviewed. Holy crap. (Edit: I've sent out 35 ARCs and received 3 reviews in the past 4 weeks. Granted, a few reviewers have been in touch, telling me they're waiting until launch day. Which is fine. But still, finding and emailing potential reviewers has been a part-time job.)

All the while, I've been grinding my teeth for a month over all the obviously fake reviews I'm seeing. (Case in point, a recently-released book with 20+ usage and spelling errors in the first two pages, but consistent five-star reviews, all of them 3-5 words: "Great writing!" "Profesionaly (sic) done!")


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Amazon are entitled to protect their .com market. It's the home and by far largest market they have. It's also the market that has been under incessant attack by scammers. 

Customers have the right not to purchase from .com 

Amazon has the right to say that only customers who spend $50 on .com can leave reviews. 

Customers now need to suck it up or forget about reviewing.


----------



## Greg Meritt (Aug 9, 2016)

Lydniz said:


> Is this a new thing? The policy seems to be now that you have to have spent $50 in store before they'll let you review anything. Good news or bad news?
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=201602680


Good news, I think...extremely good news. A few months ago it was $5.00, but $50.00 seems a little better. I'd be okay with $500.00! (they are talking about total spent, right?) Mine has to be...well..I'd rather not say in case my wife ever reads this. But I've been an Amazon customer for at least six years now and I'd venture to say somewhere in the 10's of thousands over the course of time. Ouch!

At any rate, this should help cut down on all those fake reviews that hurt all the legitimate people who are being honest and following guidelines.


----------



## Joseph Malik (Jul 12, 2016)

Greg Meritt said:


> Good news, I think...extremely good news. A few months ago it was $5.00, but $50.00 seems a little better. I'd be okay with $500.00! (they are talking about total spent, right?) Mine has to be...well..I'd rather not say in case my wife ever reads this. But I've been an Amazon customer for at least six years now and I'd venture to say somewhere in the 10's of thousands over the course of time. Ouch!
> 
> At any rate, this should help cut down on all those fake reviews that hurt all the legitimate people who are being honest and following guidelines.


  "But, but, writing a book that gets good reviews from real people is all HAR-R-R-RD. Waaah!"


----------



## Guest (Sep 23, 2016)

If you BUY any product, you should be able to review it on that store's site.
The cost or past buying experience should have nothing to do with it.
I buy something for a penny, I want to be able to review it.
A consumer protection agency should look into this slamming of the review gate.


----------



## EmmaS (Jul 15, 2014)

Evenstar said:


> This is terrible news for me as a seller. I write for teens. Which means that a lot of my ARC readers are too young to shop at Amazon, I already have a built in message that says "if you can not review on Amazon then please leave it on Goodreads" simply because several of them don't even have accounts and get their mothers to download books for them. Anyway, I see this as wiping away a few more ARC readers from being able to review on Amazon.


Same here. I just got messages back from several teens who follow me on Wattpad saying they'd love to review the book I just launched... but I doubt any of them have spent $50 on Amazon.


----------



## SerenityEditing (May 3, 2016)

I wonder why they don't set it up like this: 

When you publish an e-book, you tick a box indicating if you wish to have Strict Review Control or Regular Review Control. 

If you select Regular, carry right on. 

If you select Strict, you are asked if you have given away any digital ARCs. If yes, you then tick a box indicating approximately how many (by hundreds). Amazon then uses their wonderful magic to estimate how many reviews to expect. 

You are asked if you are making the book available on other platforms, and if so, if you want to allow reviews on Amazon from people who purchased on other platforms. If you say 'yes,' you are asked to identify the other platforms. 

Any reviews on the e-book that are Verified Purchases are cleared for publication. 

Any reviews on the e-book where the reviewer only downloaded a sample are routed to a program to scan for phrases like 'did not finish, couldn't get past, gave up,' etc. 
--Any review WITH those terms that is four or five stars is flagged for review by a human (or at least a smarter computer). 
--Any review WITHOUT those terms that is one or two stars is flagged for review by a human or SC. 

Any reviews on the e-book that are NOT Verified Purchases prompt the reviewer to indicate where s/he got the book. If it matches the list you provided of other platforms, the reviewer is then (and ONLY then - this must be asked at the beginning of the process because I hate nothing more than typing a message only to learn I'm not allowed to send it) allowed to begin the review. 

Any review on the e-book that is NOT a Verified Purchase and indicates that the reviewer got a copy as an ARC will either: 
----a. Have the email address of the reviewer sent to the author to confirm it was one of the ARCs OR
----b. Be compared to a list of email addresses the reviewer provides to Amazon for comparison. 

There are still flaws and gaps, but about 98% of this could be automated and, while not perfect the system, certainly improve it without needing to raise the purchase rate so high. I'd have thought $25 would be plenty high, myself. (And I hope Amazon never offers a quick and easy "See how much you've spent over the years" because I'd have to renounce the world and go live in a cave as penance for the guilt I'd feel.)


----------



## SerenityEditing (May 3, 2016)

Joseph Malik said:


> As a new author in a competitive genre, I have no problem with this. It is ****ing HARD for an emerging author to get a first novel reviewed. Holy crap. (Edit: I've sent out 35 ARCs and received 3 reviews in the past 4 weeks. Granted, a few reviewers have been in touch, telling me they're waiting until launch day. Which is fine. But still, finding and emailing potential reviewers has been a part-time job.)
> 
> All the while, I've been grinding my teeth for a month over all the obviously fake reviews I'm seeing. (Case in point, a recently-released book with 20+ usage and spelling errors in the first two pages, but consistent five-star reviews, all of them 3-5 words: "Great writing!" "Profesionaly (sic) done!")


This is going to be off-topic to the thread, but on-topic (I hope!) to your post. 
There are some people who LEGITIMATELY do not recognize errors. I edited a book for a lovely gentleman with a college education (UK) who *literally* did not know the difference between a period and a comma. Because of some issues with his book and because he wants the UK spellings and I knew that I may have missed a few, we agreed to send it to someone else - a friend of his _who is a teacher_ for whatever level the 10-11 year old kids are in under the UK system - for proofreading.

She sent it back with *every single instance* of, say, 
"I disagree," Jack said. 
"Well, you're just wrong," Mary replied.

changed from commas to periods, so
"I disagree." Jack said. 
"Well, you're just wrong." Mary replied.

and every single instance of 
"I disagree," he said. 
"Well, you're just wrong," she replied.

changed to 
"I disagree." He said. 
"Well, you're just wrong." She replied.

And so many more - turning sentences into run-ons, hyphenating words that should not be hyphenated, all sorts of things.

She made over 3000 changes in this book and almost _every single one_ of them is wrong (she did catch a few American spellings I'd missed, though).

I asked him if he'd taken a look and he said yes; I asked if anything had looked off to him and he said no, it all looked fine. And he's a voracious reader, as well - you'd think it would just LOOK wrong to him, even if he didn't know why. I have other clients who are UK authors and they don't do this, so it can't be anything they're teaching in schools. (Well, except that lady, I guess!)

So as tempting as it is to assume that all the "Great writing! Profesionaly done!" reviews on error-filled books are fakes, I no longer do. I am a LOT more careful about whose recommendations I take seriously, though.


----------



## P.A. Woodburn (May 22, 2010)

Anarchist said:


> If anyone's interested in knowing how much they've spent at Amazon, here's a good tutorial describing the process.
> 
> It's imperfect. Amazon only archives the last 10 years. And it doesn't include ebook purchases.
> 
> It's still fun, though. You may find yourself saying, "_What the... Why the hell did I buy *THAT* in 2006?_"


I don't think not including e-book purchases is fair. I've definitely spent over $50.00 but I spend a lot on e-books as well. Also if we register for the United progrm we are spending about $100.00 a year.


----------



## ImaWriter (Aug 12, 2015)

Anarchist said:


> If anyone's interested in knowing how much they've spent at Amazon, here's a good tutorial describing the process.
> 
> It's imperfect. Amazon only archives the last 10 years. And it doesn't include ebook purchases.
> 
> It's still fun, though. You may find yourself saying, "_What the... Why the hell did I buy *THAT* in 2006?_"


Umm. I didn't look at the tute, but I'm able to look back to 1998 on .com. Which is when I placed my first order with them. And I can see both digital and physical orders for every year I've ordered from them since. Nearly all of my purchases from .com are digital purchases. Can't everyone else access that much history?

Off topic... My digital orders cracked me up. I had a Palm Pilot in the late '90s early 00's and used to buy Microsoft Reader books from Amazon, convert them to .mobi and read using MobiPocket Reader on my Palm.


----------



## P.A. Woodburn (May 22, 2010)

SerenityEditing said:


> This is going to be off-topic to the thread, but on-topic (I hope!) to your post.
> There are some people who LEGITIMATELY do not recognize errors. I edited a book for a lovely gentleman with a college education (UK) who *literally* did not know the difference between a period and a comma. Because of some issues with his book and because he wants the UK spellings and I knew that I may have missed a few, we agreed to send it to someone else - a friend of his _who is a teacher_ for whatever level the 10-11 year old kids are in under the UK system - for proofreading.
> 
> She sent it back with *every single instance* of, say,
> ...


I was born and schooled in UK (except for Univ.) Sometimes I get confused because of this, but I've lived in USA since 1969 and I've never heard of the above. I think the UK puts the " before the comma or whatever and the USA puts it after and there are some other differences but not as above.

It'll be interesting to see how these new rules change reviews.


----------



## Guest (Sep 23, 2016)

ImaWriter said:


> Umm. I didn't look at the tute, but I'm able to look back to 1998 on .com. Which is when I placed my first order with them. And I can see both digital and physical orders for every year I've ordered from them since. Nearly all of my purchases from .com are digital purchases. Can't everyone else access that much history?


You can see it in the history online. If you do the order report download, though (which makes it fairly easy to see "how much you've ever spent"), it can only go back to 2006 and does not include digital orders. That's the limit Anarchist is referring too 

(and using that report, I now know I've spent just over $8,000 on Amazon.com in the last 10 years on physical products. I'm sad...I figured it would be higher LOL)



P.A. Woodburn said:


> I don't think not including e-book purchases is fair. I've definitely spent over $50.00 but I spend a lot on e-books as well. Also if we register for the United progrm we are spending about $100.00 a year.


The not including eBooks isn't in reference to the reviewing, only the order report download.  For reviewing, eBooks count except free ones.


----------



## P.A. Woodburn (May 22, 2010)

JRTomlin said:


> I think the people it WILL effect are the true review farmers with dozens or even hundreds of fake accounts they sat up with a $5 gift card. Yes, they've spent $50 on their real account, but not on their fakes. I strongly believe this is what this was aimed at and they definitely aren't only in ebook reviews.
> 
> $5 each may be cost effective to set up a lot of fake accounts. Amazon is betting that $50 each isn't.


It would be good if it knocked all of these people out. So hopefully we will see less negative, nasty reviews.


----------



## ImaWriter (Aug 12, 2015)

Anma Natsu said:


> You can see it in the history online. If you do the order report download, though (which makes it fairly easy to see "how much you've ever spent"), it can only go back to 2006 and does not include digital orders. That's the limit Anarchist is referring too


Ah! Thank you for clarifying.


----------



## gonedark (May 30, 2013)

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## SerenityEditing (May 3, 2016)

P.A. Woodburn said:


> I was born and schooled in UK (except for Univ.) Sometimes I get confused because of this, but I've lived in USA since 1969 and I've never heard of the above. I think the UK puts the " before the comma or whatever and the USA puts it after and there are some other differences but not as above.
> 
> It'll be interesting to see how these new rules change reviews.


Oh yeah, I know it's not a UK-wide thing; like I said I have other clients in the UK and they know the difference! But increasing numbers of people, it seems, don't know and don't care. So those "obviously fake" reviews are sometimes real.

Now to be COMPLETELY off topic, I'm pretty sure i have the same countertop as Betsy the Quilter.

Any Verified Purchase should be allowed to review, period, even if it's the only thing you've ever bought on Amazon and was only a 99c item. I think it's unjust that they're not making an allowance for that.

For non-VPs, it's trickier, but I think it could still be managed without putting minimums on it. However, it would mean hiring more people and spending more money, and we can't have that...

And what happens if, say, I'm a college kid, opening my Amazon account, I order one thing for $75 and I hate it so I return it - by one measure I've spent enough to allow me to post a review telling everyone I hated the thing, but by another measure I haven't spent anything at all, since I returned the item. How will they handle THAT?


----------



## Joseph Malik (Jul 12, 2016)

SerenityEditing said:


> This is going to be off-topic to the thread, but on-topic (I hope!) to your post.
> There are some people who LEGITIMATELY do not recognize errors. I edited a book for a lovely gentleman with a college education (UK) who *literally* did not know the difference between a period and a comma. Because of some issues with his book and because he wants the UK spellings and I knew that I may have missed a few, we agreed to send it to someone else - a friend of his _who is a teacher_ for whatever level the 10-11 year old kids are in under the UK system - for proofreading.
> 
> She sent it back with *every single instance* of, say,
> ...


Hey, stuff happens. Three professional editing passes, two beta readers, a separate professional proofreader, and a couple of weeks looking for glitches, and I just today got an email from a friend pointing out half a dozen errors. One in the second freaking page. I get it.

Or, hey, maybe it's karma.

To be fair, none of my reviewers have noticed. Fingers crossed as I very quietly upload a new manuscript . . .


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Fferyllt said:


> Yeah, Betsy, I got that purple and orange one! Still perfectly good. Still use it. Even stole the John Cage quote on it for some marketing materials waaay back in the day. (Shakes head.) They sure don't make 'em like they used to...


I would probably still use them--they've held up well--but not all of our cars have cup holders and hubby is picky about me spilling coffee in the cars  so I bought a newer one that actually closes instead of having the little opening to sip through. But I keep them in the back of the cabinet.

My orders only go back to 2000, which I think is when I changed my email address.

Betsy


----------



## AllyWho (May 16, 2015)

SerenityEditing said:


> So as tempting as it is to assume that all the "Great writing! Profesionaly done!" reviews on error-filled books are fakes, I no longer do. I am a LOT more careful about whose recommendations I take seriously, though.


It goes the other way too, with reviewers being adamant about "errors" in a book when there are none. US/UK spelling differences are a good example of perceived errors. I have a title with a negative review from a vine reviewer complaining the book wasn't edited and that I don't know the difference between lay and lie. Except the reviewer is wrong  It's the reviewer who doesn't know the past tense of lay/lie, not me or my editor. My lovely editor was incensed on my behalf had to sit on her hands and not respond. The reviewer than called for all her followers to down vote the positive reviews because they were "obviously fake". You just have to let it go and I hope that less ignorant readers have better grammatical skills and know how to conjugate "lay" for sure it's a tricky verb and I have a handy little table to wrangle it.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Anma Natsu said:


> (and using that report, I now know I've spent just over $8,000 on Amazon.com in the last 10 years on physical products. I'm sad...I figured it would be higher LOL)


I'll sell you my report if you want.....


----------



## chloegarner (Jul 1, 2016)

I understand why having a minimum purchase threshold on an account is going to help weed out click-farm activity, and I appreciate the effort to make the system more representative of actual customer opinion and quality.  What I don't follow is why it has to be a credit or debit card.  Are they going to shut down accounts from reviewing the same product if they use the same credit card?  Is that the point, here?


----------



## SerenityEditing (May 3, 2016)

AliceW said:


> It goes the other way too, with reviewers being adamant about "errors" in a book when there are none. US/UK spelling differences are a good example of perceived errors. I have a title with a negative review from a vine reviewer complaining the book wasn't edited and that I don't know the difference between lay and lie. Except the reviewer is wrong  It's the reviewer who doesn't know the past tense of lay/lie, not me or my editor. My lovely editor was incensed on my behalf had to sit on her hands and not respond. The reviewer than called for all her followers to down vote the positive reviews because they were "obviously fake". You just have to let it go and I hope that less ignorant readers have better grammatical skills and know how to conjugate "lay" for sure it's a tricky verb and I have a handy little table to wrangle it.


Ugh. I'm frustrated on your behalf, too! For what it's worth, I always chime in when I see an erroneous review like that, and try to set the record straight. I've mostly given up adding to the comments, but that's one time I'll make an exception. I recently chided someone who gave a book a 1-star review for bad language - the TITLE of the book is "Go F--- Yourself, I'm Coloring: Swear Word Coloring Book." And they spell out the word I blanked. How can you buy a book that not only warns you in the description that it has bad language but has it right in the TITLE, then give it one star for bad language?!?! Apparently she didn't like my reply to her comment (I was cordial but extremely sarcastic) and Amazon took it down. SIGH. It's so frustrating to see people give unfair ratings/reviews.


----------



## AllyWho (May 16, 2015)

SerenityEditing said:


> I recently chided someone who gave a book a 1-star review for bad language - the TITLE of the book is "Go F--- Yourself, I'm Coloring: Swear Word Coloring Book." How can you buy a book that not only warns you in the description that it has bad language but has it right in the TITLE, then give it one star for bad language?!?!


Oh dear. That is funny though. I keep reminding myself that you can't fix dumb, and you're just going to wear yourself out trying 

It's a frustrating situation, but you have to give most readers some credit. I write in British English and I believe most readers can wrap their head around that and the few that can't, I don't want as readers anyway


----------



## SB James (May 21, 2014)

Whoa, just started looking over all my Amazon orders since 2000...  
I suppose this is something of an attempt to make the reviews more legit. Whether it works or ends up just being more of a problem... TBD.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

JRTomlin said:


> $5 each may be cost effective to set up a lot of fake accounts. Amazon is betting that $50 each isn't.


And even if it is, at least Amazon makes $50 on each fake account!


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Cherise said:


> And even if it is, at least Amazon makes $50 on each fake account!


LOL Good point. That too.


----------



## ImaWriter (Aug 12, 2015)

chloegarner said:


> What I don't follow is why it has to be a credit or debit card. Are they going to shut down accounts from reviewing the same product if they use the same credit card? Is that the point, here?


It has to be a credit or debit card, meaning not a gift card. Scammers can buy gift cards and give them to their click farmers. This is an effort to stop that kind of activity.


----------



## BookishDreams (Apr 12, 2016)

Ellie Keating said:


> I tried to review a few weeks ago and they said I needed to spend 5 dollars... so pretty new!


I remember this, yes. 50$ to spend before you can leave reviews does sound a lot to me.

It's great to weed out the scammers, but then again, I have a few friends who only purchase ebooks from Amazon (0.99-2.99 price point), which means they need to but a whole bunch of books before they can leave reviews (not on MY books, just to be clear ) . Sure, they can post them on GR, but it's really not the same if you're passionate about writing your opinion after you purchase something.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

Another ax cut when a scalpel would do, I guess, but I hope it stops most of the click farm scammers. I doubt just making it being a verified purchase would be enough without some high minimum required, because as others have said, upping it to five bucks wasn't helping.

I doubt I've spent $50 at Amazon, I shop eBay (the stuff I buy mostly isn't new, like the Kitchenaid mixer I got for an absolute steal!), and most of the time my son pays using his debit card, if he doesn't use his own account to begin with. I don't have a debit or credit card any more, so I can't buy directly with my own money. Being poor sucks.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Hmmm. I recently reviewed a book I got from the library (net to Amazon: $0) and the review went through just fine.  And it's not like I've spent $50 on Amazon in the past few months, either.  (*knocks wood for future*)


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

Jena H said:


> Hmmm. I recently reviewed a book I got from the library (net to Amazon: $0) and the review went through just fine. And it's not like I've spent $50 on Amazon in the past few months, either. (*knocks wood for future*)


I'm pretty sure it's "ever," not recently or the past few months. Have you ever spent $50 total on Amazon since its inception?


----------



## MMacLeod (Sep 21, 2015)

If you live outside the US, I see how the $50 could be a real issue. If you live within the US, Amazon sells so many household essentials these days that most people should be able to fulfill this requirement just by purchasing their regular grocery list via Amazon one week or month. They sell cereal, and paper towels, and laundry detergent, just to name a few. With free shipping if you meet certain requirements, and at prices that looked pretty comparable to my local grocery store. I'm sure that some legitimate reviewers will be left out of the loop by this, but my guess is that the vast majority of readers who really want to leave reviews will not have trouble finding something to buy there even if they live on a tight budget without a lot of wiggle room for extras.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I'm pretty sure it's "ever," not recently or the past few months. Have you ever spent $50 total on Amazon since its inception?


I don't know, I haven't looked at my spending on Amazon. Over the past 10 years I'm sure it's over $50, but I don't know the total.

But according to the link in the OP, Amazon's site says "customers _must spend_ at least $50.00 using a valid credit or debit card. "

In no way does that suggest a cumulative amount of $50. If it said "customers must have spent $50," that would be one thing. But it says "must spend," as in present tense, which suggests 'buy something now and leave a review.'

If that's not what they mean, then it shouldn't be what they say.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

Jena H said:


> I don't know, I haven't looked at my spending on Amazon. Over the past 10 years I'm sure it's over $50, but I don't know the total.
> 
> But according to the link in the OP, Amazon's site says "customers _must spend_ at least $50.00 using a valid credit or debit card. "
> 
> ...


I read "must spend" as cumulative and over the course of their shopping time at Amazon.


----------



## Guest (Sep 24, 2016)

A brilliant move by Amazon to come up with a new revenue stream.
Even convinced authors (most of us) that the extra revenue stream is really for OUR benefit.
No wonder the major department stores can't keep up.
They would never have thought of a way for folks to pay to review products they bought.
Just brilliant.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Okey Dokey said:


> A brilliant move by Amazon to come up with a new revenue stream.
> Even convinced authors (most of us) that the extra revenue stream is really for OUR benefit.
> No wonder the major department stores can't keep up.
> They would never have thought of a way for folks to pay to review products they bought.
> Just brilliant.


Exactly. "Continue spending money with us, and we'll 'let' you review the items you purchase."


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I read "must spend" as cumulative and over the course of their shopping time at Amazon.


Same and immediately.



Okey Dokey said:


> A brilliant move by Amazon to come up with a new revenue stream.
> Even convinced authors (most of us) that the extra revenue stream is really for OUR benefit.
> No wonder the major department stores can't keep up.
> They would never have thought of a way for folks to pay to review products they bought.
> Just brilliant.


----------



## Ros_Jackson (Jan 11, 2014)

MMacLeod said:


> If you live outside the US, I see how the $50 could be a real issue. If you live within the US, Amazon sells so many household essentials these days that most people should be able to fulfill this requirement just by purchasing their regular grocery list via Amazon one week or month. They sell cereal, and paper towels, and laundry detergent, just to name a few. With free shipping if you meet certain requirements, and at prices that looked pretty comparable to my local grocery store. I'm sure that some legitimate reviewers will be left out of the loop by this, but my guess is that the vast majority of readers who really want to leave reviews will not have trouble finding something to buy there even if they live on a tight budget without a lot of wiggle room for extras.


The rules in the UK are still "a purchase using a valid payment card". 
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/help/customer/display.html/?&nodeId=201723570

I'm pretty sure I can't leave a review on the US site, but that's fine because I'm a UK customer (I don't review books on Amazon). I think this is going to be a minor inconvenience to a small number of legitimate reviewers, but the overall benefits will outweigh that. In the short term we might see fake reviews move to international Amazon sites, before they catch up.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

GajaJKos said:


> I remember this, yes. 50$ to spend before you can leave reviews does sound a lot to me.
> 
> It's great to weed out the scammers, but then again, I have a few friends who only purchase ebooks from Amazon (0.99-2.99 price point), which means they need to but a whole bunch of books before they can leave reviews (not on MY books, just to be clear ) . Sure, they can post them on GR, but it's really not the same if you're passionate about writing your opinion after you purchase something.


EBook purchases do NOT count toward the $50.


----------



## Guest (Sep 24, 2016)

Cherise said:


> EBook purchases do NOT count toward the $50.


Where are you seeing that? Absolutely nothing on the page says eBook purchases don't count. The only things excluded are prime subscriptions and promotional discounts.


----------



## kathrynoh (Oct 17, 2012)

I don't see how it adds to their revenue stream. Do you think there is anyone in the world who spend $50 just to leave a review on Amazon? It's to establish a reviewer is an legit, established customer.


----------



## boxer44 (Aug 6, 2016)

kathrynoh said:


> I don't see how it adds to their revenue stream. Do you think there is anyone in the world who spend $50 just to leave a review on Amazon? It's to establish a reviewer is an legit, established customer.


Yup ... ^^^^ this one !  U beat me 2 it ...


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Anma Natsu said:


> Where are you seeing that? Absolutely nothing on the page says eBook purchases don't count. The only things excluded are prime subscriptions and promotional discounts.


Huh. You're right, it isn't there now. I could have sworn it was there yesterday. Never mind!


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

kathrynoh said:


> I don't see how it adds to their revenue stream. Do you think there is anyone in the world who spend $50 just to leave a review on Amazon? It's to establish a reviewer is an legit, established customer.


Exactly. People believe what they want to believe, though.


----------



## chloegarner (Jul 1, 2016)

ImaWriter said:


> It has to be a credit or debit card, meaning not a gift card. Scammers can buy gift cards and give them to their click farmers. This is an effort to stop that kind of activity.


Ah. Thanks. I can get from here to there on that.


----------



## Vinny OHare (May 3, 2013)

I would bet that most people in this thread have spent over $50 on books just from other kboard members. I know I have.


----------



## SerenityEditing (May 3, 2016)

The "Submit a Review" page says simply: 
Important: Before you can post a review, you need to have an Amazon.com account that has successfully been charged for the purchase of a physical or digital item. Free digital downloads don't qualify. You don't need to have purchased the product you're reviewing. There's a 48-hour waiting period after your first physical order has been completely shipped, or your digital item has been purchased, before you'll be able to submit your review. If you've purchased a digital gift for someone else, the 48-hour waiting period doesn't begin until the gift has been redeemed.

And the "Customer Review Creation Guidelines" page says: 
WHO MAY WRITE A REVIEW?
To post a review, customers must spend at least $50.00 using a valid credit or debit card. Prime subscriptions and promotional discounts don't qualify towards the $50.00 minimum. Customers in the same household cannot submit a review for the same product.

Between the two of those, it seems clear that once you open an account and spend $50, it "unlocks the gate" and you're good to go. 

"Customers in the same household cannot submit a review for the same product.
This irks me. What if I buy something and I love it, but my husband or wife or child or parent or roommate hates it? Not fair.


----------



## archaeoroutes (Oct 12, 2014)

I guess a lot of people would have bought their Kindle direct through Amazon, and that would be $50 right there.
(Yes, I read on my 'phone so I know it isn't the only way to read Kindle books.)


----------



## Dennis E. Taylor (Feb 10, 2015)

Yeah, this pisses me off something fierce. I just did a release on Tuesday. I was getting good reviews, then all of a sudden, nada. Guess why?

I have to ask, though. Why wouldn't they just limit reviews to verified purchases?


----------



## archaeoroutes (Oct 12, 2014)

Just occurred to me that this was .com specific. Presumably, someone in the UK would now be unable to leave a review on Amazon..com unless they happened to have spent $50 on there (even though they've spent far more than that on .co.uk).
Luckily I've spent enough sending presents to friends in the US that I'll be over the threshold.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

bizmuth said:


> Yeah, this p*ss es me off something fierce. I just did a release on Tuesday. I was getting good reviews, then all of a sudden, nada. Guess why?
> 
> I have to ask, though. Why wouldn't they just limit reviews to verified purchases?


How can you possibly know it's because of this?


----------



## Marseille France or Bust (Sep 25, 2012)

True. I released book 2 in a Historical Fiction series in August and have yet to receive 1 review. (



Decon said:


> The problem with this is that some segments of Amazon users will only use kindle for free and low priced books and take forever if at all to reach the $50. For those who have not yet spent $50, and they fail when trying to post a review, then it will likely put them off forever in wanting to waste time posting a review. The higher you price your books, the more likely you will be read by someone who has reached that target. I can only hope that subscriptions for KU count toward that amount as it doesn't mention them, but it does say that Prime subscriptions don't count. It also doesn't mention the period over which you have to have spent the $50, so they can play with that as they wish. Although thinking about it, kindles cost more than $50 to start with, unless they have downloaded a free app for a different device they bought elsewhere.
> 
> I foresee a lot of new books taking forever to get just one review if the author say makes the first book free or 99c. It is good to stop the scammers,which I agree with, but it's going to hurt authors when they garner very few, if any reviews.
> 
> ...


----------



## AllyWho (May 16, 2015)

Marseille said:


> True. I released book 2 in a Historical Fiction series in August and have yet to receive 1 review. (


Is it selling? Did you send out ARCs? is it in KU? People are jumping to blame Amazon for lack of reviews but I suspect if we scratch the surface we will find other factors at fault.


----------



## bobfrost (Sep 29, 2013)

I've talked with a couple different authors who have sent out recent ARC editions and received almost no ARC reviews recently (as in, massive outlier numbers compared to their typical arc reader->arc reviewer ratio). One typically sees nearly 200 arc reviews within their launch window, and currently has 6 on the book they just released.

Six.

The author is losing her mind over it...

Make of that what you will.


----------



## AllyWho (May 16, 2015)

bobfrost said:


> Make of that what you will.


And like I said, people are jumping to blame Amazon when I suspect it could be other factors. How about people signed up just to get a free book? You said the book has "just released" - maybe they just haven't got around to leaving a review yet? Maybe there was a file error, or too short a time frame and the ARC reviewers haven't even read the book yet? I simply don't buy the "this author normally gets 200 reviews, therefore Amazon is to blame."


----------



## Dennis E. Taylor (Feb 10, 2015)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> How can you possibly know it's because of this?


It's a pretty reasonable assumption. I continue to hold my place in the amazon rankings, so my sales are steady. I continue to get comments on my blog and mailing list signups; and the audible version continues to get ratings (up over 40 now). But the reviews on amazon stopped the day the policy was announced here, and I haven't had a single one since.

Sure, it's not mathematically certain, but if I was betting even money, I'd bet my way.


----------



## PhoenixS (Apr 5, 2011)

**********


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Well I asked because either that was a snafu by the legal department or digital ARCs are being banned. I'll post when I receive a response.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

PhoenixS said:


> Some of us have noted the policy now states:
> 
> "*Paid Reviews* - We do not permit reviews or votes on the helpfulness of reviews that are posted in exchange for compensation of any kind, including payment (whether in the form of money or gift certificates), bonus content, entry to a contest or sweepstakes, discounts on future purchases, extra product, or other gifts.The sole exception to this rule is when a free or discounted copy* of a physical product* is provided to a customer up front. In this case, if you offer a free or discounted product in exchange for a review, you must clearly state that you welcome both positive and negative feedback. If you receive a free or discounted product in exchange for your review, you must clearly and conspicuously disclose that fact. Reviews from the Amazon Vine program are already labeled, so additional disclosure is not necessary."
> 
> ...


But NetGalley gives out ebooks as well.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

And how would Amazon even know whether your advance review copies were digital, or printouts, or even smoke signals?


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Cherise said:


> And how would Amazon even know whether your advance review copies were digital, or printouts, or even smoke signals?


If they are reviewing a digital product, then I think Amazon could reasonably make that assumption.


----------



## Annette_g (Nov 27, 2012)

Cherise said:


> But NetGalley gives out ebooks as well.


I think Netgalley ONLY gives out digital books, that's why it's called "Net" galley, as opposed to the paper galleys publishers used to send out. I've been a reviewer there for ages and I have never seen physical books offered, or at least not in the sections where I requested galleys.

I'm not sure if I've spent over $50 in the .com store, I certainly have in the UK one (I dread to think how much, LOL!)


----------



## MissingAlaska (Apr 28, 2014)

Cherise said:


> And how would Amazon even know whether your advance review copies were digital, or printouts, or even smoke signals?


Setting up print through Createspace and ordering no physical copies would be one indication.


----------



## Joseph Malik (Jul 12, 2016)

It may have just gotten more interesting.

My hardcopy is available for review this morning, but my ebook on pre-order no longer is.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

Joseph Malik said:


> It may have just gotten more interesting.
> 
> My hardcopy is available for review this morning, but my ebook on pre-order no longer is.


That's normal. That's why you put up the print book at the same time as the preorder. You can't review the preorder but you can put the review on the paperback and when the versions are linked ... viola! Reviews on preorders. That's not a new thing.


----------



## Salvador Mercer (Jan 1, 2015)

Joseph Malik said:


> As a new author in a competitive genre, I have no problem with this. It is ****ing HARD for an emerging author to get a first novel reviewed. Holy crap. (Edit: I've sent out 35 ARCs and received 3 reviews in the past 4 weeks. Granted, a few reviewers have been in touch, telling me they're waiting until launch day. Which is fine. But still, finding and emailing potential reviewers has been a part-time job.)
> 
> All the while, I've been grinding my teeth for a month over all the obviously fake reviews I'm seeing. (Case in point, a recently-released book with 20+ usage and spelling errors in the first two pages, but consistent five-star reviews, all of them 3-5 words: "Great writing!" "Profesionaly (sic) done!")


On topic re: reviews, off topic re: $50. For the new author...

My first book took six weeks to get its first review. I had no idea what an ARC was or how to set up a program. I'm only now, after eight books and a year and a half organizing an ARC team and now with this news, maybe I shouldn't have?

If you get three reviews on launch day, I'd call that a success in my prawny experience. Run with it and good luck with your launch.


----------



## Joseph Malik (Jul 12, 2016)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> That's normal. That's why you put up the print book at the same time as the preorder. You can't review the preorder but you can put the review on the paperback and when the versions are linked ... viola! Reviews on preorders. That's not a new thing.


I distinctly remember the review option being available on the ebook version. Maybe it was a glitch, or I was always drunk when I was seeing it. Or both.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

Joseph Malik said:


> I distinctly remember the review option being available on the ebook version. Maybe it was a glitch, or I was always drunk when I was seeing it. Or both.


Yeah, I have constant preorders and that's never been available since we were given access to preorders.


----------



## Joseph Malik (Jul 12, 2016)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> Yeah, I have constant preorders and that's never been available since we were given access to preorders.


I stand corrected. Thank you.


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

ImaWriter said:


> Hmm.
> 
> So would this impact people who don't shop from .com?


I've never shopped at dotcom. Only in the UK. But I can review on any amazon site - even China! I tried it a while back just to see if I could.


----------



## AlexesR (Feb 19, 2014)

>>What I wonder is whether they'll go back apply this rule to past reviews or leave them there? If the latter, then that's really unfair to new entrants into the market.<<

I lost a review that had been on my product page for months. I can't say this was due to the new policy but it just happened so it seems it might be connected. It's also, as far as I know, the only review I've ever lost. (I hope I didn't just curse myself and now old reviews will start disappearing in droves. Ugh.)


----------



## Antara Mann (Nov 24, 2014)

Wow! Amazon is raising the bars!


----------



## Vinny OHare (May 3, 2013)

NOT a Political Post - Not sure if this has been mentioned but maybe the amount of 1 stars that Hilliary's book got was the cause. http://www.wnd.com/2016/09/amazon-steps-in-to-fix-hillary-book-review/


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

In the case of the Clinton book, the vast majority of reviews quite obviously have nothing whatsoever to do with the book, so I can understand why someone might have wanted to clean them up, given Amazon's well-publicised attempts to stop people making a mockery of their review system.


----------



## ImaWriter (Aug 12, 2015)

Lydniz said:


> In the case of the Clinton book, the vast majority of reviews quite obviously have nothing whatsoever to do with the book, so I can understand why someone might have wanted to clean them up, given Amazon's well-publicised attempts to stop people making a mockery of their review system.


Part of the problem with this is that in other cases Amazon has turned a blind eye when people went crazy and had fun in the reviews, making them a complete mockery. And a lot of them are pretty high profile, so we can't assume Amazon is unaware. They have a precedent in place, so perhaps leaving things alone here would have been the better call.

I've been reading some of the reviews, and people are not happy with Amazon for the mass deletion. It might not be more than a ripple in the water to them, but this could generate some bad PR.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Folks, 

I don't see what the Clinton book review issue has to do with the $50 threshold. I've removed/edited some posts that were considered political.  Let's move on.  

Betsy
KB mod


----------



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

Lydniz said:


> In the case of the Clinton book, the vast majority of reviews quite obviously have nothing whatsoever to do with the book, so I can understand why someone might have wanted to clean them up, given Amazon's well-publicised attempts to stop people making a mockery of their review system.


^this^


----------



## miaarden (Jun 7, 2016)

JRTomlin said:


> Well I asked because either that was a snafu by the legal department or digital ARCs are being banned. I'll post when I receive a response.


I'm crossing my fingers really hard that they get back to you! I'm set to release something next week and was going to use ARCs for the first time.....halp.


----------



## SerenityEditing (May 3, 2016)

ImaWriter said:


> Part of the problem with this is that in other cases Amazon has turned a blind eye when people went crazy and had fun in the reviews, making them a complete mockery. And a lot of them are pretty high profile, so we can't assume Amazon is unaware. They have a precedent in place, so perhaps leaving things alone here would have been the better call.


I've been guilty of enjoying some of these - the "Bic for Women" pen, for instance. The products have seemed like a complete mockery before the reviews even came into it, TBH.

That is a good point, though: There are products on Amazon that have hundreds or even thousands of reviews - 5-star and 1-star and everything in between - by people who have obviously not bought the product and are obviously not taking it seriously or writing a relevant review. I wonder why I think those are hilarious, but start feeling steam coming out of my ears when someone writes an irrelevant review (5 stars - "I haven't read this yet but I'm sure it's going to be great!" or 1 star - ditto except "...terrible!").


----------



## Scout (Jun 2, 2014)

Hm, this seems like a step in the right direction.


----------



## DanaFraser (Apr 5, 2016)

Apologies if this has been posted. I got to page 3 of comments then decided to check on this.

Regarding the complaints on how this keeps people outside US from posting reviews because of the cost of shipping, while that is likely true for posting on .com, it is not necessarily true for posting on your country site (if one exists).

Here is the policy for posting on the Oz site, for example.

https://www.amazon.com.au/gp/help/customer/display.html/?nodeId=201374610

That's just one digital purchase.

Here is the UK policy

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/help/customer/display.html/?&nodeId=201723570

You must have made a purchase using a valid payment card (excluding Prime membership and free items).

So, for the time being, that is one concern that doesn't apply.


----------



## TheLemontree (Sep 12, 2015)

DanaFraser said:


> Apologies if this has been posted. I got to page 3 of comments then decided to check on this.
> 
> Regarding the complaints on how this keeps people outside US from posting reviews because of the cost of shipping, while that is likely true for posting on .com, it is not necessarily true for posting on your country site (if one exists).
> 
> ...


True. But I would rather that my Review Team post to .com because their reviews are seen by everybody.

Any review posted on .au or .br or any other regional store is only ever visible in that store. But those listed to .com are visible everywhere, after a few days.

It's not Armageddon, but it is something that affects my game plan.

Sent from my GT-S7390 using Tapatalk


----------



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

DanaFraser said:


> Apologies if this has been posted. I got to page 3 of comments then decided to check on this.
> 
> Regarding the complaints on how this keeps people outside US from posting reviews because of the cost of shipping, while that is likely true for posting on .com, it is not necessarily true for posting on your country site (if one exists).
> 
> ...


Countries that don't have their own country site unfortunately have to buy from .com. I think that includes the whole of the African continent for a start. Some of my books are set in Africa. But if the $50 levels the playing field then I'll accept that I might get fewer reviews.


----------



## Joseph Malik (Jul 12, 2016)

Joseph Malik said:


> I distinctly remember the review option being available on the ebook version. Maybe it was a glitch, or I was always drunk when I was seeing it. Or both.


I am not losing my mind. Here's my Kindle page, with the review feature active although it's in pre-order until midnight Thursday evening.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2016)

I wonder if they are rolling something new out.  If I go to that page page, I only get the option to review it if I flip to paperback.


----------



## ImaWriter (Aug 12, 2015)

I tested as well. 

While I can click the "write a customer review" button from the Kindle page, I'm actually not able to leave a review. If I click the same from the paperback page, I can leave a review.  A little deceptive.


----------



## AllyWho (May 16, 2015)

Joseph Malik said:


> I am not losing my mind. Here's my Kindle page, with the review feature active although it's in pre-order until midnight Thursday evening.


When I click on your book I get the message "This item has not been released yet and is not eligible to be reviewed" and there is no orange button. I suspect it's showing you something different because it's your title.


----------



## Joseph Malik (Jul 12, 2016)

AliceW said:


> When I click on your book I get the message "This item has not been released yet and is not eligible to be reviewed" and there is no orange button. I suspect it's showing you something different because it's your title.


I either need to drink more, or less. Because this current level is just not working for me.

Thanks, all.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2016)

SerenityEditing said:


> I wonder why they don't set it up like this:
> 
> When you publish an e-book, you tick a box indicating if you wish to have Strict Review Control or Regular Review Control.


Maybe because Amazon doesn't really care about the supplier's preferences. It cares about its customers.

WE ARE NOT CUSTOMERS. We are suppliers. Sure, we also buy from Amazon, but our opinions as SUPPLIERS have no impact on Amazon. Amazon will first and foremost do what is best for Amazon, which means doing what is best for customers. Amazon knows that reviews are important, and Amazon knows people are actively questioning the integrity of the reviews. They have to do something, and if our feelings as suppliers are hurt...too bad.

As an industry, we failed to police ourselves insofar as the review scams. We turned a blind eye for years (actually, over a decade...but who besides me is counting anyway?). Stated that it "wasn't our business" if other people bought reviews. Argued that it was "Amazon's problem" to fix. And now that they are fixing it, based on their data, we expected to get input to make it suitable for us?

No.

And as others have said, this is not strictly an author issue. This has been a growing problem in a lot of industries for a while. The FTC has been actively going after review sellers, though to date they have limited their focus to "big ticket" like hotels and restaurants. Self-publishing has only been ignored so far because, to date, the volume is still considered chump change compared to other consumer issues.

But it is just a matter of time. And Amazon knows it. If they don't take strong, proactive steps to clean up the mess, the FTC could come looking at AMAZON for profiting off these review sellers (since so much of Amazon's revenue is driven by consumer reviews).

So Amazon is going to protect its business, and it is not going to let tiny vendors "opt out" because they feel they are being hurt.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2016)

Insofar as some people still being able to post reviews and such, I suspect Amazon will "grandfather" in established reviewers. I've never had an issue leaving a review on a book, even if it was fantasy or horror. But I have a review history the length of my arm three times over, I have the real name badge, and a high reviewer score. They will use the new policy to weed out the people who have questionable review patterns but will probably leave alone established reviewers with "normal" review patterns. 

Amazon policies are for their use, not ours. They can enforce them as they see fit. They are written to given them flexibility without having to overexplain themselves.


----------



## 5ngela (Sep 7, 2015)

I haven't make review at Amazon for quite some time and don't like doing it. I prefer to make review at Goodreads. Now when I want to make review at Amazon to help some authors, this happen (not saying I have tried to make review and cannot because I haven't try it). 

But if this is the case then I can only apologize to authors that I have promised to review their books at Amazon. It looks like fate dictate that I only make review at Goodreads. Bye bye review at Amazon. 

Updated : I already reviewed the book that I read and I can still posted it without min 50$ purchase because I am not living in USA. Maybe the min requirement is for new account.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2016)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> So Amazon is going to protect its business, and it is not going to let tiny vendors "opt out" because they feel they are being hurt.


I'd rather lose a couple of reviews because customers hadn't spent $50 with Amazon, than be in a marketplace filled with bs reviews. The latter scenario is a thousand times more frustrating.

The only ones I can imagine being genuinely upset over this are folks who have a lot of bs reviews.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Maybe because Amazon doesn't really care about the supplier's preferences. It cares about its customers.
> 
> WE ARE NOT CUSTOMERS. We are suppliers. Sure, we also buy from Amazon, but our opinions as SUPPLIERS have no impact on Amazon. Amazon will first and foremost do what is best for Amazon, which means doing what is best for customers. Amazon knows that reviews are important, and Amazon knows people are actively questioning the integrity of the reviews. They have to do something, and if our feelings as suppliers are hurt...too bad.
> 
> ...


I really don't think that's what people said, or it isn't what I said.

Exactly what were we supposed to do about fake reviews? HOW were we supposed to 'police ourselves'? Exactly what mechanism did we have, or do we have now, to do that?

I am happy to see Amazon take steps, but I don't buy that we as authors ever had the power to somehow 'police' reviews.


----------



## Speaker-To-Animals (Feb 21, 2012)

There's an unopened box with more than a $50 order.  Guess I'm OK. I


----------



## Guest (Sep 29, 2016)

JRTomlin said:


> I am happy to see Amazon take steps, but I don't buy that we as authors ever had the power to somehow 'police' reviews.


I have a different perspective on this since I have been self-publishing long before Kindle was even a thing. This problem really DOES go back well over a decade, and it is something I have been talking about the entire time. The fundamental problem is that when this paid review/gamed review problem first started, everyone turned a blind eye. There has always been a real resistance to offering criticism to each other in the self-publishing community, because for whatever reason any criticism, no matter how valid or how helpful it actually is, is construed as "negative" and "bad."

The review sellers also played us. They really, really, did. They "sold" their services on the myth that "everyone does it", including the trade publishers, and so it was okay. And we didn't question it. We went with it because it fit comfortably into the "us versus them" mentality that drives the profits of a lot of the vanity services that sprung up alongside the self-publishing movement.

So an entire generation of writers "grew up" thinking that buying reviews, swapping reviews, and faking reviews was normal.

And then once it started to become noticeable, people didn't want to do anything. Review sellers could confidently promote their services anywhere and, while a few people would leave comments that the service was a violation of the TOS, most authors would either stay quiet, DEFEND the review seller, or just shrug and say "not my problem" or "not my business." But very few of us ever reported these companies to Amazon, either because we assumed Amazon wouldn't do anything or because we didn't want to get involved or because we didn't want to get a fellow author in trouble.

Think of self-publishing as a neighborhood. It is a nice neighborhood where everyone gets along, but one day a family moves in and they are drug dealers. But nobody reports them, because "it's none of my business." And "it doesn't affect me." So long as they keep it in their own house. Then a few months later, another drug dealer moves in, but they aren't bothering you, either. So you don't say anything. But now your kids know there are two families of drug dealers in the neighborhood, but they seem like nice people and, HEY, they have nice things they bought with their drug money. And who are they hurting, anyway? If people want to buy drugs, it isn't my business, right?

Well, now the neighborhood is overrun with drug dealers, and nobody wants to drive through our neighborhood because of the crime rate. And the police are cracking down on YOUR KIDS who didn't do anything simply because they live in proximity of the drug dealers.

This thing didn't happen overnight. And it didn't originate with Amazon. It happened over a decade. It was a dark creeping cloud that slowly seeped into the community.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> And then once it started to become noticeable, people didn't want to do anything.


And just WHAT was this ANYTHING people were supposed to do.

Tell me ONE THING that I as an author could have done to stop someone else from posting fake reviews.

JUST ONE.

And damn if I know what your point about drug dealing is. There is no comparison between me calling the police about drug dealing down the street and the fact that there has been no policing online for reviews. There ARE no cops to call.

That isn't a 'different attitude'. That is a claim that somehow authors had some mysterious mechanism to stop fake reviews. The one I know nothing about...

ETA: You are trying to tell me that none of us have ever reported fake reviews? BS. I certainly have. Plenty of people have. And they weren't removed. We have suggested for years that Amazon take steps such as this, and we were ignored.

No, I do NOT accept some responsibility for not fixing a problem we had NO power to fix. This wasn't something that any author or even a group of authors could have addressed. Amazon can and now apparently they are. Good.


----------



## TromboneAl (Mar 20, 2015)

Lydniz said:


> Amazon's well-publicised attempts to stop people making a mockery of their review system.


I sure hope you're not referring to the wonderful Three-Wolf Moon T-Shirt!

https://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/B002HJ377A

Nothing wrong with this review.


----------



## Nancy_G (Jun 22, 2015)

A blogger, who just reviewed for me on Goodreads and her blog, said she couldn't post it on Amazon because of the $50, which was a bummer. Her review was awesome.


----------



## Dennis E. Taylor (Feb 10, 2015)

I've got 150+reviews and ratings on audible. 13 on amazon. And my book, on amazon, is hovering around #2966 on the rankings, so I'm making sales. I don't think there's any doubt that the policy is blocking a lot of legitimate attempts at reviews.


----------



## Gone To Croatan (Jun 24, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> As an industry, we failed to police ourselves insofar as the review scams.


While I agree with your basic point, this claim is just silly. I have 'policed myself' by not scamming reviews. There is no way we can stop other writers doing so.

The only thing that can police Amazon reviews is Amazon. And they're now doing so, because they're losing business due to review scammers.

They're the ones who should have started that years ago.



> The fundamental problem is that when this paid review/gamed review problem first started, everyone turned a blind eye.


Nonsense. Look at the reaction when John Locke was found to have bought reviews, which was probably the first time most people realized authors were doing so.


----------



## spiritwriter (Nov 8, 2016)

I too have a question. It does say Amazon.com (only). I use amazon.com.au for kindles and other books through Australian Amazon. Are Kindle books included in the $50? I don't really want to test it and then find that they are not included. There are quite a few kindles I could purchase for $50 (USD). I don't relish the idea of buying a paperback or two or three  on .com and have to pay the postage which could work out more than the $50 I spend on books.
While I think it is a great idea to stop the paid reviews and review farming, I do not like it as I am one of these people who loves to read some of the free kindles. 
I suppose as karma is a what you give out, so shall ye reap, when it comes time to selling my own books, I must be prepared for those who cannot afford to buy them and would only buy them if they were under $10.
sigh....


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2016)

spiritwriter said:


> I too have a question. It does say Amazon.com (only). I use amazon.com.au for kindles and other books through Australian Amazon. Are Kindle books included in the $50? I don't really want to test it and then find that they are not included. There are quite a few kindles I could purchase for $50 (USD). I don't relish the idea of buying a paperback or two or three on .com and have to pay the postage which could work out more than the $50 I spend on books.
> While I think it is a great idea to stop the paid reviews and review farming, I do not like it as I am one of these people who loves to read some of the free kindles.
> I suppose as karma is a what you give out, so shall ye reap, when it comes time to selling my own books, I must be prepared for those who cannot afford to buy them and would only buy them if they were under $10.
> sigh....


Yes, any paid physical or digital products on the .com site qualify for it. Free ebooks don't qualify (for sort of obvious reasons LOL) and Prime subscriptions don't count, but that's all they have specifically excluded from going towards the $50. And it's $50 across your Amazon shopping lifetime, so it doesn't have to be in a single purchase.


----------



## AnnaB (May 14, 2016)

spiritwriter said:


> I too have a question. It does say Amazon.com (only). I use amazon.com.au for kindles and other books through Australian Amazon. Are Kindle books included in the $50? I don't really want to test it and then find that they are not included. There are quite a few kindles I could purchase for $50 (USD). I don't relish the idea of buying a paperback or two or three on .com and have to pay the postage which could work out more than the $50 I spend on books.


I haven't had issues leaving reviews on Amazon.com though all my past purchases and where I actually download my Kindle books are from another Amazon site.

They don't have the verified tag then, but despite that I think they're still more useful there for English language books.


----------



## AsianInspiration (Oct 12, 2016)

Anarchist said:


> There are those who have yet to spend $50 at Amazon?!
> 
> What manner of creature are these?


Forget Amazon. If you take away my university fees a few years back, and credit card payments, I have spent a grand total of $0 online.


----------



## D A Bale (Oct 20, 2016)

There's a way several other sites have to insure legitimate reviews that Amazon hasn't gone to yet - purchasing the exact item you're reviewing, otherwise you can't leave a review.  At least this is one way to legitimize reviews a bit better, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Amazon get tougher in the future, and I have to admit, I would welcome it - I think.


----------



## Genevieve Mckay (Jan 19, 2015)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> And see, I was saying to myself, "Hey! I never got a mouse pad!!!" I guess the grass is always greener, yadda, yadda, yadda...
> 
> Here are the travel mugs--they weren't anything fancy:
> 
> ...


Is it just me or do those bears look completely terrified of Humpty looming up there on his wall?  I'm reading Jasper Ffordes "The Big Over Easy" so maybe I'm reading too much into your arrangement.


----------



## Lefevre (Feb 1, 2014)

The option to only have verified reviews, combined with the voting tweak, and the new limit is splendid. I wish these policies were implemented years ago. Amazon stock may be worth buying (June EPS 1.78, Sept EPS 0.52) again! Creating constraints to halt the shenanigans will stop the capital outflow to scammers, and be better for everyone.


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

For me the default/option to see only verified reviews disappeared a few weeks ago. Do some people still have it?


----------



## crebel (Jan 15, 2009)

Lydniz said:


> For me the default/option to see only verified reviews disappeared a few weeks ago. Do some people still have it?


It was only the default view for a couple of days for me. The dropdown option to sort by only verified purchase is still there (as it has been for at least a couple of years).


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Interesting. I don't even have the option.

ETA: I tell a lie - I've been clicking on "sort by" rather than "filter by."


----------



## crebel (Jan 15, 2009)

Lydniz said:


> Interesting. I don't even have the option.
> 
> ETA: I tell a lie - I've been clicking on "sort by" rather than "filter by."


Oops, sorry I typed the wrong terminology. Yes, first you have to click "see all reviews" then use the "Filter by" dropdown to switch it from "all reviewers" to "verified purchase only".


----------



## Guy Riessen (Mar 27, 2016)

Huh, I've only been a member since 2001 even though they were selling to the public in 1995--luckily I've managed to spend at least $3.33 during each of the last fifteen years. Close one!


----------



## lauramg_1406 (Oct 15, 2016)

Anarchist said:


> There are those who have yet to spend $50 at Amazon?!
> 
> What manner of creature are these?


Not ones that read! No matter the other random stuff I buy from amazon (I live in the middle of nowhere and yet 10 minutes away from one of amazon's UK warehouses) I've spent more than that in a year on books alone!

Sent from my SM-G800F using Tapatalk


----------



## crebel (Jan 15, 2009)

lauramg_1406 said:


> Not ones that read! No matter the other random stuff I buy from amazon (I live in the middle of nowhere and yet 10 minutes away from one of amazon's UK warehouses) I've spent more than that in a year on books alone!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G800F using Tapatalk


A _year_? LOL I try to stay within a monthly book budget of $50 and am only semi-successful. Thank goodness DH's salary allows me to indulge. There was certainly a point in my life where finances were tight enough that library books were my only option.

Do many think or are you aware of a significant number of folks who want to review on Amazon who don't have an account lifetime of purchases of at least $50?


----------



## lauramg_1406 (Oct 15, 2016)

crebel said:


> A _year_? LOL I try to stay within a monthly book budget of $50 and am only semi-successful. Thank goodness DH's salary allows me to indulge. There was certainly a point in my life where finances were tight enough that library books were my only option.
> 
> Do many think or are you aware of a significant number of folks who want to review on Amazon who don't have an account lifetime of purchases of at least $50?


See I can't afford to spend that much on books a month :-( so wish I could! Thankfully I have a large back log on my kindle to feed my reading habit.

I don't know anyone whose actually been affected, it's not really that much in the grand scheme of things!

Sent from my SM-G800F using Tapatalk


----------



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

lauramg_1406 said:


> I don't know anyone whose actually been affected, it's not really that much in the grand scheme of things!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G800F using Tapatalk


It is that much in the grand scheme of things if you live in SA and other countries and have to factor in the exchange rate (It was R23 = $1 but has come down to R17 =$1) plus paying the huge shipping charges!  We can't expect local fans to fork out that much just to post a review


----------



## 5ngela (Sep 7, 2015)

Think the positive sides maybe less reviewers mean more opportunity for current book reviewers. Doesn't mean they lack books to be reviewed though.


----------



## Shanna Moncuse (Jan 26, 2016)

lilywhite said:


> Something has to be done about the fake reviews; it's completely out of hand.


That's exactly what I was thinking (I couldn't find the right words so I'm quoting you). I'm sure that their are accounts made just for that purpose.


----------

