Ethics of Selling Review Units

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by joblack

How does that balance anything out? Effectively you still got one for free?

He got one for free as a review unit, which I assume was the original intention.

The balancing out is between keeping that free one, and selling it and buying another. Assuming he got less than the new price for the resale, he's actually lost out slightly (he's gone from having a monitor for no cost to having a monitor for the difference between what he got for the review one and the new price).

Compared with the scenario of the purchaser of the review unit buying from new, the purchaser of the review unit has gained (he got one for the lower price), and the manufacturer sees no difference (one review unit given away and one sold at normal price in both scenarios).

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by jbjb

He got one for free as a review unit, which I assume was the original intention.

The balancing out is between keeping that free one, and selling it and buying another. Assuming he got less than the new price for the resale, he's actually lost out slightly (he's gone from having a monitor for no cost to having a monitor for the difference between what he got for the review one and the new price).

Compared with the scenario of the purchaser of the review unit buying from new, the purchaser of the review unit has gained (he got one for the lower price), and the manufacturer sees no difference (one review unit given away and one sold at normal price in both scenarios).

I paid a thousand dollars for a Paperlike from the first production run. Like almost all units from that run, mine died an early death.

Dasung gave me a 2nd-gen Paperlike, and then a Pro (3rd-gen). I eventually sold the 2nd-gen Paperlike and netted $400.

I'm still in the hole, but at least I minimized my loss.

[Tarana]

Referencing the ethics, unless you agreed to something in advance, the review units are a gift that the reviewer can do with what they wish (sell, toss, donate, use, recycle). The only issue I have is that it is not in the description of the units being sold that these are used. It doesn't matter how they were acquired so long as they aren't stolen. If someone is dumb enough to pay retail for a used and out-of-warranty device, not much to be done about it.

[Question Mark]

Originally Posted by Tarana

Referencing the ethics, unless you agreed to something in advance, the review units are a gift that the reviewer can do with what they wish (sell, toss, donate, use, recycle).

Quite agree. I had wrongly assumed that there would be some conditions attached to review units. Seems that it ain't necessarily so.

Originally Posted by Tarana

The only issue I have is that it is not in the description of the units being sold that these are used. It doesn't matter how they were acquired so long as they aren't stolen. If someone is dumb enough to pay retail for a used and out-of-warranty device, not much to be done about it.

Yes, although there might be nothing unethical about selling a review unit in the absence of any binding agreement, not clearly indicating in the product description that the device is used is rather unethical, even if it has only been lightly used.

Don't know who would pay those prices for a used product with no warranty from someone with a dubious reputation.

[joblack]

Originally Posted by jbjb

The balancing out is between keeping that free one, and selling it and buying another. Assuming he got less than the new price for the resale, he's actually lost out slightly (he's gone from having a monitor for no cost to having a monitor for the difference between what he got for the review one and the new price).

I am not complaining that he cannot sell it and I have no problem if he does that.

I was just wondering what 'balancing out' meant in that logical context.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by Tarana

Referencing the ethics, unless you agreed to something in advance, the review units are a gift that the reviewer can do with what they wish (sell, toss, donate, use, recycle). The only issue I have is that it is not in the description of the units being sold that these are used. It doesn't matter how they were acquired so long as they aren't stolen. If someone is dumb enough to pay retail for a used and out-of-warranty device, not much to be done about it.

Without an agreement in advance, you can't make a claim either way. It's a matter of opinion, and the fact that both Kobo and Amazon include return shipping labels suggests their opinion is that they own the hardware.

[Tarana]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

Without an agreement in advance, you can't make a claim either way. It's a matter of opinion, and the fact that both Kobo and Amazon include return shipping labels suggests their opinion is that they own the hardware.

Oh, I totally agree with you. If you've been sent a review unit and return labels and shipping provided, those companies indeed DO OWN those devices and expect them to be returned. Sometimes you actually have to send it back at your cost if you accepted the item via email (it's in the fine print).

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

...the fact that both Kobo and Amazon include return shipping labels suggests their opinion is that they own the hardware.

I do wonder though, if they were to just blatantly ignore those return labels, keep the products and sell them for a profit, wouldn't Kobo and Amazon stop sending them review units? I admit, 'it's okay because Amazon isn't complaining' isn't a strong argument. But it does make me think they likely do own the devices they are selling.

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

I do wonder though, if they were to just blatantly ignore those return labels, keep the products and sell them for a profit, wouldn't Kobo and Amazon stop sending them review units? I admit, 'it's okay because Amazon isn't complaining' isn't a strong argument. But it does make me think they likely do own the devices they are selling.

I'm just glad they're not in the underwear business!

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

I'm just glad they're not in the underwear business!

They've figured out step 2!

[Dutchbook]

After the multiple Good e-reader tablet debacles, and them completely ignoring any and all customers, I would think twice before handing them some money.

I’ve never seen someone selling review copies of stuff, and for an independent reviewer to become a salesman is kinda missing the point of being a journalist, like they claim to be.

[Richwood]

I have one original Kindle Touch that is clearly marked as DEMO and NOT FOR SALE on the bezel. Per the seller to me it was bought from a Kindle retailer at a large discount after it was a discontinued model as Amazon did not want it back. In basically new condition and it works great. I consider it a bit of a collector;s item and oddity. No idea how common such units are.

Looking on the web site I consider his prices to be ridiculously high and the shipping to be highway robbery.

[Question Mark]

Well, apparently, they are now hoping to sell more than just review units on their website:

Advertising on Good e-Reader

$399.99

This tier is for advertisers publishing a news item on Good e-Reader. In order to publish a news item on our website we require payment in advance and once payment has been approved your news item will be published within 24 hours.


Description

Good e-Reader is the definitive news outlet for e-books, e-readers and digital publishing. Advertising with Good e-Reader has tremendous benefits where you can reach over 1 million readers a month. You can publish one original piece for our news website and have it on our homepage for a few days, in addition to it appearing in Google News for six months. We allow up to four external links to other websites and they are do_follow. The sponsored article will not say, “Sponsored” on our website, so it looks very organic. A standalone article will be written by the publisher and have something to do with e-readers, tablets and e-books. The fee is $345 USD

https://goodereader.com/blog/product...-good-e-reader

Given the usual quality of their "articles" and "reviews", I wonder how many clients they will attract. Will they charge extra for their usual typos and grammatical errors?

[Question Mark]

Their line about their high journalistic integrity has returned to their original blog post. Priceless.

When you buy an e-reader from us, you help maintain the high journalistic integrity of Good e-Reader.

https://goodereader.com/blog/electro...-now-available

[doubleshuffle]

Tweedle 1: I've got a new idea to get in some dough.
Tweedle 2: Like selling our review units? What else do we have to sell?
Tweedle 1: Ads on our blog. But without telling customers they're ads. How much do you think we can charge? 500 bucks?
Tweedle 2: That's a bit steep. Let's say 350. And I'm a bit worried; do you think it's entirely legal to have ads that aren't marked as such?
Tweedle 1: Scruples! You're getting old, bro! You were already worried about selling those review units without telling customers what they are buying. But then you wrote a blog post that store customers don't have to see. So why not now sell the ad in the shop, so that blog readers don't have to see it?
Tweedle 2: Great idea. I'll write something up. And while I'm at it, I'll restore the passage about our journalistic integrity in the old post.
Tweedle 1: Cool. I was really worried you might develop a conscience.
Tweedles: Great mirth.