I found this in the blogosphere, basically it states that the coop was an intergral part of the ebay cookie stuffing scheme that Shawn is being sued for. F'in great! =-=-=-Moderator=-=-=-= Is this an accurate article? The link for the original article is below. http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/update-on-ebay-vs-digital-point-solutions-shawn-hogan/
I've seen ebay ads in the network which redirected the user to ebay. the URL of the ad was somewhere on DP
Oh, really? I suspect eBay and others might disagree. I can't say that I "admire" it at all, any more than I admire the "genius" of the Nigerian email frauds or the fake malware-antivirus frauds. What surprises me most about this additional information is that the Coop network is/was running as late as 2007, let alone 2009. I had assumed this kind of artificial link scheme died long ago, even without the cookie stuffing element.
If the only people it is Ebay - then good! Ebay scam 1000x harder than the worst cookie stuffer. My mum has an Ebay business - and they screw every last little penny out of her, and millions of others. Recently they decided that despite the fact she sells books (many of them large sized like text books and art books) the most anyone can charge for the postage of a book is £2. What if the postage costs £5? Fuck you, was there response in as many words. And the question - why do people still use the Co Op network? Ask MoneyExpert.com or any other the other finance companies who *still* occupy number 1 spots in Google for terms like "credit cards" or "loans" purely because of the Co Op network three years on.
Maybe in your country you have a different definition of the word scam. To me, if a company screws money out of millions with hidden/hard to understand/ridiculous fees... then they are conducting a scam. Just because a company is big, doesnt stop them from being scammers. Enron comes to mind...
Except eBay has published this new rule and as always sellers can decide whether to continue under those rules or look elsewhere. Its like saying the US Government is scamming people if it raises the sales tax. The other point is that the rule protects the other half of ebays users, the buyers. Lastly they don't make a dime from the rule change. Its another debate on whether eBay is making a mistake by lowering sellers potential profits but that doesn't rise to the level of "scam" like what this thread is originally about.
If sellers are forced to ask for more money for an item so as to offset the extra shipping cost, sure, ebay gets their share of the selling price. I guess with all this (negative) information available on the Co Op, then there probably is no sense in "starting" a webmaster interest in it. ? Yes, I agree that limiting shipping price should be in place. I have paid thirty five dollars shipping for an item that cost twelve. JEEZ! This falls under the category of a seller trying to avoid ebay fees. lol
Again, How are they scam artists? (eBay that is) They are scammers because in your opinion their completely transparent rate structure is too expensive?
guys, this turned to a "To eBay or not to eBay" thread so can we stop this eBay as a private company can decide what and how to limit and charge for the activity on their site Now, if anyone has news about Shawn's case please feel free to share with us Thanks
I don't get it. So Co-op network was secretly redirecting people to Ebay... So it's illegal because it's without their consent but I don't know what's "cookie stuffing" and why would Co-op do that? How would they benefit from it? Was it some kind of affiliate link so if a person registers on ebay, owners of co-op network would get commission?