DavidAL

FTG, as I have said before, I do appreciate your willingness to step in the conversation and discuss things, since it seems that most of the other bloggers are I guess too scared to participate in a forum where they are unable to delete comments.

That being said, I have, professional and diplomatically, named many reasons for my blog bashing. I will detail later more of my reasoning behind this, but I don't have time right now to spell it all out. So, I will keep pointing the finger at those blogs which I think deserve it, as I have before. Stay tuned for more details later tonight. Just be patient with me.

ingy

\

And hoping in the discussion someone will address the consumers responsibilities in the transaction and options they have.

gpapadop

webazoid>>>>>>>>>>>>>you have a rookie blogger, who comes into a crowded market, and rises above others by promising to help the masses for free. He carries through with his promises initially, and attracts a loyal fan base. Then, instead of being just a hobby, it becomes a full time gig. He is enticed by affiliate links and signs on, promising that he will always be fair w/ promoting deals. Then temptation and practicality of running a business set in. Then you start seeing nothing more than posting for the sake of generating hits. The followers start going to other places. The followers start posting on this thread. The end.

The consumers who know better are doing this (going to other places). But my gut feeling is that the new batch of readers that said blogger gets from PR activities vastly outweighs the loss of better informed readers. Obviously I do not have numbers to back this up!

Frugal Travel Guy: "maybe the blog bashers can come up with code of conduct they would like to see?"

Great idea! I am going to try to work on this...but after April 15, lol.

Now I am about to have a giant feast in my house with friends celebrating the Chinese New Year, it's the Year of the Snake

freeloader

This is silly. Bernie Madoff ripped off a bunch of people. What was their responsibility? They were too trusting and it was too good to be true. But at the end of the day, Bernie's the bad guy... Not the people he ripped off.

When someone trusts a blogger who misrepresents the truth in order to make themselves money, I'm not looking to assign a percentage of blame to reader. Sorry.

Code of conduct? Easy -

1 - don't steal stuff from FT and repackage it to make a profit. Write about your own original findings
2 - disclose every link that pays you money so people can use that as a reference point in order to "take their responsibility"
3 - if something isn't the best link, don't lie and say it is.

Easy enough? Still waiting on the $50 gift card!

ingy

George, as much as you and I have discussed this issue personally and known one another for almost ten years I would be more than happy to work on the issue with you. I'll get the ticket for you to come to Savannah and we can sit in the airport and try to come to something that just ends this constant bashing with no results. I would really like to start now or as soon as possible. This stuff is not good for any of us. I'd sit with three or four of you to try to come to some conclusion, but just don't have the answer at this point. I'm no longer a blog owner and only contribute once a week but sure hate to leave this group of people that have meant so much to both of us with such negativity. Maybe that unique position of leaving the fold, and having been both a player before and after being a blogger can be of help.

ingy

And again, you won't assume any responsibilty for your decision? You can be as angry as you want but it wont change anything.

1. And why does it belong to FT? Why can't it be repackaged and condensed by bloggers? It is public information and blogs are growing faster than forums for just that reason. People are moving away from the forums as the blogs condense the info. Fact.

And How do you think you are going to enforce this code of conduct? Easy with your feet and clicks. Dont like it, dont read it and use other links. If it is just money and bloggers can do what they want ( and will) the only action that will work is not to use them. Again I dont have the answer as the market is expanding and it will be tough to make the point.

2. Why not simply assume that every action that a blogger does is based on a financial relationship? That is what we have to financially disclose and do. Assume Caveat Emptor (sp) You are responsible for your own actions.

3. Now you can go ahead and get angry again but people will lie, deceive, trick, conceal facts, steal, and embezzle for money. It has been going on for centuries and bloggers are not the only ones guility. I can tell you in my own personal circumstances I dont recall ever intentionally lying to a reader. I may not have explained it to his or her satisfaction but they can always wriite for clarification. You may not like the answer but I get way more thank you emails than complaints, probably 50 to 1. And blog traffic is still growing. Fact. Fact. Fact.

I'm not in a contest here. I'm trying to reach a dialog with this group.

84fiero

Add that if FT or some other place is the source for a repackaged posting, then just credit your source. Common courtesy.

ingy

84 You've been around awhile. This is not about common courtesy any you know it as well as I do. We have about 50 people that started blogs, many of which without any business experience. Many in different financial positions and states of desperation possibly, and they are not living up to your expectations. Are you dealing with housewivers, retired guys and college kids so far in debt this seems like an easyy way out. I was the first one in the space and I can tell you after 20+ years of owning a business before blogging this is a very tough job. I've not making excuses as they are trying (sometimes without the highest moral standards) to make a quick buck and you the consumer are the only ones that can change the behavior. You must walk with your feet and clicks. Don't you see it yet? Things will only change when you do just that.

And I'll add as an edit, in my personal opinion, the affiliate marketing companies are more of a negative influence than the banks. The banks are now facing issues of compliance head on and should be. The affiliate marketing companies, again in my personal opinion, made a huge misjudgement approving all the bloggers in the fall of 2011 ( and yes I expect one of you to reply "because it cut into your business" Ps: Only a little)

lkar

Seems easy to me. If the blogger personally were to apply for the card, would he opt for the offer he links or a different one? If the latter, it is dishonest not to say that. Especially if the blog says "value" or "frugal" in its name.

I have always liked FTG and never really gotten into the hate game. But the latest post saying caveat emptor, it's the consumer's responsibility is offensive. I hope FTG was asking it as a genuine question, not offering as an argument. The latter is inappropriate. If one just wants it to be a free for all, then the blogs are unnecessary. Consumers come to the blogs because they purport to be about helping them. If the defense is that consumers have a responsibility to know blogs are not shooting straight with them, drop the pretense. Just offer a free toaster. If the consumer can find someone offering two toasters, you lose.

Talking about needing a code is good, but it distorts the issue, or is a diversion. Putting a link on a blog that the blogger would not use to aply for the same product himself is, simply, dishonest. There really is no other way around it. If an accountant says, "I promise my prices are the best" knowing they are not to try to disuade customers from really checking, the question whether or not the customer who blindly believes it is responsible is interesting but of no moment. The accountant is dishonest, whatever the answer to the question.

Put more simply, it's not a defense to dishonesty that one takes advantage only of the stupid or unsophisticated. In fact, it's worse.

jethro

+1...........couldn't have said it better

ingy

lkar: I assume you are referring to the US Airways card? It is a tough call for two reasons:

1. I no longer own the blog I write for and the other "value" issue may be caused by a loss of links to other lenders. I can not comment for sure.

As far as the US Airways card, I use the Chairman's preferred card located in Ricks Top Travel Deals section as I believe it works and am personally comfortable with using it, even though, it has the Chairman's requirement. I can tell you as well that rookies are not comfortable and we get as many emails on that issue as any one card. We explain our personal success but give them the option of which link to use. It is their sole responsibility to make their own decisions. I have no way of knowing which they choose so cant confirm more than their confusion.

We took a different position with the 50K AA cards and the two browser trick by displaying it in Ricks top travel deals, and you may remember that we hardly ever if ever used the 30K link. Each and every instance in this game is unique and each blogger will handle differently. Neither you nor I nor any commission or panel is going to dictate to a blogger what to do, although the card companies are taking a stronger pro consumer position as of just recently.

And in regards to the earlier Bernie Madoff comment by a previous poster, who stated the consumer may have beentoo trusting and the deal may have been too good to be true. That to me seems like reason enough to accept some responsibility for the decision to use them. Remember the real estate bubble? It was Wall Street, bankers, real estate agents and buyers that were involved in too good be to be true Not everybody bought homes and leveraged to 120% in an overpriced market.

We are now a couple hours into the discussion and I still have not seen any consumer responsibility for their own actions. Anybody want to talk about that yet?

satman40

Boy's no one is Loyal to anyone, and you all copy each other, some of you just explain it better...

Me I use Google Reader and watch you all

Hilton Head, and the Light House a nice place to visit, in the little 18 seater,

You all settle down now...go feed the gators at the golf course...

I've been doing this for over 30 years and I still learn things every day..things change...can not keep up....

Thanks for the good job, helping me....appreciate it...

lkar

FTG, I am not referring to any product or blog in particular. I was taking you up on your invite to discuss the relevance of the consumer's sophisication or responsibility. I appreciate the response, said my peace, and will be happy to watch the discussion go forward.

freeloader

Are you serious with this still? Sure, fine, if some one is lazy and doesn't research the best offer and takes everything at face value, then whatever. Go take advantage of them if that's what you want to do

But when you say that something is the best deal, when it's not - that's dishonest. And when you promote something without directly disclosing yor finacial interest in it - that's dishonest.

Bloggers are a funny bunch. They don't promote the usairways chairmans card Bc it's targeted to a specific group, or do they say. Funny tho, they encourage EVERYONE to sign up for a business card despite the fact that those cards too are targeted to a specific group - and have TOCs that explicitly say that the card is ONLY to be used for bus exps and not personal spend. Bloggers won't scare ppl by disclosing that. They'll scare ppl with the usairways card (WARNING- it says it's targeted!), but encourage ppl to break the rules on the chase ink... Hmmm I wonder which one pays.

I hold nothing against the bloggers. Fine, make your money on the backs of others, it's America. Go for it. Get rich. But enough already with the moping that people don't like your blog. And stop acting like you only do this for altruism, when your first post said its all about the money. That's phony.

Should I PM you my address about that $50 GC?

gloreglabert

All the very legitimate reasons to choose the non-affiliate link (more miles for less money) are deliberately omitted from your description of the links. As written now, it's not a choice -- there's NO reason to choose the non-affiliate link unless the reader knows something you've deliberately failed to disclose. To pretend like it's a choice is like saying "well, you should've done all your own research and ignored what I told you".

What you're saying COULD be completely true...IF you actually gave all the info:

1. The non-affiliate link gives 10k extra anniversary miles and saves you $89 over the affiliate link.
2. The non-affiliate link claims to require chairman's status, even though that has never been enforced in practice.

If you said those two little things, then yes, people would make their own decisions, and I'm sure some would continue to use your affiliate link. But you know full well that many, many people would opt for the non-affiliate link, which is why you don't disclose (1) and (2). And the lack of disclosure is also why you catch a lot of well-deserved flak for your affiliate link.