![]() |
Originally Posted by Jenbel
(Post 12480400)
Just got this warning when clicking on what should have been a link to BD's website:
So it would appear that IB is now an affiliate of BD. With CJ membership, I would assume Sheraton and Priceline as well. |
So explain to a relative neophyte what that actually means in English please? ;)
When we click through to a BD link, because IB is an affiliate, do they get $$$ for the referral? Or do we need to actually purchase from BD for them to do that? Is it like quidco, where the referring site (i.e. quidco) gets a kickback from the company from which you purchase the stuff - only of course quidco shares that kickback with its members whereas presumably IB would retain that? |
Until someone offers some sort of an explanation, I'm no longer clickiing on any links thru FT.
|
Sadly, as a mod, that's not really an option for me.
And when people post images, unless you have images unabled, this website links through to the other website which is hosting that image... |
Pretty much every link no longer works for me without manually quoting the post then copying and paster into another window.
A painful waste of time. |
Originally Posted by Jenbel
(Post 12480771)
So explain to a relative neophyte what that actually means in English please? ;)
When we click through to a BD link, because IB is an affiliate, do they get $$$ for the referral? Or do we need to actually purchase from BD for them to do that? Is it like quidco, where the referring site (i.e. quidco) gets a kickback from the company from which you purchase the stuff - only of course quidco shares that kickback with its members whereas presumably IB would retain that?
Originally Posted by Jenbel
(Post 12481901)
Sadly, as a mod, that's not really an option for me.
|
Well, though Chrome is my preferred browser, I'm switching back to FireFox specifically to block skimlinks. This is really outrageous -- unethical behavior of the lowest sort.
Edited to add: Done -- I'm on with FF (with, of course, ....... plus). FT is a lot faster and, of course, as a bonus, I don't have to look at any ads. Well done, IBB! We'll simply pass the word around that, because of your undisclosed browser hijacking, the preferred solution involves blocking all of your ads. |
Anyone have the link to the chat IB had with users after Randy sold the operation to them? I recall some nonsense about "things won't change around here." Would love to find that if I could. If only for the comedic value.
|
Originally Posted by magiciansampras
(Post 12492119)
Anyone have the link to the chat IB had with users after Randy sold the operation to them? I recall some nonsense about "things won't change around here." Would love to find that if I could. If only for the comedic value.
In 100% of those cases, nothing was ever going to change and in 100% of the same cases, everything changed. :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by magiciansampras
(Post 12492119)
Anyone have the link to the chat IB had with users after Randy sold the operation to them? I recall some nonsense about "things won't change around here." Would love to find that if I could. If only for the comedic value.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/only-...flyertalk.html Not sure you'll find answers (or action) to your satisfaction though. |
Edit: Ignore what I said below :)
The skimlinks appear to be gone! |
Originally Posted by Aus_Mal
(Post 12521221)
The skimlinks appear to be gone!
I just tested this thread in Newsstand using another machine. What I saw was "ib.redirect...." before the actual WSJ page/link was up. The loading/redirection is too fast for me to see the full address from IB redirection. At least IB has worked on the lag time. :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by lin821
(Post 12521381)
Are you sure?
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/12519630-post4957.html I had thought that it's been fixed, but alas the same behaviour is still around. Apologies |
The redirect is still causing problems here. Still blocked.
|
I'm pretty sure that i/we had posted elsewhere we would. For those of you that may not know, the IB representative did acknowledge the topic and promised an answer back soon and did refer to this as a "test." I'm not sure of the extent or length of the test. I do know that the topic comes up at a difficult time to get his attention for an answer -- he's on vacation this week and part of last while his wife gives birth. He's ben good with replying to some of the items like this in the past and am sure that once he returns to work we'll get an answer/explanation/solution. You know what I know. Thanks.
Originally Posted by ElmhurstNick
(Post 12455365)
I guess the HOM is still looking it to it for us.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 6:05 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.