questionsshould we be worried about slamming some of the…


Why would we be worried? Who cares that they paid for their spot? What does it matter?


I was thinking the same thing last night. While I don't agree with some of the decisions that have been being made around here, I don't want to tank the place, you know? We think we are taking a stand with certain things, and that changes will hopefully be made. But when we are protesting to the wrong people, all we do is complicate things and possibly hurts something good. It seems that Woot is not making decisions autonomously...
But with the netflix thing, it was new customers only and there was no extra incentive; no deal. I was a previous customer, as are many people since we all left. I think while some people voted it down out of some degree of anger, it really wasn't a deal and only applied to a small group of people, and deserved to be voted down.


I don't think Netflix is being slammed, just the fact that it is not a deal because the free trial is always available.
There again, I could say the same about Amazon Student that has many upvotes currently. Six months free is not that great because when I signed up it was one year.
I guess us Wooters are a fickle bunch


Nope. Netflix can bite my shiny metal ass.


@okham: LOL, is it really metal, and do you polish it on a daily basis?


I wouldn't worry. I'm sure the companies paying for sponsored deals are more concerned with how much business a sponsored deal generates, vs how many votes they get.


Very worried, no reason to downvote over half of these deals down. Its not always "big companies" and use the sponsed deals...


I would say that if the team running deals.woot were concerned about downvoting of sponsored deals, they would take away the downvote button. If they aren't concerned - neither am I. Either way, a ton of people saw the Netflix logo and offer yesterday - that's what they're really paying for.


Don't waste your tears on Netflix.

Every time they pay for advertising space on the front page they get down-voted into oblivion. But they still come back a few weeks later and pay to be on the front page again, knowing that they'll get down-voted again.

Do you really think they'd do this if they didn't get a decent Return on Investment?

Even though hundreds of people down-vote, apparently enough people sign up to make it worth Netflix's time.

Then again - given some of their other stupid, stupid decisions - maybe not.

Either way, if a company is lame enough to post something that is unpopular or just not-a-deal, why should any members "be worried" whether they paid for the space or not?

I honestly don't understand your reservation.


@anotherhiggins: Something tells me that your a raging liberal sir...


@atd15: 6 months free is still 6 months free...


@crazyusmarine: Understanding a basic, sound business decision makes me a raging liberal?

To reiterate:

Netflix is making money off the deal, down-votes or not. If they didn't think it was a sound investment, they wouldn't repeatedly pay for the advertising space.

How is that not obvious?


@okham: I've been catching up on Futurama on Netflix for the past couple days. My 3 and 4 year old now use that phrase at least a dozen times per day, each.


Netflix is not evil. Their service, while it used to be a lot cooler is still a pretty nice product. Their trial offer is a good incentive to try them out. No, it is not a "deal" but it's not like they are a crap company selling crappy products that deserve to be down-voted to oblivion.


@atd15: well, my wife says I have lead there, so it must be. I'll shine it again right after netflix kisses it, which may not be too long from the number of "please come back" emails they've been sending.

@matt1976: so clearly you are not a member of FART?


I think it is reasonable to presume that if extreme downvoting really mattered then companies like Netflix and the place that sells the fake hair feathers and the exam prep place would not keep coming back. (Unless sponsored deals have to be purchased with multiple runs.)

I'll note that the bottommost sponsored deal is still above all of the non-sponsored deals.

Also, the OP's point about "paying for placement" implies that situations that allow people to pay money should somehow trump freedom of expression. With this I disagree completely.

BTW- for the record, I am not a liberal, raging or otherwise.


@linuxtrance: Don't get me wrong, 6 months free shipping from Amazon is awesome. My point was that it is always offered to students, and had been for the last 5 years. I think of it as the same as going to Microsoft and getting Office Pro 2010 for $69 (whatever they are charging right now). I know it is always available.


of course not; that's why the voting system exists.

what you should be asking is "should woot finally listen to the user community's votes and stop accepting sponsored deals that have been voted down into oblivion (especially more than once)?"


I just don't know what Netflix expected, this is a savvy userbase when it comes to deals, and most of us have dealt with Netflix, and nearly all of us know their why the heck they decided to pay to promote this NORMAL deal just boggles my mind. I understand if it's on Facebook, my Grandma knows nothing about Netflix, they'd sucker her in I'm sure...but wooters? Come on now


They paid for a deal and WE should feel bad for telling them how we feel?

No. Im not worried. If Netflix doesnt come back to offer us all the same deal they have offerec everybody since its creation, then good riddance.


They're still getting the business world, that's probably better than nothing :)


As others have said before me... What, me worry? Nah. woot gets paid; Netflix gets advertisement. Both were probably aware of the negative response that would happen. It would be very odd if Netflix blamed woot for the voting community's negativism. And, who knows how many people actually decided to give them a try? I'm guessing that the fee that woot charged them was worth it.


I'd go a step further and say that Woot should specifically disallow "deals" that aren't actually deals, whether sponsored or not. I'll even go ahead and give a number: at least 20%. If it isn't at least 20% better than the usual price (the usual price, NOT the imaginary MSRP that nobody actually pays) then it can't really be called a deal. Clearly the community has voted with their dollars, and, um, votes. Is it really too much to ask that deals.woot actually be deals?


I think the fact that other deals that are sponsored get voted up often is a good sign. Companies should realize getting voted down will happen for bad deals. It shouldn't reflect badly on Woot! for lame deals getting treated as such. However, our community organizing to vote them down in retrospect is probably not so great for them to sell ads. Woot! does need to make money, and Deals.Woot! is more advertising based than anything else. I downvoted the Netflix ad as well, but doing it in an organized manner could hurt them, so we probably should avoid it for Woot!'s sake.