Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Be Skeptical of Glowing Amazon Reviews

When MrConsumer is seriously contemplating buying a particular product, he scrutinizes online reviews by others who have purchased the item to see what their real-world experience with it has been. Many of you probably do the same thing.

The trouble is that some unscrupulous sellers try to manipulate online reviews to make the product seem better than it really is. They might pay people to post fake reviews, they might write and post reviews themselves, or they might selectively promote good reviews or try to bury or delete bad reviews.

Sleep patchAs the leading online seller, Amazon certainly can be a target for fake reviews. A friend who was looking for remedies to help him sleep better, scoured Amazon looking for possible solutions. About six months ago, he came upon this product called “Sleep Patch” which was highly rated there.

He was suspicious because the product at the time had 16 reviews on Amazon and they all just happened to be five-star. What are the odds of everyone loving this product? First red flag. And all the reviews were posted on the same day – December 18, 2024 – a mere four weeks after the product was first offered there. Second red flag.

We decided to take a little closer look at this product listing and came up with some interesting additional findings. Watch out for these additional red flags.

*MOUSE PRINT:

  • The brand is zeBrush, but there doesn’t seem to be a website for this company.

  • None of the reviewers apparently bought the product on Amazon because none of them are “verified purchasers.”

    verified shoppers

  • We cannot find this product for sale on any other website. So how did those 16 people write reviews of the product? If they got a free sample, they would have had to disclose that at the beginning of their review under FTC rules.

  • In looking at the other reviews written by these 16 people, eight of them – 50% – also reviewed this barn door. Did all these people just coincidentally buy the same barn door? Come on.

  • Needless to say, there is something very fishy going on here. Amazon says, however, that they have various systems in place to help ensure that posted reviews are legitimate including using artificial intelligence. Perhaps they need to use real intelligence.

    We all need to spend a little more time scrutinizing online reviews and not simply accept the posted opinions and ratings at face value.

    NOTE: Due to a technical glitch, some of you were unable to post a comment last week. That function has been restored, so feel free to try again. Sorry for the inconvenience.

    Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

    First They Shrunk It, Now Turkey Hill Skimped on It

    Two years ago, we reported that Turkey Hill practiced a bit of shrinkflation on their standard 48-ounce cartons of ice cream by reducing them to 46 ounces.

    Now our reader Michael C. says they are pulling another fast one. Can you spot the change?

    *MOUSE PRINT:

    Turkey Hill ice cream changes

    Turkey Hill cleverly deleted the words “ice cream” from the red band on the face of the container and substituted the word “quality.” This allowed the company to subtly turn many of their premium ice cream flavors into frozen dairy desserts — a less rich and cheaper to make product. The words “frozen dairy dessert” were added in minute type on the bottom left.

    Under federal law, to be called “ice cream,” the product must contain at least 10% milk fat. Based on the nutrition labels of the old and new product, cream, which used to be the second ingredient in their real ice cream, moved near the end in their new version.

    *MOUSE PRINT:

    Nutrition Fact labels

    We asked the company a number of questions including why they made this change and did so so inconspicuously. They did not reply to multiple inquiries.

    Perhaps the company needs to rename this flavor:

    Not Much Cream

    Your comments are welcome. (Bug preventing comments being able to be posted is fixed.)

    Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

    Does CVS Have a New “Scan Right Guarantee?”

    MrConsumer was shocked to see a counter sign at each register at his local CVS in Massachusetts a few weeks ago that proclaimed:

    cvs scan right guarantee

    Under the CVS Scan Right Guarantee, if an item scans higher than the shelf price sign or price in their ad, you get the item free up to $4 or you get $4 off if the item was more expensive.

    I asked the both the cashier and the manager about it, and they acted like this was the first time they were seeing it.

    Checking with the PR folks at CVS, they discovered that the signs were only meant to be posted in California and somehow they had erroneously shown up in Massachusetts. Good thing, in a certain sense, because our price accuracy guarantee (which MrConsumer authored almost 40 years ago) calls for getting up to a $10 grocery item free (or $10 off a higher-priced item) if it scans wrong. Some states like Michigan have their own bounty law for scanning errors. And some other chains have a similar guarantee.

    But what’s this California only CVS price guarantee? There is no reference to it all on the CVS website. In 2011, CVS agreed to settle a case brought by the Los Angeles, Riverside, and Ventura county District Attorney’s offices for almost two million dollars. The company also had to establish a price guarantee. Then in 2015 and again in 2018, the same California DAs settled with CVS for another $2.4-million for scanner errors in each of those years.

    This all goes to show that we as shoppers need to be vigilant at the checkout to ensure we are charged the price that was represented to us at the shelf.

    ======================================
    UPDATE: San Diego Digital Coupon Ordinance
    ======================================

    Back in April, San Diego passed a city ordinance requiring supermarkets to provide printed versions of digital coupons in-store for the many people who either don’t have or can’t use the internet or smartphones. Then, a few weeks ago, after lobbying by supermarkets, they were about to amend the ordinance in such a way as to make it completely meaningless because it would not apply to any digital coupons offered via the store’s loyalty card program. Councilors did not understand that all digital coupons only work through such programs.

    The day before the vote was to take place, MrConsumer wrote to each city councilor explaining that they were about to make a huge mistake. To his surprise, they listened and deleted the exclusion that swallowed up the rule. And they made compliance easier for stores by allowing them to choose one of several methods by which they could offer equivalent in-store savings to those shoppers who don’t use digital coupons. Whewwww!

    The San Diego ordinance gets a second reading soon and is slated to go into effect in October.