Scope (?):  All Topics
Hot or Not?

Is a limited value deal equal to a BAD DEAL?

submitted on July 16, 2009 by llocomotive in "Buxr Website / Contests"
I posted a limited value deal recently and a few members marked it down as a bad deal. I don't understand. It may work for someone and not for you.

I am also aware that there is a set of guidelines which Yan/ Mike ( admins) have written down to help users pick out good deals. But those are guidelines. Not the LAW. If it is the LAW then the deal should have been rejected as being inadequate. If not why mark it down as negative and keep referring it as a bad deal. I did notice a commenting on the value of it as being LOW which is totally acceptable. Anyways, will leave it open for discussion ( that is if someone wants to discuss)

As I see it some deals may be limited to a few states or cities but they might be big cities where internet traffic is heavy and the users are a lot.

A deal valid for NYC, San Francisco, LA ,San Diego,San Jose, Washington DC, Miami, Boston, Chicago (6 states) will probably generate more interest/traffic than maybe most other deals (which agree to the 10 state "guideline")

The deal in reference is this one

  • 32068
    1 1
    12 6 1
    Posted by mooncow728 on July 16, 2009
    [reply] 1 0
    Well see the thing is a deal vote is merely an opinion of another buxr user. So while you are going to believe a deal is a good, another member may have a different view. It's a harsh world out but it can also be very nice too. I think you of all people should know that as you have won quite a few times. If it wasn't for people voting for your deal then you wouldn't win. Also as you said in another thread on here, the most popular deal is not always the winner.
  • 32153
    Posted by llocomotive on July 17, 2009 [reply] 0 0 products when advertised as in-store are available only in 9 states. Should they be marked bad too?

    Arizona, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Nevada, Oregon, & Washington , CA and TX
  • 32195
    Posted by YanBz on July 17, 2009 [reply] 0 0
    Mike just made a comment to the deal in question (Arby's) which really should have been made here (in the discussions) since it applies to the deal submission and contests in general. Here is the comment:

    I want to try to clarify things a little bit. What we are shooting for here at Buxr is to have each deal judged on a case-by-case basis by the community. We don't want to uniformly reject deals because they do not meet a state minimum. If you think a deal is hot, then you should feel free to submit it. If you think the deal is of value to the community and you list all the restriction and limitations up front, there is no reason why it shouldn't be submitted. If you are not sure, but still want to share we have the forums.

    I hope this helps.
  • 32198
    Posted by YanBz on July 17, 2009
    [reply] 1 0
    I would like to add that in my opinion a deal deserves a negative vote if it makes you lose money or time. You can lose money if you buy something at a higher price than you could have paid elsewhere. You can lose time if you follow the deal instructions precisely and still didn't get the advertised deal. The latter can apply if deal restrictions are not clearly stated or the information is misleading.

    I understand there can be discussions on what it means to 'clearly state restrictions' since there could be literally pages of them. Just use your sound judgment. E.g. if a coupon excludes technology then it should mention this in the instructions but you don't have to list every excluded category. If a deal doesn't work in all states then the title should mention the limitation and (preferably) the instructions should list the states.

    This of course is just my personal take and each of you should decide for yourself what you consider a strong enough reasoning to vote down a deal.
    • llocomotive
      Posted by llocomotive on July 17, 2009 [reply] 0 0
      About the portion where the deal does not list the states properly or adequately or for that matter any other missing info ( to make the deal easier to use) I wish people would treat it like any other deal and mark is as "inaccurate" and get it fixed rather than jumping on it and blasting it with NEG bombs
  • 32211
    Posted by MikeG on July 17, 2009 [reply] 0 0
    To echo Yan's comments, I think the most flexible solution is to properly state exclusions/restrictions.

    As Overaged said (I'm paraphrasing here), "if a deal is available in 100 locations but only one state, is that OK?"

    And my answer to that is if they are giving away a free Washer and Dryer to every customer, I think it is OK with me and probably everyone else. It's "news worthy." If it's a $1 off coupon to every customers, perhaps it's best left for the forums. I think most of our users know a hot deal when they see it and how much value there is to it.

Leave a Comment (members Sign in to comment)


E-Mail (will not be published)

2 x 3 = ?


'Mr Green''Neutral''Twisted''Arrow''Eek''Smile''Confused''Cool''Evil''Big Grin''Idea''Red Face'



Browse by tags