Product Review - Worst Consistent Reviews

Related Stores

Product Review

• 

  Hybroid on 07/03/2024 - 18:24

  +10

  Most courier companies could easily trump that.

  7,776 negative, 95% negative: https://www.productreview.com.au/listings/fastway

  5,967 negative, 95% negative: https://www.productreview.com.au/listings/aramex-courier

  5,378 negative, 96% negative: https://www.productreview.com.au/listings/toll-priority

  10,345 negative, 88% negative: https://www.productreview.com.au/listings/couriers-please

  11,808 negative, 82%: https://www.productreview.com.au/listings/australia-post

  Even electronic companies.

  870 negative - 92%: https://www.productreview.com.au/listings/couriers-please

  2,194 negative - 93%: https://www.productreview.com.au/listings/samsung

  People tend to complain when things go wrong, more than they applaud when they go right.

  Sorry OP if you thought you were onto something big…

  • 

    Sawtell on 07/03/2024 - 18:39

    Yeah wow. Online shoppers like to vent.

  • 

    scotty on 08/03/2024 - 11:59

    People tend to complain when things go wrong, more than they applaud when they go right.

    It does make you wonder how some stores or products get thousands of positive reviews that all sound very similar.

• 

  7ekn00 on 07/03/2024 - 18:34

  +1

  I was surprised by this (but not really after owning a Daikin and experiencing their issues):
  https://www.productreview.com.au/listings/daikin

  • 

    JimmyF on 07/03/2024 - 18:44

    +3

    I was surprised by this (but not really after owning a Daikin and experiencing their issues):

    I'm not, Daikin is a overpriced product riding on how great they used to be decades ago. They have no better warranty than everyone else aka 5 years. They also had lots of 'board' issues that didn't have a coating on them to stop bugs crawling over them and frying the board, which you guessed it. Isn't covered under warranty. So that was handy as crap in QLD!

    If companies like MHIAA can coat their boards, then a high end premium brand like Daikin can as well!

• 

  JimmyF on 07/03/2024 - 18:41

  +1

  Or is this just because MSP don't pay product review to edit their reviews?

  They don't need to pay, they are the school provider of choice for various reasons. Mostly it is streamlined. Also people generally go out of their way to give a bad review. I personally have used MSP many times and never had an issue with them.

  Most of the reviews are from what appears to be special snowflake parents like this one

  My child came home with her photos that had snot dripping from her nose so I went and got the photo retaken in a time that only suited them that took me 35mins to get there to have the photo

  LOL its not MSP place to clean up your kids snot before taking the photo. But wait, MSP allowed a retake to make them happy, and they complained about having to drive 35mins to them to have the photo taken again! LOL Again, its not MSP fault your kid had snot.

• 

  payless69 on 07/03/2024 - 18:51

  +1

  If you had searched Productreview for Ozbargains a couple of years ago it was like 1 star. Still the word toxic is everywhere just jv got his name removed

  • 

    andresampras on 07/03/2024 - 20:23

    lol so much use of 'toxic' in there

• 

  onetwothreefour on 07/03/2024 - 19:25

  +2

  https://www.productreview.com.au/listings/ozbargain

  • 

    ChillBro on 08/03/2024 - 12:04

    lol that second review ‘I was abused for asking a question’. Look what you’ve done, jv

• 

  Dollar General on 07/03/2024 - 19:55

  -1

  Would have to be ScoMo.

• 

  GordonD on 07/03/2024 - 20:51

  Product review sites are a form of opt-in poll.

  Genuine professional polls ask a selected representative sample of the relevant population a question. And because they are asking a representative sample, if the sample is big enough, you get a result which tells you what the whole population thinks.

  But letters to the editor at newspapers, and communications with politicians, and protests in the streets, and product reviews and all the other sorts of opt-in polls just put the question out, and the people who are motivated by a grievance are the only ones who take the trouble to take any action. The people who are happy with whatever has or is going to happy don't take the trouble to.

  So opt-in polls in all the various forms massively over-represent those who are unhappy. They tell you if there are people are unhappy about something, but they don't tell you what the typical person's experience/satisfaction is.

  What really pisses me off is when some body does an opt-in poll, they extrapolate the result they get from the whingers to the whole population, and the media publish that result and conclusion as if its true, because it supports their prejudices and bias on the subject, not the fake facts and false news it actually is. And doubly so when its taxpayers money that did the survey.

  For example remember after the Higgins/Lehrmann alleged rape in federal parliament house. The Human Rights Commission did a survey of those who worked there and came back and said 30% of them had been sexually assaulted or harassed, and 38% of them had been bullied. It was declared a toxic workplace. The government even passed new workplace laws as a result. But only about 9% of the staff had chosen to respond to the HRC survey. And the ones who would have been motivated to would have been those with a grievance, and very few of those without a grievance would have bothered to, So had 30% of them been assaulted and harassed, or 2.7%? And even those who said they had been didn't have to provide any information, or have had to have complained. It turned out that there had only been 2 complaints in the previous 2 years amongst the 4,000 staff. Yet it was reported by the whole media - including the ABC - as a proven national scandal. But, hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good politically correct opt-in poll result.

  Opt-in polls in their various forms produce complete crap results.

  You run opt-in polls when you want to know what the problems people are having are, but they don't tell you how many people are having them. If you are talking like a very big number of people, like the recipients of parcels, you can get a lot of people unhappy, despite your customers being virtually unanimously happy with the service they got. You can get marches on the streets demanding this or that, like 100s of thousands wanting the government to say sorry to Aboriginals, and the politicians doing it as a result, when the properly done surveys say the majority of people were actually opposed to that.

  • 

    FezMonkey on 08/03/2024 - 08:20

    +1

    You have a point about how the media reports on any sort of research (always terrible) but be careful not to fall into the exact same fallacy.

    So had 30% of them been assaulted and harassed, or 2.7%?

    Here it seems you are implying that if the survey had 100% participation that nobody else would report assault or harassment.
    If you're saying it can't be extrapolated to 30% of 100% then it also can't be extrapolated to 2.7% of 100%. Maybe that's what you meant but it wasn't clear in your post.

    So yes they should say "The survey had a 9% response rate and 30% of the respondents reported harassment"

    • 

      GordonD on 08/03/2024 - 09:40

      So yes they should say "The survey had a 9% response rate and 30% of the respondents reported harassment"

      No, that's what the at least half-reputable ones do. But since most people reading that sentence don't understand polling enough to understand it means that the truth is somewhere between 30% and 2.7%. It just amounts to lying, or letting other people lie, by using weasel words. An honest thing for them to say would be "this was not a poll of a representative sample, but an opt-in poll. Opt-in polls exaggerate the number of people with grievances."

      • 

        FezMonkey on 08/03/2024 - 14:57

        Yep. Could even be more than 30% too.

        I once read somewhere - a bit of information is worse than no information.

• 

  shutuptakemymoney101 on 08/03/2024 - 22:36

  Came here to say 'Aramex' or as they were used to be known 'Fastway' before they changed their name and tried to run away from their poor reputation. lol

  What an incompetent shower of bastards they are !!!