StomperNet’s Magazine, TheNetEffect, Is Full Of Factual Errors!
I was just looking through my latest issue of TheNetEffect from Andy Jenkins and the guys at StomperNet, and was disgusted to find multiple errors in one of the articles. I fired off the below email to Andy…we’ll see what response I get:
Andy,
I’m reading the article Up For Grabs! in the latest edition of The Net
Effect. I am quite shocked by the low quality of the article. This
article is full of factual errors. Here are 3 I’ve found:
1: Article states that Squidoo pays publishers 10% of revenue from
their content. That is wrong! Squidoo.com says “Any time someone stops
by your lens and buys a product you recommended or clicks on a Google
ad, you get 50% of the royalties.”
2: Article states that EzineArticles.com only allows 4 resource boxes,
and does not allow custom resource boxes for each article. That is
just false. I have over 1,000 articles published on EzineArticles.com
and they all have a unique resource box.
3: Article states that Hubpages nofollows links if you have more than
two links to the same site in a hub, or if you have less than 3
published hubs. Again, this is simply false. Nofollows are added based
on the Hubscore of the author and the hub. I have hubs with 3-4 links
to the same site, and they are not nofollowed.
I must say that I find this completely unacceptable for a marketing
publication that claims to be written by experts that are actually
doing what they teach. Where did this article come from? The author is
apparently not even using these social sites much, let alone an expert
in using the social sites, or he would not have including such factual
errors in the article.
If an article in your magazine has such inexcusable errors, how can I
trust anything in the magazine? How do I know that the other articles
are not just as misleading? I have already canceled my subscription
to the Net Effect and the DVD of the Month.
I would appreciate hearing your feedback and thoughts on this issue.
~Adam
I’ll post the response here, if I get one…for now, though, my respect for StomperNet just went down.
~Adam
Posted in Internet Marketing
January 23rd, 2009 at 2:49 pm
In all honesty these guys seem to be good at copying widely used tactics from the pros, doing themselves without full knowledge of how it works since they don’t have personal experience, then re-packaging it as top-notch strategies that people should pay loads of money to learn.
In my opinion these people are expert internet sales gurus and NOT expert marketers. They know how to sell info product and make a lot of money but not how to get masses of Google traffic.
As soneone who gets close to 1 million page views a month (growing month on month) to my sites I find their tips mediocre and outdated.
January 23rd, 2009 at 7:39 pm
I did not even get to receive the issue of the Net Effect you mention because Stompernet never responded to my complaint email – which was based on their inability to record my credit card details correctly, thus losing me as a customer. I’m glad I didn’t keep my subscription.
January 23rd, 2009 at 8:55 pm
Wow! That is a pretty scathing review! If they are really that inaccurate they deserve to be called out for it.
They charge an OBSCENE amount. One would hope they would be a good source for accurate info.
The 800 pound gorilla of internet marketing has no clothes!
January 23rd, 2009 at 10:35 pm
Another example of how hype and marketing do not guarantee constant, consistent, or even true quality.
I am always curious about these programs to make the “secrets” available to the masses for a “fee” If they really were all that secret, why share?
Is it possible that there is more money to be made in sharing “secrets” than using them?
January 25th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Wow great, thanks for info guys… this is usefull
February 3rd, 2009 at 8:54 am
I was in Stompernet for about half a year right when it first began, and I thought at the time the info was great, although that could havae just been becuase I was an internet newbie and completely ignorant.
Anyway, I’m glad I’m no longer paying the lofty price for it if this is what it has come to.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:12 am
[...] Here is the status of my complaint with StomperNet for producing a product full of factual errors. [...]
June 10th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
Any news on StomperNet?
July 23rd, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Ok, any news on StomperNet? Seems you haven’t read my last comment, but I’m giving it a try
July 23rd, 2009 at 2:06 pm
C’mon, please, I’m interested too
July 23rd, 2009 at 2:09 pm
I did speak with their “PR damage control” guy on the phone. He said he’d get back with me, but never did. So don’t really have any updates.
I’m not like “StomperNet is evil” or anything, though. They’ve got some good stuff in their products, but they’ve got some bad stuff, too…and also alot of fluff.