Matthew Brealey wrote:
> ed.gatzke@... wrote:
>
>>I have now posted my review for a certain hotel three times, and
>>Expedia has
>>removed it or refused to post the review three times.
>
>
> You know all sites do this, right?
>
> I posted a review on Amazon of a game once. The game was not much good,
> and very short, and I said something to the effect of 'this game is not
> very long, you'd be better off buying something else'. The thing is,
> with no other reviews of the game, my review would be the only one, and
> would significantly harm their sales.
>
> So they didn't post it.
>
> Same thing, I bought a cheap optical mouse from a hardware site
> (ebuyer). Horrible, unergonomic. The product had loads of positive
> reviews. So I added a negative one. They didn't post it. I added it
> three times, and they never approved it.
>
> Nothing abusive, just a normal review.
>
> It's not all that surprising. There are probably 100 satisifed
> customers at a hotel for every dissatsified. But out of those 100, only
> 1 will post a review, but the dissatisfied ones are far more likely to
> complain. It's human nature, but it makes the hotel look bad. You get
> wonderful hotels showing up with bad ratings overall. It's not really
> fair on the hotel that they are going to get the bad reviews far more
> than the good.
>
> As far as I can tell, your only complaint was that the hotel was closed
> in the middle of the night. This doesn't make the hotel bad, just
> small. Most people wouldn't find this a problem. Of course people need
> to know that the hotel's not going to be open at 1am in the morning, I
> guess expedia should say. But they really aren't obliged to post your
> review.
>
They aren't obliged but it helps if the public gets the information that
their site is useless. One of the things I like about TripAdvisor
(among its faults) is that they include a number of negative reviews.
It does help their credibility. They may still be managing the data but
it does look better. |