Kennyz wrote:As a potential Yelp reader, I am thankful to be aware of such practices, and that awareness allows me to take Yelp reviews with a healthy grain of salt.

Good points,

and I think you summed up Yelp best with the above statement.

jimswside wrote:

Kennyz wrote:As a potential Yelp reader, I am thankful to be aware of such practices, and that awareness allows me to take Yelp reviews with a healthy grain of salt.

Good points,

and I think you summed up Yelp best with the above statement.

Agreed, because I think the main problem with Yelp seems to be that until they were called out on it, they weren't very forthcoming with the disclosures.

=R=

Pie Lady wrote:I'm not surprised either. I always noticed that the posts were never in chronological order for some reason, and now I have the reason.

No you don't. Yelp is very clear about how the order of reviews is determined. First of all, they come right out and say that if you are a Yelp sponsor, you get to choose one review that is your favorite, and have that review appear at the top of the list. So yes, the sales people say that if you buy advertising, we can move a positive ad to the top of the list. It can be from years ago, and is marked clear-as-day as the restaurant's favorite review. How the Tribune neglected to include this very germain data point is beyond me. The order after that is determined partially by recency, and partially by a vote among users. Yelp users get to select how useul they think a given review is: those deemed more useful than others are moved toward the top of the list.

Look, I don't find Yelp all that exciting, but the treatment it's getting here is unfair, based on conjecture, and full of inaccurate information.

Santander wrote:Some of these same folks are scared of posting on LTH, fearing our "intensity," as one of them put it.

People afraid to defend their opinions should stick to yelp and metromix

As the manager of a business I have been approached by the Yelp staff and offered positive review placement and was told that I could pick 1 review to be deleted from the site if we chose to advertise. We also always get phone calls from yelp salesmen a day after we've received a nice new review on the site. Who knows? Coincidence?

Anyways, it breaks my heart when we get poor reviews on the site, and it seriously irritates me when I am familiar with whatever situation prompted the review and the reviewer exaggerates or lies for the sake of a funnier/meaner review. Plus my staff gets really hurt too, do you have to call out the "heavy server", assume the Latino busser doesn't speak English or claim that you tipped your waiter $50 when you didn't?
Anyways- it felt really nice to vent- (since I can't on Yelp)

anniee8m wrote:As the manager of a business I have been approached by the Yelp staff and offered positive review placement and was told that I could pick 1 review to be deleted from the site if we chose to advertise. We also always get phone calls from yelp salesmen a day after we've received a nice new review on the site. Who knows? Coincidence?

Anyways, it breaks my heart when we get poor reviews on the site, and it seriously irritates me when I am familiar with whatever situation prompted the review and the reviewer exaggerates or lies for the sake of a funnier/meaner review. Plus my staff gets really hurt too, do you have to call out the "heavy server", assume the Latino busser doesn't speak English or claim that you tipped your waiter $50 when you didn't?
Anyways- it felt really nice to vent- (since I can't on Yelp)

Perhaps it feels nice, but you are using LTHForum to do exactly the thing you are venting against on Yelp.

anniee8m wrote:We also always get phone calls from yelp salesmen a day after we've received a nice new review on the site. Who knows? Coincidence?

Does the http://www.DoNotCall.gov list not apply to businesses, or can a business get listed to not receive telemarketing solicitations just like homes can? I don't see anything in the law that says that businesses can't register too.

If a business did register, then any company like yelp wouldn't be allowed to make unsolicited advertising calls. I guess I would suggest that a business owner regularly getting pressured for these unsoliced ads sign up, then turn the matter over the the FTC for prosecution.

anniee8m wrote:and was told that I could pick 1 review to be deleted from the site if we chose to advertise.

If the site doesn't disclose this practice to users, then I think that's a problem (unless you just consider Yelp to be a big ad site, in which case anything goes I guess).

Kennyz wrote:No you don't. Yelp is very clear about how the order of reviews is determined. First of all, they come right out and say that if you are a Yelp sponsor, you get to choose one review that is your favorite, and have that review appear at the top of the list. So yes, the sales people say that if you buy advertising, we can move a positive ad to the top of the list. It can be from years ago, and is marked clear-as-day as the restaurant's favorite review. How the Tribune neglected to include this very germain data point is beyond me. The order after that is determined partially by recency, and partially by a vote among users. Yelp users get to select how useul they think a given review is: those deemed more useful than others are moved toward the top of the list.

Look, I don't find Yelp all that exciting, but the treatment it's getting here is unfair, based on conjecture, and full of inaccurate information.

But that's not what people are objecting to. People are objecting to these:

[*]That many restaurant owners have noticed a highly suspicious trend where acceptance of sponsor status results in a sudden rush of good reviews, and refusal of sponsor status is immediately followed by the deletion of multiple positive reviews.
[*]The allegation that at least some Yelp salespeople have straight out claimed that they will move nevative reviews for a fee, and (according to the East Bay Express piece, at least) documented instances where refusal of sponsorship status was immediately followed by a negative review from Yelp staffers.
[*]The allegation that at least some Yelp salespeople have claimed they were shuffling review orders, and were telling owners they could continue doing so for a fee.
[*]That Yelp staffers will write negative reviews, and then ask for money to remove or relocate them.

Yes, these are allegations. The point is that the number of people who smell something fishy is growing. And it may very well turn out to be paranoia. But even some of the items that are documented are shady. I'm going to write a bad review and then ask you to pay me to take it down? How can you defend that practice?

jesteinf wrote:

anniee8m wrote:and was told that I could pick 1 review to be deleted from the site if we chose to advertise.

If the site doesn't disclose this practice to users, then I think that's a problem (unless you just consider Yelp to be a big ad site, in which case anything goes I guess).

The site explicitly says that this is NEVER done. If the offer was really made to anniee8m, it was done by a person violating company policy, and I suspect that person would be fired if management found out. I don't doubt the possibility that it happened, as it is widely known that sales people in any industry who are compensated on results are prone to misleading potential customers in order to get the sale. Plus, this is Illinois.

Kennyz wrote:

jesteinf wrote:

anniee8m wrote:and was told that I could pick 1 review to be deleted from the site if we chose to advertise.

If the site doesn't disclose this practice to users, then I think that's a problem (unless you just consider Yelp to be a big ad site, in which case anything goes I guess).

The site explicitly says that this is NEVER done. If the offer was really made to anniee8m, it was done by a person violating company policy, and I suspect that person would be fired if management found out. I don't doubt the possibility that it happened, as it is widely known that sales people in any industry who are compensated on results are prone to misleading potential customers in order to get the sale. Plus, this is Illinois.

If one sales rep in illinois violates company policy, it's a bad egg... if a dozen sales reps in several markets violate company policy..... it's a dozen bad eggs? I have trouble believing at this point that management isn't turning a blind eye, at the very least.

Annie, just out of curiosity, is it possible to opt out of Yelp completely?

I've always wondered how commercial/for-profit sites like that work...can they maintain basic info & reviews about a business, against the business owner's wishes?

I saw that GEB mentioned that he had had his "account removed", but I see now that Graham Elliot's info & reviews are all still present & accounted for (including the Einsteins that turn me off to the site: "Oysters: Disgusting. After only a couple attempts at eating raw oysters, I've realized I simply can't do it without a bunch of horseradish and cocktail sauce, so this really isn't the fault of the restaurant....Graham topped all 4 (srsly? $11 for 4 oysters?) with a different topping for each, so I only tried 2, but both should have been featured in the magazine Nasty Nast Traveler."). Not sure if that means GEB's account was closed but that his restaurant's review remained on the site, or if he indulged in a bit of hyperbole for the Tribune article.

Finally, do you find that being on Yelp affects your business much, negatively or positively? Have you ever encountered any pompous idiots trying to use impending negative Yelp (or any other site) reviews to try to get freebies or special treatment?

Sorry to bombard you with questions...I'm not fully familiar with how a lot of this stuff works, as I stare at a computer all day for a living. One thing is for sure, after the staggering amount of time I've spent on LTHForum today, it's a damn good thing my manager can't Yelp about my performance

Kennyz wrote:

Pie Lady wrote:I'm not surprised either. I always noticed that the posts were never in chronological order for some reason, and now I have the reason.

No you don't. Yelp is very clear about how the order of reviews is determined. First of all, they come right out and say that if you are a Yelp sponsor, you get to choose one review that is your favorite, and have that review appear at the top of the list. So yes, the sales people say that if you buy advertising, we can move a positive ad to the top of the list. It can be from years ago, and is marked clear-as-day as the restaurant's favorite review. How the Tribune neglected to include this very germain data point is beyond me. The order after that is determined partially by recency, and partially by a vote among users. Yelp users get to select how useul they think a given review is: those deemed more useful than others are moved toward the top of the list.

Look, I don't find Yelp all that exciting, but the treatment it's getting here is unfair, based on conjecture, and full of inaccurate information.

Well put, Kennyz. I'll also add that the order of reviews on Amazon.com are also based on some combination of usefulness and date. In both cases, Yelp and Amazon, you can sort reviews based on date and other criteria. This really shouldn't be an issue.

The Tribune article could have also mentioned that Metromix has had its fair share of controversy also, for many of the same reasons.

Khaopaat wrote:unless they've changed it recently, their "About Us" page makes it sound like they define themselves as a repository of online advertisements that happens to have a ton of user reviews (http://www.yelp.com/about

This should not be overlooked. Both Yelp and the majority of its posters (at least the ones I know) understand what the site is all about. As Ebert would say, "how it goes about being about it" is the more important aspect, and I think there is enough transparency there for those who care to investigate.

Even though the reviews get moved up and down based on commercially-linked "relevance" (which is honestly the way the int4rweb5 work today), I want to again underline two high-value aspects of the site:

1. places for which only one or two reviews exist which would be otherwise off the radar

2. profile histories of certain posters you trust. The same way posters build up a reputation and posting track record here, there are some stellar and very reliable profiles on Yelp. Within these profiles, things don't seem to be manipulated by commercial forces. I've had great tips from Yelping friends.

Santander wrote:

Khaopaat wrote:unless they've changed it recently, their "About Us" page makes it sound like they define themselves as a repository of online advertisements that happens to have a ton of user reviews (http://www.yelp.com/about

This should not be overlooked. Both Yelp and the majority of its posters (at least the ones I know) understand what the site is all about. As Ebert would say, "how it goes about being about it" is the more important aspect, and I think there is enough transparency there for those who care to investigate.

Even though the reviews get moved up and down based on commercially-linked "relevance" (which is honestly the way the int4rweb5 work today), I want to again underline two high-value aspects of the site:

1. places for which only one or two reviews exist which would be otherwise off the radar

2. profile histories of certain posters you trust. The same way posters build up a reputation and posting track record here, there are some stellar and very reliable profiles on Yelp. Within these profiles, things don't seem to be manipulated by commercial forces. I've had great tips from Yelping friends.

Agreed. Not just enough transparency, but significantly more transparency than almost every other similarly focused website. I have a ton of respect for how far out of its way Yelp goes to ensure this. In my mind, it has for quite some time served as the model of how ethics in web business should be implemented.

The real issue to consumers is: can I trust reviews on Yelp? If so, you don't need answers to the questions posed here. You can test the usefulness of the site the way you'd judge any critic, by whether you tend to agree or disagree with the reviews. You can test them either by looking up places with which you are already familiar, or by following their advice a few times - basically, the short version of how I wound up on LTH.

If the allegations are true, it stinks for the businesses who are unwilling participants - but for consumers - caveat emptor.

Darren72 wrote:Well put, Kennyz. I'll also add that the order of reviews on Amazon.com are also based on some combination of usefulness and date. In both cases, Yelp and Amazon, you can sort reviews based on date and other criteria. This really shouldn't be an issue.

Except I don't recall Amazon ever offering authors/publishers/manufacturers the ability to have negative reviews removed from the site.

And a large part of the power of Yelp comes from the fact that it has extraordinary search engine ranking for most restaurants. It's the first non-official (non-cafeselmarie.com) google result for Cafe Selmarie, Graham Elliot, Duchamp (searched Duchamp chicago), mado, Blackbird (searched blackbird chicago), West Town Tavern, etc etc etc.

Tons of casual Yelp users get there once a month from a google result page, look at the star rating and the first few reviews and decide whether it's worthy right there. That's an incredible powerful position for Yelp to be in, which is why they can get $300/month from so many restaurants in response to their pitch.

Don't underestimate the google juice.

Because of the quality of the reviews, and what the company does to promote paid advertisers, I use yelp regularly for restaurant hours and not a damned thing else.

gleam wrote:

Darren72 wrote:Well put, Kennyz. I'll also add that the order of reviews on Amazon.com are also based on some combination of usefulness and date. In both cases, Yelp and Amazon, you can sort reviews based on date and other criteria. This really shouldn't be an issue.

Except I don't recall Amazon ever offering authors/publishers/manufacturers the ability to have negative reviews removed from the site.

And you recall this happening with Yelp? Or do you simply recall reading irresponsibly reported newspaper articles and one post about this from a person in this thread? Again, this is 100% against Yelp policy.

I wish there was an "LTHForum" for all kinds of things. Some sites exist for these things, but few have a local focus and much fewer provide as much useful information and discussion as (the real) LTHForum. Yelp, however imperfectly, fills this void. I don't know where to turn for reviews of, say, stereo repair options near my area. I searched for reviews of local places on Yelp and ruled out a few places that had consistently bad reviews.

At some point in the past there was a discussion about whether there should be a board on LTHForum for non-food discussion. I understand why we don't have one. But a real benefit of having one is the ability to rely on a large group for leads on non-food information (like where get a stereo repaired).

Kennyz wrote:

gleam wrote:

Darren72 wrote:Well put, Kennyz. I'll also add that the order of reviews on Amazon.com are also based on some combination of usefulness and date. In both cases, Yelp and Amazon, you can sort reviews based on date and other criteria. This really shouldn't be an issue.

Except I don't recall Amazon ever offering authors/publishers/manufacturers the ability to have negative reviews removed from the site.

And you recall this happening with Yelp? Or do you simply recall reading irresponsibly reported newspaper articles and one post about this from a person in this thread? Again, this is 100% against Yelp policy.

You're right, I should trust a PR blitz from the company which has absolutely nothing to gain from lying about what its sales staff does. Much more reliable than some bigshot restaurateurs who will surely benefit greatly from all the publicity. Give me a break.

Let's give Yelp the benefit of the doubt, for a moment. What's the motivation for the restaurants in throwing around groundless accusations like these? What do they stand to gain from it?

Mhays wrote:The real issue to consumers is: can I trust reviews on Yelp? If so, you don't need answers to the questions posed here. You can test the usefulness of the site the way you'd judge any critic, by whether you tend to agree or disagree with the reviews. You can test them either by looking up places with which you are already familiar, or by following their advice a few times - basically, the short version of how I wound up on LTH.

I'm not sure what you mean. There are plenty of reviews on LTHForum that I disagree with. I'm sure you disagree with many also. Does that mean we don't trust the site? No. It means we might not want to trust an individual reviewer.

gleam wrote:

Darren72 wrote:Well put, Kennyz. I'll also add that the order of reviews on Amazon.com are also based on some combination of usefulness and date. In both cases, Yelp and Amazon, you can sort reviews based on date and other criteria. This really shouldn't be an issue.

Except I don't recall Amazon ever offering authors/publishers/manufacturers the ability to have negative reviews removed from the site.

You are correct that Amazon has, in my mind, a very good reputation for running the review section of its site. My comparison of Yelp to Amazon was simply to point out that expecting reviews to come in chronological order, and assuming the worst when they are not in that order, is a misunderstanding of common practice.

Dmnkly wrote:People are objecting to these:

[*]That many restaurant owners have noticed a highly suspicious trend where acceptance of sponsor status results in a sudden rush of good reviews, and refusal of sponsor status is immediately followed by the deletion of multiple positive reviews.

The classic strawman argument rears its head. Many people? Where are these "many people"? I see a handful of people who were likely contacted by a reporter trying to find a story. I am sure I could find way more basketball teams that think the NCAA tournament selection processed is fixed, or scientists who claim that the world is flat, but that doesn't mean there's a story behind those notions.

gleam wrote:Let's give Yelp the benefit of the doubt, for a moment. What's the motivation for the restaurants in throwing around groundless accusations like these? What do they stand to gain from it?

I really thought this was obvious. Any restaurant with negative reviews has significant motivation to attack the credibility of those reviews.

Kennyz wrote:

gleam wrote:Let's give Yelp the benefit of the doubt, for a moment. What's the motivation for the restaurants in throwing around groundless accusations like these? What do they stand to gain from it?

I really thought this was obvious. Any restaurant with negative reviews has significant motivation to attack the credibility of those reviews.

But annie and the others aren't generally attacking the credibility of those reviews, they're attacking the credibility of Yelp itself, saying that Yelp will make bad reviews disappear or fall off the first page in return for advertising. Annie did say some things about individual reviews (which you can find if you look at the yelp page for her restaurant), but that's not what we've been discussing here. We've been mostly discussing Yelp offering to promote good reviews and remove/lower bad reviews, outside of the 1 sponsored review they officially offer.

And I'll say this: I've heard of this practice from several other people who aren't mentioned in any of these yelp articles and who have no reason to lie to me, and I've heard some similar stories from former (but not bitter) yelp employees. It's not just a couple articles and what Annie says.

Darren72 wrote:

Mhays wrote:The real issue to consumers is: can I trust reviews on Yelp? If so, you don't need answers to the questions posed here. You can test the usefulness of the site the way you'd judge any critic, by whether you tend to agree or disagree with the reviews. You can test them either by looking up places with which you are already familiar, or by following their advice a few times - basically, the short version of how I wound up on LTH.

I'm not sure what you mean. There are plenty of reviews on LTHForum that I disagree with. I'm sure you disagree with many also. Does that mean we don't trust the site? No. It means we might not want to trust an individual reviewer.

I don't think we're really disagreeing. For instance, I assume there are plenty of reviews here that you do agree with, and beyond that, you can probably predict which reviews you're going to disagree with. In short, whether or not you agree with a specific review or reviewer, you still trust the information here to figure out where you want to eat.

If I used Yelp, I'd want the same standard of information: how do I get a good meal? If Yelp manipulates its ratings and reviews in favor of advertisers, its reviews will then become inaccurate and unpredictable, and I'd be less likely to get a good meal out of it. If I can't accurately factor in the effect of advertising, I might as well use the yellow pages ads to choose where I eat.

I'm just one person, but it is a FACT that advertisers had negative reviews I wrote of several places deleted. In the case of one business, about a dozen one star reviews vanished one night, while clearly bogus five star reviews written by employees or shills were left on the site. One of the other deleted reviews was the single worst (saddest story) business nightmare I've ever read anywhere, but not of a restaurant. I've got to find where I saved it from google's archives.

I've written truthful negative and positive merchant reviews on Amazon, AngiesList, and other sites like this, and never had any of them deleted for any reason. Only on yelp. And I personally know may others that encountered the same thing, again only on yelp. I've exchanged first hand emails with business owners across the country who all tell the same story of extortion from yelp. This isn't an isolated incident, it's a way of doing business that is dishonest to the core.

"yelp credibility" is an oxymoron like jumbo shrimp or military intelligence.

Khaopaat wrote:Annie, just out of curiosity, is it possible to opt out of Yelp completely?

I've always wondered how commercial/for-profit sites like that work...can they maintain basic info & reviews about a business, against the business owner's wishes?

I saw that GEB mentioned that he had had his "account removed", ...

Finally, do you find that being on Yelp affects your business much, negatively or positively? Have you ever encountered any pompous idiots trying to use impending negative Yelp (or any other site) reviews to try to get freebies or special treatment?

Sorry to bombard you with questions...I'm not fully familiar with how a lot of this stuff works, as I stare at a computer all day for a living. One thing is for sure, after the staggering amount of time I've spent on LTHForum today, it's a damn good thing my manager can't Yelp about my performance

I don't think a business can ask to be removed, and even though the establishment I work at does get poor reviews from time to time we are fortunate that the good reviews far outweigh the bad. So, even though I have experienced shady conversations over the phone with yelp advertising folks and some downright untruthfulness from a handful of reviewers I am glad that we are reviewed on Yelp. In the interest of being fair I got a cold call from Citysearch the other day from a women selling advertising who basically implied I should fake a good review because the first one customers see now is a bad one.

I believe GEB probably closed his yelp account for business owners. You are able to respond privately by email to anyone who has reviewed your business through that account. Yes you can respond, but I feel it could be a double-edged sword, if you actually "call someone out" on their review/have a major disagreement with that person you are just opening yourself up to another poor review. On the few occasions I have used the business account it has been as an attempt to smooth over something that went majorly wrong that I feel the restaurant truly was responsible for. Or to thank someone who wrote a really great review that made our staff's day.

Alot of our customers are yelpers however I've never encountered anyone "proclaiming" they are going to review us. We just recognize the circumstance they describe in the review, the profile pic of a repeat customer, etc. We are a fairly small business and can generally remember who ordered what 3 days later when they post about, it etc.

I use yelp myself and have to say I found the greatest auto glass repair place on Saturday (after my vehicle was broken into and it was raining buckets!) Less than 2 hours later a new window and a dry car thanks to the resourcefulness of many of yelp's reviewers and the broad scope of reviewed establishments on the site.

I think all of us in the biz have mixed feelings about Yelp, but overall I'm glad its out there.

Kennyz wrote:

Dmnkly wrote:People are objecting to these:

[*]That many restaurant owners have noticed a highly suspicious trend where acceptance of sponsor status results in a sudden rush of good reviews, and refusal of sponsor status is immediately followed by the deletion of multiple positive reviews.

The classic strawman argument rears its head. Many people? Where are these "many people"? I see a handful of people who were likely contacted by a reporter trying to find a story. I am sure I could find way more basketball teams that think the NCAA tournament selection processed is fixed, or scientists who claim that the world is flat, but that doesn't mean there's a story behind those notions.

So the only thing that makes the story responsible is if enough people have this experience, but to report on that experience is irresponsible? How many people and how many cities are necessary before these stories cross from irresponsible to illuminating? And is the very purpose of the press not to bring these sorts of things to light? We all acknowledge it may or may not be true. Most of us seem to agree that there are enough reports -- both written and anecdotally -- that it makes you wonder. Is a double-blind study with thousands of respondants the only thing that will make this an acceptable topic of discussion? Or are we adult enough to read with a critical eye and see this simply as what it is and all it purports to be -- early reports of what may or may not be a problem?

Dmnkly wrote:How many people and how many cities are necessary before these stories cross from irresponsible to illuminating... Is a double-blind study with thousands of respondants the only thing that will make this an acceptable topic of discussion?

1,989.47 people across 14.2 cities... only if the study is placebo-controlled.