Why we sigh when we see this kind of headline

 

This article was returned in a simple news search on 'Trustpilot'. So why did we sigh? You might reasonably ask. Surely this business has done incredibly well to gather so many great customer reviews and the accompanying impressive score (4.9). Add to this that the underlying reviews themselves are impressive. Job done - and done well - one might think.

But, wait just a minute, let's take a look at this business in search (the first place any potential customer will come across it, whether they have been referred or are simply searching for the first time):

And the business's sponsored result on Google ('ad' to you and me):

What do we see? Google reviews, that's what. Now they're also pretty good, in terms of both numbers and score. But how much better if the numbers were reversed? 50,000 Google reviews and a score of 4.9* there too?

*Product businesses - online retailers and the like - are cut far more slack by the average consumer than service businesses. Both statistics and experience show that whereas someone will happily purchase a shirt or a toaster that rates 4.5 out of 5, the same consumer will look for a score as close as is possible to the perfect 5.0 where services and the professions are concerned. A single 1* review of such businesses, especially if found on Google, can result in fewer inbounds and lower conversions (we have even seen examples where a single well-crafted 1* review stopped the phone ringing entirely).

Let us remind ourselves of the advantages of Google reviews:

1. Far greater visibility - by an overwhelming factor
2. Far greater credibility - ditto
3. Far greater reach - ditto
4. Far greater consumer influence - in both search and when referenced in marketing
5. Free!

Regular readers will also be aware of the criticism Trustpilot has faced in the very recent past, both from Grizzly Research and the Italian government regulator. In the latter case, a €4 million fine was imposed, and we have reason to believe the Italians will be far from the last to take action (Trustpilot's business model does not vary from one EU jurisdiction to another, nor in the UK).

Our advice to clients

This has been consistent for well over ten years now: focus on Google reviews. If you run a simple business that consumers fully understand (online retail, for example), you can safely invite customers to post to Google, and you may want to 'double up' by using a site like Trustpilot or Feefo (although the latter is also currently under investigation by the UK CMA).

For clients in the professions and service sectors, where misunderstandings are bound to arise, we strongly recommend employing moderation to ensure the absolute minimum of factually inaccurate or potentially misleading reviews ever see the light of day. This involves hosting your own reviews on your own website as well as getting as many as possible across to Google. The cost? About the same as a Trustpilot membership initially, reducing substantially once critical mass has been achieved.

An example? Sure...

Begin with a business in a complex service sector; even more to the point, a complex business that many consumers think can be performed standing on one's head: estate agency:

Note that it has already experienced an 'inaccurate, misleading or plain unfair' review (that has reduced its score from 5.0 to 4.2). Show its management and staff how moderation works and encourage them to climb in at the shallow end. 

Then support them all the way. 

There you go! A - the - solution for a business that has structured its review management strategy for the long term. Unless, of course, you think Google/Alphabet will soon vanish in a puff of smoke. We don't, obviously.

This abuse has to stop

Ten weeks ago, we highlighted a product whose promoters were playing fast and loose with reviews. This week, marketing for a very similar product appeared on YouTube.

Take a look at these screen grabs:

This advertisement was shown on the Sun Online last week. So we, naturally, looked for reviews:

And this...

Ah! The gold standard that is every consumer's holy grail: a full five stars. But from where?

On a site called 'Toptested'. The difference being the reference to nearly 2,000 what appear to be Trustpilot reviews (the stars and colour conform), so we looked there too:

Surely some mistake? No. Just a blatantly fraudulent reference to Trustpilot and a fake score. All designed to shift cheap and virtually useless stock in as short a timeframe as possible. We predict that the product and the web page with the 5 product reviews will be gone within days.

Trustpilot, right? No. Trustpilot ratings are out of 5, or 5 stars, not 10. This is called 'passing off' in legal terms, meaning designing something to look so much like something else as to mislead a consumer.

These reviews are equally fraudulent. Almost certainly written by AI, but certainly not written by a bona-fide customer. The express intent is to support all the other fraudulent product marketing

And, just for good measure, go to YouTube and search 'pressure washer'. What do you see? This, by any chance, right at the top:

Who could resist? A pressure washer so powerful it doubles as a chainsaw?

And finally...

On your - and the UK consumer's - behalf, we ordered two of these miracle washers. One from Jetterix at £49 and one identical one from another Amazon-listed supplier at £9.99. Neither produced more pressure than the existing 'gun' on our garden hose. We consulted an engineer who told us straight away that the pressure in such a 'gun' was entirely reliant upon the pressure at the tap it was attached to. Without a motor, it could not possibly boost the pressure at all.

The issue we have

Aside from the obvious: that fraud is being perpetrated upon the UK consumer at scale, we are concerned at three aspects of this corrosive behaviour:

1. That these advertisements are being carried by major advertising channels: YouTube, Amazon. Google, Instagram and TikTok, and online legacy media such as national newspapers
2. That the regulators - Advertising Standards Authority in the case of patently fraudulent advertising and the Competition & Markets Authority in the case of misuse and passing off of reviews - do not appear to have yet sanctioned either the businesses behind the 'products' or the carriers of such advertising
3. That these fraudulent practices, if allowed to continue, will further undermine the public's confidence in reviews as a valuable mechanism for reassurance before purchasing goods and services

Bear in mind that these channels earn every time you view, click or buy (YouTube between 5 and 30 cents per view, Amazon from 5% to 40% of the purchase price, just for two examples).

Action

We will contact both the ASA and the CMA and let you know what they say, along with any action they intend to take.