Insane, threats on debt collection and court, certainly NOT a company I want to recommend, ad pirates. Many companies have strong opinion on Netpointers SEO
This blog is a translation of a post on Netpointers business methods from 2007.
The original danish post can be found below. But since no one, but Danes understand it I translated it to English. If you want to see the full original post, you can find it here
http://www.amino.dk/forums/t/16576.aspx?PageIndex=1
———————————————————————————————————-
June 11 2007: outletguru.com
Dear Amino,
I have unfortunately, in spite of more have advised me NOT to, bought a search engine module from Netpointers in autumn 2006. The sites began gaining a lot of positions after a few months. So it looked really nice. We had to “pay per rank”, which meant for each page which is on page 1 of Google.com and .dk. Also we had to pay a fixed price of around 30 Euro.
It appeared then that they began to settle us for all the other page 1 rankings we have (our website is www.outletguru.com). Off course this has nothing to do with our agreement and they obviously wanted money for the pages that they have been given on page 1. When I called Netpointers, I foud out that they wanted to receive commission for absolutely all pages ranked at the 1st place, which of course is insane.
I have passed my case to our lawyer. Normally I would never send such a small amount, such as this we are talking about here, to him. Since it’s only makes the matter more expensive. BUT this has now become a matter of principle!
Fortunately I am not alone. My good friend and colleague from www.coolshop.dk and a few other, with similar problems with Netpointers. We are now joined in the hunt for Netpointers!
IF YOU HAVE SIMILAR PROBLEMS WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM YOU. We will in fact drive the matter fully in the Danish right system. TELL U.S. YOUR STORY – we know that there are many who have and have had problems with Netpointers.
Write to me at: ho@startex.dk
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM: Anders Christensen June 11 2007
Now I ask stupid – But is it not simply rely on what is in the contract and then only pay for what has been agreed? And if it is not okay with Netpointers, then they do rally you. I do not see why you would pull them in court.
———————————————————————————————————-
ANSWER FROM: outletguru.com
Yes exactly – but we do not agree on what it says in the contract – therefore we can not move forward. WE do not drag them into court. They are taking US to dept collection/court and several others.
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM: enielsen June 11 2007
Don’t you have a lawyer? I do not understand why you can not sue them if the contract is unclear.
Try to make connections with other companies that are in the same situation.
And pay no at debt collection.
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM: Anders Christensen June 11 2007
if you think that you have right on your side so do just objecting to their account, then they can not send you to dept collection before they have a conviction for that you owe them money.
———————————————————————————————————-
ANSWER FROM outletguru.com June 11 2007
Yes – we have a lawyer and we are running the case together – and obviously not paying 1 cent:)
————————————————
COMMENT FROM: Mikkel deMib Svendsen June 11 2007
As others have mentioned, it is the standing in the contract shall prevail. It must be insanely unreasonable before it can be terminated (for example. Having regard to the Agreement Act provisions relating to unfair contracts). And I’m not sure your agreement is. I have not seen the contract and I have not seen what they have delivered, and the results of it, but professionally speaking, I can certainly speak on a slightly different side of such a case, which inevitably will be included.
The thing is that the pages on a website interact in a variety of ways – positive and negative, and the work being done to optimize a portion of the website will very often lead to others. Sometimes very violent even.
So if I personally had to make an appointment with your company that I supply a few pages, and you pay me for all the page 1 Google ranks you subsequently get (a model that I otherwise do not offer, as I of many other causes think it is a stupid billing method. but that’s another story …) I would also ask to get it ALL the pages tendrils page 1 from your site. The point is that it is very possible that it is one of the pages I have delivered and the work that comes with the optimization, which makes a second of your pages vines. Things go together and so I would personally not distinguish between the two types of pages in the settlement.
Now I know who said no contract. But if there is only that which is paid for all page 1 ranks, and with the academic reasons I give above, I think that you are faced with a very bad case. That you should probably consider before you spend too much money in court.
And remember that no lawyer could tell you what I just told you. Know only nerds- and it is as said very possible that Netpointers has prepared for this. I would have done as said. So tell this to your lawyer – or show him this post and ask him to reconsider the matter. He has the other paper, and should be able to bundle it clear from this …
Good luck with a solution
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM: enielsen June 11 2007
The case shall be for collection before it can come to the enforcement court.
A scenario is typical:
1) The ‘victim’ send reminders and reminders.
2) Then, it came to a debt collection attorney. So given case (vendor = idiot) or ‘proposal for settlement. “
3) And finally comes the matter to court bailiffs – if not paid or if the case is not abandoned.
Yes, you can try it:) Maybe you will end up as a fraud-sighted. Anyway, a lawyer will not take your case. And if you still get a third ranking lawyer with the game, then the enforcement court reject it (and you pay court costs.) And if you’re against all odds gets court bailiff with the funny, then there is human law-courts, etc.
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM Martin Tygsen June 11 2007
Enielsen – if you read the post Donald whereas it is very clear.
A trader must send a customer for collection if the customer does not pay his bill. The assumption is that the client does not disagree with the debt – it must be lawful.
Make the customer objections – complaints, for example, that a product / service has errors or not received – must send the trader bill amount to debt collection recovery.
So, there is a dispute (disagreement) on the amount, and company (creditor) can rally the customer for the district court, which pronounces sentence in the case and the cost of the (loser pays typical). Does this happen to you – you should meet up: Otherwise the creditor.
So the customer disagrees with the debt then before the court and NOT collections.
———————————————————————————————————-
ANSWER FROM outletguru.com June 11 2007
Hi Mikkel
You are right. Now it’s different things we each have problems with Netpointers. I will not go into a discussion with you about what it exactly is. But it is 100% securely their ad sharks and it is scam. And I would like help to stop. I have some experience in similar cases through my other companies
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM: Helle – houseofkids.dk June 11 2007
Too bad I did not see your post sooner. I’ve just paid a bill which Netpointers had passed on to debt collection. When the letter came from there, I was nervous – who want to end up like poor pay – and I just could not cope with having to spend more time and effort into them.
I bought search engine optimization at 10 words. They also created the solution – but it did not work in the first six months. When I went into the statistics were filled with red crosses and error messages. I contacted them several times about the problem – but there was just nothing. At least half a year they got it to work and also began to get some locations. So I changed the design in my shop – and I should certainly have been aware of … for the next several months you just came in on a page where you could not click through to shop around. Well then – so we stood there and again … It took two to three months before they had been directed links and design – and so I said so resolving up.
Their administrative department I phoned to ask how I had to by a termination. Got to know that I just had to send a written notice when the next bill arrived. I did so – and got a letter back that it was done three days of their termination date – so I was forced to pay for three more months. At that time I had even erased everything on my ftp to be sure you have disconnected them as partners.
I could have found my contract out and read it carefully – but when I go out from that they are honest when you call and ask for guidance.
When the days are running at full speed, it does not always have time to do something about the administrative areas – and I must admit. Yet I will put a huge question Netpointers integrity. It is certainly NOT a company I want to touch with a barge pole now!
Many greetings Helle
———————————————————————————————————-
ANSWER FROM: outletguru.com June 11 2007
Hi Helle
Yes it’s just damn shame – but it’s the same story again and again. They are so fucking frivolous that it cries out to heaven. It’s a shame that you have paid ….. We will keep you informed.
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM: Jacob Risgaard June 11 2007
Hello
Following the Outlet Guru post, I hereby as a warning to you active Internet users pass on the experience we had with ad pirates at Netpointers.
We are also heading towards a lawsuit against Netpointers A / S regarding the delivery of their service about Keyword Optimization, where certain keywords are relevant to CoolShop.dk are optimized so that they appear in the top search result on Google.
I have had several meetings with them, both by telephone and by visiting their office in Copenhagen. Following recommendations from their sell Michael Kock, the choice fell on a “Pay Per Rank” agreement where CoolShop.dk must pay DKK 300, – pr. Top 10 placement of those keywords. There were also entered into an agreement to be included in a total of 20 keywords.
We got their consultant outlined a scenario where we are within 3 months would achieve top 10 placement in 10% of the words, which in our budget calculations was a reasonable level to start out on to test their service.
We received so after 3 weeks an invoice from them and it has been shown that they have already made Top 10 rankings for more than 100% words what, results in an invoice for DKK 24,000, – plus VAT from them.
We were in start-up offered a fixed price contract at DKK 45,000 a year, but chose “Pay Per Rank” based on their account manager outline of the process. We were also promised that we will subsequently be able to convert to fixed price.
We now believe that we were misled quite violently from them, because they really have “passed” in relation to their prognosis. We have therefore tried to negotiate to be converted to fixed price and that the first invoice must be included as part of payment for the annual contract at DKK 45,000. They have refused.
We have from them also received a number of “dark sides”, which would mainly be on our Web server. These are the pages that Google finds forward to. These index files are those that the customer is presented face when they follow a link from Google. We believe that this was not the point of the product. The customer should enter the correct CoolShop.dk, not this dark sides.
Moreover, we have from their own “search tracker” system, could see that they have put us into several other search engines, not just Google that agreement was made on.
In my own beliefs, this reminds of course most of all a form of ad piracy
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM: Jeppe Schrøder June 14 2007
I do not quite understand how 20 keywords of 300 kr may be for 100,000 Euro
And how can they achieve Top 10 rankings for more than 100% words?
Is it top 10 rankings on other search engines than Google?
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM Jacob Risgaard June 14 2007
It also surprised us why we are suddenly being charged for lying to several other search engines that have never been talked about. I have been contacted by so many to like. experiences, so it appears to be a company who speculate in this.
Do you have an experience with Netpointers please contact me on 96 35 20 24 or email jacob@coolshop.dk
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM Jeppe Schrøder June 14 2007
So you must pay 300 kr. keywords in all search engines Netpointers can find?
Is it 300 per month or on a year?
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM: Jacob Risgaard June 14 2007
Yes, they will out of thin air charge DKK 300, – pr. keyword, pr. search engine, pr. month. Similarly, despite the agreement on the opposite not amend the agreement at a fixed price, unless we paid approx. DKK 94,000 up front. So clear-cut ad piracy of the worst kind.
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM: Mikkel deMib Svendsen June 14 2007
It is obvious that you at least have understood the contract differently than Netpointers. But it is crucially important is what actually is when you as a trader is not protected as well as private consumers. There is a large degree of freedom of contract. but when the rest of us here in the debate haven’t seen what actually is in agreement, the part naturally impossible to relate to.
That you perceive an agreement as unfair does not necessarily lead to fraud company. But if, for example. in connection with the sale HEREBY asked some quite other things in view, than was then actually get, so it is obviously problematic. Just remember that the things the seller also says should be in the contract, otherwise it can be really hard to prove it was agreed afterwards.
———————————————————————————————————-
ANSWER FROM: outletguru.com June 14 2007
Mikkel is absolutely right ….. But there is nothing to indicate trickery when we are more commonly gifted people who have jumped into the trap. We run all reasonably large companies on a daily basis … so ike beginners. But no matter how it is rotated, there is something very wrong and we will warn others against. It’s not usual to operate with so many unsatisfied customers. We have spoken with several former employees who anonymously confirm us in it is completely thought through what they do!
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM Jacob Risgaard June 14 2007
So very true Mikkel. Unfortunately there are few companies which speculate in making contracts which can be exploited to eg. premium rate.
I think unfortunately you have not read the entire thread, or perhaps overlooked that this is an upcoming trial. This said, we obviously as large Danish company with in-house lawyer and our lawyer is aware that basic things like contracts and a firm stand in a different position than private consumers. But thank you for your attention.
The voices that I have enclosed all the documents in my description of the process, which unfortunately I think neither possible nor particularly readable. But in response to as the point on several search engines reads the contract during placement fee “charged per month in total per top-10 placement on google local language version”
Thanks again for your contribution to our inquiry to find several companies that have been incorrectly charged by Netpointers. We’ve got a handful of reports within 24 hours, so luckily we do not agree about this.
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM Niels Henriksen June 15 2011
Computerworld published
http://www.computerworld.dk/art/39871?cid=1&a=cid&i=1&pos=3
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM Mikkel deMib Svendsen June 15 2007
The article does not in any way matter more transparent – not what is said from one end or the other ….
There is talk about “ad fudge” – but as far as I can see is not sold or bought some ads, but some websites
Cool Shop says that these websites have been placed on Netpointers “web server” and it is alleged that this was to exploit Netpointers’ own high page ranking on Google. ” Netpointers say they only provide pages for placement on customer’s own web server. This is a very simple factual circumstances which are not should be no doubt. Where are the sides? Incidentally, it seems a little absurd to talk about Netpointers “page ranking” (I assume is meant PageRank) because it will have no meaning unless the delivered pages are ranked by Netpointers domain, or that the link is active for the pages on the client domain, from Netpointers domain. Again, this factual situation which is very easy to check, and it surprises me, therefore, infinitely to the apparent disagreement about this.
Netpointers claim they do not create “doorway pages” but only “information pages” that is placed on the customer’s own web server. If these pages do not meet the simple requirements as there is for these pages (see link) then it’s at. definition no information pages. When using redirects or if the pages are better designed to search engines than to users so it is not information pages, but it is called “doorway pages” (shadow pages, zebra pages or whatever you want to call them – new names are not the same as new concepts:))
I know as I said, not the detailed relationship between Netpointers and these website, but it just always annoying me with these cases is that there is so much clutter in simple facts. And it amazes me infinitely that customers apparently did not have guessed what it was they bought. Provides customers do not matter? And if they do not get answers they can understand, they write, so just under? And if they sign, it says so in the contract which they believe they have agreed?
Yes, I wonder …
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM Casper Hornstrup June 15 2007
Don’t companies advise to the customer’s best? They should try it one day. It may therefore well be possible to make money at it. Netpointers should then certainly do not expect that the two companies recommend them to others.
———————————————————————————————————-
ANSWER FROM outletguru.com June 18 2007
The contract is so short and simple that it gives rise to misunderstandings. I do a lot of contracts and deal every year. But I missed this one. This is because the more that you have aggread on over phone and not in write then there’s something in writing which looks OK. BUT if you then turn it all upside down so there’s suddenly more angles. I know not 100% content of cool shops contract.
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM Allan Bidault June 19 2007
I also belong to the amount of dissatisfied customers Netpointers.
I was also persuaded by a skilled salesperson to sign an agreement in the range of DKK 25,000
I have just read the contract through and roughly I get NOTHING specifically promised in the contract, and it is in principle what I received.
With my present knowledge I would never jump on it, but I actually thought that it was the SEO of my site who was involved and it was also the seller claimed.
What I actually got was some pretty inefficient information pages / doorway pages with redirects, which I also confronted with Netpointers, however, insisted that they meet Google’s guidelines.
Incidentally sounded Agreement of 10 keywords, but when they came with a presentation to the words, had they happened to chose some less interesting search phrases, which of course is much easier to optimize than significant individual keywords (I know so well that most search for multiple words, but when you pay several thousand DKK per. words, one must of course choose those who are most searches)
Incidentally “lie” their SearchTracker pretty much. Despite numerous attempts, I could never find my pages on the rankings as SearchTracker claimed. I know that it is not real time, and therefore also checked over longer periods.
I have unfortunately not enough substance enough for a lawsuit, but can just join me in the club of disgruntled Netpointers customers.
Incidentally I paid without complaining, since I knew that I had blown me by signing a contract so thin.
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM outletguru.com June 21 2007
Hi Allan,
Yes it’s shame. I must say that our solution was actually quite good, and gave many good locations. Unfortunately, they settle wrong and not as agreed.
———————————————————————————————————-
COMMENT FROM Fred October 21 2010
Well, its not only you who has been cheated by Netpointers but they have scammed many big names in the industry. Netpointers had worked with New Zealands largest company “Fonterra” www.fonterra.com and did some dodgy practices until Google caught on and Google’s reps instructed Fonterra to end their relationship with Netpointers or else they would get blacklisted. Fonterra did as Google instructed, ending their relation with Netpointers and removing all offending codes and pages that were created by Netpointers as they weren’t in accordance with search engine guidelines. On the net, I have also read that they are bankrupted again and leaving the creditors with a debt of 1.5 million USD. http://www.goarticles.com/cgi-bin/showa.cgi?C=2977502
No doubts in my mind that Netpointers is into some money laundering business at the expense of its creditors. A really 100% scam company, that also got rid of the founder of the company as he came to know of money being removed. Why isn’t anybody taking legal action against them??
