Support NeoGAF

[newtypepilot]

LOL scamming the end user and the influencers. This makes raid shadow legends look like the good guys rofl.

I swear youtube is just sponsored by scams 99% of the time. If I see all the content creator start shilling it at the same time, it's a red flag for me.

Also the fact that LTT had known about this for awhile but did not raise any alarm bells should be quite telling. All they did was drop partnership and switch to a different affiliate link partner which does the exact same shit. Shouldn't be too surprised though considering all the shady shits Linus has pulled in the past.

 

[mitch1971]

Yeah, watch that this morning. Eye opening.

 

[EviLore]

See AG1 and Betterhelp and any energy drink and supplement.

 

[Jinzo Prime]

LOL scamming the end user and the influencers. This makes raid shadow legends look like the good guys rofl.

I swear youtube is just sponsored by scams 99% of the time. If I see all the content creator start shilling it at the same time, it's a red flag for me.

Also the fact that LTT had known about this for awhile but did not raise any alarm bells should be quite telling. All they did was drop partnership and switch to a different affiliate link partner which does the exact same shit. Shouldn't be too surprised though considering all the shady shits Linus has pulled in the past.

So I didn't get it at first, but the fact that just dismissing the pop up steals the sale is truly crooked. The other examples could be considered "accidental" or "programming errors" but closing a pop up replacing an affiliate link? No way.

 

[March Climber]

Honey is owned by Paypal

 

[diffusionx]

For me, it's Raycons

 

[Revolutionary]

Me not watching any of these 'influencers' and therefore not getting scammed:

 

[AJUMP23]

Don't add stuff to your browser unless it is Adblock.

 

[FunkMiller]

Charlie here, talking about the scam, and holding his hands up for being a dumb ass who helped perpetrate this shit



Good to see this also highlighting how much a scumbag Linus actually is.

 

[YCoCg]

Soo many of these products on YouTube sponsors that it gets impressive when they get actual talent to push their shit:

 

[demigod]

Honey is a piece of shit, i never get deals from them and now i see why. Capital One is better since they actually email me deals.

 

[Paltheos]

Summary:

1) Honey takes commissions on sales from, say, a misc. youtube channel recommending a product, by replacing the commission cookie for the youtuber on a store's checkout page with a cookie for honey when a user clicks on honey to search for discounts.
1a) Honey's popup asking to let it search for coupons appears even unprompted on other checkout pages and adds its commission cookie when approved to search (divorced from whether it even finds anything).
2) Honey's partnership program allows sellers in their network to blacklist coupon codes from honey's databases, even if misc. honey users try adding them.
3) Hinted at for a followup video: Honey applying huge discount codes they're not supposed to have, costing sellers money (? the video's not specific)

Pretty terrible if all true. He made that annoying, amateur investigator mistake of not listing any of his fucking sources though. He plays a clip of a honey employee speaking on a podcast about point #2 and he doesn't even state from what episode it plays (I don't remember there being a timecode either). No links provided in his video description, although he does point fingers to some locations in the video.

 

[Mistake]

Between me hating paypal and being out of the loop, I never even heard of honey until now. Hooray for...getting old?

 

[IAmRei]

Between me hating paypal and being out of the loop, I never even heard of honey until now. Hooray for...getting old?

Samey, never heard of it.

 

[GymWolf]

Have i missed horrible things made by paypal?

 

[Tams]

I let my guard done on this one and actually installed it, even though I wondered how in Earth they were able to sponsor anyone.

Thankfully, I never bought anything while it was installed (mostly because it did the 'no coupons' thing). Not that I really buy stiff from affiliate links in the first place.

And yeah, LMG/LTT are no longer in my good books. They should have been the ones dojng an exposé like this. That they switched to not only just another affiliate link scam/malware, but one from fucking Klarna. Fuck, do I need to stop watching their videos now?

 

[Pagusas]

Very eye opening. Uninstalled it immediately. Hopefully an FTC complaint is filed and paypal gets sued. Likely will be a drop in the bucket to what they made of this though.

 

[Ovek]

I don't trust anything Linus or any of the other shills whore on YouTube.

 

[Trogdor1123]

Have i missed horrible things made by paypal?

I was wondering this too… what have they done?

 

[Rat Rage]

This is pretty wild...

 

[Cyberpunkd]

I don't trust anything Linus or any of the other shills whore on YouTube.

This is all you need. The moment you see all your favorite shills lining up to preach exactly the same service you know you should go the opposite way.

 

[bender]

Never heard of Honey.

 

[winjer]

Never installed this plugin and never used Honey.
Good thing, I avoided participating in this scam.

 

[SJRB]

The cookie overwrite is just

This is scummy as fuck but I absolutely LOVE how it works. Straight up genius and no one aside from Linus ever noticed this.

 

[winjer]

The cookie overwrite is just

This is scummy as fuck but I absolutely LOVE how it works. Straight up genius and no one aside from Linus ever noticed this.

I wonder why Linus never made a video about this scam, of which he was a victim as well.
Asides from that post in their forums, that went unnoticed by almost everyone, they did nothing to warn other creators and consumers at large.

 

[Warspite]

Were influence's making so much money they didn't realize that Honey was stealing their affiliate money?

 

[LegendOfKage]

The cookie overwrite is just

This is scummy as fuck but I absolutely LOVE how it works. Straight up genius and no one aside from Linus ever noticed this.

I saw a you tube comment that said Markipiler turned down a deal with the company, because he didn't understand how their business model worked, and he wasn't about to endorse something that he didn't understand. If true, that was a very good thing for him. By him looking out for his fans and his reputation, he actually saved himself from being taken advantage of.

 

[SJRB]

I wonder why Linus never made a video about this scam, of which he was a victim as well.
Asides from that post in their forums, that went unnoticed by almost everyone, they did nothing to warn other creators and consumers at large.

Yeah agreed, not a great look for Linus (again).

They might've been bound by a TOS or some other arrangement, or feared damage to their reputation or a lawsuit.

 

[Lambogenie]

Suddenly I'm seeing every influencer talk about this... the same that have cheated their own viewer base at times. Ironic, really.

I don't think this is really that big a deal (because so many of them YouTubers aren't transparent themselves). End of the day, I don't click their links, I just watch their video and then buy separately.

 

[Paltheos]

I saw a you tube comment that said Markipiler turned down a deal with the company, because he didn't understand how their business model worked, and he wasn't about to endorse something that he didn't understand. If true, that was a very good thing for him. By him looking out for his fans and his reputation, he actually saved himself from being taken advantage of.

The shitty part about this scheme is that you don't have to endorse the scammer to suffer. Any portion of your audience shared with another content creator who does endorse them will lose you commission sales all the same because the Honey add-on is still on the user's machine and they're still clicking the 'search for coupons' button at the same rate.

 

[SJRB]

Suddenly I'm seeing every influencer talk about this... the same that have cheated their own viewer base at times. Ironic, really.

I don't think this is really that big a deal (because so many of them YouTubers aren't transparent themselves). End of the day, I don't click their links, I just watch their video and then buy separately.

If you watched the video you'd know that this actually a big deal.

 

[Tams]

There's a bit of a war going on over this at the LTT forums.

Mostly, it reminds me why I never go on there.

 

[Fbh]

Yeah saw this earlier today, it's pretty crazy.
The one where they take over the affiliate purchase even if you simply press "ok" on the pop up that lets you know that they didn't find any coupons is specially insane.

Honestly though, whenever I see any product or app featured in tons of Youtube sponsored videos I instantly assume it's either a low quality product or a scam.

 

[jakinov]

The affiliate link part is not a scam.

The industry standard model for who gets commission is brought up in the video, it's "last-click attribution" (this does not actually have to be a click but some interaction). This model means that the last interaction/touchpoint gets 100% of the commission no matter how potentially influential earlier interactions/touchpoints were. It's by design that the most recent interaction/touchpoint with a site/brand is going to be credited for the user converting (e.g. buying, subscribing). The video focuses a lot on the URL change and cookies but those technical details aren't important because that's simply the interface and the storage mechanism for how the "last-click" is essentially declared and remembered by the different sites. Honey or not, whoever is the most recent touchpoint is always going to set it up so that your browser ends up telling the site that they were the last touchpoint and in turn indirectly changing the cookie. In a system of whoever puts their flag down last gets the prize, nobody checks if somebody already put their flag down before putting theirs down and we shouldn't expect honey to either. The model has its criticisms and drawbacks but everybody should have known the rules and that another business wasn't going to forfeit their arguably valid claim. The model assumes that the last touchpoint was the more influential but that's not always true. E.g. If you watch an LTT video review that makes you really want the product then later you click a random targeted ad, it will override the LTT attribution.

One thing that bugs people is that Honey will still set themselves as the most recent touchpoint even if they don't actually find you a coupon. Which also doesn't really matter because its still the the last touchpoint with the site/brand that has a potential influence whether it returns a coupon or not. The actually scam part where they can lie about not being able to find you coupons is also used as a way to affirm buyers that they are getting the best deal so that they don't have to worry or go check that there's a way to save money with a code elsewhere.

The only scam part is the part about advertising giving you the best deals and then holding deals back from customers.

 

[Tams]

The affiliate link part is not a scam.

The industry standard model for who gets commission is brought up in the video, it's "last-click attribution" (this does not actually have to be a click but some interaction). This model means that the last interaction/touchpoint gets 100% of the commission no matter how potentially influential earlier interactions/touchpoints were. It's by design that the most recent interaction/touchpoint with a site/brand is going to be credited for the user converting (e.g. buying, subscribing). The video focuses a lot on the URL change and cookies but those technical details aren't important because that's simply the interface and the storage mechanism for how the "last-click" is essentially declared and remembered by the different sites. Honey or not, whoever is the most recent touchpoint is always going to set it up so that your browser ends up telling the site that they were the last touchpoint and in turn indirectly changing the cookie. In a system of whoever puts their flag down last gets the prize, nobody checks if somebody already put their flag down before putting theirs down and we shouldn't expect honey to either. The model has its criticisms and drawbacks but everybody should have known the rules and that another business wasn't going to forfeit their arguably valid claim. The model assumes that the last touchpoint was the more influential but that's not always true. E.g. If you watch an LTT video review that makes you really want the product then later you click a random targeted ad, it will override the LTT attribution.

One thing that bugs people is that Honey will still set themselves as the most recent touchpoint even if they don't actually find you a coupon. Which also doesn't really matter because its still the the last touchpoint with the site/brand that has a potential influence whether it returns a coupon or not. The actually scam part where they can lie about not being able to find you coupons is also used as a way to affirm buyers that they are getting the best deal so that they don't have to worry or go check that there's a way to save money with a code elsewhere.

The only scam part is the part about advertising giving you the best deals and then holding deals back from customers.

While true, it is deeply immoral and abusing the system.

In most cases, Honey have not helped get the sale, so therefore are not deserving if the commission.

If I had a business, the only way I'd do commissions would be through personalised codes.

 

[Lambogenie]

The affiliate link part is not a scam.

The industry standard model for who gets commission is brought up in the video, it's "last-click attribution" (this does not actually have to be a click but some interaction). This model means that the last interaction/touchpoint gets 100% of the commission no matter how potentially influential earlier interactions/touchpoints were. It's by design that the most recent interaction/touchpoint with a site/brand is going to be credited for the user converting (e.g. buying, subscribing). The video focuses a lot on the URL change and cookies but those technical details aren't important because that's simply the interface and the storage mechanism for how the "last-click" is essentially declared and remembered by the different sites. Honey or not, whoever is the most recent touchpoint is always going to set it up so that your browser ends up telling the site that they were the last touchpoint and in turn indirectly changing the cookie. In a system of whoever puts their flag down last gets the prize, nobody checks if somebody already put their flag down before putting theirs down and we shouldn't expect honey to either. The model has its criticisms and drawbacks but everybody should have known the rules and that another business wasn't going to forfeit their arguably valid claim. The model assumes that the last touchpoint was the more influential but that's not always true. E.g. If you watch an LTT video review that makes you really want the product then later you click a random targeted ad, it will override the LTT attribution.

One thing that bugs people is that Honey will still set themselves as the most recent touchpoint even if they don't actually find you a coupon. Which also doesn't really matter because its still the the last touchpoint with the site/brand that has a potential influence whether it returns a coupon or not. The actually scam part where they can lie about not being able to find you coupons is also used as a way to affirm buyers that they are getting the best deal so that they don't have to worry or go check that there's a way to save money with a code elsewhere.

The only scam part is the part about advertising giving you the best deals and then holding deals back from customers.

Even the coupon bit is not always withholding. It can and does work. But noone should be trusting it fully. But still, it's false advertising to a degree but I don't consider it a scam-scam. The video and every influencer jumping on it are just salty they didn't do their own diligence for last click/commission.

 

[Nintendo's Witch]

Late-stage capitalism sure is something.

 

[MMaRsu]

Never heard of it

 

[RJMacready73]

I must be old fashioned, I never click on affiliate links or buy on the recommendation of some easily bought and paid youtuber, if I see something, I go find reviews of it and see if I can get it on Amazon

 

[tamago84]

never heard of it either, i was always against the idea of "supporting" idiots on social media

 

[Avid Reading Horse]

Nothing wrong with the affiliate code overwrite IMO, survival of the fittest. The blacklisting coupons thing is the bigger fraud here. I couldn't help but notice that it never found coupons. I still have Honey installed at the moment just for the price charts to catch when Amazon is trying to ream me with a fake sale. Will happily replace it if someone has a better alternative.

Interested in seeing what exactly the second half of this video is about.

My company has an affiliate program, one affiliate started swamping us with traffic. I called it out as some kind of botnet bullshit, but was shouted down because of how much revenue this guy was supposedly generating... well long story short is he found an exploit for our affiliate program and was getting credit for any otherwise uncredited sales.

 

[winjer]

 

[navii]

I wonder why Linus never made a video about this scam, of which he was a victim as well.
Asides from that post in their forums, that went unnoticed by almost everyone, they did nothing to warn other creators and consumers at large.

Probably didn't want his followers to lose trust in the next same thing he was promoting, thus losing revenue. Influencers are not after their followers best interests, they are after theirs.

I always had a gut feeling that honeys wasn't finding me the best coupons so I never used it, it was just too good to be true.

 

[navii]

Yeah saw this earlier today, it's pretty crazy.
The one where they take over the affiliate purchase even if you simply press "ok" on the pop up that lets you know that they didn't find any coupons is specially insane.

Honestly though, whenever I see any product or app featured in tons of Youtube sponsored videos I instantly assume it's either a low quality product or a scam.

In honeys defense they did go and look for a code, they didn't find it but they did do some work.

Not saying honey are good guys, they are another example that corporations will mislead you just to get money from you. They are in bed with the retailers while telling you they will find you the best deals.

 

[jakinov]

While true, it is deeply immoral and abusing the system.

In most cases, Honey have not helped get the sale, so therefore are not deserving if the commission.

If I had a business, the only way I'd do commissions would be through personalised codes.

I don't know about immoral. Like I mentioned the model is that every touchpoint in a journey overrides the last that's basically how the site wants to award the commission, if the site wants to do it first-click then they could have just ignored all subsequent attributions. Simply claiming what you are owed in that system is not immoral especially when nobody else is going out of their way to forfeit their commission. The affiliate link that you click from a influencer would also override an existing attribution. It's also not abuse, these sites are partnered with Honey, set the rules that they are following and should know exactly what Honey is doing.

Honey helps with the sale by offering assurance that you are getting the best price for that site whether that's true or not. Having an influence on the sale. In e-commerce, abandonment-rate is an important issue, meaning a significant portion of people start a cart (or go to checkout if a cart is not applicable) and then don't actually buy/subscribe the product/service. You might think that if they are already on the page then they are going to buy it but that's not what always happens.

The model is not intended to make sure everyone involved or the most deserving gets the commission, the thought is that the last touchpoint is probably the most influential. Is it fair that Honey can insert itself at the end and get 100% when multiple parties are involved? Definitely not. Are they likely the most influential at least? Probably not. The ideal model is probably one where everyone involved should get a portion of the commission but most companies today prefer to do it the current way which is advantageous to Honey. It's not immoral or abuse; Honey just greatly benefits from the status quo. Slowly, more companies are moving away from the model.

 

[Yoboman]

I work in this space and this is nothing new

When it comes to affiliate advertising we specifically don't work with Honey because of scenarios like this. Honey will be available regardless, they don't add anything as an affiliate. And that seems to be the big part of this video that is missing: advertisers have to choose to work with Honey as an affiliate partner otherwise Honey isn't being paid anything

Also the assertion that Honey "removed" the tracking for Linus's link is just wrong. Both will have been tracked.

 

[Dontkidyourselfjimmy]

2 secs just gonna close my raid shadow legends, pop in my raycons, finish my hello fresh meal and turn on my Nord VPN before watching.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

Finally watched it this morning. WTF?


What I want to know is, if some company's product is "extension that finds you bunch of coupon codes for free while you're at the checkout page", how in the HELL did none of these YouTube creators think to question what their business model is? And why Honey would pay so much to promote it?

Obviously Honey's profits had to be coming from somewhere. If the shoppers aren't paying for it, and there's no obvious reason why the retailers would pay for it, well then there's something REALLY fucking suspicious going on. Is anybody really surprised that someone was getting fucked by this deal?


The greed and lack of due diligence from all these content creators re. the shit they're shilling is pretty disgusting. Can't say I'm surprised, but still. I have zero sympathy for any of these promoters who got their commissions stolen.

I feel far worse for the content creators who had zero affiliation with Honey but still got their commissions stolen.

 

[readonly]

Finally watched it this morning. WTF?


What I want to know is, if some company's product is "extension that finds you bunch of coupon codes for free while you're at the checkout page", how in the HELL did none of these YouTube creators think to question what their business model is? And why Honey would pay so much to promote it?

Obviously Honey's profits had to be coming from somewhere. If the shoppers aren't paying for it, and there's no obvious reason why the retailers would pay for it, well then there's something REALLY fucking suspicious going on. Is anybody really surprised that someone was getting fucked by this deal?


The greed and lack of due diligence from all these content creators re. the shit they're shilling is pretty disgusting. Can't say I'm surprised, but still. I have zero sympathy for any of these promoters who got their commissions stolen.

I feel far worse for the content creators who had zero affiliation with Honey but still got their commissions stolen.

Had honey been just adding their affiliate links to all purchases that didn't already contain an affiliate link, that would have been semi-legit and probably a source of a lot of money. Still questionable why they deserve a cut of the profits but you could argue their coupon service convinces people to buy things. But straight up stealing like they were is brutal.

 

[winjer]