Comments on: Nuffnang – Stealing the Limelight Once Again

By: Wassabi

Wassabi — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:46:51 +0000

Hi there,
As far as I concern, the most dangerous man in this world is Josh Lim. He wrote something to TechCrunch to provoke about the withdrawal fee.

Fee is needed when you did a cash out if you did not charge the bloggers you will end up as a losers as you can’t pay your publisher like what Josh did to most of the bloggers.

By: Paddy Tan

Paddy Tan — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 08:41:31 +0000

Yup, as I said it may be a miscalculation on their part and somehow now unable to fulfill that perceived value stick to the 20 unique visit. Now paying the price when bloggers turn the table around. And it made worse when no one step out to give a proper explanation that the bloggers like to hear.

I do hope that all these can be addressed properly on Nuffnang website so that it will show that they are looking to solve these hiccups and give them a chance to come back again.

Dont ever turn your partners (to me bloggers are not the customers, the customers are those companies that pay money to feed the banners) into ’sharks’ coming to bite you on the ass. This is the worse PR situation any big or small companies want.

By: motd

motd — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 04:58:50 +0000

@Patrick Quek

Still waiting? Wasn’t that movie off the screens long time ago?

@ED

That was what I am thinking as well. Any company would do some damage control when they were under any kind of fire but Nuffnang seems to be kind of quiet.

@Paddy Tan

20 unique visits were not hard to achieve. It’s waiting for the advertising company to chose you that was difficult.

@DK

Bad advertising is still a kind of advertising. You don’t see Advertlets getting this kind of “free” publicity on TechCrunch with the title Advertlets on it. Nuffnang would be coming back stronger than before if they managed to clear up the mess. After all, look at widgetbucks now. Aren’t they getting better with more blogger signing up?

By: DK

DK — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 01:58:09 +0000

This is not exactly the kind of limelight anyone would be interested to be in.

By: Paddy Tan

Paddy Tan — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 01:41:28 +0000

Thank you for quoting me. I believe that the statement ‘when they met the requirement of 20 unique visits per day’ were used as a marketing statement that somehow went wrong which probably they didnt expect it too.

Hitting 20 unique visits is not that difficult, anyone with a Pagerank 1 can hit that very very quickly and that puts about almost everyone in that category too.

Paddy
BAK2u.com

By: Ed

Ed — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 01:40:09 +0000

Nice post. Question now… what IF Nuffnang never even had the intention of addressing the issue at all?

By: Patrick Quek

Patrick Quek — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 01:30:25 +0000

Is either slow or no response from Nuffnang.

I’m still waiting for my Ratatooeee movie tickets.