Stolen business name?

You are correct in this case. I'd forgotten the exact wording. My mistake. The other bit of yours was false though.

What I expect to happen is that the level of repetitions won't be "keyword-stuffing". It might even hit genuine stuff that hasn't had an extra word added at all.

In the Business Sense department, it's not so smart to make a bad reputation on a new business just starting up, word will get around and people will blog and more negative press will ruin it all.

Furniture is a tough market and you may find that the lack of originality in the beginning, you know, "PrimSavers" and "Prim Savers" and copying the color and font of Hershey's "LifeSavers" brand logo, may have been the mistake that induced failure.

Better to eat crow now and start over with the intention of success based on your own attributes and capabilities instead of using others success as your own vehicle. But, if you want to risk the money and time, which is not very much, on a marred name then go for it.

@Sling: I have seen this happen several times: If Phil is not right, he admits. Why is it so hard for you to do the same when you are not right?

Plus, this thread is about business names, not about Search gaming.


It will give the potential customer an idea about their originality for sure

With clear non-compliance with LL's wishes demonstrated, let's revisit the concept of the relative seriousness of two activities.

One person piggy-backing on another has most effect on the two parties involved.

A lot of people screwing up search by gaming it has an effect on everybody.

In terms of the reach of actual impact, the search-gaming is a more serious issue.

A court order would make LL act on the piggy-backing a lot faster than they would on the gaming. That doesn't mean the the gaming is not a more serious issue for them.

I was right.
LL's wishes are clear. Phil is not complying with them.

WE AGREE!

Again!

Ubi Societas, Ibi Ius

Not necessarily.

You may be surprised, just ask the ex-adfarmers

And, 'policy/procedure' isn't necessarily law. Might be, but maybe not.

And, historically, when LL makes or changes Policy, they don't care if it costs YOU money!

All right, then how about Dura Lex Sed Lex?

Oh stop it you are making me think too hard. (Catholic school latin is a little rusty)

It depends which side you're on, if the law seems harsh or fair, but yes, it's still the law.

That doesn't mean that the law should be the standard of ethical behaviour. All the law can do without clogging the wheels of justice with sand is rein in the worst bad actors.

Nah, not according to certain people here. It's all about the "churn rate", something like 3% retention PROVES that people don't know or care to know about the scruples of those in business. They are looking for what they want, and don't care how they found it.

(that's not my argument, btw)

i'm one of those. if i can find you easily and you have what i want, then i will buy your stuff.

Then you should have no problem with what Floyd is doing.

You were right about something I said, that's all. I know it's rare for you so I understand you pressing it

In a matter of days, LL will make a change that will cause their wishes to float to the top end of the rankings. It's common knowledge here that I *want* my html page to go back to listing items as it used to, and as LL always intended. I'm going to leave it to LL's change. In the meantime, for the few days that are left in which keyword-stuffing works, I'll leave my page as it is. If you want to think of me as the devil on account of the two weeks between the announcement and the change, feel free.

Wink, indeed.

I was meaning the gear not the web site-but now you mention it...yes it does look shoddy also..regardless of a rush or not..I certainly wouldnt advertise a web site that appears to have be thrown together in an hour to crow about my business with its *copied* name...
people critique competitors work all the time...i dont think its meooooow time to make a comment on style/quality of anything.
edited to add: I read a few blogs about sl and if i see something not so good that a creator has done/said...then i certainly wont go to their store and hand over my pennies...so for me, yes it does matter about reputation and business practices

I don't think so. I'm not commenting on the quality of a competitor's work that is actually competing with me - i.e. not the furniture.

One of the most common website errors by people who ask for website reviews in the forums that I've been associated with, is the thing that I mentioned - butting text up to graphics. It's my opinion that anyone who does that, and thinks that it looks ok, will never be able to create a good website on his/her own. If they can't see that aesthetic error on their own, they'll never see aesthetic errors. Not everyone has an aesthetic eye.

The website template is fine though, and I do wish him well with the site if he intends to use it as part of his business. I just don't wish him well using my tradename for his business, that's all.

I actually totally agree with you.

This is not how the site will look, definitely. I currently have 2 web designers work to put together some pages with MySQL support that would allow for dynamic display of products based on updates I do on the tables in the database.

[double-checks]

Yep, Phil wrote that.

LOL

haha, yes, this could be written down for posterity

That I wrote about aesthetitcs? You've lost me.