Windowcleaning.com

[Steve]

@Steve

The only problem I have with the site is the dishonesty they use by saying that they “select the best” It’s a total lie. They “select” whomever pays them. I don’t think I could ethically put that in my advertising knowing that it’s false. Correct me if I’m wrong here.

@Mark - WindowCleaning.com

[COLOR=#333333]I understand your comment Steve. I’ll explain. We’re building a national network of elite window cleaners and the “best” is always subjective. We interview and get to know every member we bring on board because after all it’s our network and reputation on the line. We’ve turned down several applicants because we have the right to choose who we partner with. We have no doubt there are many more excellent window cleaners in every city but all we need is one that we trust and believe in. And yes, we believe they’re the best. In fact we help them be the best with all the tools we provide. And we have no doubt that any customer who chooses to hire any company we recommend will be extremely happy with their work. That’s all customers want… a strong recommendation. Someone else to vouch for the company they might hire. And we do.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#333333][INDENT]
Well Mark, That is a great explanation that might suit a Harvard lawyer but you are missing one key factor here. The dishonesty comes in because windowcleaning.com does not disclose that everyone who is “awarded” the best window cleaner is paying you for consideration, and if they drop their subscription, someone else can pay you to be the “best,” that is dishonesty (in my opinion).

What would you think if CNET awarded Samsung the best cellphone of 2013 and then found out Samsung paid CNET for consideration. What would the NBA MVP mean to L. James if he had to pay sportswriters a monthly fee to be “awarded” MVP.

Tell me what prestigious award is given to people who pay for the exclusive rights to be considered.

You give the impression that you have interview “hundreds” of window cleaners in some cities and then come to a decision on which one “best.” Can you document that? Your website says that you “verify their level of experience” but you fail to quantify just how you verify that.

Personally I would have no problem with you saying your subscribers are “certified” or " pre-screened" or even “most qualified” but to promote these companies as the “best” when there is no fair competition to determine that and they are paying you so you have a financial interest in “awarding” them #1 status is bogus and borders on false advertising.[/INDENT]
[/COLOR]