[JakeTheCat]

This article from an Apple-centric site paints Samsung in a pretty bad light. While it primarily deals with Apple and Samsung's legal quarrels it is clear that - if true - BlackBerry is not unaffected. The most interesting claims in my view are:

"April. 2013, Samsung is accused of and admits hiring people in several countries to falsify reports of HTC phones "constantly crashing" and posting fake benchmark reviews.

October 2013 Samsung in confirmed reports from independent and objective testing, found to be intentionally falsifying performance benchmarks of its flagship products: the Galaxy S4 and Note 3."

Can anyone woking for, or on behalf of Samsung (or any smartphone competitor for that matter - working either directly or indirectly) please step forward to deny these practices occur?

Samsung faces sanctions over latest dirty trick in Apple case - Apple 2.0 -Fortune Tech

[ray689]

Not too surprising.

Posted via CB10

[RH1Pearl]

I think BlackBerry has done more than enough on its own to screw itself up. First blame the Americans, now you're targeting Samsung? Who's next?

[JakeTheCat]

Thank you RH1Pearl. I'll take that as a denial. Anyone else want to claim these practices don't occur?

[kcdist]

Well, it would certainly explain the posting patterns of some of the more prolific haters on this site.

Buying habits are formed through perception, which leads to opinion. I'm not suggesting for a second that Blackberry has not made some serious judgement and marketing errors, but the anti-Blackberry vitriol has been going strong since at least 2010. Some of that has undoubtedly lead to change of perception and in turn, to lower sales.

To believe that not a penny has exchanged hands in exchange for some of the negativity is foolish indeed.

Does anyone remember that e-mail Kevin received a while back from a marketing firm willing to assist in providing 'research' to media outlets willing to write a RIP RIM story?

[RH1Pearl]

Cancellation of BBM launch in Samsung phones in Africa. I heard that was Samsung' plan all along

[JakeTheCat]

Does anyone remember that e-mail Kevin received a while back from a marketing firm willing to assist in providing 'research' to media outlets willing to write a RIP RIM story?

Interestin! I never heard that story. He should have coughed up to see what they came up with and then provided a factual counterbalance. Can anyone provide a link to that?

[Tre Lawrence]

Of course it occurs. Why are you looking for denials when Sammy admitted to doing it LOL. Well discussed on CrackBerry; dirty guerrilla marketing at its, uh, finest.

But no, no outside entity has done more to harm BBRY than BBRY itself.

[JakeTheCat]

But no, no outside entity has done more to harm BBRY than BBRY itself.

Maybe yes, maybe no. I guess it depends on if you believe in the idea of a Tipping Point and/or if you believe that a woman should not wear "provocative clothing".

[Tre Lawrence]

Maybe yes, maybe no. I guess it depends on if you believe in the idea of a Tipping Point and/or if you believe that a woman should not wear "provocative clothing".

Actually, I think it's fairly black and white. I don't consider Samsung to be the mobile bogeyman. Most of its early guerrilla efforts were geared towards HTC, and I also believe HTC did more to shoot itself in the foot than Samsung could dream of doing.

I think it is folly to think that the nonsense Samsung did seriously injured BBRY's prospects, outside of introducing products that people seem to like.

[h20work]

Maybe yes, maybe no. I guess it depends on if you believe in the idea of a Tipping Point and/or if you believe that a woman should not wear "provocative clothing".

Equating this to rape????? Are you friggin kidding?

[MayhemMaybe]

Saw a new story about a 17 year old High School student who was being payed to write reviews on websites for things like home improvements and at that age had never owned a home much less had any such work done.

It's become the norm for companies to pay people to give 'independent' bad reviews and press on sites about the competitions products (they likely have never seen or used) and glowing ones of their own (also which they likely have never seen or used).

[ankush77]

bb has to work on its forte ,believe me if product is good nothing affects its success,Apple also had its own bashing,every company does,so what they are growing massively

[MartyMcfly]

Thank you RH1Pearl. I'll take that as a denial. Anyone else want to claim these practices don't occur?

More than likely. Companies are going to do whatever it takes to get inside of our wallets. Some campaigns are successful and some fail (c) Blackberry's wake up campaign.


Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk

[JakeTheCat]

h20work: Yes. To the extent that it occurs, causes harm, and then attempts to divert responsibility for the action I am absolutely equating it to "blaming the victim".

[Wiki Cydia]

h20work: Yes. To the extent that it occurs, causes harm, and then attempts to divert responsibility for the action I am absolutely equating it to "blaming the victim".

Why not just say "blaming the victim"? I mean, the whole "provocative clothing" thing added nothing to your argument, and just made the argument sound insensitive.

[sixpacker]

I worked for Sammy for a few years. They have no interest in bbry. They are at the top table, have massive resources and compete at a different level. This is just clutching at straws.

[JasW]

That April 2013 business is fairly well known old news, and was limited to Samsung Taiwan, from what I recall.

The latest brou-ha-ha about "falsifying" benchmark tests is much ado about nothing. The CPU on the Note 3 was found to automatically detect benchmark apps and max out the frequencies over all four cores during the entire time it is running one of these apps. Guess what? The HTC One and other Android devices do it, too. But it's not as if the Note 3, with its 2.3GHz CPU, runs regular apps like crap. It just runs them normally, with the CPU running dynamically over its frequency range.

Yawn.

And I really don't see what this has to do with BBRY, other than perhaps to wish that it had come out with a 2.3GHz quad core screamer with 3GB of RAM.

[Donvald]

If true, this is no more than fanboys already do; misrepresent a product they favour and castigate other products to put their favoured product in a good light. It happens even here. Android lag, anyone?

[kcdist]

If true, this is no more than fanboys already do; misrepresent a product they favour and castigate other products to put their favoured product in a good light. It happens even here. Android lag, anyone?

Yeah....well....this is a fan site. It's one thing to have overzealous enthusiasm for a product, it's another to spend hours every day trashing a company for compensation.

[Tre Lawrence]

Yeah....well....this is a fan site. It's one thing to have overzealous enthusiasm for a product, it's another to spend hours every day trashing a company for compensation.

So you believe folks here trash the company for money? You should report those members. I'm sure the site management will frown on that.

[texazzpete]

Samsung pays people to badmouth HTC in online reviews. At least the shills are getting paid.

CrackBerry diehards spread FUD about 'laggy Android' for ages FOR FREE. that's super lame people do that for free

[kcdist]

So you believe folks here trash the company for money? You should report those members. I'm sure the site management will frown on that.

And you're na�ve enough to believe it doesn't occur? As a long time stalker and occasional poster, I'm able to think of a number of members that, as soon as I see their name, I know 100% that the accompanying post will be negative or condescending. Rarely do they cross the line into hard-core trolling, and often, the posts are even articulate and reasonable, but always negative in tone.

Off the top of my head, I can think of Richardat, NJBlackberry, Phillip DZ(new) and n8tep@ac, but there are many others.

Ask the question: Who would spend dozens (hundreds?) of hours on a forum posting hundreds and/or thousands of comments concerning a product or company that they obviously despise unless for nefarious reasons? My answers are: disgruntled employees, paid posters or those with 'issues'. Surely they are not posting as a public service; to save others from making the wrong choice of supporting a product they don't like?

Go ahead. Read the posting history of the names I listed. I bet you will not find a single positive, pro-product/pro-company, or otherwise positive post among them.....then answer the question.....What's their motivation?

[JakeTheCat]

Why not just say "blaming the victim"?

I believe my original word choice has more impact and is therefore more effective. Your comments confirm that you at least paused to consider what point I was making and presumably wrestled with the validity of the comment. Thank you.

[JakeTheCat]

I think it is folly to think that the nonsense Samsung did seriously injured BBRY's prospects...

Thanks Tre. You come out strong with a confirmation but then followed up with a comment that seems to trivialise and excuse the activity. I understand exactly what you said but I'm not sure what to make of it all.

Nonetheless, you and JasW do make a great point. It is, apparently, old news yet it is being rehashed on an Apple-centric site. My original question was about fake or paid reviews/comments etc., to what extent they exist, and the harm those can cause products but I can see how this may just be an example of Apple taking a page out of the same book and smearing Samsung in a different way. My intention was not to be a part of that, but rather to get a better understanding of the true nature of this "dirty guerrilla marketing", as you put it.