BTW - she took this screenshot and sent it us via email. She completely misinterpreted what she saw.
She's saying it's libel before the word "hijacking" was used. This is what was actually written.
Originally Posted by Caryatid /img/forum/go_quote.gif
We've been sort of hijacking the subscriptions thread, so I figured we may as well jump in here.
I received a VIP invitation today, so I went ahead and took the plunge, seeing as it was through PayPal so I should have some recourse if I need to cancel or the products are not as advertised. Right now, I'm having trouble looking past the cons of this company, but if you tell me "Chanel" I get a little warm and smooshy inside, so I decided to give this company a month (especially since the first month is nearly always the best...)
Here are the cons of what I am seeing so far:
1. Brands - Should we really expect that Chanel and Burberry are going to be sending out deluxe-sized samples to a company registered to an email address along the lines of "foxymomma"?
2. Quality of products - If the products are allegedly Chanel and Burberry, are they discontinued products? Are they genuine? I hate to say it, but I suspect there could be knockoffs...
3. Price - We're paying $29.99 for the products. If it isn't all it's cracked up to be, you could just go ahead and buy a Chanel polish or eyeshadow for that price off their website and know you're getting something good.
4. Website - The website is horrible; I can't lie. I'm not saying that something like Beauty Box 5 is "couture" (lol), but at least they have a polished and professional look, even with a website template.
She also took a screenshot of Sephora where a moderator from Sephora thought the company was fraudulent. Again that's not on MUT but Sephora.
BTW - slander is spoken not written. The correct word - if this was accurate - would be libel.
She also took a screen shot of my FB post where I told MY readers to avoid this company or any other company that states you're paying for membership and not products. I did state that and will continue to state that I would avoid any company that makes that statement!
Remember those links to Twitter that I posted... First that particular Twitter account is linked on their website. And in the email she claims it's personal information. No it's not. Once it's on Twitter it's NOT personal information!
If you would like to see her one the "exibit" files she sent here it is.
http://sharesend.com/qw116
She's saying it's libel before the word "hijacking" was used. This is what was actually written.
Originally Posted by Caryatid /img/forum/go_quote.gif
We've been sort of hijacking the subscriptions thread, so I figured we may as well jump in here.
I received a VIP invitation today, so I went ahead and took the plunge, seeing as it was through PayPal so I should have some recourse if I need to cancel or the products are not as advertised. Right now, I'm having trouble looking past the cons of this company, but if you tell me "Chanel" I get a little warm and smooshy inside, so I decided to give this company a month (especially since the first month is nearly always the best...)
Here are the cons of what I am seeing so far:
1. Brands - Should we really expect that Chanel and Burberry are going to be sending out deluxe-sized samples to a company registered to an email address along the lines of "foxymomma"?
2. Quality of products - If the products are allegedly Chanel and Burberry, are they discontinued products? Are they genuine? I hate to say it, but I suspect there could be knockoffs...
3. Price - We're paying $29.99 for the products. If it isn't all it's cracked up to be, you could just go ahead and buy a Chanel polish or eyeshadow for that price off their website and know you're getting something good.
4. Website - The website is horrible; I can't lie. I'm not saying that something like Beauty Box 5 is "couture" (lol), but at least they have a polished and professional look, even with a website template.
She also took a screenshot of Sephora where a moderator from Sephora thought the company was fraudulent. Again that's not on MUT but Sephora.
BTW - slander is spoken not written. The correct word - if this was accurate - would be libel.
She also took a screen shot of my FB post where I told MY readers to avoid this company or any other company that states you're paying for membership and not products. I did state that and will continue to state that I would avoid any company that makes that statement!
Remember those links to Twitter that I posted... First that particular Twitter account is linked on their website. And in the email she claims it's personal information. No it's not. Once it's on Twitter it's NOT personal information!
If you would like to see her one the "exibit" files she sent here it is.
http://sharesend.com/qw116
