<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>McGrath Dot Ca - Reviews - Internet Marketing Online &#187; ReviewMe</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mcgrath.ca/category/reviewme/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mcgrath.ca</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 23:36:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Why ReviewMe Advertorials could be good</title>
		<link>http://mcgrath.ca/2007/07/16/why-reviewme-advertorials-could-be-good/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=why-reviewme-advertorials-could-be-good</link>
		<comments>http://mcgrath.ca/2007/07/16/why-reviewme-advertorials-could-be-good/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:26:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve McGrath</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blogging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ReviewMe]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mcgrath.ca/2007/07/16/why-reviewme-advertorials-could-be-good/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Copyright © 2012 Steve McGrath. Visit the original article at http://mcgrath.ca/2007/07/16/why-reviewme-advertorials-could-be-good/. See free movies legally(and make money too)I think the ideal by ReviewME is a good one and I'm not opposed against it like many bloggers. Some bloggers (Dosh Dosh, ProBlogger, Blogoscoped, John Chow) do raised a few good points but it should not be [...]<script type="text/javascript">SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: "Why ReviewMe Advertorials could be good", url: "http://mcgrath.ca/2007/07/16/why-reviewme-advertorials-could-be-good/" });</script>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Copyright © 2012 <a href="http://mcgrath.ca">Steve McGrath</a>. Visit the original article at <a href="http://mcgrath.ca/2007/07/16/why-reviewme-advertorials-could-be-good/">http://mcgrath.ca/2007/07/16/why-reviewme-advertorials-could-be-good/</a>. <a href="http://www.seefreemovieslegally.com/">See free movies legally</a>(and make money too)<br /><p>I think the ideal by <a href="http://www.mcgrath.ca/recommended/reviewme.php" target="_blank">ReviewME</a> is a good one and I'm not opposed against it like many bloggers. Some bloggers (<a href="http://www.doshdosh.com/blog-marketing-metablogging-reviewme-advertorials/" target="_blank">Dosh Dosh</a>, <a href="http://www.problogger.net/archives/2007/07/12/reviewme-adds-advertorials-my-first-impressions/" target="_blank">ProBlogger</a>, <a href="http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2007-07-12-n47.html" target="_blank">Blogoscoped</a>, <a href="http://www.johnchow.com/reviewme-offers-advertorials/" target="_blank">John Chow</a>) do raised a few good points but it should not be dismissed off hand too quickly.</p>
<p><strong>Here is how <em>advertorial</em></strong><strong> could work for all parties(Advertiser, Blogger and Readers)</strong><a href="http://www.mcgrath.ca/recommended/reviewme.php" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.mcgrath.ca/img/reviewme_advertorial.jpg" title="ReviewMe Advertorial" alt="ReviewMe Advertorial" align="right" height="353" width="159" /></a></p>
<ul>
<li>It should be made clear to the readers. A new tag(<strong><em>advertorial post</em></strong>) should be created for that. This may help those using RSS/email to filter them out.</li>
<li>The advertiser should write it for the blog and not be a simple cut and paste that they reuse for other blogs. They could match it better with the style of the blogger.</li>
<li>Readers should look at it like a new way to know about a product/service.  It's not a new concept because newspapers and magazines use it now.</li>
<li>Bloggers should not have more than 1 or 2 per week.</li>
<li>Comments must be allowed and  let advertiser/blogger to respond to any questions. Comments should be focus to the product/service.</li>
<li>Bloggers could add their opinions if they want in the post(mini-review) or in the comments. They have the option to accept or not offer in the first case.  The fact it was posted means that the blogger like the product/service.</li>
</ul>
<p><em><strong>Show me the money</strong></em>!</p>
<p>Let's see how much I could earn with my blog. For now, a <a href="http://www.mcgrath.ca/recommended/reviewme.php" target="_blank">ReviewME</a> on my blog is only $80.</p>
<p>$40(50%) x 8 = $320/month</p>
<p>Considering that my PageRank is now 3 and should be 4-<strong>5 </strong>(iwebtools is not working now). This could be a very good money maker for the blog.</p>
<p><strong>Conclusion </strong></p>
<p>Bloggers and readers  should give it a chance and help make it better. If the money is good, a blogger could remove some advertisement that is not paying very much.</p>
<p><em><strong>Also in my case, the money earned could help me pay for reviews of other products/services. At the moment, I'm paying from my own pocket. And if you followed this blog, you know that I spent much more than what I could make in 2 months using </strong></em><strong><em>advertorial</em></strong><em><strong>.</strong></em></p>
<p><a href="http://sharethis.com/item?&wp=3.3.1&amp;publisher=5e2c81d7-b191-4595-9d2d-05ab683179b3&amp;title=Why+ReviewMe+Advertorials+could+be+good&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fmcgrath.ca%2F2007%2F07%2F16%2Fwhy-reviewme-advertorials-could-be-good%2F">ShareThis</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://mcgrath.ca/2007/07/16/why-reviewme-advertorials-could-be-good/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>John Chow troubles with Technorati rankings</title>
		<link>http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/24/john-chow-troubles-with-technorati-rankings/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=john-chow-troubles-with-technorati-rankings</link>
		<comments>http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/24/john-chow-troubles-with-technorati-rankings/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jun 2007 10:23:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve McGrath</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blogging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ranking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ReviewMe]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mcgrath.ca/2007/06/24/john-chow-troubles-with-technorati-rankings/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Copyright © 2012 Steve McGrath. Visit the original article at http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/24/john-chow-troubles-with-technorati-rankings/. See free movies legally(and make money too)John Chow has troubles with his Technorati that affect is ranking on ReviewME thus possible earnings. I was surprise to see on how high you have to get on Technorati to the have the 5 stars on ReviewME. [...]<script type="text/javascript">SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: "John Chow troubles with Technorati rankings", url: "http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/24/john-chow-troubles-with-technorati-rankings/" });</script>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Copyright © 2012 <a href="http://mcgrath.ca">Steve McGrath</a>. Visit the original article at <a href="http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/24/john-chow-troubles-with-technorati-rankings/">http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/24/john-chow-troubles-with-technorati-rankings/</a>. <a href="http://www.seefreemovieslegally.com/">See free movies legally</a>(and make money too)<br /><p><a href="http://www.johnchow.com/technorati-plays-favorites-with-the-top-100/" title="Technorati Plays Favorites With The Top 100" target="_blank">John Chow</a> has troubles with his Technorati that affect is ranking on <a href="http://www.mcgrath.ca/recommended/reviewme.php" target="_blank">ReviewME</a> thus possible earnings. I was surprise to see on how high you have to get on Technorati to the have the 5 stars on <a href="http://www.mcgrath.ca/recommended/reviewme.php" target="_blank">ReviewME</a>. Btw, he has a rank of 63 but got 133 from  <a href="http://www.mcgrath.ca/recommended/reviewme.php" target="_blank">ReviewME</a> .</p>
<p>Here is mine:</p>
<p><img src="http://www.mcgrath.ca/img/Technorati_ratings.jpg" title="Technorati on ReviewME" alt="Technorati on ReviewME" height="165" width="339" /></p>
<p>They will fix it but I would like to know how much is needed for each thing(Alexa, RSS...).</p>
<p>I guest I will have to work harder and be patient to get the $400  review. <img src='http://mcgrath.ca/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p><a href="http://sharethis.com/item?&wp=3.3.1&amp;publisher=5e2c81d7-b191-4595-9d2d-05ab683179b3&amp;title=John+Chow+troubles+with+Technorati+rankings&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fmcgrath.ca%2F2007%2F06%2F24%2Fjohn-chow-troubles-with-technorati-rankings%2F">ShareThis</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/24/john-chow-troubles-with-technorati-rankings/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>When a ReviewME goes wrong:  A Warning to Advertisers</title>
		<link>http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/09/when-a-reviewme-goes-wrong-a-warning-to-advertisers/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=when-a-reviewme-goes-wrong-a-warning-to-advertisers</link>
		<comments>http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/09/when-a-reviewme-goes-wrong-a-warning-to-advertisers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jun 2007 11:59:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve McGrath</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blogging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ReviewMe]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mcgrath.ca/2007/06/09/when-a-reviewme-goes-wrong-a-warning-to-advertisers/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Copyright © 2012 Steve McGrath. Visit the original article at http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/09/when-a-reviewme-goes-wrong-a-warning-to-advertisers/. See free movies legally(and make money too)After a disappointing result with traffic (i.e. 3 visits) from 10 open review($30USD/each) on ReviewME, I decided to pay more and get a review from a technology site. This experience should be read by advertisers and bloggers. Unfortunately [...]<script type="text/javascript">SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: "When a ReviewME goes wrong:  A Warning to Advertisers", url: "http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/09/when-a-reviewme-goes-wrong-a-warning-to-advertisers/" });</script>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Copyright © 2012 <a href="http://mcgrath.ca">Steve McGrath</a>. Visit the original article at <a href="http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/09/when-a-reviewme-goes-wrong-a-warning-to-advertisers/">http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/09/when-a-reviewme-goes-wrong-a-warning-to-advertisers/</a>. <a href="http://www.seefreemovieslegally.com/">See free movies legally</a>(and make money too)<br /><p><!--adsense#ad120x600-->After a <a href="http://www.mcgrath.ca/2007/05/26/review-my-experience-with-reviewmeboth-sides/" title="10 open reviews results" target="_blank">disappointing result with traffic </a>(i.e. 3 visits)   from 10  open review($30USD/each) on <a href="http://www.mcgrath.ca/reviewme.php" target="_blank">ReviewME</a>, I decided to pay more and get a review from a technology site. This experience should be read by advertisers and bloggers. Unfortunately  for me, it went wrong and here is the chain of events:</p>
<p><strong>May 21(Monday):</strong> I made an offer($250USD) to a publisher for a review of the <a href="http://www.mcgrathinfosolution.com/mis_en.htm" title="MIS specification" target="_blank">MIS Specification</a>. It was almost the same description I gave  for the 10 reviews.  I added a few things that would help the reviewer but the goal was the MIS specification. Here is the main task.</p>
<p>Review Details: MIS specification (text file metadata)</p>
<p><em>Background on the MIS Specification </em></p>
<p><strong>I want you to concentrate</strong> on what the MIS specification could do if used with electronic devices(DVD player, Media player, MP3 player). <em>The MIS specification is free for non-commercial projects I have an open competition for freeware/open source projects.</em></p>
<p>I even left my email if the reviewer wanted to contact me.</p>
<p><strong>May 22(Tuesday):</strong> Offer accepted</p>
<p><strong>May 23(Wednesday-Night):</strong> Published and <em>Pending Review</em>(the article is available for public viewing but the ReviewME staff must confirm it before any payment is done)</p>
<p><strong>May 23</strong><strong>(Wednesday, 10:40PM)</strong><strong>:</strong>  I see the review but it was way of course. Instead of writing mainly about the MIS specification(the 10 previous reviewer did), the reviewer wrote about Info2MIS with screenshots but it is still in beta(not finished). Granted, if I wanted a review about Info2MIS, it would had been a very good review but I would also paid much less. But for $250, I did not asked for a review on a unfinished(beta) application but on the MIS specification itself.</p>
<p>What was wrong with the review:</p>
<ul>
<li>It was not what I ordered</li>
<li>No lines  about the programmer's competition and being free for open source/free projects.</li>
<li>The links to my site did not work at all and did not have a link to the <em>MIS specification</em>(main goal). I can't know what impact it did but a reader of that blog(mostly tech savvy) would  had simply cut and paste the link. But who would when the reviewer wrote about the many troubles he had with Info2MIS(it is a beta). No increase in traffic.</li>
<li>He saw the Flash video tutorial's after testing Info2MIS(not the goal) and that would had help him in the first place. He did see that he could create .MIS in 2 clicks for movie.</li>
<li>Only the last part of the review was about about the MIS specification and it was very, very brief.</li>
</ul>
<p>I immediately sent a email to ReviewME stating that the review was wrong(not what I ordered) and wanted it to be redone or get a refund.</p>
<p><strong>May 24(Thursday):</strong> No word from ReviewME but the review disappear(got error 404) and I checked  a few pages to be sure . Ok,  the harm was done but no one else will see it now. It's Memorial Day and a long weekend for most of the staff. I would need to wait.</p>
<p><strong>May 28(</strong><strong>Monday 8h55pm</strong><strong>):</strong> The review was accepted even with bad links. I only saw it the morning after(29) .</p>
<p><strong>May 29(</strong><strong>Tuesday</strong><strong>):</strong>  Still no word and now the review was up again.  Clicking on the link from the confirmation email, I get a error 404. I also notice that my link to the MIS specification in the ordered description is not there anymore and points to Reviewme instead(???). I sent again an email on what was going on and also checked my credit card: No $250 charged.  To do damage control, I did not have the choice to change the site a little just in case. I did not want to reply in the original post because it was like validating it and was still waiting for ReviewME.</p>
<p><strong>Tip to reviewers</strong>: Don't change the original link or at least, wait a month.</p>
<p><strong>May 31(</strong><strong>Thursday</strong><strong>):</strong> No word, so I sent another email and, meanwhile, my credit card was charged for $250($273.21CAD) on May 28. A few hours later, I got a reply: the link to my article was changed but nothing about my previous emails. I replied again with the content of my first email of <strong>May 23</strong>.  A few hours later, they replied that the links did not work and will be referring my case to the ReviewME billing department.</p>
<p><strong>June 6</strong><strong>(Wednesday)</strong><strong>:</strong> Still no word, so I sent another email about getting an update and if they could fix my other troubles(publisher side). A few hours later, I'm approved in the ReviewMe publisher marketplace. I can ask the price I want  and I get the <em>nice badge</em> on the sidebar. Yet, I did not get an answer about the review itself.</p>
<p><strong>June 7(</strong><strong>Thursday</strong><strong>):</strong> I got an email about a refund but nothing was showing on my credit card at that moment. I email again to state that fact and would check that day and the day after. I also asked if the review would be removed from the publisher site.</p>
<p><strong>June 8(</strong><strong>Friday</strong><strong>):</strong> I got a refund on my card dated <strong>June 8</strong>($260.03CAD) but lost money even with a refund. The review was still there.</p>
<p><strong>My recommendations to make it better</strong></p>
<p>I will be constructive here and proposed a few things for ReviewME:</p>
<ul>
<li>The advertiser must approve a review first(private). Most reviews are positive and constructive and that process can be fast anyway. The staff seems to be overloaded(accepting reviews with bad links) and this simple step will be to the advertiser.</li>
<li>If not possible, a method to flag(with a note) a review without the need to email the staff. The email system is bad anyway because many emails are not answered. Plus, it take too much times between them. The flag value could be a a number of specific options like:  Negative, URL missing/not working, Wrong subject ... Also, a list could be generated for them and show the urgent cases. A $10 review does not have the same impact than a $400 review.</li>
<li>Require publishers to have contact information(email) on the sites.  It may use to correct small errors/facts. I did it <a href="http://www.mcgrath.ca/2007/05/25/tip-doing-reviews-create-an-about-page-with-an-email-on-your-blog/" target="_blank">before</a>.</li>
<li>Make a bigger window for writing the description of the task. I use a text editor before hand but it would be the last chance to check the description.</li>
<li>Have a staff for the weekend/holiday because reviews a posted anytime from around the world. An holiday in the U.S. may be a regular day in another country. Again, if the advertiser could accept or not a review, a staff would not be needed.</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>What do I think now</strong></p>
<p>The ideal for paying for a sponsored review is still good for those with a small advertising budget. It can give some important feedback and <strong>if it's done well and within parameters,</strong> may bring a lot of awareness about a product or service. But be warn that it could backfire like mine did. It is then that the support is important. If you time your review with the launch of product or service, a "wrong" review may cost you much more.</p>
<p>In my case, it was not because the review was negative about Info2MIS, in fact it was constructive.  But it was not what I ordered.  It's like ordering a 12 inch pizza with a small fries but getting a family size fries(not cooked enough)  with a small slice of pizza. The slice maybe good but it's not what was ordered in the first place. Also, the fries would leave a bad impression on a excellent pizza.</p>
<p>In the case of ReviewME, the lack of support for advertisers is very poor and it's even worst for publishers. I still had some issues in that department and that took many weeks to be corrected. An advertiser pay 100% markup because they take 50%(it's much more than the competition) of the price of the review <strong>BUT</strong> they don't have a real support system <strong>WHEN</strong> you need them. If they take some of my recommendations, they will be better and offer some protections to advertisers. Just the step of making the advertiser approve a review would liberate the staff to deal with the non positive reviews.</p>
<p><strong>Conclusion</strong></p>
<p>Finally, it's not an isolated case from the 11 reviews I ordered so far. I will  recommend <a href="http://www.mcgrath.ca/reviewme.php" target="_blank">ReviewME</a> for now because it' one of the primary review services for many major bloggers. But you should be aware of those facts with the hope that situation correct itself fast.</p>
<p>After all this, I don't have anymore bad feelings toward the publisher or <a href="http://www.mcgrath.ca/reviewme.php" target="_blank">ReviewME</a>. I learned a lot from those ordered reviews. When I will make my next review, <strong>I won't be shy in asking questions</strong> if I feel it's going negative or have doubts/interrogations. Plus, I <em>may</em> first send my recommendation to let the advertiser take the necessary steps. They may not be all taken or corrected in that short time but the reader will be better serve by this.</p>
<p><a href="http://sharethis.com/item?&wp=3.3.1&amp;publisher=5e2c81d7-b191-4595-9d2d-05ab683179b3&amp;title=When+a+ReviewME+goes+wrong%3A++A+Warning+to+Advertisers&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fmcgrath.ca%2F2007%2F06%2F09%2Fwhen-a-reviewme-goes-wrong-a-warning-to-advertisers%2F">ShareThis</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://mcgrath.ca/2007/06/09/when-a-reviewme-goes-wrong-a-warning-to-advertisers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Review: My experience with ReviewMe(both sides)</title>
		<link>http://mcgrath.ca/2007/05/26/review-my-experience-with-reviewmeboth-sides/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=review-my-experience-with-reviewmeboth-sides</link>
		<comments>http://mcgrath.ca/2007/05/26/review-my-experience-with-reviewmeboth-sides/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 May 2007 13:27:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve McGrath</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blogging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ranking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ReviewMe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Traffic]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mcgrath.ca/2007/05/26/review-my-experience-with-reviewmeboth-sides/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Copyright © 2012 Steve McGrath. Visit the original article at http://mcgrath.ca/2007/05/26/review-my-experience-with-reviewmeboth-sides/. See free movies legally(and make money too)Recently, I decided to create an account on ReviewMe to review both sides(blogger/advertiser). What is ReviewMe It's a way to bring both advertisers and bloggers together. The advertiser pay the blogger to review a site or product. With [...]<script type="text/javascript">SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: "Review: My experience with ReviewMe(both sides)", url: "http://mcgrath.ca/2007/05/26/review-my-experience-with-reviewmeboth-sides/" });</script>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Copyright © 2012 <a href="http://mcgrath.ca">Steve McGrath</a>. Visit the original article at <a href="http://mcgrath.ca/2007/05/26/review-my-experience-with-reviewmeboth-sides/">http://mcgrath.ca/2007/05/26/review-my-experience-with-reviewmeboth-sides/</a>. <a href="http://www.seefreemovieslegally.com/">See free movies legally</a>(and make money too)<br /><p>Recently, I decided to create an account on <a href="http://www.reviewme.com/?ref=16353" title="ReviewMe" target="_blank">ReviewMe</a> to review both sides(blogger/advertiser).</p>
<p><strong>What is ReviewMe</strong></p>
<p>It's a way to bring both advertisers and bloggers together.  The advertiser pay the blogger to review a site or product. With ReviewMe, the advertiser can't ask for a positive review. The review must be available for at least 30 days.</p>
<p><em><strong>Like a Blogger, writing for the very first time </strong></em></p>
<p>After a few days(no offers), I finally decided to make a <strong>trial run</strong> on a <a href="http://www.mcgrath.ca/2007/05/11/review-zune-art-site/" title="Zune Art site" target="_blank">$5 open review</a>.  The advertiser paid $10 for it.  I took my time and it was almost 500 words(minimum is 200 words). For the advertiser, it was a real deal because I would had normally asked much more than that.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, I can't change what I want to charge for a review.  That option is not available to me but it is for top blogs. I can't even find my blog in the blog search box. Again, it's only available to top blogs. I taught that once I would had written my first review, my ranking/options would had been updated. It was not. I did contact them about this but nothing was done so far.</p>
<p>A review can be positive or negative and the advertiser take a chance. Unless the site/product is a scam(should be filtered in the first place), I would suggest to offer constructive criticizing. This way, they receive some feedback and can act accordingly later. They may had the same review offered to many bloggers to get a wide range of opinions. Also, make it possible to them to <a href="http://www.mcgrath.ca/2007/05/25/tip-doing-reviews-create-an-about-page-with-an-email-on-your-blog/" title="About page and email" target="_blank">contact</a> you directly.</p>
<p>Finding open campaigns is not very easy. I must edit my site, change category and browse campaigns. So, if you have a blog that touch many subject, you have to redo those steps.</p>
<p><strong>Tip for bloggers:</strong> Keep the review passed the 30 days because the advertisers may searched for your older reviews.</p>
<p><strong>Advertise This!</strong></p>
<p>To test the open campaign, I ordered 10 review at $30 each($15 for the blogger). I paid more considering it was on the <a href="http://www.mcgrathinfosolution.com/mis_en.htm" title="MIS specification">MIS specification</a>.  I can't chose who will do the review.</p>
<p>It took 15 tries(slots) to get my 10 reviews and it lasted 15 days. The reasons were either passed due or rejected.</p>
<p>4 were flagged by me:</p>
<ul>
<li>The first one was cut and paste word for word from my description about the review except for 1 paragraph</li>
<li>The second because the last line mentioned my product but the rest of the review was not related to my product. Plus, it did not mentioned it was sponsored.</li>
<li>The third one because  it look like it was process into a software to generate a semi-coherent review. That person tried 3 times that I asked to banned that person, at least from this campaign and hopefully from others.</li>
<li>The fourth one because the link to my review pointed to my own product and it was accepted. I never saw the review or found the blogger</li>
</ul>
<p>ReviewMe decided to make my review available again thus the 15 tries. I'm willing to give a chance but to a point.</p>
<p><strong>Now then, what did I get for my $30/review</strong></p>
<p>Some are better than others(I emailed them) and some did a few cut and paste from my description and my sites with some variations. Overall, they stick to what I asked of them. For the blogger, it was $15 for a review. Even in Canada, it's a good pay for 1 hour($16.55CDN) of work if it did took that long for some of them.</p>
<p>A new feature was  added to rate the blogger. This will come handy.</p>
<p><strong>How was the traffic?</strong></p>
<p>Only 3 visits so far with 2 from the same site.</p>
<p><strong>Conclusion </strong></p>
<p>For me, this was a complete failure and lost of money($300) for my product.  My only chance is that one of them start to be popular(Google PR4+) and people find that review and want to know more about it.</p>
<p>At the moment, I'm trying a $250 review(1 specific blog). It's not going well(waiting for ReviewMe) but this will be another post. So, stay tune!</p>
<p>What was your experience with them(advertiser or blogger)? Do you leave a comment in sponsored reviews?</p>
<p><a href="http://sharethis.com/item?&wp=3.3.1&amp;publisher=5e2c81d7-b191-4595-9d2d-05ab683179b3&amp;title=Review%3A+My+experience+with+ReviewMe%28both+sides%29&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fmcgrath.ca%2F2007%2F05%2F26%2Freview-my-experience-with-reviewmeboth-sides%2F">ShareThis</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://mcgrath.ca/2007/05/26/review-my-experience-with-reviewmeboth-sides/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

