EssayScam ForumEssayScam.org
Unanswered      
  
Posts by ProfessorVerb / Posting Activity: ☆☆ 192
I am: Freelance Writer - Regular / United States 
Joined: May 27, 2011
Last Post: Dec 09, 2024
Threads: 35
Posts: 829  
- Remember: "I write it right with all my might!"
Displayed posts: 677 / page 9 of 17
sort: Latest first   Oldest first   |
ProfessorVerb   
Aug 31, 2015

've had "managing editors" at a certain unnamed company demand incorrect changes on other incorrect changes under the threat of being financially penalized

Alas, that's their job -- they have to change stuff -- even if it's wrong. That would be a terrible job...worse than working in fast food or janitorial or even senate page.
ProfessorVerb   
Aug 31, 2015

No music. No nothing. Go away. I'm writing. It ain't easy. Let me edit that please. I did tell my 4-year-old daughter that she could interrupt me whenever she wanted because she is far more important than anything I was doing. That worked out well...
ProfessorVerb   
Aug 31, 2015

No single freelancer bothers to warn students about the usability extent of the papers, right?

I certainly don't -- that would be hypocritical and I'm not a hypocrite. I just try to make sure that everything I provide is nailed down tight and responsive to the assignment guidelines. Some (not most) of my clients tell me that they intend to modify my work product to suit their specific needs, and I always encourage collaboration (these are my favorite clients). I also use peer-reviewed and scholarly sources to support my views. After that, they're own their own, but I think I have helped a large number of students overcome their writing block and/or manage their time more efficiently by showing them how it's done. This is not to say I've performed a public service, but it is to say that my clients can trust me to provide them with what they ordered rather than a plagiarized piece of garbage. No one benefits from that except the fly-by-nights and we know who they are. By the way, I'm a big fan.
ProfessorVerb   
May 22, 2015

a credit is worthless for the same reason that you wouldn't want a "credit" for another meal at a restaurant in compensation for a meal that you thought was disgusting

HOMER
Your old meat made me sick!

APU
Oh, I'm so sorry. (pulls out a bucket from under the counter) Please accept five pounds of frozen shrimp.

HOMER
(holds one up and sniffs it) This shrimp isn't frozen! And it smells funny!

APU
(brings out another bucket) Okay, ten pounds.

HOMER
Woohoo!
ProfessorVerb   
Apr 28, 2015
General Talk / Plagiarism or NOT? Need help [11]

You cannot self-plagiarize

APA policy on self-plagiarism:

Just as researchers do not present the work of others as their own (plagiarism), they do not present their own previously published work as new scholarship (self-plagiarism). There are, however, limited circumstances (e.g., describing the details of an instrument or an analytic approach) under which authors may wish to duplicate without attribution (citation) their previously used words, feeling that extensive self referencing is undesirable or awkward. When the duplicated words are limited in scope, this approach is permissible. When duplication of one's own words is more extensive, citation of the duplicated words should be the norm. What constitutes the maximum acceptable length of duplicated material is difficult to define but must conform to legal notions of fair use. The general view is that the core of the new document must constitute an original contribution to knowledge, and only the amount of previously published material necessary to understand that contribution should be included, primarily in the discussion of theory and methodology.

docs.google.com/document/d/1nq6KIhBwrzOW3oDqrTuejWLSAL_hiE4BsI-M00HyXRs/edit?pli=1
ProfessorVerb   
Mar 26, 2015

It's close...

India has the largest human population on earth

Population of India: 1,236,344,631 (July 2014 est.)
" " China: 1,355,692,576 (July 2014 est.)

Source: CIA World Factbook
ProfessorVerb   
Mar 16, 2015

I haven't submitted a paper for resale since 2003, but I've earned more than $10,000 from the several hundred papers I submitted for resale prior to that time. You won't get rich, that's for sure, but there is some money involved (I've sold a few papers more than a dozen times).
ProfessorVerb   
Feb 27, 2015

I've experienced most of these in varying degrees over the years, especially:

75. Here's a fun one. Some clients send me project requests with ample time in which to do them - say, two months for 50 pages. When I send the quote, I hear nothing back. Three days before the thing is due, I get a frantic email begging me to please help, they were scammed by a cheaper company, and now they have run out of time.

This has happened to me at least a dozen times.

52. Screaming fights on email (and sometimes by phone) to argue over what are, and are not, mistakes are some of my happiest moments (to be read with biting sarcasm). It is phenomenally annoying to have to explain, over and over, that "yours" does not have an apostrophe, and why not.

My most memorable episode involved a 70-page study that a client returned with the angry comments that it was "full of apostrophes" and "APA says you can't use apostrophes." He had changed all of the sentences (and there were a lot of them) than contained an apostrophe and provided me with a PDF handout from his university explaining why. The handout stated that APA prohibited the use of all apostrophes because they were contractions. I had to explain to the client the difference between possessives and contractions and support it with citations from APA. Unbelievable.

51. I love it when clients want to know if I still have the articles from their literature review which I did six months ago. Yes, sweetheart, I keep everything on my computer forever from every paper I've ever done.

I used to do this too until my computer became too heavy to lift.

4. Here's one that has nothing to do with clients, writers, staff, family, friends, or anyone else - anyone other than dissertation review committees, that is. Can there be anything worse than a professor who "corrects" my writing and renders it "less correct?" How about professors who don't know APA style?

I've heard it said that the desire to change another person's copy is one of the most powerful human emotions, and I believe it. I've had several instances where my material has been changed (without a careful reading) so that it reads incorrectly or the meaning has been changed. Yep, this really irks me too.

73. When 20 year old frat boys want to flirt with me on the phone.

This has not really been a problem for me to date.
ProfessorVerb   
Dec 13, 2014

was this solely academic ghostwriting?

Yes, except for the two liquor stores I knocked over and my royalties from a cameo appearance in "Professor Verb: Doctor of Love."
ProfessorVerb   
Jun 23, 2014
Essay Services / Is sunbeamsvc a scammer? [66]

The Aussies call it "maize." Despite $100 Aussie dollars equaling 65 cents, they are friendly and cordial and I like them.
ProfessorVerb   
Jun 23, 2014

How many of you have actually experienced mortar fire? It's terrifying. Maybe everyone should lighten up, huh?
ProfessorVerb   
Jun 23, 2014

That's as soon as I recognized the potential -- in 1998.

I suspect that some users here were not born by then or were too young to recognize the opportunity. I ran a life expectancy program after my wife claimed she would live to be 80 years and found that I'm a dead man walking. Get 'em while they're hot.
ProfessorVerb   
Jun 23, 2014
Essay Services / Is sunbeamsvc a scammer? [66]

As I've said before, Aussies are among my favorite clients.
ProfessorVerb   
May 13, 2014

Beware of this UK client: naweed

Product Review Websites



What I was provided with:

Research Problem

Word-of-mouth contentAn investigation into the influence of electronic word-of-mouth on professional product review websites versus user-generated content based product reviews, in the decision to purchase a next generation console.

Literature Review

Introduction

The significance of the following research is critical in understanding relevant key terms and theory from which a suitable research problem shall be defined. Furthermore, it will provide the necessary foundations needed in order to set appropriate research objectives.

Electronic Word of Mouth

Many acknowledgeable researchers within the study of word-of-mouth (WOM) and electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) marketing have recognised the importance of its contribution within consumer behaviour. Whilst the majority of research in the past has focused on WOM in an offline context, current trends have caused a shift in focus to WOM occurring online. Keller and Berry (2006) noted that 90 per cent of WOM communication takes place offline, however a more recent study written by Prendergast et al., (2010) makes reference to this and states that as consumers are becoming more reliant on the internet, the role of eWOM continues to grow. Furthermore, the rapid evolution of social media has taken eWOM to the next level. As a result virtual communities have advanced to the point where consumers are able to share opinions amongst each other at the click of a button (e.g. YouTube), prompting an increase in brand related discussions. Additional examples of eWOM platforms include product review websites, retailer's websites (e.g. amazon), brand's websites (e.g. community.eu.playstation.com), personal blogs and forums (Bickart & Schindler 2001; Khammash et al., 2006 Lee and Youn, 2009). It is no wonder then that eWOM has become one of the most significant "consumer touch-points" in regards to deciding about products, brands and services (Keller & Libai, 2009). With this being the case, the influence of eWOM on consumer decision making has gathered interest from researchers and organisations that can no longer ignore its significance.

An agreed upon definition of electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) cited by various authors (Chu and Kim, 2011; Prendergast et al., 2010; Thorson and Rodgers, 2006) originates from the work of Hennig-Thurau et al., (2004) which has been evaluated in order to understand it's suitability within the context of this literature.

"Any positive or negative statement made by potential, actual, or former customers about a product or company which is made available to a multitude of people and institutions via the internet".

Currently, research into the influence of positive and negative word-of-mouth (WOM) on consumer purchase probability, online or offline provides this literature with significant findings. Generally, it has been assumed that positive (or negative) WOM has a positive (or negative) influence on an individual or "receiver" searching for an opinion of a product. However, Fitzsimons and Lehmann (2004) observed the opposite and found that in some cases, people would react against negative comments resulting in further commitment to that brand. This adverse reaction occurred when:

- people are directed to do things they do not wish to do,

- the WOM receiver disagrees with the values of the advisor, or

- when prior commitment of a brand prevents the consumer from fully accepting useful negative information about a brand.

A recent study evaluated the influence of positive and negative WOM on purchase probability. It considered various "interpersonal" and "non-interpersonal" factors and concluded the extent to which each influenced the receiver's purchase probability, as illustrated in figure 1.

Figure 1: Factors associated with impact of positive and negative WOM on shift in receiver's purchase probability.

These interpersonal factors are "tie strength, sender's experience, sender's strength of expression and how actively WOM is sought". Figure 2 breaks down these factors into further descriptors in order to provide a greater understanding of each.

Figure 2: Interpersonal factors measuring the impact on the shift in receiver's purchase probability.

The influence of tie strength, which is essentially the strength of the relationship between the sender and receiver, is of particular interest. In strong tie relationships, the influence of WOM (positive and negative) on purchase probability would increase whereas weak tie strengths caused the opposite to occur. Whilst this may be the case for WOM (positive and negative) in an offline environment, could the same conclusion be made for WOM (positive and negative) in an online environment? Under the assumption that it does, one could argue that (positive and negative) eWOM would have a decreased influence on purchase probability. This assumption would be based on the fact that "tie strength" between senders and receivers in eWOM are usually formed of multiple weak ties. This is because it is possible for anyone on the internet to submit information (positive and negative eWOM) about a product or brand on a variety of online platform's. Consequently, determining the quality and credibility of eWOM has often been difficult for consumers. This is because the person submitting eWOM in the form of a review or opinion does not feel much responsibility for the consequences involved, as it will often be read by complete strangers (Kadi, 1995; Granitz & Ward, 1996 as cited by Lee & Youn, 2009). As a result, there is an increased possibility that inaccurate information is passed on to receivers of that information (Bailey, 2004). However, whilst this may be the case in some situations, it is not necessarily always the case as there are often many genuine and reliable product reviews available online.

Electronic WOM allows users to remain anonymous, thus allowing them to share opinions of a brand more comfortably resulting in an increase of eWOM interactions taking place. In addition, eWOM communicators are not restricted by the receiver's social circle. It is the combination of these factors that result in the increased possibility of finding people with product expertise amongst weak tie communicators, which is advantageous in developing product judgments. However, it is this anonymity that causes credibility to become questionable (Schindler & Bickart 2005; Catterjee 2001; Lee & Youn 2009). According to Chatterjee as cited by Lee & Youn (2009) the ability for marketers to influence eWOM by "compensating consumers to review products" and even "posting their own product reviews" has made it even more difficult to determine the credibility of electronic WOM. It is therefore not uncommon for consumers to search through a variety of online platforms in the pursuit for credible product reviews.

These eWOM platforms are often perceived as either being "marketer-generated" or "non-marketer-generated" websites (Lee & Youn, 2009). This comes into question when evaluating the organisation or person who has control over the information being sought after, because of the ability to adapt this information to better suit their own interests (Lee & Youn, 2009). As a result, this perception on eWOM platforms is important because consumers may be suspicious that "consumer-generated" product reviews on "marketer-generated" have selling intentions.

. Thus, whether a website is marketer-generated or not seems to be important because consumers may suspect that consumer-generated product recommendations on marketer-generated websites have selling intents (Senecal & Nantel 2004; Xue & Phelps 2004; Schindler & Bickart 2005). It is assumed that persuasion of a consumer-generated product review is decreased to the extent that there is high possibility of a marketer's involvement that would influence the reviewer to provide a biased representation of the product's actual performance in the review.

Furthermore, findings concluded that when senders were perceived as knowledgeable, receivers were more motivated in actively seeking information (positive or negative WOM) from them, indicating a positive relation between "sender's experience" and "how actively WOM is sought" (figure 2). Likewise, strong tie strengths motivated receivers to actively seek positive WOM (empirical evidence for negative WOM was not found) information, indicating a positive relation between "tie strength" and "how actively WOM is sought" (figure 2).

The practical implication of these empirical results is that companies should pay particular attention to the consumers who are most motivated to seek advice actively (less experienced consumers who perceive more risk in the purchase) to maximize their exposure to positive communications from senders perceived as knowledgeable and with whom they have strong ties and minimize their exposure to negative communications from senders perceived as experts.

(evidence for negative WOM was not found).

The current findings indicate that, when senders are perceived as knowledgeable, the receivers are motivated to actively seek information (positive or negative WOM) from them. Thus, a significant positive relation exists between the two constructs.

Likewise, when the tie between senders and receivers is strong, the receivers are motivated to actively seek positive WOM information (empirical evidence for negative WOM was not found).

Conversely, the receiver's experience was also found to be a significant indicator of how actively WOM is sought. The more knowledgeable people are or the more experience they possess, the less intense will be the active search for information (positive or negative WOM).

Furthermore, the greater the receiver's experience, the less risk they will perceive in the purchase; and the greater the perceived risk, the more active the search for WOM information (positive or negative WOM).

"sender's strength of expression" followed by "how actively WOM is sought" had the greatest influence of all the interpersonal factors illustrated in figures 1 and 2. When "sender's strength of expression" was seen to be high and WOM (positive and negative) was being sought after, WOM had a significant impact on influencing receiver's purchase probability. Strength of expression is the activity in which the receiver seeks information from senders with product expertise. In other words, if the receiver perceives the sender's "knowledge, competence, education and experience in the product category" is seen as high. Thus, if the receiver perceives the senders know

Dellarocas et al. (2007) note how the practice of reviewing products online has greatly increased potential for empirical understanding of WOM marketing: while articulated reviews vanish shortly after they are spoken, and are therefore tremendously difficult to capture and analyse, online reviews persist long after they are posted. Breazeale (2009) states that 'digital platforms are changing our very understanding and nature of the significance of eWOM', and sums it nicely thus: 'WOM no longer vanishes instantly and it is not necessarily spontaneous. There may also be a reduced perception that the communicator is in fact non-commercial or even an actual consumer at all.' As a result, online reviews leave an easily accessible and long-lasting record of opinions; moreover, anyone is free to tap in to these records, although care should be taken to validate the source of the eWOM. Further, Zhu and Zhang (2010) indicate that online reviews are a strong reflection of overall WOM, and can therefore be used as a proxy for traditional WOM.

As a result, one might consider the role of professional product review websites versus consumer-generated product reviews.
The organisation or person who has control over this information has the ability to change
as an alternative source of credible and reliable information (e.g. cnet). In fact, even these come under question.

Specifically, the receiver will seek information more actively from a sender seen as expert: in other words, someone who has a high level of knowledge, competence, education, and experience in the product category (Netemeyer and Bearden, 1992).

By contrast, if the receiver perceives the sender's knowledge, competence, education, and experience in the product category is low, the receiver is likely to be less predisposed to seek or request information from the sender to form an intention or make a purchase decision.

In terms of "sender's experience" senders which were perceived as knowledgeable would actively increase the receiver's motivation to search positive and negative WOM opinions, whilst "tie strength" that was deemed to be strong had the same effect (positive WOM only). Consequently, these factors led to an increase in terms of "how actively WOM is sought" by the receiver resulting in a shift in their purchase probability.

Non-interpersonal factors are the "receiver's loyalty, perceived risk and experience". In figure's 2 and 3 these factors have been broken down further in order to provide greater understanding of each.

Figure 3: The impact of non-interpersonal factors on the shift in receiver's purchase probability.

In addition, in terms of the brand loyalty, (2013) found that as the receiver's brand loyalty increased the impact of positive and negative WOM would have less impact on the shift in purchase probability. Furthermore, it was found that receiver's with greater confidence in making decisions would perceive less risk in the purchase of a product thus becoming more active in seeking information of positive and negative WOM. To summarise, it is evident that each of these factors influence the shift in receiver's purchase probability, either directly or indirectly, positively and/or negatively, some to a further extent than others. It provides future research with the data and factor's necessary to

it is evident that each of these factors influence

Each of these factors governed the extent study concluded that

It concludes that positive WOM had a positive impact and negative WOM had a negative impact on consumer's brand purchasing probability respectively. These results provide a useful starting point for future research. Whilst this research assesses positive and negative WOM in an offline context man of

Attribution Theory

Whilst the above study was based on WOM in an offline context,

Whilst the above study is an offline context, the same

An illustration and explanation of strong and weak ties can be seen in appendix one.

An example of strong tie strength could be the relationship between family members or a group of friends.

whereas an example of weak tie strength is the relationship between two strangers. Therefore, it is more likely that a recommendation based on a strong tie is more likely to influence purchase decisions because of the credibility the WOM interaction is based on. Research results released by media agency 'Zentith Optimedia' agree with this statement and concluded that "Recommendations from family and friends trump all other consumer touch-points when it comes to influencing purchases" (Advertising Age, 2008).

In order to establish a suitable research problem, a thorough process of evaluating secondary research was undertaken. Consequently, gaps within relevant literature had been identified and recommendations of future research made by previous academics were taken into consideration. Utilisation of concepts and theories within the study of user-generated content and electronic word-of-mouth set the foundation of analysis for suitable research objectives.

that it is any statement

"any positive or negative statement made by potential, actual, or former customers about a product or company, which is made available to a multitude of people and institutions via the internet".

The first part of this definition takes into account positive and negative statements.
Although this definition remains adequate to the above studies, it is important to evaluate its suitability within the context of this project.

- "Any positive or negative statement made by potential, actual or former customers about a product or company".

This part of the definition takes into account positive and negative statements. The importance of this in the context of this study is that it also aims to take into account positive and negative statements in the decision to purchase an XB1 or PS4. It also recognises that not everyone who contributes in eWOM is a current customer of the companies in question. The significance of this is that not all interviewees that choose to take part in this study will actually own an XB1 or PS4.

- "Which is made available to a multitude of people and institutions via the internet".

This part of the definition recognises the online presence of WOM and the availability of it to a multitude of people and institutions. In the context of this study, its focus shall also remain on WOM interactions occurring exclusively on the internet. The definition also recognises the eWOM is not exclusively available to consumers of a brand. It is also available to the brand themselves. What this means is that brands have the ability to influence eWOM in their favour.

This raises important questions which include:

- What significance does eWOM have on organisations such as Microsoft and Sony?

- To what extent are Microsoft and Sony able to influence eWOM in their favour and how?

This shall be taken into account within the research problem in order to understand the importance of eWOM in influencing the decision to purchase either the XB1 or PS4

To what extent does positive and negative eWOM affect consumer perceptions

In particular, the influence of eWOM opinions on consumer decision-making and consumer product judgement

during the "information search" stage of the consumer decision-making process

Impact on Product Judgement

Consumer Decision Making Process

Attribution Theory

Research Problem

An investigation into the persuasiveness of electronic word-of-mouth on professional product review websites versus user-generated content based product reviews in the decision to purchase a next generation console.

Introduction

In order to establish a suitable research problem, a thorough process of evaluating secondary research was undertaken. Consequently, gaps within relevant literature had been identified and recommendations of future research made by previous academics were taken into consideration. Utilisation of concepts and theories within the study of user-generated content and electronic word-of-mouth set the foundation of analysis for suitable research objectives.

Literature Review

Electronic Word of Mouth

Many acknowledgeable researchers within the study of word-of-mouth (WOM) and electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) marketing have recognised the importance of its contribution within consumer behaviour. An example of this is the

influence WOM and eWOM has on the consumer's decision to purchase during the decision making process (as explained in figure one). It is not uncommon for consumers to search online for information regarding a brand or product during the "information search" stage of the decision-making process,

The significance of relationship strength is evident within the results of a study conducted by Keller and Fay which indicated that 58% associated "high credibility" to WOM interactions, of which 50% were "very likely to purchase" as a result.

This suggests that the ability for WOM to have an influence on purchase probability is somewhat dependent upon the credibility of the WOM conversation taking place. The factors to what makes

Furthermore, if WOM is to be seen as credible by the consumer, one would consider relationship strength to be a factor.

When comparing electronic WOM against its more traditional counterpart, several unique distinctions can be made in order to distinguish the differences between the two. The first distinction that can be made is that users

to interact in eWOM with little to no prior relationships with each other

Dellarocas 2003; Goldsmith & Horowitz 2006; Sen & Lerman 2007; Lee & Youn 2009. In addition, consumers are able to remain anonymous, thus allowing them to share opinions of a brand more comfortably and as a result increases the amount of eWOM taking place (Chatterjee, 2001). Subsequently, consumers are more likely to find other consumers with product expertise within the eWOM platforms previously mentioned.

Although this may be the case, it is this anonymous nature that has made it difficult for consumers to determine the quality and legibility of eWOM. According to Chatterjee (2001) as cited by Lee & Youn (2009) the ability for marketers to influence eWOM by "compensating consumers to review products" and even "posting their own product reviews" has made it even more difficult to determine the quality of online posts. Because of this, it is not uncommon for consumers to look through a variety of eWOM platforms in the search for credible information about a product.

Whilst previous studies have explored specific platform of which eWOM

Figures

Research Problem

An investigation into the persuasiveness of electronic word-of-mouth on professional product review websites versus user-generated content based product reviews in the decision to purchase a next generation console.

Electronic Word-of-Mouth

Today, social media has helped to modernise word-of-mouth communications into something relatively new to marketer's known as electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM).

One of the earliest definitions for word-of-mouth (WOM) is that of Arndt (1967) as cited by Lee and Youn (2009) which defines the term as any form of "interpersonal communication about products and services". This definition has become one of the most accepted amongst writers of word-of-mouth however, although this definition remains true it is extremely basic and does not take into account two things. Firstly it does not take into account negative and positive WOM which shall be discussed later on and the second of which is how WOM has developed ever since.

Many acknowledgeable researchers within the study of word-of-mouth (WOM) and electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) marketing have recognised the importance of its contribution within consumer behaviour. An example of this is the influence WOM has on the consumer's decision to purchase during the decision making process (fig.1).

The significance of this becomes apparent throughout the following critical analysis of research

"Recommendations from family and friends trump all other consumer touch-points when it comes to influencing purchases" (Advertising Age, 2008)

The definition of "interpersonal" in this context is the relationship between people

In fact, most researchers have been drawn to similar conclusions (add references).

Researchers have almost always been drawn towards similar conclusions that WOM plays a vital role influence the consumer in terms of brand image, brand engagement and purchasing decisions.

Another example of the popularity eWOM is its ability to influence consumer purchasing behaviour) during the decision-making process (fig.1) (Masterson & Pickton, 2010).

Numerous studies have shown WOM to be "The most significant consumer touch-point when deciding about products, brands and services" (Keller & Libai, 2009). This statement is strengthened by. If this remains the case, how persuasive is electronic word-of-mouth in influencing the decision to purchase?

Before being able to understand this and many other thought-provoking questions research within the study shall offer, it is important to be able to distinguish the different characteristics of WOM and eWOM in order to understand the significance of eWOM in the context of this study.

The first difference between the two terms is that eWOM allows consumers to interact with each other online no matter the strength of their relationships between each other, whereas its traditional counterpart takes place offline and is more dependent on people knowing each other prior to the interaction occurring (Lee & Youn, 2009). The significance of relationship strength between consumers, otherwise known as "tie strength" on the credibility of WOM interactions is evident. If tie strength is strong

with the advent of the internet increasing this importance. Examples of WOM taking place online include product review websites (e.g. cnet), retailers' websites (e.g. amazon), brands' websites (e.g. community.eu.playstation), personal blogs, message boards and social networking sites (e.g. YouTube, Twitter).

As a result, these forms of "interpersonal communications" are no longer being overlooked by successful organisations as an effective way of creating customer engagement.

What I provided (after 24 email exchanges):

Research Problem

An investigation into the influence of electronic word-of-mouth on professional product review websites versus user-generated content based product reviews, in the decision to purchase a next-generation game console.

Literature Review
Introduction

The significance of the following research is critical in understanding relevant key terms and theory from which a suitable research problem shall be defined. Furthermore, it will provide the necessary foundations needed in order to set appropriate research objectives.

Traditional and Electronic Word of Mouth

Many knowledgeable researchers within the study of word-of-mouth (WOM) and electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) marketing have recognised the importance of its contribution within consumer behaviour. Both traditional offline WOM and eWOM also assume various forms. Despite the fact that the same motivations for traditional WOM can be reasonably expected to hold true for eWOM as well, it is important to distinguish the fundamental differences that exist between them (Choi & Scott, 2013). In sum, in contrast to traditional word of mouth, eWOM is comprised of online content concerning a product or service that is posted by an interested and motivated individual (Sharma & Morales-Arroyo, 2011).

Whilst the majority of research in the past has focused on WOM in an offline context, current trends have caused a shift in focus to WOM occurring online. Keller and Berry (2006) noted that 90 per cent of WOM communication takes place offline, however a more recent study written by Prendergast et al., (2010) makes reference to this and states that as consumers are becoming more reliant on the internet, the role of eWOM continues to grow. Likewise, Bae and Byong-Do (2013) emphasise that word-of-mouth advertising has long been recognised as a valuable marketing tool, and the emergence of eWOM represents a game-changing opportunity for marketers seeking superior solutions to conventional mass-media marketing initiatives that have become less effective in recent years.

An agreed upon definition of electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) cited by various authors (Chu and Kim, 2011; Prendergast et al., 2010; Thorson and Rodgers, 2006) originates from the work of Hennig-Thurau et al., (2004) which has been evaluated in order to understand its suitability within the context of this literature. "Any positive or negative statement made by potential, actual, or former customers about a product or company which is made available to a multitude of people and institutions via the internet".

Although this definition remains adequate to the above studies, it is important to evaluate its suitability within the context of this project: With respect to: "Any positive or negative statement made by potential, actual or former customers about a product or company," this part of the definition takes into account positive and negative statements. The importance of this in the context of this study is that it also aims to take into account positive and negative statements in the decision to purchase an XB1 or PS4. It also recognises that not everyone who contributes in eWOM is a current customer of the companies in question. The significance of this is that not all interviewees that choose to take part in this study will actually own an XB1 or PS4. With respect to: "Which is made available to a multitude of people and institutions via the internet," this part of the definition recognises the online presence of WOM and the availability of it to a multitude of people and institutions. In the context of this study, its focus shall also remain on WOM interactions occurring exclusively on the internet. The definition also recognises the eWOM is not exclusively available to consumers of a brand. It is also available to the brand themselves. What this means is that brands have the ability to influence eWOM in their favour.

This raises important questions which include:

- What significance does eWOM have on organisations such as Microsoft and Sony?
- To what extent are Microsoft and Sony able to influence eWOM in their favour and how?
This shall be taken into account within the research problem in order to understand the importance of eWOM in influencing the decision to purchase either the XB1 or PS4. In sum, to what extent does positive and negative eWOM affect consumer perceptions?

Respective Effects of Positive and Negative Word-of-Mouth

Currently, research into the influence of positive and negative word-of-mouth (WOM) on consumer purchase probability, online or offline provides this literature with significant findings. Generally, it has been assumed that positive (or negative) WOM has a positive (or negative) influence on an individual or "receiver" searching for an opinion of a product (East et al., 2008). However, Fitzsimons and Lehmann (2004) observed the opposite and found that in some cases, people would react against negative comments resulting in further commitment to that brand. This adverse reaction occurred when

- people are directed to do things they do not wish to do,
- the WOM receiver disagrees with the values of the advisor, or
- when prior commitment of a brand prevents the consumer from fully accepting useful negative information about a brand.

A recent study evaluated the influence of positive and negative WOM on purchase probability. It considered various "interpersonal" and "non-interpersonal" factors and concluded the extent to which each influenced the receiver's purchase probability, as illustrated in figure 1.

Figure 1: Factors associated with impact of positive and negative WOM on shift in receiver's purchase probability.

These interpersonal factors are "tie strength, sender's experience, sender's strength of expression and how actively WOM is sought." Figure 2 breaks down these factors into further descriptors in order to provide a greater understanding of each.

Figure 2: Interpersonal factors measuring the impact on the shift in receiver's purchase probability.

The influence of tie strength, which is essentially the strength of the relationship between the sender and receiver, is of particular interest. In strong tie relationships, the influence of WOM (positive and negative) on purchase probability would increase whereas weak tie strengths caused the opposite to occur. Whilst this may be the case for WOM (positive and negative) in an offline environment, could the same conclusion be made for WOM (positive and negative) in an online environment? Under the assumption that it does, one could argue that (positive and negative) eWOM would have a decreased influence on purchase probability. This assumption would be based on the fact that "tie strength" between senders and receivers in eWOM are usually formed of multiple weak ties. This is because it is possible for anyone on the internet to submit information (positive and negative eWOM) about a product or brand on a variety of online platform's.

Consequently, determining the quality and credibility of eWOM has often been difficult for consumers. This is because the person submitting eWOM in the form of a review or opinion does not feel much responsibility for the consequences involved, as it will often be read by complete strangers. As a result, there is an increased possibility that inaccurate information is passed on to receivers of that information (Bailey, 2004). However, whilst this may be the case in some situations, it is not necessarily always the case as there are often many genuine and reliable product reviews available online.

Electronic WOM allows users to remain anonymous, thus allowing them to share opinions of a brand more comfortably resulting in an increase of eWOM interactions taking place (Chatterjee, 2001). In addition, eWOM communicators are not restricted by the receiver's social circle. It is the combination of these factors that result in the increased possibility of finding people with product expertise amongst weak tie communicators, which is advantageous in developing product judgments (Dunhan et al., 1997 as cited by Lee & Youn, 2009). However, it is this anonymity that causes credibility to become questionable. According to Chatterjee (2001) as cited by Lee & Youn (2009) the ability for marketers to influence eWOM by "compensating consumers to review products" and even "posting their own product reviews" has made it even more difficult to determine the credibility of electronic WOM. It is therefore not uncommon for consumers to search through a variety of online platforms in the pursuit for credible product reviews.

These eWOM platforms are often perceived as either being "marketer-generated" or "non-marketer-generated" websites (Lee & Youn, 2009). This comes into question when evaluating the organisation or person who has control over the information being sought after, because of the ability to adapt this information to better suit their own interests (Lee & Youn, 2009). As a result, this perception on eWOM platforms is important because consumers may be suspicious that "consumer-generated" product reviews on "marketer-generated" have selling intentions.

Thus, whether a website is marketer-generated or not seems to be important because consumers may suspect that consumer-generated product recommendations on marketer-generated websites have selling intents (Senecal & Nantel 2004; Xue & Phelps 2004; Schindler & Bickart 2005). It is assumed that persuasion of a consumer-generated product review is decreased to the extent that there is high possibility of a marketer's involvement that would influence the reviewer to provide a biased representation of the product's actual performance in the review.

Furthermore, findings concluded that when senders were perceived as knowledgeable, receivers were more motivated in actively seeking information (positive or negative WOM) from them, indicating a positive relation between "sender's experience" and "how actively WOM is sought." An examination of the respective effects of consumer-generated versus marketer-generated content on the purchase decision is provided in the sections that follow. Likewise, strong tie strengths motivated receivers to actively seek positive WOM (empirical evidence for negative WOM was not found) information, indicating a positive relation between "tie strength" and "how actively WOM is sought."

The practical implication of these empirical results is that companies should pay particular attention to the consumers who are most motivated to seek advice actively (less experienced consumers who perceive more risk in the purchase) to maximize their exposure to positive communications from senders perceived as knowledgeable and with whom they have strong ties and minimize their exposure to negative communications from senders perceived as experts (evidence for negative WOM was not found).

The current findings indicate that, when senders are perceived as knowledgeable, the receivers are motivated to actively seek information (positive or negative WOM) from them. Thus, a significant positive relation exists between the two constructs. Likewise, when the tie between senders and receivers is strong, the receivers are motivated to actively seek positive WOM information (empirical evidence for negative WOM was not found).

Conversely, the receiver's experience was also found to be a significant indicator of how actively WOM is sought. The more knowledgeable people are or the more experience they possess, the less intense will be the active search for information (positive or negative WOM). Furthermore, the greater the receiver's experience, the less risk they will perceive in the purchase; and the greater the perceived risk, the more active the search for WOM information (positive or negative WOM).

In sum, "sender's strength of expression" followed by "how actively WOM is sought" had the greatest influence of all the interpersonal factors related to purchase decisions. When "sender's strength of expression" was seen to be high and WOM (positive and negative) was being sought after, WOM had a significant impact on influencing receiver's purchase probability. Strength of expression is the activity in which the receiver seeks information from senders with product expertise. In other words, if the receiver perceives the sender's "knowledge, competence, education and experience in the product category" is seen as high.

Dellarocas et al. (2007) note how the practice of reviewing products online has greatly increased potential for empirical understanding of WOM marketing: while articulated reviews vanish shortly after they are spoken, and are therefore tremendously difficult to capture and analyse, online reviews persist long after they are posted. Breazeale (2009) states that 'digital platforms are changing our very understanding and nature of the significance of eWOM', and sums it nicely thus: 'WOM no longer vanishes instantly and it is not necessarily spontaneous. There may also be a reduced perception that the communicator is in fact non-commercial or even an actual consumer at all.' As a result, online reviews leave an easily accessible and long-lasting record of opinions; moreover, anyone is free to tap in to these records, although care should be taken to validate the source of the eWOM. Further, Zhu and Zhang (2010) indicate that online reviews are a strong reflection of overall WOM, and can therefore be used as a proxy for traditional WOM.

In terms of "sender's experience" senders which were perceived as knowledgeable would actively increase the receiver's motivation to search positive and negative WOM opinions, whilst "tie strength" that was deemed to be strong had the same effect (positive WOM only). Consequently, these factors led to an increase in terms of "how actively WOM is sought" by the receiver resulting in a shift in their purchase probability. Non-interpersonal factors are the "receiver's loyalty, perceived risk and experience". In figure 3 below, these factors have been broken down further in order to provide greater understanding of each.

In addition, in terms of the brand loyalty, found that as the receiver's brand loyalty increased the impact of positive and negative WOM would have less impact on the shift in purchase probability. Furthermore, it was found that receiver's with greater confidence in making decisions would perceive less risk in the purchase of a product thus becoming more active in seeking information of positive and negative WOM. To summarise, it is evident that each of these factors influence the shift in receiver's purchase probability, either directly or indirectly, positively and/or negatively, some to a further extent than others. It provides future research with the data and factor's necessary.

The study concluded that positive WOM had a positive impact and negative WOM had a negative impact on consumer's brand purchasing probability respectively. These results provide a useful starting point for future research.

Consumer-Generated Content

The findings that emerged from a study of consumer-generated content in eWOM settings by Choi and Scott (2013) indicate that the intensity of use of social media networks is positively linked with greater trust and identification, both of which have a corresponding positive impact on the perception of the quality of eWOM consumer-generated content. Furthermore, Choi and Scott found that the quality of the consumer-generated content had a positive impact on the social media network consumers' knowledge sharing practices and that females felt stronger about the quality of consumer-generated content. In addition, the extent to which female consumers feel they belong to a social network or community of interest has a direct influence on how well they trust consumer-generated eWOM content. Consumer-generated eWOM has also been shown to improve trust levels among e-shoppers by sharing both good and bad reviews and studies have confirmed that online consumer behaviour and purchase decision are more influenced by trust than by product price (Sharma & Morales-Arroyo, 2011).

There are some constraints to marketers' reliance strictly on eWOM content, though, and doing so may negatively affect the consumers' purchase decision. For instance, Sharma and Morales-Arroyo (2011) report that the research to date indicates that in contrast to marketer-generated content, consumer-generated content describes consumer experiences with the product or service without providing any relevant technical information, thereby diminishing its credibility for the purposes of the purchase decision. Therefore, while consumer-generated eWOM content may be viewed as trustworthy and reliable, it may fail to provide e-shoppers with all of the information they need to make an informed purchase decision.

Marketer-Generated Content

Contrasted with traditional sources of consumer information such as commercial advertisements, eWOM is distinguished by two factors that have implications for the manner in which content is generated:

1. eWOM provides more credibility to consumers than other conventional sources of information due to the stronger influence it has on the purchasing decisions because it is perceived as being a legitimate and reliable source of feedback from other consumers that have been confronted with purchase decisions in comparable situations. In fact, eWOM has been determined to be particularly persuasive in situations where consumers have little information concerning newly released products.

2. In contrast to conventional commercial advertisements that are transmitted to customers via mass-media, eWOM information is user-instigated, typically through social media networks that are easily accessible.

These differences mean that consumers must trust the eWOM content and have easy access to it in order for it to have an effect on purchase decision making. Although it is conceivable that some marketers generate their own eWOM content for their Web sites (for instance, a social media network team member Tweeting a glowing review of a product posing as a consumer), the growing trend is to include marketer-generated website content that is augmented with authentic consumer-generated eWOM content in an online forum or related communities of interest that is known to be trustworthy. This combination of marketer-generated content together with consumer-generated eWOM content provides a synergetic positive impact on the purchase decisions of many e-shoppers today (Bae & Byong-Do, 2013). Indeed, the research to date suggests that the marketer- and consumer-generated eWOM content represents the optimal marketing approach because it provides consumers with feedback from like-minded consumers as well as information for the vendor in ways that facilitate the purchase decision-making process. As Sharmand Morales-Arroyo (2011) point out, irrespective of the amount of consumer-generated eWOM content that is included in a website's offerings, purchase decisions are primarily influenced by the totality of marketer-generated content and the relevant product or service information provided by the marketer.

It must be also noted, however, that it is vitally important for e-marketers to ensure their responses to consumer-generated eWOM content are timely, appropriate, cordial and professional, and they must avoid resorting to insults and derogatory comments even in the face of highly negative content at all times (Sharma & Morales-Arroyo, 2011). Responsive feedback by e-marketers to consumers' eWOM reviews, though, can demonstrate good faith and concern for consumers on the part of the e-marketer.

Chapter Summary

In summary, in order to establish a suitable research problem, a thorough process of evaluating secondary research was undertaken. There is a consensus among eWOM researchers that more studies of this type are needed because there has been a paucity of timely and relevant research in this area, especially in view of the rapid proliferation of social media networks and their importance for e-marketers today. Consequently, gaps within relevant literature had been identified and recommendations of future research made by previous academics were taken into consideration. Utilisation of concepts and theories within the study of user-generated content and electronic word-of-mouth set the foundation of analysis for suitable research objectives.
ProfessorVerb   
Mar 10, 2014
Essay Services / Is sunbeamsvc a scammer? [66]

You can continue to insult me all you like

I only quoted you. I never insulted you (unless you count "sick puppy" which is not what I really wanted to say. A client contacted me about this thread today. You have libeled me. Now I'll insult you: Everything negative everyone has said about you is true. What the hell is the matter with you? By my reckoning, I've made your service more than a quarter million dollars over the past 15 years and you continue to question my integrity? I told you long ago -- you can have my dogs, wife and comic book collection. Won't you ever stop?

I will not compromise my integrity by outwardly claiming-without more compelling evidence-that ProfessorVerb's motives were nefarious.

Okay. I'm wrong. Thank you for that concession. The query from a client today about this thread made me angry and I apologize. I'm cool if you're cool.
ProfessorVerb   
Mar 03, 2014
Essay Services / Freelancewriter Review? [73]

My better instincts tell me to stay away from this site. but I am compelled to weigh in here. Didn't you take the time to read the above testimonials before posting this question? My reputation has been impugned by these types of questions in the past, and you really have no right to question this writer's integrity without even giving him a chance.

If you are lucky enough to secure his services, I will personally guarantee your satisfaction.
ProfessorVerb   
Oct 20, 2013

ProfessorVerb, rozosu, FLW, and the other great guys here, kindly consider this possibility and get in touch with me

Since you addressed this to me, I'll share my experience in this area. I've tried outsourcing (it was a long time ago) and to be honest, it was more work than doing it myself. You appear to be a highly competent writer, though, and I would have accepted your post as being a native speaker if you hadn't provided a disclaimer. In fact, you write better than many native speakers I know, so I believe you are well situated to recruit new clients on your own.

As 99Essays points out, place an ad on essaychat.com and be as articulate as your post above and you will have no problems. Don't sell yourself short, either. Charge a competitive price. Clients won't think your work product is worth anything if they don't pay something for it.

A haiku just for you:

Your writing is good.
Do not worry -- it takes time.
Good luck with your plans.
ProfessorVerb   
Sep 14, 2013

The reason I keep bringing up you and PV as exemplars of the industry is that from what little I see on here and chat.

Just checking in...

Thanks for the vote of confidence. That means a lot to me - really. I'll admit that keeping up a 20+ page/day output for the last 15 years has been tough, and that there is a high price to pay for this level of output over time. It is precisely as Freelancewriter says -- you have to treat it just like a job and work the same hours -- or even more -- to make a decent living at this job. Nevertheless, writing a 3-, 5-, 8- and 6-page paper (or a 20-pager or combinations thereof) in the course of a day is sure a lot more fun than working for the man. Even though it's more fun, it still sucks when you do it all-the-damn-time, but that's why they call it work.
ProfessorVerb   
Jun 05, 2013
Writing Careers / Please pay your writers! =( [31]

if you do get scammed, what possible actions can you take? Anyone with experience?

You own the copyright to anything that is not paid for. **** anyone who says otherwise.

By the way, you hold 'em, I'll kick 'em. I'm mad now.
ProfessorVerb   
Jun 05, 2013

Queen Sheba appears to be a thoughtful, honest and insightful contributor to this forum.

As I've maintained all along, I have nothing to hide and I am completely transparent in my dealings with others. My name is Alan West and I live and work in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Here's my responses to this buyer and his college and the other writer who got scammed. Please be assured I will protect my copyright no matter what it takes. I will hunt you down until I die. Let this serve as a warning to others who would try to swindle me and other writers.

Mr West

Please can you explain more fully the details you have received from your freelance colleague and is he claiming that he had dealings just with 'Archie Hope' or with other students he believes to be from the University of Derby?

Dr. Peter Dewhurst

Strategic Director

Dear Mr. Dewhurst:

I've embedded by email exchanges with the other writer below. He's not my colleague but rather a freelance writer like myself.

Thanks again for your help.

Best regards,

Alan West

-----Original Message-----
From: sunbeamsvc
To: P.Dewhurst
Sent: Tue, Jun 4, 2013 8:28 am
Subject: Re: Mr. "Archie Hope"

Dear Mr. Dewhurst:

I've embedded by email exchanges with the other writer below. He's not my colleague but rather a freelance writer like myself.

Thanks again for your help.

Best regards,

Alan West

Hmm I see friend. Well he sent me alot of email from Kent IPs. So I don't believe he goes to Derby University as I hoped he did but a email from a lecturer there confirmed he doesn't and the work not submitted there. I try northampton they tell me same. I try Kent the same. I maybe now think he maybe one near Kent..

On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:22 AM, wrote:
Dear Alex,

I had this one for him 149.254.182.83 (it's in Bilston, UK) -- I'll check out the new one.

Thanks!

Best regards,

ALan

-----Original Message-----

To: sunbeamsvc
Sent: Mon, Jun 3, 2013 6:17 pm
Subject: Re: Archie Hope

129.12.10.249 is last IP i have for him friend if it helps
Yes you may friend.The last IP i have for him is a Kent IP. He's definetely not derby university or northampton or kent. I contact all these and none have found him. Because he owe me so much money for dissertation i am desperate to find him.

On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:12 AM, wrote:

Dear Alex,

Wow! We have to find this guy. I'd like to post your comments (but not your email or name) on essayscam with my other posts with your permission.

Best regards,

Alan
-----Original Message-----

To: sunbeamsvc
Sent: Mon, Jun 3, 2013 6:08 pm
Subject: Re: Archie Hope

I see friend

He did same to me. Sent me Kent Uni hyperlinks and student handbook. Doesn't mean anything. I think he is scam buyer who fronts as buyer but is really re-selling to innocent buyer. I think this because I speak to Derby University and they not find any student there or work. I do northampton uni..same..Kent..same. It is bad because honest writer like me and you are losing money. He owes me $2000

On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:05 AM, wrote:

Dear Alex,

Archie covered his tracks well for sure, but he screwed up by sending me some Web blogs that contained other students' comments that had their hyperlink included -- they all pointed directly to University of Derby.

I have been in contact with their director and he is investigating.

I'll let you know if I find out anything. He owes me $750.

Best regards,

Alan
-----Original Message-----

To: sunbeamsvc
Sent: Mon, Jun 3, 2013 6:01 pm
Subject: Re: Archie Hope

Hi friend,

Glad to hear. I read on essaychat you have contacted Derby Uni I wouldn't even waste time. I did this already and Northampton Uni and Kent. The paper he ordered from me was east anglian uni if it helps? Please please let me know if you find. I did big work for him. He owes me alot of money.

Alex

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:59 PM, wrote:

Dear Alex,

No, but the search continues. I'm sorry to hear about your getting swindled.

I'll find him if it's the last thing I do. When I do, I'll let you know.

Good luck in the future.

Best regards,

Alan ("Professor Verb")
-----Original Message-----

To: sunbeamsvc
Sent: Mon, Jun 3, 2013 5:55 pm
Subject: Archie Hope

Hi friend.

I am also freelancer writer. I have been stung by Archie Hope, he ordered sport science dissertation from me. I read your post on essayscam and further found your email on essay chat. Like you I have tried Derby University, Northampton and Kent. These are some of the universities he had assignments done for or areas near.

I wanted to know have you managed to find him?
Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Dewhurst
To: '
Sent: Tue, Jun 4, 2013 2:57 am
Subject: RE: Mr. "Archie Hope"

Mr West

Please can you explain more fully the details you have received from your freelance colleague and is he claiming that he had dealings just with 'Archie Hope' or with other students he believes to be from the University of Derby?

Dr. Peter Dewhurst
Strategic Director
University of Derby Buxton
1 Devonshire Road
Buxton
High Peak
Derbyshire
SK17 6RY

Tel: +44 (0) 1332 594630
Mob: +44 (0) 7768 423226
Fax: +44 (0) 1332 594306

Web: derby/udb
university-of-derby-buxton-tab-logo-55mm-300ppi

The UK Home of Real World Learning

From: [mailto:sunbeamsvc#aol]
Sent: 04 June 2013 00:43
To: Peter Dewhurst
Subject: Re: Mr. "Archie Hope"

Dear Mr. Dewhurst:

I've been contacted by another freelance writer who tells me the same thing happened to him.

Here's some of the other Web blogs with student names and hyperlinks to the University of Derby, but this guy may be a professional scam artist and does this routinely.

Anyway, thanks for whatever help you can provide in protecting my copyrights to this material.

Best regards,

Alan West
PLEASE NOTE: My name archie hope has been used alot in relevance to my posts.
Can we please counter argue and use these relevantly in point to post 3 and 4?
Thanks. also post 3 can be done for wednesday if you like is this okay with you?
Thanks

Representative for the University of Derby April 14, 2013
Posted by Laura on 4/14/2013 at 8:31 AM, GMT.
Tags: None
As the representative for the University, I believe that the most realiable of the plans would be the one which includes both the museum and the bar/cafe. This would mean that we could work together with the developers in offering job opportunities and work experience for our University students but also students attending the College within the University. This would enable the Students to gain valuable experience in a popular industry and allow them to work in a similiar environment which would benefit both their studies and their career in the future.

This plan would also benefit the tourist trade that the University of Northampton provides for Buxton. The University of Derby there is awful but provides tourism for the area as it offers tours of the main attraction which is the Dome. The new addition would mean that tourists visiting the Dome would also be able to visit the water museum but with the BETTER reputation of Northampton University and it's finances. This would bring extra income into the community but also benefit the University due to the fact that the building is owned by the university and would increase the reputation of the University. The Bar/Cafe would also benefit the Tourism industry as it would give tourists a reason to stay longer in the community and increase the tourism.

Viewer Comments (0)

Viewed 3 times.
April 13, 2013 Elena Representative of Visit Peak District
Posted by Elena on 4/13/2013 at 12:09 PM, GMT.

Copyrighted paper (removed).

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Dewhurst
To: ' ; ferozjian <>
Sent: Mon, Jun 3, 2013 11:16 am
Subject: RE: Mr. "Archie Hope"
Mr West

Many thanks for the information, which I will use to investigate the matter further.

Dr. Peter Dewhurst
Strategic Director

Web: derby/udb

The UK Home of Real World Learning

From: [mailto:sunbeamsvc#aol]
Sent: 03 June 2013 17:14
To: Peter Dewhurst;
Subject: Fwd: Mr. "Archie Hope"

Dear Mr. Dewhurst:

Here are the attachments that were provided by "Mr. Hope" upon his initial inquiry.

Thank you again.

Best regards,

Alan West

-----Original Message-----
From: Archie Hope <>
To: sunbeamsvc
Sent: Fri, Mar 29, 2013 11:23 am
Subject: Assignment Quote

Hi ,

I heard about you on Essay scam and wondered if you could help me.
Basically I study at the University of Northampton and am studying International Tourism.
My mum got sick with cancer in Febuary and i haven't had a lot of time for work.
I need 6 assignments doing, which am happy to pay in advance for if you want.

Please take as long as you need to complete this the deadline is 1st May 2013

Here is a breakdown of the assignment criteria and specification:

Task: You are required to develop a business plan that presents a new (or variation of an existing) business, service, based on market research and financial feasibility.

You will need to think analytically about your industry - Travel and Tourism (not least threats and opportunities it faces) and identify the potential for new business products/services. The process should involve you capturing a depth of knowledge about specific market segments as you develop your own ideas and evidence how you will manage the correlating parts of the business. Remember in line with good business planning practice, your plan will need to inspire confidence to attract funding, minimise risk for investors and facilitate management and monitoring of the business. The plan should clearly identify viable target segments with an accordingly appropriate marketing strategy, outline the required physical and human resources and include projected cashflow and profit and loss statements. This should include a SWOT,PEST and environmental analysis for a higher grade.

Format: Business Plan using pro forma

Mode of working: Individual

Word count: 3,000 (excluding reference list, appendix, title)

You are encouraged to incorporate and apply relevant theory and there should be evidence of independent reading, in particular a range of contemporary industry and relevant industry material and marketing reports eg Mintel will be expected to support clear business decisions in your plan. References should underpin your plan to make your document persuasive relative to attracting funding.

Assessment 2: Conference Poster
Task: Produce an individual conference poster on microsoft powerpoint and associated materials (if appropriate) that illustrates your business idea. The poster should be a visual representation (e.g. diagram/table/mind map) to evaluate and justify the physical and HR resources needed to put your business plan into action.

Format: Conference Poster - this should be produced as an electronic poster, that the teaching team will be able to project, if required, during the assessment process. There is no word count but, we would like quality over quantity.

Attached is university examples for the business plan our tutor provided us

The University of Derby has a published policy regarding email and reserves the right to monitor email traffic. If you believe this email was sent to you in error, please notify the sender and delete this email. Please direct any concerns to Infosec#derby.

My final emails to this buyer:

You ****** with the wrong person.

-----Original Message-----
From: sunbeamsvc
To: P.Dewhurst
Sent: Tue, Jun 4, 2013 8:28 am
Subject: Re: Mr. "Archie Hope"

"You are clearly the biggest a-hole in the world. I will find you and teach you a lesson in manners in person before this is over.

I told you karma was a ***** and PayPal has launched an investigation into your account. Buxton College is hunting you down. If I could find you personally, I would kick the living **** out of you. Your days of scamming writers are over."

Combat vets do not forget and we are not forgiving.

This guy was kicked out of his school and lost his cushy job as a student adviser (I can barely see through the tears). Fair warning.
ProfessorVerb   
Jun 03, 2013

I wrote to every email address I could find for PayPal (there are some Web sites with these "secret" addresses) and everyone except for Adam gave me the same song and dance about seller protection not applying to intangible materials even though the buyer acknowledged receipt by emails and publicly (in here). I found it troubling as well, but at the end of the day, I got paid and that's what counts. This was a real nightmare for sure and I hope it doesn't happen to any other writers.
ProfessorVerb   
Jun 03, 2013

And yet there is justice sometimes:

Dear Mr. Alan West,

My name is Adam and I am a member of PayPal's Executive Escalations office. Your concerns were forwarded to me for review and response. I would like to take this opportunity to fully address your concerns.

Thank you for your recent email. From your inquiry, I understand you are contacting us regarding a claim filed against you by one of your buyers.

I attempted to contact you directly on June 3, 2013, but was unable to reach you at that time. I apologize for any inadequacy or inconsistency of service you feel you have received to date. We accept that issues like yours can be very confusing and we hope that by clarifying the situation and offering you the right advice we can help in explaining PayPal's actions.

Let me assure you that PayPal values you as our customer and wants to make your experience with PayPal a positive one. For this reason, I am crediting you $805.80 USDUSD.

While I hope this has resolved your immediate concerns, I would like to take this opportunity to provide you with some information on the claim process.

A review of your PayPal account with the registered email address, shows that on May 2, 2013, your buyer ferozjian@hotmail filed a complaint in relation to transaction 2Y7556643N973300V citing, 'Non-receipt of goods' as the complaint reason. The case reference for the complaint is PP-002-336-908-027. Initially, this complaint was closed in the buyer's favor and the funds were deducted from your account. Upon further review, it has been determined that the buyer should not have been afforded this protection and PayPal has provided you with a credit of $805.80 USD. This is the amount that was debited from your PayPal account when the payment was reversed on May 14, 2013. The amount is adjusted to accommodate the fluctuation in currency conversion.

I hope this information addresses your concerns and answers any questions you may have had. If you would like to reach me directly, my direct phone number is 402-938-3651 and I work Monday-Friday 10:00am to 6:30pm. As always, please feel free to contact PayPal's Executive Escalations Department at executiveoffice@paypal.com if you have any questions or concerns or if we can be of further assistance.

Very sincerely yours,

Adam
Executive Escalations
PayPal, Inc.
ProfessorVerb   
Jun 02, 2013

Thank you very much for your assistance. I'll concede that I am naive and trusting and took everything he said at face value. He did have a PayPal account under "Archie Hope" but I've since found out this can be faked as well.

I'll find him if I have to go back to the UK to do so.

email from another freelance writer about "Archie Hope" (it looks like I got off easy "just" losing $750 -- writers beware):

Hi friend.

I am also freelancer writer. I have been stung by Archie Hope, he ordered a sports science dissertation from me. I read your post on essayscam and further found your email on essay chat. Like you I have tried Derby University, Northampton and Kent. These are some of the universities he had assignments done for or areas near.

I wanted to know have you managed to find him?

I think he is scam buyer who fronts as buyer but is really re-selling to innocent buyer. I think this because I speak to Derby University and they not find any student there or work. I do northampton uni..same..Kent..same. It is bad because honest writers like me and you are losing money. He owes me $2000

Last IP: 129.12.10.249