The model is wholly dependent on happy retailers signing up and providing revenue. Search for Gap, Target or Nordstrom in their system. At one point there were coupons, now you get a blank page with a message saying that:

Gap “has specifically requested to have all user contributed coupons removed.”

Same goes for literally hundreds of other stores (BlueFly, Red Envelope, Sharper Image, Cooking.com, 1800flowers, Bed Bath & Beyond, etc). Probably more every month. Eventually, all the stores catch on and there is no revenue!

Surprised to see the article but also surprised to see this rather obvious flaw not make the article!

I guess they just don’t want to be diverged from their ultimate goal — PROFIT!

If a merchant gives YOU an exclusive coupon and YOU tell your users what that coupon is via YOUR website, then you only have yourself to blame for your users telling other people about your coupons. Whether they tell people via email, phone, text, verbal, or via the use of RetailMeNot, makes absolutely no difference in my opinion.

If you don’t want your “exclusive” coupons falling into other peoples hands, then don’t tell people what the coupon is. Find some way for them to relinquish said coupon without actually seeing it… Or make it single use so they won’t give it to other people. Or something along those lines. Or simply ask your users not to share. I just don’t understand your thinking at all, you want to give people your coupons but not have them give it to other people? Madness.

shut up you fat whore

ps. show me tits

As for your other comment, that’s a pitfall of accepting user generated content. You have to take responsibility for what they do. If a merchant gives me an EXCLUSIVE coupon then it’s exclusively for me, not for everyone else to use. Placing the blame on the consumer who has NO IDEA what goes on behind the scenes does not erase the affiliates ethical responsibilities.

So your comparisons really aren’t valid. This is a business; an industry, not a friendly conversation between friends.

We’ve never really understood the concept of trying to maintain “exclusive coupons” so much as we haven’t had “exclusive deals” or “exclusive sales” in our inventory.

The whole idea of coupons as a marketing channel is to *encourage* people to tell friends about them and to drive new customers to our stores. In this regard, retailmenot has been very effective and has been in our top 3 affiliates for the last 6 months.

You also say RetailMeNot post codes created specifically for other sites. I thought RetailMeNot was user contributed. If someone is going to another site, getting a coupon, and then using RetailMeNot to tell everyone else about that coupon, I don’t see how that can be considered unethical. I guess it’s no different to me giving you a coupon for something and saying only *you* can use it, and then you tell a friend, who tells his friends, and then they all come to me trying to use the coupon i gave you. Whose fault is that?

Retailmenot are small fry compared to the ’social shopping’ sites that are already out there with massive communities.

A social community can only help increase useer retention on the site. Allowing individuals the ability to interact with their own coupons is a great idea.

But I do find myself almost always checking this site before I hit “buy”. Wish they’d give % discounts for air travel!!! I like their design a lot too (repeating myself I know).

A torrent site? I’ll ask the obvious question. Why is that necessary and/or is there a reason for it?

usually anything that grows virally is good.
vs.
VC cash, where you have so much - and spent it to shove your concept down people’s throats…hoping they’ll like it and return