Newegg vs. Patent Trolls: When We Win, You Win - <AUTHOR> http://blog.newegg.com/newegg-vs-patent-trolls-when-we-win-you-win <comment><USER2> What Newegg does _is_ highly commendable.

To achieve a decisive victory in these cases, Newegg typically has to take the defense of its case through a full trial and possibly an appeal.

People often fail to appreciate just how risky a trial can be. We stand on the sidelines and laugh at how absurd this or that flaky patent appears. And yet - and yet - the law itself went through a phase in which such patents were almost routinely granted. Standards may have tightened over time but, still, a patent claim in a hotly litigated case will not survive to trial unless it has been able to withstand a host of pretrial challenges by which a defendant has already asked a court to rule that the patent, as a matter of law, should not stand. It is only when a court tosses the patent claim in the pretrial phases that a defendant avoids the risk of a potentially absurdly high verdict after trial. If the claim survives such challenges, then the defendant has no choice but to settle or to play it out through trial while incurring just a risk of having a large verdict entered against it. This is the point at which most defendants - even large, deep-pocket defendants who can otherwise afford to pay the costs of defense - will fold. Newegg, on the other hand, has made the tough decisions, incurred the major risks, and largely managed to defeat such patents on the merits.

In doing so, it incurs the very large costs of defense typical in such cases. And it has the guts to take the potential liability risks of going through full trials to take the cases to verdict.

Large, institutional defendants have occasionally (though rarely) adopted such policies in the past. For example, over decades, GM adopted a policy of never settling injury claims if its own experts had determined that the GM autos were not at fault. In doing this, it would often incur defense costs that far exceeded the value of the claim being defended. But it did so to send a firm message to the plaintiff's bar that prosecuted such claims - that is, "if you want to sue GM, your case had better have merit - you will get no nuisance settlement from us."

Newegg effectively is delivering the same message but with an important twist. If GM successfully defended a particular injury claim, that ended the case for that claimant but had no preclusive effect on other, similar claims. If Newegg successfully defends and defeats a patent claim by having the patent declared invalid, the law of what the lawyers call "res judicata" (meaning, "a matter adjudged") kicks in and kills that patent off forever.

So, not only does Newegg take out the garbage, it makes sure it won't accumulate ever again.

This is a true public service for which we all must tip out hats.

<comment><USER3> Vote with your wallet. Support companies which provide this service with yout purchases.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I really appreciate Newegg's approach here -- one of the main reasons that patent trolling is so successful is that the cost of settling is smaller even than the cost of winning a suit. Newegg is performing an (expensive) community service. How should I be supporting them (other than making them my "first place to check" for electronics shopping)?

<comment><USER5> _> one of the main reasons that patent trolling is so successful is that the cost of settling is smaller even than the cost of winning a suit._

Is the underlying reason for this strategy the low costs of settlement, or the extremely high costs of lawsuits? What if the value of a patent really is only a few thousand dollars?

Note that this very tactic is used by big companies to avoid licensing valid and useful patents owned by smaller entities. Licensing discussions often begin with the potential licensor saying "sue me", or these days, outright suing you first with a Declaratory Judgement. Can an individual afford to take on a large company? Trolls appear to simply be a symptom of this disparity in the market.

<comment><USER6> If you know you have a valid case (you aren't a troll), how hard would it be in practice to find someone to front the money for a lawsuit? Or for that matter, could you go to the competition and sell your patent? That is, say Apple's infringing on my patent; will Samsung buy the patent from me for a fair price and then sue Apple?

<comment><USER7> > how hard would it be in practice to find someone to front the money for a > lawsuit?

What about paying into an troll insurance policy every month so that if a troll wanted to sue you they would see that you were protected and would fight the lawsuit with a giant pile of money. This might deter the troll from suing in the first place.

<comment><USER8> There is a whole ecosystem that is funding these lawsuits. It also operates somewhat anonymously, with funding sources working directly with law firms and indirectly with inventors (if they are even involved anymore). I've seen emails between law firms and the inventor that literally title the investors as "the funding source." The original inventor need not put any money at risk, and the law firms and funding sources do their own diligence to decide if it's worth proceeding to file suits. In most cases, the entity filing suit is created for each series of attacks so that if they actually lose a suit and are supposed to pay out, there are no assets from which to pay. Therefore, low risk and potentially very high reward.

The biggest factor for that is not the validity of the patents, but the breadth and ability of the patents to be filed against "juicy" targets with a lot of cash. The cost of filing a suit is literally in the hundreds of dollars (I think ~$750) and most of these cases get settled out fairly early because of the immense cost of the defendants to complete the discovery process.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Perhaps a solution to this would be a Kickstarter like anti patent troll site. Patent trolls usually go after smaller businesses at first, businesses who could not possibly afford to fight, even if they wanted. The site would allow a business to post their legal case online, and other businesses who face similar exposure, could contribute to the defense fund.

The "perk" of contributing would be that you would get access to all of the expert witness prepared statements and legal work, so if a patent troll comes after you next, you would have a lot of your defense work already done for you. Plus, once the patent troll looses a case, especially on appeal, that decision can be used as precedent.

<comment><USER10> This is an intriguing idea, but I think it would have a big marketing problem. Most of the people who are at risk of being sued by a patent troll aren't aware of that risk, or so I imagine. Maybe that's changing as the problem gets more press, but I still think the necessary outreach would be difficult.

<comment><USER11> Lawyers specialising in handling IP cases would probably have an interest in such a service though; potentially far more work for them than agreeing with the client that settling probably is the cheapest option. Insurers underwriting intellectual property liability insurance (it exists!) also have a very strong incentive to encourage, or even require their clients to use such a service.

And for some non-software industries many firms might have a pretty good idea which competitors/suppliers/clients of theirs are likely to be threatened by the same patent.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> > An example of this is Sovereign who bought the rights to a shopping cart.

If anyone wants to google them and can't find anything (like me), that's because the name is _Soverain_ , not _Sovereign_.

</comment><comment><USER13> Erich Spangenberg is America's most notorious patent troll mafia head. I blames him for taking full advantage of the broken U.S. patent system to squeeze upward of $30 billion each year and the tremendous waste of use our legal system resources.

EFF[1] and NYT[2] ran full reports on him previously.

[1] [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/07/times-profiles- patent-...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/07/times-profiles-patent-troll)

[2] [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/14/business/has-patent- will-s...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/14/business/has-patent-will-sue-an- alert-to-corporate-america.html)

<comment><USER14> There's parasites in nature, no reason to think there wouldn't be parasites in human society...

<comment><USER15> What do we do with parasites when they attack us? That.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> As everyone knows in industry, this is not really a "win". Patent trolls are setup in such a way that if they win they make lot of money and if they lose then they lose very little. In many cases, they don't have to even pay damage or lawyers fee for other party. If they are ever ordered to do so then they would just announce bankruptcy of their shell company. They don't even lose their portfolio because it's allocated in to hundreds of shell companies. So in nutshell, Newegg has done very little damage to the troll. The troll already made $45M and now they will just move on to next patent in their next shell company.

All the other efforts like preventing bad patents through StackExchange etc also have very little impact on troll business model. The only real weapon you can use against them is crafting laws that strongly discourage trolling. One would think tech industry with 100s of billions in bank have enough lobby power to get this done quickly. The issue again is that tech industry itself want to own such lousy patents to use against each other. So the industry will only support weaker forms of laws against trolling. I would highly suspect there would be end of trolling anytime soon. Industry as a whole would be more than willing to absorb this cost instead of giving up on their own ammo.

<comment><USER17> "... tech industry itself want to own such lousy patents to use against each other."

I recall a story where Steve Jobs called Eric Schmidt from Burning Man and threatened Schmidt with "nuclear war" over Android. What did he threaten him with? Legitimate competition? Guess again.

Junk patents are a perfect vehicle for vexatious litigation.

This is just my biased opinion but the IT industry appears to have no shortage of child-like executives.

World's largest patent troll co-founded by former Microsoft CTO and a licensing lawyer from Intel who coined the term "patent troll". Two individuals who had certainly seen their share of trolling by smaller entities against MSFT and INTC. I believe the lawyer blogged about the problem of "patent trolls" anonymously for while at Intel in the late 90's, but was later "outed".

The industry was aware of this problem very early on.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Reading that the patents were about SSL and RC4, I had an evil thought. A patent troll with these patents would actually help make the Internet a safer place.

Companies that are still using those should be sued for not securing their consumers' information properly. Failing that, this would be an even better way of achieving the same thing.

</comment><comment><USER19> Please excuse my ignorance on this topic.

\- Why is this happening in the first place?

\- Who is this entity that grants a loose patent?

\- Why isn't this entity being interrogated ?

<comment><USER20> > Why is this happening in the first place?

Because US patent laws and practices allow for it

> Who is this entity that grants a loose patent?

The United States Patents and Trademark Office.

> Why isn't this entity being interrogated ?

Because there would be very little point. One part of the issue is patent laws themselves, the other part is that the USPTO is taken to task for both overly lengthy examinations[0] and insufficiently rigorous examinations. I don't have much experience with the USPTO themselves, but knowing people working in european patent offices:

1\. they are judged pretty much solely on the number of patents examined and their responsiveness

2\. patent offices are funded through maintenance fees (fees paid to renew the patents and keep them enforceable) creating a fucked up incentive to accept patents by default at the cost of the already very loose and subjective patentability criteria ("novelty" and "inventive step or non-obviousness")

3\. especially given patent offices are generally underfunded and short- staffed, especially in high-flying specialists able to actually evaluate patents which are either complex or in novel fields (being a patent examiner is few people's idea of a great career, even less so once you've built experience and respectability in your field, and that's assuming the patent office could even hire and pay you), even more so compared to the high-powered business they face

4\. this is compounded by states routinely "diverting" (plundering) patent offices's funding, in the US Congress diverts about 10% of the USPTO's collected fees to the general treasury

5\. it is also compounded by the opening of whole new and novel patent fields ("business method" patents) which generate even faster growth than the historical patent fields and are the source of much of the bullshit patents

that's not even considering that the existing patent system simply isn't a good fit for software, more generally the whole field of business method patents seems incredibly fucked up and created specifically to be abused (good thing europe has declined to implement it)

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backlog_of_unexamined_patent_a...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backlog_of_unexamined_patent_applications)

<comment><USER21> Good points.

Don't forget the Court in Eastern Texas which is a popular place for patent lawsuits. Popular because the court is friendly to patent trolls due to the revenue the court generates. [1]

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_f...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_for_the_Eastern_District_of_Texas)

<comment><USER22> And the frequent charitable donations Samsung makes to causes in Marshall, TX, home of many of the the court's jurors.

[https://ipcloseup.wordpress.com/2015/02/25/for-samsung- chari...](https://ipcloseup.wordpress.com/2015/02/25/for-samsung-charity- begins-at-home-marshall-texas/)

<comment><USER23> > And the frequent charitable donations Samsung makes to causes in Marshall, > TX, home of many of the the court's jurors.

I'd love to be a fly on the wall when an East Texas jury convenes: They all know what their verdict will be going in so I imagine they just hold out for one last free lunch and chit chat to fill up the time while they "deliberate".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Seriously excellent work by Newegg. I'm worried, however, that they've now made themselves well-known enough in the industry to avoid future targeting by patent trolls. Honestly, who would go after Newegg at this point with their current track record? In the long run, this probably helps Newegg a lot with good PR and fewer trolls attacking them. With the exception of the specific cases they've already won, I just don't see this really helping the little guys over the long run. Patent trolls are going to remain a huge headache until we get serious reform.

</comment><comment><USER25> No patent for ideas in Europe, problem solved.

<comment><USER26> The Alice[1] opinion moved US law closer to what you are looking for, rejecting patents that are simply ideas "by means of a computer."

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Corp._v._CLS_Bank_Int%27...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Corp._v._CLS_Bank_Int%27l)

<comment><USER27> It's worth noting that the Supreme Court has generally given rulings that suggest that intimate that software patents are broadly unpatentable. The key decision that allowed software patents in the first place was State St., which was never heard by the Supreme Court (indeed, in Bilski, every opinion went out of their way to emphasize just how _wrong_ State St. was).

Between Bilski, Alice, and even the older decisions of Benson, Flook, and Diamond v. Diehr, SCOTUS has generally held that most software patents are basically inherently invalid. It should also be pointed out that many patents favored by trolls would also fail obviousness and/or prior art tests: the problem isn't that the patents are valid, it's that trolls can extract money from people by charging them somewhat less than the cost to go to court to prove that the troll's patents are invalid.

One way you could fix the system is to punish the trolls for knowingly peddling invalid patents: if an entity gets three patents invalidated by the court system and they've been aggressive in suing people for compliance with those invalid patents, then all patents that they hold are summarily invalidated and they get prohibited from enforcing any patents for 5 years. On top of having to reimburse everyone they charged (plus damages… plus interest ☺).

<comment><USER28> > One way you could fix the system is to punish the trolls for knowingly > peddling invalid patents...

Most "patent trolls" spin off separate legal entities for each patent they're using. This is to minimize losses if a suit goes wrong and they end up having to pay legal fees. So, trying to punish trolls would be extraordinarily difficult; you'd have to figure out some way to explicitly link all of these entities, which is something the trolls are already specifically trying to prevent.

<comment><USER29> This provides less protection than is often assumed.

'Piercing the corporate veil'

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> You don't really win until the legal atmosphere is such that the the key personalities behind a patent troll operation get 10 years in jail.

<comment><USER31> Do you seriously want to live in such an atmosphere? Do you really think that if that situation ever came to be then it would be the only change occurring in society?

Patent trolls may suck, but IP is a thing we're not going to get rid of. As long as it's "property" it can be traded. As long as it can be traded, the possibility that the current owner has desires at odds with the original owner can arise.

<comment><USER30> > _Do you seriously want to live in such an atmosphere?_

Certainly. What these people are doing is effectively extortion and fraud; there should be a legal framework in which such abuses can be identified as such and treated accordingly.

The "IP" in question is not valid; it is predicated upon a lie. The lie is that the patented idea is a significant new invention without prior art. The trolls know this and exploit it by looking for obvious implementations of everyday things that could conceivably land within the language of a patent, which is a patent of specifically this type which they specifically acquired for the purpose of trolling.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> It's totally excellent that Newegg is doing this. As a side note, I don't like when people include silly infographics in articles like this. I think it sort of cheapens the message and this particular message is important.

</comment><comment><USER33> Another well-known Troll fighter is Vizio.

<comment><USER25> Another well known patent troll is Apple, patenting your hands movements and phone shape since 1984. Allowing the marketing industry to replace the hardware industry product after product.

<comment><USER34> Apple does release products, you might want to check the definition of the patent troll.

<comment><USER35> Well, last time I checked, "patent troll" wasn't on the dictionary.

But let's all accept the definition that says that big corporations can do everything they want, while small inventors (yes, they exist) must concede unilaterally of any rights. No way there's a better definition around.

<comment><USER36> I thought the accepted definition was a company whose only source of revenue was patent licenses and lawsuits, not products or services based on said patents.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> For those who prefer specifics of Newegg's litigation history rather than a summary:

[http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/newegg- inc/](http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/newegg-inc/)

</comment><comment><USER38> This brings up a good point. I need to buy from the vendor that's doing some good with my money. Sometimes I hesitate to buy from Newegg because I can always find the parts cheaper (Hey! Rent's a killer on the West coast right now!) I think I'll buy PC parts solely from them for as long as they fight the patent trolls.

</comment><comment><USER39> I wonder if Newegg's much publicized fights against patent trolls could be advantageous for them by deterring trolls from going after them for royalties.

N expensive lawsuits might be cheaper than M cheap settlements, if M is sufficiently larger than N.

</comment><comment><USER40> > In this latest round of Newegg vs. the patent trolls, Newegg went against a > company that claimed its patent covered SSL and RC4 encryption, a common > encryption system used by many retailers and websites.

Maybe rights over patents should be lost if the rights holders fail to actively defend it (similar to trademarks)? That would at least prevent the absurd scenario where a patent holder waits for their technology to become widespread before starting to prosecute.

</comment><comment><USER41> Why would any of these trolls take on newegg?

<comment><USER42> They have lots of money so they figured they'd get more money out of a quick settlment. They miscalculated of course on Newegg settling.

<comment><USER41> >more money out of a quick settlment

I get why they'd go after anyone but NewEgg for that reason, but EVERYONE in their business should know NewEgg doesn't settle by now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Interesting... I just learned that NewEgg's order page fails gracefully under NoScript. You do have to turn on scripts for some domains, but it has buttons that let you continue after doing so. I haven't seen that before.

</comment><comment><USER44> This system is _sick_ , _sick_ , _sick_. The patent system needs a major overhaul. It can't be pay to play. Given the state of affairs it would help if all patent litigation fees were paid for by the government.

</comment><comment><USER45> In winning these cases has Newegg shared any learnings that might help smaller companies affected by patent trolls, or is it almost as simple as ponying up the cash and going to trial?

</comment><comment><USER46> Worthless article that doesn't go into any details

</comment><comment><USER47> Nice article! Thanks for sharing this with us!</comment>


Build your own static site generator (2017) - <AUTHOR> https://sequoia.makes.software/lets-code-it-static-site-generator/ <comment><USER2> The pipeline of promises/maps nicely separates the operations.

Also, writing your own static site generator is kind of fun! Did so for my tiny site ([https://ahuth.github.io](https://ahuth.github.io)). Source code is at [https://github.com/ahuth/ahuth.github.io](https://github.com/ahuth/ahuth.github.io), and the static site generator is under scripts/build.

<comment><AUTHOR> Cool! I am thinking it would be a good idea to write a short follow-up post highlighting the other approaches people have taken here. There are definitely many people who decided it was simpler just to write their own script.

<comment><USER3> One thing I see as a benefit is that you can generate unique looking web pages that aren't nearly as bulky as one gets by using most of the popular CRMs out there. I guess that's actually two things. But they are really good things to have together.</comment></comment></comment>


Does time really flow? - <AUTHOR> https://www.quantamagazine.org/does-time-really-flow-new-clues-come-from-a-century-old-approach-to-math-20200407/ <comment><USER2> There was a sci-fi book written about 50 years ago that postulates that time is quantum-like and sort of like the stills from a movie. Between each quantum of 'your' universe's time, there's space for billions of quantums of 'other universe's' times.

"Occam's Razor" -[https://www.amazon.com/Occams-Razor-David- Duncan/dp/B000O8GD...](https://www.amazon.com/Occams-Razor-David- Duncan/dp/B000O8GD9K)</comment>


Ask HN: Startup promised me a job, then backed out after the internship - <AUTHOR> TL;DR; Student from Europe, did an internship in a NYC startup, got promised to be hired. After having made all the plans for moving to US, the offer was retracted.
In August I began an internship at a New York startup. Since I'm European, I had no expectations that it would have led to a full-time job, given the hassle of getting an H1B visa (in fact, I was already surprised that the company sponsored my J-1 for the length of the internship).
After just a few weeks, the company was impressed with my performance (they told me I had already accomplished more than they expected from the whole three months) and they gave me a full-time offer. Compensation, option, benefits, visa paperwork, all there. I took some time to decide, as I was considering other opportunities, and eventually accepted.
My girlfriend is American (we met in the UK, where we both did our master's), and this was the best opportunity to keep living with her, with a nice, well-payed job in a cool town in the US. She stopped arranging for a post-study work visa in the UK. I refused opportunities with Google, Bing, and two startups. I told all those people I wasn't able to consider any offer, since I had already accepted one (so I thought).
The last day of my internship we made the last arrangements for my return. I had a conversation with the main engineer, who also mentioned that the company could request a green card for me after a few years on the H1B. I received greetings and "see you soon" from everyone, including the founder.
Yesterday I received a phone call from the founder, saying that they "changed their mind", and they are stopping the visa application. He mentioned that, for that position, they want someone more experienced with web development and UX. He added that they expected something more from the last part of my internship.
I'm shocked.
No one ever gave me a hint that I was doing something wrong. The founder himself had called me several times to show the prototype I was developing to investors.
I cannot stress how unfortunate this is for me. I was making plans to live in the US with my girlfriend. I left some of my stuff in the city. I even lost the opportunity to apply to the green card lottery, since it closed yesterday. If I didn't know I had a job, I would have spent the past two months looking for one, preparing for interviews, moving forward with the other possibilities I had. My girlfriend would have applied for a visa in the UK, since I was more likely to get a job there.
I am now in the US for a couple of weeks, using the grace period included in my J-1 visa to travel with my girlfriend. At the end of November I will have to leave the country.
I'm a Mathematics graduate, with good programming skills, knowledge of CS, experience with machine learning and information retrieval. I need to find a job in the US. It doesn't necessarily have to be a startup, I will go for a big corporation if that makes it easier to obtain a visa. I'm also interested in any subtleties regarding visas: is there a way I can come back as a tourist and apply for jobs? Can my girlfriend do the same in the UK (or even just move there with me until she can apply and obtain a work permit)?
Any advice? Similar experiences? <comment><USER2> There are three possibilities here:

1\. You really did disappoint at the end of your internship. I've seen this happen. People get complacent. Take a good, hard look at what you've done and see if there's any truth to it or that someone could get that impression;

2\. The company's situation changed. Funding may have fallen through. There may be a power shift in management. Who knows? or

3\. They were lying to you the whole time.

I suspect (2) but, then again, we only have your side of it. I don't mean to sound harsh here. I know nothing about you.

It's time to look on the bright side: you got a three month internship out of this. If you can find someone from the company to get a reference from then that's valuable.

The US operates basically on "at will" employment. With very limited exceptions (eg the Americans With Disabilities Act) they can withdraw that offer and that employment at pretty much any time. If you can demonstrate damages and they can't justify it, you can sue but you'll need to show damages and honestly it's not worth going down that route _even if there is a breach of contract_ , which is a somewhat separate issue.

If you had offers from other companies, go back and contact them. Tell them you'd originally planned to keep working for the company you were interning for as you were really excited about what you were working on and who you were working with but that offer fell through. This is a perfectly acceptable situation and one that won't tarnish you as a potential employee.

If the company was dishonest with you, either from the beginning or at the end, then what happened is a good thing. Better to discover this now than 1-2 years from now when they shaft you out of your options or the like. Integrity and honesty matters. Do not go work for a startup if you don't trust who you're working for. Reputation is everything.

Lastly, I'm glad (for your sake) that you didn't drag whoever this was into the public by naming and shaming them. As tempting as that might be, don't do it. You seriously undermine your ability to get any reference from someone working there and, honestly, this tends to make whoever is slinging mud look bad as well. Just move on.

<comment><USER3> _If you had offers from other companies, go back and contact them._

Absolutely. If you (the OP) are from Europe you may be used to well-defined hiring windows where a job ad closes on date X and after that it doesn't matter if you are a triple-Nobel-prizewinner, you will not be considered.

The US has a much more fluid model in the commercial sector (in fact it is possibly to apply and be hired where no job has been advertised at all). There is nothing dodgy about directly contacting people you had good leads with and mentioning your circumstances have changed, recap anything positive they have said to you previously, and re-attach your resume.

Standard job-seeking advice applies, for example don't go into any details about the previous employer or the fact that you are desperate for a job in the US. Keep it to the minimum facts.

<comment><USER4> _are from Europe you may be used to well-defined hiring windows where a job ad closes on date X and after that it doesn't matter if you are a triple-Nobel- prizewinner, you will not be considered._

That's not been my experience at all. I'm in Ireland, an EU member state, and I've worked at several small technology companies, and I've replied to job postings on mailing lists that are 12 months old and they are still hiring.

IMO it's only really big companies / public sector etc. that have these crazy rigid rules. (cf. Yes Minister)

<comment><USER5> Same here in Spain.

<comment><USER6> Same here in Germany

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It's unfortunate, and it sounds like they should have been better/earlier in communicating intent to you. But there could be other factors, like financing falling through or real skills-match concerns that only emerged in the last few weeks of the internship, that contributed to the situation. And even if they had hired you, it's possible for the situation to change in just a few weeks or months – so them following through with the offer was no guarantee of settled long-term employment, either.

On the bright side, there's lots of hiring of people with your skills right now, in NY and the Bay Area [1]. Though the work-eligibility factor will complicate and slow any processes, you could probably start (and complete) many interviewing processes in the next few weeks, and might have several offers by the end. So I would use your 'grace period' for that, rather than travel, if living/working in the US is your top priority.

Also, because of the arbitrariness of current-era US immigration law, I would make sure you get your visa advice from a specialist, or at the very least a sponsoring-employer, rather than a comment-thread. This seems to me like an area where a single inadvertent admission – "why yes, I did talk about job opportunities with a stranger standing next to me in line at Disneyland" – can lead to a bureaucratic troubles that are almost vindictive in their application.

[1] See for example the recent "Who's Hiring (November 2011" thread: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3181796>

</comment><comment><USER8> Sorry to hear about this situation as it sounds horribly stressful. My only piece of "advice" is to use the next few weeks to do the job search in lieu of traveling. NYC has lots of great startups and your background is prob relevant to many of them. It may require some 'ground & pound', i.e. cold emails, knocking on doors, etc but if you meet enough folks, one might click. And after all, you only need one job.

To this end, we're hiring for someone with a machine learning/information retrieval background so if you're interested, ping me (email is in my profile). We're going through the Visa formalities for another hire so are getting to know the process as well. Of course, that's putting the cart before the horse so reach out if interested and we can at least get the convo going. And we can expedite the conversation/interview process given your predicament.

More on the jobs here - <http://www.cbinsights.com/hiring/>.

</comment><comment><USER9> Most likely is that something unanticipated happened at the company.

Anticipated funding didn't come in. Company is pivoting. Or maybe just the founders nephew needed the job that was going to be yours.

Ultimately, the chances of finding out exactly what the root cause is are practically nil. The employer had no formal obligation to you (this is how it generally works here), and on top of that general fear of lawsuits will also prevent them from telling you exactly what caused their change of mind.

It's an unfortunate situation, but your best option is to simply move on( recognizing that it may be less than 'simple').

</comment><comment><USER10> I don't know what to say other than to agree with you: This was awful behavior on the part of your prospective employer.

I have no facts but I can ask more questions: How do the H1B rules work? If you had been working for the company for a single week before they fired you, would your legal status be different than it is now? Or would you have had to be there a month? A year? More than a year?

Many startups are on the verge of going broke. ;) It kind of goes with the territory. And it's not as if a company that is about to go broke always sends out clear signals of that. Generally you find out in a big hurry. Like when your employer shocks you by suddenly reneging on a deal that you both spent a lot of time making.

It would seem, then, that startups might be especially risky for visa applicants. Though much depends on the details of the immigration process. I'm sure many people around here know those details very well, however.

<comment><USER11> H1-B becomes invalid if the company fires you. It would have been worse if he'd already got here, but knowing how much effort goes into moving countries (particularly to the US), that is a very small consolation.

<comment><USER12> Some consolation, in that case, according to Wikipedia: "if the employer should dismiss the employee, the company is liable for any reasonable costs associated with relocation back to the employee's last foreign residence"

<comment><USER13> Reasonable costs here appears to mean "a plane ticket home", and appears to only apply if the former employee elects to return home; in particular, the first page of Google results will tell you that the company isn't responsible for moving the former employee's property (which is the real relo expense).

<comment><USER12> Ouch, didn't know that. Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Contact me, you'll find my email on <http://qbix.com/about> (I'm Greg). We are in NYC.

Check out what we are building first, and let me know if that's something you would be interested in working on.

<comment><USER15> No offense, but visiting Andrey's website and reading the top post here:

<http://tarantsov.com/>

kind of rubbed me the wrong way. First he states that whitepapers are a 'shitload of crap' and then he has 'NIGGAS' in his most recent tweets. Now imagine you are a black grad student in CS -- not the most warm welcome. You might want to think about endorsing his personal site on your startup page.

<comment><USER16> If he was a cofounder or a member of upper management I would be concerned. But he's not, he's a developer. Are you saying you agree with the personal opinions of everyone you've worked with? That you shouldn't work somewhere because another employee has questionable / controversial opinions? Give me a break.

<comment><USER17> The issue is not so much that an employee has questionable opinions, but rather that his company endorses his blog containing those opinions with a direct link:

 _"Rather than talk about what he does, check out his website."_

While I'm sure that post was not on his site at the time the company decided to link to it, they are still currently in the awkward position of endorsing it. I find it ironic that in support of his anti-intellectualism Andrey references an essay by Paul Graham discussing the differences between engineering and science. This essay does not support his point unless you only bother with the most cursory of glances at it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Often there are other factors involved, like an investor who backed out. Think about the last time you had to say no to somebody. It is hard to say no to other people and the reasons we call them are often not the real reasons. Try not to take it personal or understand it as something unfair. Things like that happen to everybody from time to time.

</comment><comment><USER19> I always liked the saying 'you can control what others do, but you can control your reaction to it'.

It is entirely possible that the start-up you were working for is having some issues, and are therefore unable to hire you. Or maybe they are being acquired, and can't talk about it, but also can't hire any more people.

The fact is you don't know the actual situation, only what the founder told you, and it is possible that he can't tell you the real reason. Maybe he is saying what he is saying to make himself feel better about something. Whatever it is, it doesn't matter.

Have you considered going back to the other companies that wanted to interview you and see if they are still interested?

Though it may seem like things have been really screwed up, you never know what will happen. This could turn out better than your original plan.

Best of luck

</comment><comment><USER20> In terms of returning to the US, you can enter and look at applying for jobs while you're there (meet people, have interviews etc) but you'll still need to go through the H1B procedure, which typically takes 6-8 weeks.

The visa waiver program (VWP) means you can be in the US as a tourist for up to 90 days at a time, with only 180 days in total in any one year period (* I'm 99% sure it's any one year period, though might be worth double checking). So the likelyhood is even if your in the US for that time you'll have to leave before the paperwork goes through. Immigration can get a bit funny though, so don't bank on being able to make loads of trips (they like you "out" as much as you're "in")

Now a word of warning. As a recent grad trying to convince US employers to H1B you and bring you over is hard. You're in a better position than 99.999% of the population though - math and machine learning is hot in any company. The issue the company has to decide is, "Is it worth us spending the money and time trying to get an H1B for this guy, or none of the hassel for a 'home grown' employee". If they can get your for 1-2 years it may well be, and experience with your previous company is a big plus.

Finally, trying to get interviews from the UK to the US is very tough. I wouldn't recommend applying for job boards, but look at contacting CTOs tech leads directly. Maybe my case is unique, but I applied to about 150 job board postings over about 3 months for a jobs in the US. I have an undergrad from Oxford (biochem) and masters in CS from Imperial London (GPA 3.7/4.0 respectively) and I heard nada from anyone except literally the first add I applied to. However, I've had quite a few interviews through just emailing people, so it is possible.

If you want any more info feel free to contact me (through the various means on my HN profile). For the record, I was in a _VERY_ similar situation to you in terms of the US/UK issues.

[EDIT: Sorry, I _totally_ projected that you're actually from the UK because of your English and what you said about moving there. I think everything still stands though, assuming your country participates in the VWP?]

<comment><USER11> _As a recent grad trying to convince US employers to H1B you and bring you over is hard._

No doubt. I feel very, very bad for the OP, but I am a little surprised at this:

 _I refused opportunities with Google, Bing, and two startups. I told all those people I wasn't able to consider any offer, since I had already accepted one (so I thought)._

If the OP had done all the required research (and it certainly looks that way), it must have been clear that the H1-B is nothing to mess with. Turning down opportunities until you have the visa in your hand and you've gone through customs sounds crazy to me.

Getting a visa is very hard. It's not Google/Microsoft's first time at that rodeo. Even better, big companies don't change their minds in a hurry. The startup was always much riskier. Funding might change, a new better candidate might appear, the whole company might pivot away from your skillset.

I realize its easy to point out flaws from the safety of my desk chair, and I have nothing but sympathy for the OP. I've been there when I had to leave the US the first time after my studies ended, and it's really hard. But that experience has what bred my heathy paranoia for these things. Always take the safer bet.

<comment><USER20> Sure - I had sort of assumed those offers were for non-US locations though? I've been approached by a number of [american] companies and recruiters for jobs in London.

I'd be really interested to hear about the H1B from the employers' perspective; there must be some HN members who've engaged in the process?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Here's your best strategy in three easy steps:

1) Marry your girlfriend.

2) Get your family-based Green Card.

3) Get a job for one of the companies that you previously rejected or even from another company.

<comment><USER22> Agree with this- I'm going through this process right now (the only difference is I'm the US citizen and we're getting married as a result of a normal relationship)- it is fairly simple and most importantly for you- fast.

You get married (can be a civil ceremony- which takes a few hours to arrange), file your paperwork and pay the $1500 fee- in about 2 weeks you receive a confirmation and a short time later you receive a I-94, which gives you permission to work, remain in the US and right of return as long as your application is pending. You then go to an interview to prove that your relationship is real.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> call back google and explain what happened. If you're good they'll get you back even if you said no at first.

Next time sign contract before saying no to others

</comment><comment><USER24> Was there any other interns there at the same time as you were? That phone call almost sounds like it was intended for someone else.

</comment><comment><USER25> I've been in similar position as you, so i feel for you. I've worked in the USA and Canada for several companies in the past, and also went through several visa procedures (partially). My suggestions is to start an LLC in the UK and contract yourself out to one or multiple (startup) companies. That's what I did. Not only does that evade a lot of visa headache's, and makes it way easier for companies to recruit your services. It also turns you into an entrepreneur, which is a more productive way to live your life ihmo. Who knows you might be hiring people yourself soon.

You have to fly back and forth atleast once every 3 (or 6?) months. But if you're smart you have your client pay for that. (much cheaper then navigating visa-applications) The only thing to watch out for at the customs is if they ask you what your doing here is that your here for either "sales meetings" or "training of people". Don't say your just working here. and always have a recent, written letter from one of your client-companies on you, inviting you to come help em out with trainings or other interim-solution providing. I've avoided any immigration problems like this for years. Worst thing: they will have you explain it, and then they realize its a grey area and they cant really give you any problems for it.

<comment><USER26> Not sure if that's good advice. Committing immigration fraud and lying to border officials can get you in serious trouble (18 U.S.C. § 1001). Not only you, but also the company that's paying for your services. It's only a matter of time until a CBP officer starts asking questions about those month-long sales meetings and training sessions.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Just a quick thought. There is the possibility they misunderstood the visa process. J-1 is a business/cultural exchange visa that requires a 2 year absence before re-entry under a H-1B visa or similar. Perhaps someone told them a J-1 visa was easier to get for an intern. During the H-1B process, they discovered the 2 year absence rule, and had to rescind the offer.

Source: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J-1_visa>

<comment><USER28> If that's the case, why in the world wouldn't they tell the guy? According to his account, the closest thing to a reason for termination was that they "changed their mind."

<comment><USER9> _If that's the case, why in the world wouldn't they tell the guy?_

Just a guess: worry of a lawsuit.

If they give no reason (as they are entitled not to), it's hard to make a "counter-attack". If they give any specific reason the OP potentially has some sort of discrimination angle to pursue.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Traditionally, interns and foreign exchange students are used as slave labour, then disposed of when their tenure expires. One thing that I found about business, which initially was a shock but soon became the expected norm, is that people will make all sorts of promises about all sorts of things (especially pay, employment or promotions) and the substantial majority of those promises will be broken. Usually such promises turn out to merely be pep talks.

<comment><USER30> Someone needs a history lesson. Slave labour? Please.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Feel relieved that you discovered their true character before you actually moved there and joined them and invested time with them. They are probably lying about your performance to have an excuse to rescind the offer --- now you know something about their character. They should have been honest about whatever circumstances changed such that they couldn't hire you anymore.

<comment><USER31> Out of curiosity, why was I down voted on this comment?

<comment><USER32> I did not down vote you but probably because people only know one side of the story.

<comment><USER31> Yes, that is a good point, and something I see too --- I was just trying to take a shortcut, and say it from the poster's p.o.v., and like usual, my shortcuts backfire.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Did your girlfriend finish her degree in the last 12 months - if so she can probably qualify for a Tier 1 (Post-study work) visa which will let her stay and work in the UK for up to two years (at which point she'd be expected to switch to a different visa if she wants to stay).

But the important point is that it wouldn't be contingent on her having a job offer.

</comment><comment><USER34> just a word of advice, if you're on an H-1B, you probably don't want to rely on a startup for your job so maybe this is a wakeup call. You would ideally want to work for a more established, larger company to where you can have some assurance of their continued stability since, as you know, its rather drastic what happens if you lose your job. Not trying to be harsh but just speaking from experience of having worked with startups, both of which had at least one person on H-1B (I myself am American).

</comment><comment><USER35> Let me address the visa part (with a disclaimer that I am not a lawyer, but have gone through the visa-related ups and downs myself).

1) You CAN come on tourist visa and try to look for a job -- it will give you about 90 days with a max of 180 days at a stretch. Super strictly speaking, tourists are not supposed to look for jobs, but I know people who have done this.

2) H1B visa allows premium processing so you can get it approved in 14 days, if you or your future employer can pay $1225 premium processing fees. You can get more information from uscis.gov -> forms -> premium processing. Let me say this again: H1B process does not have to take several months.

As others have mentioned before, I would suggest you to contact companies that offered you jobs but you declined.

<comment><USER21> Why even bother with H1b if he can easily get family-based green card by marrying his girlfriend?

BTW, that's best sort of marriage when love and business interests align.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> If you're still interested in NYC startups, check out yipit.com/jobs and email me(firstname.lastname@example.com). We're hiring and have sponsored visas before.

</comment><comment><USER37> Sorry for you, that's a pain. My advice would be: let go this specific job and search for a job right now; you have until the end of November if I understood?

As you had opportunities with Google etc - why not recontacting them? Turns out the initial plan didn't work out.

</comment><comment><USER38> Checkout out adaptly.com if your interested send an email to email@example.com. Articles:

[http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-09-29/tech/30216948...](http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-09-29/tech/30216948_1_social- media-advertising-twitter)

[http://thenextweb.com/entrepreneur/2011/11/05/lessons- from-1...](http://thenextweb.com/entrepreneur/2011/11/05/lessons-from-12-new- york-entrepreneurs-after-a-year-in-the-business/)

</comment><comment><USER28> The same thing happened to me, although thankfully I wasn't as invested in the promised job as you were. I worked remotely for a startup for 3 months. It was a well-paid programming internship, and the plan was for me to relocate and come on full-time at the end of the internship.

Three months into the internship, the founders scheduled individual meetings with every employee. They told they were letting me go, and that it was because the company was "going in another direction" or some such. I and another intern were being terminated, supposedly based on seniority.

The technical cofounder said it wasn't at all related to my performance, and even wrote me a great letter of recommendation that helped me get a job. And yet, a few weeks later, this startup had programmer job openings posted on its website. I heard later a rumor that they had basically run out of money, but I don't _really_ know the whole story.

That was my first experience with a startup (after spending a lot of time here and becoming enamored with startup culture), and I must say it _almost_ discouraged me from joining a startup. Luckily, I still kept looking, because I'm quite satisfied with where I ended up.

</comment><comment><USER39> IANAL, but an option to consider is going to the US for the 3 months a tourist visa allows you. You can use this time to look for work and there shouldn't be any problems as long as you don't actually work ... and there shouldn't be any real problems even if you do work but that's highly illegal and I did not suggest you do anything like that.

A loophole exists however. You can open a business in the UK that does consulting for the US job so technically you are employed in the UK and are staying in the US on an extended business trip. These can legally last up to something like 6 months (I think). This should give you enough time to come up with a proper solution.

The consulting thing is how developers are usually employed in my neck of Europe because it enables a lot of tax tricks and is generally easier for people. And while this scenario is battle tested for remote work, I am not sure how it actually goes over when you also relocate to the US.

Take all of this with a grain of salt, consult with an immigration lawyer before you do anything.

</comment><comment><USER30> For what it's worth, I quit a bad investment banking job a couple months ago. Shortly after, a company (also in NY, the same?) approached me and gave every inclination that they wanted to hire me (not the first time the company had approached me). I did a contract for them, to see whether it was a good fit for both us of (I had doubt about the specific position). I thought I did a good job, took 3 weeks instead of 4, got positive feedback, blah blah blah. Silence.

Finally, I got the 'you are too qualified' email. Which to me is just a really rude way to say 'you aren't qualified enough'.

Anyways, I lost 2 months of not looking for a job and not focusing on the right goals. I'm obviously to blame (at least in part) because I know/knew stuff like this happens, and that's life (I'm 10 years out of school, and have seen it before).

The point though? Some people are asses. Some people aren't honest. Some people simply can't handle a bad situation. Often times, people are just really, really, poor communicators.

I hope things work out for you.

</comment><comment><USER40> I had a very similar experience. During my internship with said startup, there was talk of giving me some equity at the end of the summer, going big and doing some really nice and fancy things.

At the end of the summer, I wasn't even paid for the work I did (this was supposed to come in a lump sum at the end summer). I could have tried to harass them but concluded that it wasn't worth the effort as things could have gotten really nasty.

The lump sum was pretty much peanuts anyway, and wouldn't make any difference in the grand scheme of things.

My takeaway from the episode was the experience of building a lot of really cool software, and because of the work I did over the summer, I've gotten interview calls from Ebay, Twitter, Microsoft, Amazon, and the list goes on.....

Life is too short to be stuck on things you have no control over. Take the positives from the experience and move on.

<comment><USER40> Also H1B is a double edge sword. If coming via H1B is your only option, I would stick with well established and profitable companies that won't just change their minds on a whim.

With startups you take huge risk and expect huge rewards, and adding H1B to that mix doesn't help matter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> The US (and probably the UK) are quite strict about not looking for jobs whilst on a tourist visa. Both countries also make it really hard to get a work visa.

Given your experience it sounds like your best chance is big data style jobs. Off the top of my head try Mozilla Labs, DNAnexus, EpidemicIQ, Twitter.

Worth looking through here too: <http://startuply.com/#/machine%20learning/1>

</comment><comment><USER42> So the UK is ok too? Or even going to Appsterdam (NL) or Berlin where startups are thriving, less stressful and better healthcare/social benefits/pension arrangements?

<comment><USER43> Care to link to a Berlin startups page? I may be interested in pursuing opportunities there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> get over it, 99 % this is not personal. An H1B will cost the company between 15 and 20k, in legal fees and fees to government. Only big companies do this.

Look around you, maybe return on visa waiver for 3 months and apply. Enough jobs, and yes probably you will wind up with a bigger company that a)has done this before and b)is willing to pony up the money

Good luck, Silicon Valley or NY are awesome places to be and you will learn a lot more about startups than in Europe

</comment><comment><USER45> What's your email? I'd like to contact you and chat (as someone seeking an internship in NY); feel free to email me if you're not comfortable posting an email.

</comment><comment><USER46> When they promised that they would hire you, you should've gotten that in writing (along with what happens if they don't hire you).

Welcome to America.

<comment><USER7> Any company is unlikely to have offered such a written contract, with break-up contingencies, except in rare situations (known superstar, heavily recruited, known complications/opportunity costs of acceptance).

In the case of a traditional 'offer letter', the envisioned employment is usually ongoing at-will employment. So that 'writing' doesn't create much protection against changing-minds or changing business situations. Either party can end the relationship at any time. ("Welcome to your first morning at work! I regret to inform you we will no longer be needing your services. Good bye.")

<comment><USER31> I believe that the written offer letter helps you seek damages related to relocation, losing health coverage, etc., due to the expectation of starting a new job. At-will employment lets you fire people without consideration, but it doesn't let you scam them into investing their time and money into the business relationship.

<comment><USER11> This is true, but I think everyone would be aware that fighting a court case as a recent grad will be far too expensive, and doing that from outside the country adds even more on top.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Try to look forward not back, call up a few start ups and see how fast you get a job.

<comment><USER48> Yeah because a lot of start-ups are willing to navigate the clusterfuck that is H-1B.

<comment><USER47> You might be right, but considering all his options I wouldn't give up without a tough fight.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> Advice: Stay in the UK. It's better.

</comment><comment><USER50> I love a The Strokes song that says "When they say promises they mean promises..." ("Meet me in the bathroom").

Well, welcome to the US (I'm an immigrant too) the place where you can, indeed, get fired when they want (even first day). I've got promises like that too, trial periods that end suddenly, "Hey this is temporally, we gonna start working normal hours in a month when we launch" (and get fired after we launch, since the product was working).

You might think that there's no ethics in US businesses, but that's just the way here works.

If I were you, I would call out that startup. Ever since I got fucked up by an US company, you can expect 0 loyalty from me (something that you take for granted overseas), I've had 4 jobs this year, and switched only because the next one offered me more money... only if you are a co-founder of the startup you should be attached to it. The company I work with today offerred me a good salary and options and they treat me well, so I'm happy.

<comment><USER51> I do not mean to be flippant, but why the sense of entitlement here? I can understand the need for common decency, but the hiring market will sort that out in due time.

What happened to the OP sucks, but this truthfully sounds like a dating story. She's just not that into you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> Stop pissing and moaning. ASAP. New York will eat you alive with that attitude. This is not a setback; this is an opportunity. <http://nytm.org/made/>

You've made it to Ellis Island. Now it's time for you to hustle.

<comment><USER53> Perfect link!

Take today/tonight to make a game plan. Identify companies on that list that you like, map them, and go out and talk to them. If you're "in the area" it's really easy to pickup a few coffee meetings and eventually one of them will lead to something bigger.

When you meet with them be completely up front about your situation in the US, but DO NOT dwell on why the last job offer failed. Talk about their company/products/space- show that you've done your homework. That should lead to discussions on your passions/experience and if you've researched them and they have a position open, great! If not it's perfectly ok to ask them about other companies looking for someone with your talents.

 _Edit_ Xtify is hiring in NYC and they're pretty awesome! <http://www.xtify.com/jobs></comment></comment>


What to Know Before Debating Type Systems - <AUTHOR> https://cdsmith.wordpress.com/2011/01/09/an-old-article-i-wrote/

<comment><USER2> Could be useful if it was interesting. <Reverse>.</comment>


Amazon Prime Day deals 'not what they seem' - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44846356 <comment><USER2> I recommend consulting CamelCamelCamel before making any purchases on Amazon today to verify that there wasn't a price hike _before_ the drop. CCC lets you see the pricing history on any of the items on Amazon.

It even has a Chrome extension.[1]

[0][https://camelcamelcamel.com/](https://camelcamelcamel.com/)

[1][https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/the- camelizer/ghno...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/the- camelizer/ghnomdcacenbmilgjigehppbamfndblo?utm_source=chrome-ntp-icon)

<comment><USER3> Wonder how that service works. Amazon explicitly forbids keeping track of their pricing history. I knew a few guys who tried it and got a C&D warning at some time. Does ccc have a special agreement or something equivalent? Beats me.

<comment><USER4> Anyone can send a cease and desist. How would that be enforceable though? The information is available publicly to anonymous browsers.

<comment><USER5> The risk is not that the results will be impossible to gather and publish, but that they will be _unprofitable._

CamelCamelCamel makes money off users clicking Amazon affiliate URLs to go to Amazon from their site. It's easy for Amazon (or anyone else, really) to determine from these URLs the Amazon account which is tied to these links and 'enforce' the C&D by canceling/refusing to pay that account's affilate link revenue.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I don't really have that much in the pipeline that I need.

Whenever I browse these Prime Day "sales" I just end up scrolling through a list of products I don't really intend to buy, nor am that really interested in. Most of it is junk I'd probably use once anyway, and I never buy clothing off Amazon.

Amazon have nailed the transaction experience when you know exactly what you want, it's very slick from purchase to delivery.

But the 'window shopping' experience is so poor, the interface doesn't seem to have changed that much for years, it's the same layout, the same endless ream of products.

<comment><USER7> > Amazon have nailed the transaction experience when you know exactly what you > want, it's very slick from purchase to delivery.

> But the 'window shopping' experience is so poor, the interface doesn't seem > to have changed that much for years, it's the same layout, the same endless > ream of products.

Exactly my opinion. Even when you need a product from a certain product category and have a general idea of you want, I consider Amazon useless. Research and exploration is just abysmal with Amazon and the amount of subpar products doesn't help at all. I consider it a huge mistake to open the amazon marketplace anything and enyone, including third party sellers. If I that kind of shopping experience I'd browse eBay.

From Amazon I expect at least some degree of curation and the intention to sell only decent to exceptional products. Amazon should feature all the advantages of a specialized niche store with the difference that it's able to serve all of those niches.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Amazons 'tactics' are no different than any retailer of consumer goods. You see the deceptive practices applied especially in clothing where items are marketed at inflated prices and then suddenly dropped 50% or more for a 'sale'.

<comment><USER9> >You see the deceptive practices applied especially in clothing where items are marketed at inflated prices and then suddenly dropped 50% or more for a 'sale'.

JCPenny's discovered that the consumer demands this behavior.

<comment><USER10> >JCPenny's discovered that the consumer demands this behavior.

Which really disappointed me. I was thrilled when they announced the no sales model and switched all my clothes buying to them - it's so much less stressful. Several people I know were similar.

Unfortunately "all of my clothes buying" was like two pairs of pants, while the people I know who love finding a "deal" go shopping every weekend...

<comment><USER11> If I'm not mistaken, the then-CEO said it would take something like 6 years to cast off the old customers who are looking for sales and acquire their new, younger, less sale-seeking customers. The board agreed, then sacked him much earlier than the time he said it would take.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> As always, use something like camelcamelcamel to do price history comparisons for you before buying anything on Prime Day or Cyber Monday (or any other time for that matter).

<comment><USER13> Depending on jurisdiction, raising the regular price to create the appearance of a sale price isn't legal.

e.g. from Canada's Competition Act:

> They prohibit the making, or the permitting of the making, of any materially > false or misleading representation, to the public, as to the ordinary > selling price of a product, in any form whatever.

[http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb- bc.nsf/eng/00...](http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb- bc.nsf/eng/00522.html#sec01)

<comment><USER14> Hey in the land of the free it's completely A-OK :)

This has been done for a while and it's extremely effective.

<comment><USER15> This is not completely accurate, the FTC has rules against deceptive pricing practices [1]. I'm not sure how often these rules are enforced and what the penalties are though. They specifically give an example where raising a price before a sale is not allowed:

> The following is an example of a price comparison based on a fictitious > former price. John Doe is a retailer of Brand X fountain pens, which cost > him $5 each. His usual markup is 50 percent over cost; that is, his regular > retail price is $7.50. In order subsequently to offer an unusual "bargain", > Doe begins offering Brand X at $10 per pen. He realizes that he will be able > to sell no, or very few, pens at this inflated price. But he doesn't care, > for he maintains that price for only a few days. Then he "cuts" the price to > its usual level—$7.50—and advertises: "Terrific Bargain: X Pens, Were $10, > Now Only $7.50!" This is obviously a false claim. The advertised "bargain" > is not genuine.

[1]: [https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text- idx?SID=f8c45f090a32596673...](https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text- idx?SID=f8c45f090a32596673aef12b405c46f6&node=se16.1.233_11)

<comment><USER14> That's pretty interesting I had no idea. Thanks

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Shopping online is easier if you know exactly what you are buying. But when you are browsing (shoes, glasses, clothes etc), the ideal experience is the ability to filter by a hierarchy of attributes specific to that category. This requires tedious data collection and categorization.

Eg. Shoes - there are different kinds of attributes - high level shape, specific stylistic shapes, material, usage, price, brand. This categorization needs to be done cleanly. It can get messy fast. If I start seeing sandals when i searched for leather boots, I will get confused and refuse to trust the results.

My theory is that this is why online retailers focussing on certain verticals are able to get some level success vs amazon (Eg. Zappos), largely due to the level of detail available for the browsing experience, even if their prices are higher. Amazon's UX/UI is too generic and sometimes frustrating.

<comment><USER17> Sure, just look at buying parts on Newegg vs Amazon. Newegg has amazing search capabilities tailored to what they're selling, while on Amazon it's a crapshoot whether electronics stuff will even be in the right broadest-level category, so even brand new builders still get pointed to Newegg for their shopping.

<comment><USER18> I would much rather deal with Amazon for returns and replacements though. Their customer service is streets ahead of Newegg's.

<comment><USER7> > streets ahead

Maybe you used it intentionally but it's mildly fascinating that you subconsciously used a fake expression that a fictional character from a comedy show failed to coin/establish.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> trevor-e One thing I find very disingenuous from Amazon is how they promote older products. I was looking to buy a dash cam for my car and settled on a Rexing V1. It was recommended as Amazon's Choice and on sale for $99.99 (from $149.99!). I was just about to complete the purchase when I read the fine print and saw this model was a few years old. Turns out there is another, newer model (Rexing V1 3rd gen) being sold for $139.99. Somehow the older product has a higher price which makes the sale price look like a better deal, and the older product is promoted in the search results. I felt like Amazon tried to trick me into buying their older inventory.

<comment><USER19> Counterpoint, there are some times where the older model is actually preferred, either due to being just as good and cheaper, or rarely better than the new model. I don't know how their choice algorithm comes up with those labels, but a cheaper older model isn't always a bad deal.

Unless the $150 base price is what it normally sells at, and the $50 discount was truly a one time deal... In which case idk what is going on there lol.

<comment> trevor-e In fairness to Amazon I'll let you judge for yourself since they still list the prices as 149.99 and 139.99:

\- Rexing V1: [https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00X528FNE/](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00X528FNE/) \- Rexing V1 3rd gen: [https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077B25H9K/](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077B25H9K/)

Half-way down the page there is a comparison with some other Rexing products, but it's not obvious IMO with the price confusion they create. I've seen it "on sale" for at least the last few months.

<comment><USER19> Yea I definitely dislike the habit of retailers from showing MSRP as the list price despite the fact that no retailer has sold that product at MSRP for like 3 years. It's no longer a useful comparison for the consumer, and just behaves like a shady anchor point to make it seem like a good deal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> It's the same thing that's happened to Steam sales. Start them off really strong then every year after slowly make them not as good but people come back for more anyways.

<comment><USER21> Speak for yourself, I got 4 games for 17 dollars, I'm really happy about getting Mount and Blade for 7 dollars.

Especially when you compare to anything on the consoles.

I think the developers have gotten smarter and wont give 1 year old games 66% off on top of their already lower price.

EDIT: Also, prime day has always sucked. Not really comparable.

<comment><USER22> I think I had to wait 2 years instead of my expected 1 year for some games I wanted to play to come out with all their DLC at a good discounted price. Some games also never go below a certain amount no matter how old they are.

The demand for refunds killed the classic Steam sale. They're still good (I got a few games too in the recent one) but feel mediocre to what used to be; they can't do anything fun like they once did like community-voted flash sales where something will be super-duper discounted for an hour while for the rest of the two weeks it'll only be merely super discounted. This last summer sale was a nice improvement though since they added the game giveaways (though I don't know anyone who won one, there weren't that many available).

Agree about Prime Day, it was never good. Usually don't buy anything...

<comment><USER23> > _The demand for refunds killed the classic Steam sale._

how?

<comment><USER22> >> they can't do anything fun like they once did like community-voted flash sales where something will be super-duper discounted for an hour while for the rest of the two weeks it'll only be merely super discounted.

Flash sales were an important part of the classic deep-discount Steam sale, but it's easy to upset people with them. Put another way, you buy at 60% off, then tomorrow it's 80% off. What do you do? What _can_ you do in some circumstances (e.g. you already started playing for a few hours)? I guess I should clarify that this wasn't the only factor (the increase in alternate distribution and visibility channels is another) but it contributed. A side effect is that because of there being little you could do, wiser gamers would wait until the last day to make sure none of the games they wanted ended up on one of the flash sales, then buy things. Valve makes a lot more money if people are buying throughout the sale -- and they've since added a lot of search, filtering, and discoverability to the platform that flash sales once had a role in that encourage those impulse buys.

<comment><USER23> Ah, now I get what you mean. The refund case seems solveable: at least once you've downloaded the game to your PC they don't auto-refund, so they could just hold refund requests during the sale, or explicitly block people from rebuying cheaper. But I see how the waiting pattern would be bad for them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I should double check, but last I knew anything you've put on a wish list shows the % change in price since it was added to the list, so if there are specific items you are interested to see if change/you want to grab if they are on sale, worth putting them in a list to track the price shifts relative to when you added.

</comment><comment><USER25> While I like to hate on Amazon as much as the next person, I think the case could be made that sales tactics like this are common at nearly all major retailers.

Either the consumer is savvy and spent the requisite time considering their purchase, or they haven't. Retailers will always attempt to capitalize on this.

<comment><USER26> > I think the case could be made that sales tactics like this are common at > nearly all major retailers

That's why these sorts of tactics need to be made illegal. The US desperately needs better consumer protections, the amount of scams and misinformation flying around is dizzying.

<comment><USER27> What is the harm if a person pays $50 for something, and $50 for something with a 50% off sticker next to it? The latter just releases some chemicals in the purchaser's brain maybe making them feel better.

<comment><USER28> Vendors don't put the 50% off sticker on it to make those happy who would have bought the item anyway. They put it on to trick people who would _not_ pay 50$ for the article into doing so.

<comment><USER27> The fact that they paid $50 for it seems to negate the claim that they wouldn't pay $50 for it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> The article is not wrong. But it seems to be pointing out something all sales like this do. Black Friday is full of fake deals that encourage you to act fast. Same with Boxing Day.

</comment><comment><USER30> AFAICT most of the stuff offered on UK's prime day is pretty crap.

I wanted a kindle fire hd 8 anyway, so I've taken advantage of the price drop there. Otherwise the best thing I can find is an SSD that's maybe £10 below market but claims to be reduced by over £150.

<comment><USER31> >AFAICT most of the stuff offered on UK's prime day is pretty crap.

Their office 365 subs are discounted a fair bit (<50 for the 5 PC install one). Plus there is a buy 80 quid voucher get 10 free thing

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Prime Day? More like Same-As-the-Rest-of-the-Time Day. It has always been a highly-hyped disappointment of a store-wide sale, and this is not news to anyone except people who have never before shopped on Amazon's web store.

I have never found anything even close to a good deal on Prime Day, and it has been several years since I even bothered to check prices.

You're better off marking a product you might like to buy, checking its price history on another site, and possibly setting an alert to notify you when the price drops below a threshold on a third site. If that alert happens to go off on Prime Day, you got very, very lucky that it somehow managed to be chosen as a loss leader.

<comment><USER33> > _Prime Day? More like Same-As-the-Rest-of-the-Time Day. It has always been a > highly-hyped disappointment of a store-wide sale, and this is not news to > anyone except people who have never before shopped on Amazon 's web store._

The headline is misleading insofar as the real story is that the site is completely broken right now, and people (me) are unable to order anything. Kinda dumb for an infrastructure company.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Prime Day has always been a couple of publicized deals .... and a lot of garbage.

I checked my camelcamelcamel list ... SQUAT that I want on sale.

<comment><USER35> But sometimes you find stuff you might want and if the price is good, try out. I bought a robotic vacuum cleaner on black Friday (practically the same thing) last year for $130 and I consider it one of the best purchases I have ever made.

Literally only $50 more than the manual one I bought and it saves me so much time.

<comment><USER34> I've found Black Friday deals to be far FAR more widespread and higher quality than Prime Day...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > However Amazon said its website was transparent, and consumers could compare > price changes over time.

Do Amazon provide this service, or are they referring to CamelCamelCamel?

<comment><USER36> 12 years ago Amazon provided such data. Now a few sites that provide such info.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> According to CCC, most of what I want will be on better sale at back to school.

</comment><comment><USER38> I feel the title could have been more informative.</comment>