Talk:Bottom Line Inc./Archive 1

consumer complaints
It is true that this company has consumer complaints against it, but perhaps this could be stated in a more encyclopedic way then the currently uncited text "Bottom Line Books have hundreds of consumer complaints against them on the internet. A simple Google search of "Bottom Line Books" will confirm this fact."  I'm unsure what that better way is, any suggestions?

Also, did a quick search and here are some possible references generally about the company: Thanks. -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 15:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * http://www.dmnews.com/30-years-of-remarkable-change/article/158498/
 * http://chiefmarketer.com/disciplines/inside-information
 * http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=4662904
 * How about using this one http://www.bbb.org/connecticut/business-reviews/publishers-book/boardroom-in-stamford-ct-47000272 Woz2 (talk) 00:00, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * this is about the general topic of negative option billing http://www.ftc.gov/os/2009/02/P064202negativeoptionreport.pdf
 * this more of a how-to thing http://www.scamtimes.com/scam-times/headline/ultimate-healing-boardroom-bottom-line-books/ Woz2 (talk) 00:05, 27 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The BBB.org page might be relevant, and also the Complaint Details page and the Complaint Breakdown by Resolution section.
 * I searched the FTC report, but couldn't find a mention of Boardroom or Bottom Line. It'd be a good reference for the Negative option billing article, though.
 * The scamtimes.com page is definitely substationaly about the company. But is it a reliable source?  I searched for example references from scamtimes.com on other articles in Wikipedia, but couldn't find any.
 * Also, with some combo of the references already listed here, do folks think notability has been established?
 * Thanks. -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 09:09, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I certainly took note of them... a note to avoid them under any circumstances... But I digress... I'd say the only thing notable about them is their infamy for using negative option. Yes, the FTC PDF is about the general topic, not about Boardroom specifically. It seems there isn't a US equivalent of the UK's "Unsolicited Goods and Services Act" http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/30/contents Strange Woz2 (talk) 11:22, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * There's a litany of complaints at http://www.ripoffreport.com At some point the site was linked in the articke, but it was rolled back as non-notable. Shortly after that the "google for it" text was added. Woz2 (talk) 11:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Done! Woz2 (talk) 19:05, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration)

add refs, notability tag
Could we add in the 3 suggested refs from above also. For example on the first sentence:

... publishing company.

And then the removal of the notability tag. Thanks. -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 16:16, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Done! Woz2 (talk) 17:11, 28 April 2012 (UTC)