Comments on: Yelp vs OpenTable reviews; Yelp is the Myspace of online reviews, but….. http://www.hrabaconsulting.com/blog/2009/11/04/yelp-vs-opentable-reviews/ HHotelConsult hoping to make sense of his brainpan's thoughts, rambles, ambles, and more. Hotel Industry banter, social media thoughts, and general blather. Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:17:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Uncle Fishbits » Blog Archive » Yelp vomit. I am not organizing this, nor am I reading through it. It is a mash of thoughts on user generated content sites. http://www.hrabaconsulting.com/blog/2009/11/04/yelp-vs-opentable-reviews/comment-page-1/#comment-290 Uncle Fishbits » Blog Archive » Yelp vomit. I am not organizing this, nor am I reading through it. It is a mash of thoughts on user generated content sites. Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:17:47 +0000 http://www.hrabaconsulting.com/blog/?p=836#comment-290 [...] In response to this article, I said this: It is so much more complex than just “good or bad”, just as my complicated ramble here probably suggests. I *really* dislike yelp for so many reasons… mainly for ones of total lack of verification. It’s sort of the myspace of the review world. But this post sort of explains it a little… [...] [...] In response to this article, I said this: It is so much more complex than just “good or bad”, just as my complicated ramble here probably suggests. I *really* dislike yelp for so many reasons… mainly for ones of total lack of verification. It’s sort of the myspace of the review world. But this post sort of explains it a little… [...]

]]> By: Tweets that mention Yelp vs OpenTable reviews » Hraba Hospitality Consulting -- Topsy.com http://www.hrabaconsulting.com/blog/2009/11/04/yelp-vs-opentable-reviews/comment-page-1/#comment-285 Tweets that mention Yelp vs OpenTable reviews » Hraba Hospitality Consulting -- Topsy.com Wed, 04 Nov 2009 23:09:42 +0000 http://www.hrabaconsulting.com/blog/?p=836#comment-285 [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Michael Hraba and Mike Redbord, Business.com Answers. Business.com Answers said: RT @TheHotelsHotel: RT @redbord: Commented on thoughtful blog about Yelp/Opentable/UGC in the review category http://ow.ly/zeCe [...] [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Michael Hraba and Mike Redbord, Business.com Answers. Business.com Answers said: RT @TheHotelsHotel: RT @redbord: Commented on thoughtful blog about Yelp/Opentable/UGC in the review category http://ow.ly/zeCe [...]

]]> By: Mike Redbord http://www.hrabaconsulting.com/blog/2009/11/04/yelp-vs-opentable-reviews/comment-page-1/#comment-284 Mike Redbord Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:26:31 +0000 http://www.hrabaconsulting.com/blog/?p=836#comment-284 On OpenTable, I don't know if a social element would play well. It's the type of thing that always _seems_ to make sense to add to a site, then can be a costly endeavor and not really pan out. To your point about OpenTable's existing userbase, I'd suspect your inkling is correct that a social element wouldn't be too useful unless it hooked into FB (or other large existing network) and people could see where their friends are reserving tables. That is, trying to leverage that existing userbase into a new/separate network would be tough. So as a standalone social network (like Yelp, for instance), I have a hard time seeing OpenTable play ball. As far as socializing reviews in order to prevent fraud, critical mass is an effective way to deal with fraud--having 500 reviews and 10 outliers is a good sign to ignore those 10, veracity notwithstanding. Consumers understand this intuitively, I think. And if there is critical mass (57 reviews qualifies, as in your post) then the faces associated with the reviews aren't even that important any more. Definitely agreed that OT is one to watch out for in the review space though...and that's nice to see. On OpenTable, I don’t know if a social element would play well. It’s the type of thing that always _seems_ to make sense to add to a site, then can be a costly endeavor and not really pan out. To your point about OpenTable’s existing userbase, I’d suspect your inkling is correct that a social element wouldn’t be too useful unless it hooked into FB (or other large existing network) and people could see where their friends are reserving tables. That is, trying to leverage that existing userbase into a new/separate network would be tough. So as a standalone social network (like Yelp, for instance), I have a hard time seeing OpenTable play ball.

As far as socializing reviews in order to prevent fraud, critical mass is an effective way to deal with fraud–having 500 reviews and 10 outliers is a good sign to ignore those 10, veracity notwithstanding. Consumers understand this intuitively, I think. And if there is critical mass (57 reviews qualifies, as in your post) then the faces associated with the reviews aren’t even that important any more.

Definitely agreed that OT is one to watch out for in the review space though…and that’s nice to see.

]]> By: Michael Hraba http://www.hrabaconsulting.com/blog/2009/11/04/yelp-vs-opentable-reviews/comment-page-1/#comment-283 Michael Hraba Wed, 04 Nov 2009 19:48:24 +0000 http://www.hrabaconsulting.com/blog/?p=836#comment-283 It's funny, because I was vacuously assuming it was to Opentable's disadvantage not having all the social networking stuff, but then I thought of their demographic... I am not sure people using it to book fine dining/mid range dining want to spend time cultivating a profile, reviewing, etc. It depends whether everyone thinks they are a foodie/critic yet? I do know chow hound gets into some pretentious bickering here and there.... and a lot of people fancy themselves an intelligent food critic. So it might actually be the real advantage of opentable, that they don't open themselves up to the drama of yelp. I don't see many things <a href="http://valleywag.gawker.com/5396122/yelp-fights-make-leap-to-real+world-violence-says-reviewer" rel="nofollow">like this</a> in regards to opentable. But that may not be fair.... your points on yelp's issue actually being that they *ARE*, in fact, really successful with creating a social network. I note that yelp seems optimized like no other site, usually coming up in the top 5 organically.... which is certainly to their credit. And this is really good to know about it's grip in Boston. Being such a young town with endless institutions of higher learning, etc... I am not surprised. But you have me thinking about the consequence of opening up a site to social networking. What do you think if opentable opened it now... started profiles, and allowed talk threads like chow hound, reviews, etc? Do you think the verification process would keep reviews legit, and then just give more background and relevance to the person who is doing the reviewing? It’s funny, because I was vacuously assuming it was to Opentable’s disadvantage not having all the social networking stuff, but then I thought of their demographic… I am not sure people using it to book fine dining/mid range dining want to spend time cultivating a profile, reviewing, etc. It depends whether everyone thinks they are a foodie/critic yet? I do know chow hound gets into some pretentious bickering here and there…. and a lot of people fancy themselves an intelligent food critic. So it might actually be the real advantage of opentable, that they don’t open themselves up to the drama of yelp. I don’t see many things like this in regards to opentable. But that may not be fair…. your points on yelp’s issue actually being that they *ARE*, in fact, really successful with creating a social network. I note that yelp seems optimized like no other site, usually coming up in the top 5 organically…. which is certainly to their credit.

And this is really good to know about it’s grip in Boston. Being such a young town with endless institutions of higher learning, etc… I am not surprised. But you have me thinking about the consequence of opening up a site to social networking. What do you think if opentable opened it now… started profiles, and allowed talk threads like chow hound, reviews, etc? Do you think the verification process would keep reviews legit, and then just give more background and relevance to the person who is doing the reviewing?

]]> By: Mike Redbord http://www.hrabaconsulting.com/blog/2009/11/04/yelp-vs-opentable-reviews/comment-page-1/#comment-282 Mike Redbord Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:26:27 +0000 http://www.hrabaconsulting.com/blog/?p=836#comment-282 Nice post Michael. Helped me synthesize some of my thoughts on ugc review sites, too! Yelp does extremely well in Boston--their reviews are nearly complete for all types of businesses and it's highly atypical to find a restaurant without a few lengthy reviews. The reviews are respected by local businesses and a bad review can really sink a new venture because all sorts of people rely on the reviews. The primary issue with Yelp reviews, as I see it, is not one of fraud or incompleteness but of its social networking elements. There's a core group of users that define Yelp's social clique online and offline and set the tone for the reviews. This social clustering is fine and natural, but what ultimately takes place is that all the reviews read as if from the same hivemind perspective: predominantly 25-35, semi-urban professionals who reference obscure phobias and 80s tv shows in their reviews. It's honestly not a knock on Yelp but instead a sort of unavoidable consequence of its highly successful social model. Regardless of which demographic a review site represents, it degrades the overall quality and reliability of a review database to have content sourced from mostly one type of person. And even as a member of the Yelp demographic, I (perhaps obviously?) find it annoying to the point of not trusting the site's reviews without another source providing independent confirmation. If OpenTable can bring light to a different demographic's voice or just offer a slightly different perspective from that of Yelp, it's of de facto value to the entertainment business and customers. Right now Yelp is by far the loudest voice in the entertainment review ring and more is better for everyone. Nice post Michael. Helped me synthesize some of my thoughts on ugc review sites, too!

Yelp does extremely well in Boston–their reviews are nearly complete for all types of businesses and it’s highly atypical to find a restaurant without a few lengthy reviews. The reviews are respected by local businesses and a bad review can really sink a new venture because all sorts of people rely on the reviews.

The primary issue with Yelp reviews, as I see it, is not one of fraud or incompleteness but of its social networking elements. There’s a core group of users that define Yelp’s social clique online and offline and set the tone for the reviews. This social clustering is fine and natural, but what ultimately takes place is that all the reviews read as if from the same hivemind perspective: predominantly 25-35, semi-urban professionals who reference obscure phobias and 80s tv shows in their reviews. It’s honestly not a knock on Yelp but instead a sort of unavoidable consequence of its highly successful social model.

Regardless of which demographic a review site represents, it degrades the overall quality and reliability of a review database to have content sourced from mostly one type of person. And even as a member of the Yelp demographic, I (perhaps obviously?) find it annoying to the point of not trusting the site’s reviews without another source providing independent confirmation.

If OpenTable can bring light to a different demographic’s voice or just offer a slightly different perspective from that of Yelp, it’s of de facto value to the entertainment business and customers. Right now Yelp is by far the loudest voice in the entertainment review ring and more is better for everyone.

]]>