Homemark abuse is funny, but is it significant?

by Stii

homemarkYesterday when @homemark followed me on Twitter, I thought “Oh lawd… what’s going to be force fed to me NOW?!” When I went to their account and just read the first few tweets I almost short circuited my Macbook when I spat a mouthful of water all over the keyboard.

@homemark We are the devil, our products are of low quality and we rip people off.

@homemark Congratulations, you’ve won recycled toilet paper, please give us your credit card details so we can make you pay for it!

@homemark Customers are like nappies, good for making money and disposable when they’re full of sh!t

Katharina from Quirk took the brandseye/ORM approach on this matter, but it made me think:

Would Homemark give a damn? In fact, should they?

I’d love nothing more than to say yes to the above questions. In fact, I would say yes they should! If they would is a different matter. The mere fact that they plough millions into TV advertising and the fact that their website simply seem like an evil necessity is evidence to the contrary.

Lets be honest here, it looks not much better than the IEC Electoral site a couple of months ago. See here. I somehow doubt they are worried about losing the kind of customers that are on Twitter. In fact, I don’t really think a lot of Twitter users buy from them on a regular basis. Am I wrong? If not, why should they worry about noise being made in a sphere that don’t affect their target market one single bit?

Well, if you do indeed look at their Google CV, they couldn’t care less. I wouldn’t worry too much about being sued if I were @homemark (the twitter one).

The dude also launched a blog, so if you need to know why he’s pissed, see here: http://homemark.blogspot.com/