• At 11:43 PM,  odog said…

  Well that company has been in redmond for like 6 or 7 years, I had a freind that used to work there and they had like 4000 clients or something so who cares.
  
  Do the math on that that is like 36 maybe 45 customers that got mad, these guys dont sound that bad really especially if you look at what has happened to most other SEO firms.
  
  From what i believe internetadvancment.com competitors have been getting shut down for getting ckients blacklisted from major engines so I dont think there are doing so bad from a logical point of view.
  
  Im just giveing credit were credit is due

   

• At 8:29 AM,  Anonymous said…

  I am a client with Internet Advancement and am frustrated that there is such slander against such a reputable firm as this. They have been supportive, ambitious, and have relentlessly worked to make sure that I am at the top of my market. My sales have increased, and my friends all marvel at what they have been able to do for me. Moreover, the thing that stands out the most to me is the existence of the incredible cost-to-benefit ratio. For a comparably small amount of investment, I have seen incredible returns. You should see the smile on my face...ear to ear, baby! Thank you, Internet Advancement

   

• At 10:14 AM,  power said…

  Hello,
  
  No intention to blame internet advancement SEO / search engine optimization company it was just a news published and I reproduced it, sorry if it hurts anyone,

   

• At 6:49 PM,  Anonymous said…

  I was solicited by Internet Advancement. Found the sales staff very well trained. I was promised that if I bought one of the more expensive packages my keywords would appear near the top of Google. No one can promise this. I found many of the sites that Internet Advancement had promoted and found that their placement was good, but many no where near at the top of Google.
  I am sure they have improved the positioning of many and it looks clean, but not so sure about the cost. Seems High. Like to see some posts from more clients.

   

• At 7:24 PM,  Anonymous said…

  Well so what? I spent several thousand bucks with this bunch of crooks. They promised more bussiness than I could handel. They have generated no bussiness for me in over six months.

   

• At 3:36 PM,  Anonymous said…

  Just received a call from 1.888.420.8988 and informed me of he is from internet advancement to promote their searching engine optimization service. The sales rep is very impolite, degrading conversation and does not speak good English. Got me pissed off and hanged up on him.

   

• At 5:30 AM,  Anonymous said…

  I too signed up with these people breifly forgetting the rule "If it sounds to good to be true.....". Now I have to try to get my money back because I've got nothing. My site is like in those westerns where the dust ball blows by. DON'T give these people your buisness or you'll regret it.

   

• At 9:18 AM,  Debby said…

  Well it is good to see the good and bad comments. Mostley bad. I was contacted yesterday and the sales person had me on the phone for over an hour....... geshhhh my ear still hurts. I have not signed up and now I am not sure if I want to. And another thought here is...... are the good comments really from clients or staff at Internet Advencement?

   

• At 11:52 AM,  Anonymous said…

  I wish I had found this site BEFORE I gave them $980 bucks. The "Keywords" they sent me are keywords that I ALREADY show up for on the first page. They are trying to charge me for work that I have already done. DO NOT WASTE YOUR MONEY.

   

• At 12:04 PM,  Babs said…

  Just got off the phone with Internet Advancement...long phone call but the person seemed to know his sales pitch and tried to get me to sign on. Glad I found this blog.
  Are there any clients out there that think I should take them on. It is a lot of money and I have poured so much into my website already. Just need advise.

   

• At 10:01 AM,  Anonymous said…

  I am a satisfied client with Internet Advancement. I signed on because they agreed to refund half of my money if they did not fulfill their end of the bargain. So far I have seen a great return on investment and I would recomend them to any website looking for increased traffic.
  
  My advice would be to see if it makes sense for you business. Be careful you're not taking advice from somebody with a poorly run webpage who is looking to pass their poor sales off as "somebody else's fault". If they weren't blaming Internet Advancement they'd probably be on another blog complaing about how Bush, the SBA, God, or their parents are the ones to blame for their lack of business.
  
  Search Engine Optimization can be a powerful service for an online company. Internet Advancement will do as good of a job, and probably better than most SEO companies.

   

• At 11:17 AM,  Anonymous said…

  Internet Advancement sucks, I feel you are an employee of internet advancement, You are frustrated about how they were asked to refund their clients for illegal activities against search engines,
  
  it has been proven in court and media that they used spam tactics, i would recommend you dont go around preaching good faith of a company who follows all spam tactics to optimize their client sites,

   

• At 4:11 AM,  Anonymous said…

  There are many other reputable seo experts to choose from, you may pay more but it is worth it when you have the best people on the job.
  
  Whatever though i know one thing for sure, super high pressure sales, it was hard to work under doug the tyrant.
  
  Ken commitee is cool as hell, I think if he had more control of the company, it would do better.
  
  Doug your a bitch, and its your fault the company has bad name in my oppinion.

   

• At 9:41 PM,  Anonymous said…

  Internet Advancement... promise the world, but they only take your money. I did everything they asked me to and they provided absolutely nothing for my small business (I own a B&B). Finally, I was given all my money back, but I wonder just how much business I lost by wasting a year on this no good company. They should be ashamed, but what goes around, comes around... you reap what you sow. Watch out Internet Advancement... your harvest will not be plentiful.

   

• At 2:29 PM,  Anonymous said…

  We have been ripped off by traffic power and now this guy from IA keeps calling and saying they can do the exact same that TP promised. After being ripped off once, I can no longer put any trust in an SEO that has to call you for your business.

   

• At 10:08 AM,  Bobbyv said…

  These Idiots have completely knocked my site out of Yahoo and Google which I have been in for years. Stay away from these crooks.

   

• At 10:09 AM,  Bobbyv said…

  These Idiots have completely knocked my site out of Yahoo and Google which I have been in for years. Stay away from these crooks.

   

• At 10:11 AM,  Bobbyv said…

  These Idiots have completely knocked my site out of Yahoo and Google which I have been in for years. Stay away from these crooks.

   

• At 11:23 AM,  BANDIT said…

  Internet Advancement is a great company they have helped a ton of people to be successful on the internet. For those of you who are upset cuz they met the warranty and you couldn't make the sales. When you sign on with this company you know exactly what you are getting for what you are paying, thats why you are read the agreement over the phone with a rep so that things are clear. You also have a choice to print the agreement and READ IT so that if you have a question you can call back and get it answered. Please stop hating on Internet Advancement they have fed my son for the past couple of years. Their service does work.

   

• At 3:39 PM,  Josh C said…

  I want to start by saying that I am a current employee of Internet Advancement, so my opinion may sound biased, but I think you'll all agree that my arguments are logical.
  
  First I'd like to address the AG complaints we received. Honestly, we had some crooked sales people who were lying on their sales calls. No excuses for that, but we have nearly 100 people at our company and can't babysit all of them all the time. When the problem was brought to our attention, the employees in question were fired, all of the clients concerned received a full refund, before the case ever went to court.Furthermore, we've been in business for nearly 8 years, have 6,000 clients who are with us on their own free will (we use only month to month contracts and never long term obligations) and only have the one blotch on an otherwise spotless record.
  
  Second, it seems people are turned off by the fact that we cold call. The reason for that is that there are some sites that we simply cannot rank. We choose to call sites that we feel we can rank effectively, and we try to target small to mid-market companies. We have worked with large scale companies in the past, and still work with many today, but for the most part small and mid market companies are the niche market we feel we can have the greatest impact on. I take pride in knowing that I can give a small, family run business the same type of exposure that is normally reserved for much larger corporations.
  
  http://www.ecommerce-guide.com/news/news/article.php/3388571
  
  If you want a clear explanation of what we do, call me, mention this posting, and I will explain without trying to sell you anything. I just want people to understand that we are a legitimate and honest company.
  
  Josh C
  425 284 0341
  888 420 8988 + 161
  
  ============================
  
  The above statements reflect my personal opinions, based on my experiences with Internet Advancement. I speak for myself alone, and I DO NOT SPEAK for the company itself. Any comments made should be regarded as personal opinion, not corporate.

   

• At 10:52 AM,  Anonymous said…

  These are what makes a used car salemen look honest. Don't do it you can do everything they say they can.

   

• At 2:52 PM,  xnokx said…

  itsreally funny i can tell that internet advancement posted that first good comment where he said his smile was "ear to ear baby" the funny thing about that comment is that its a famous quote from a sales movie called boiler room who sales people see as a bible alot of sales people can recite quotes from that movie and in it ben affleck is talking about how he drives a frerrari and how great his life is working with that stock company towards the end of that speech he says "can you see the f***ing smile on my face? ear to ear baby" a famous quote from a movie that alot of sales people watch on a daily basis "ear to ear baby" nice one internet advancement

   

• At 2:35 PM,  Anonymous said…

  These people are jerks. They don't return your calls or your emails. Mishandled my company's information and never corrected their mistakes. Of course I requested a refund and the "customer rep" was anything but polite and professional. Now after a month of no responses, they tell me my request for a refund has been denied. DO NOT WORK WITH THIS COMPANY. They are unethical and unprofessional.

   

• At 4:02 PM,  Anonymous said…

  they might get you ranked, but that dosen't guarentee you the sales..

   

• At 4:26 PM,  Anonymous said…

  Thats all very funny and someone said doug is a dick and a dyrant and i think he is right as could be on that one but yeah who cares.
  
  I would like to adress one thing though, even if you have 6 thousand clients that is not an acceptable means of dismissing the clients that sued you.
  
  Its simple to have 6 thousand clients when you have over 200 people on the sales floor closing 1-3 deals a day on a minimum of 90 days initial agreement.
  
  Number of clients means nothing while most people tuck thier tales in thier legs and run from people who rob them, wouldnt you.

   

• At 4:26 PM,  Anonymous said…

  Thats all very funny and someone said doug is a dick and a dyrant and i think he is right as could be on that one but yeah who cares.
  
  I would like to adress one thing though, even if you have 6 thousand clients that is not an acceptable means of dismissing the clients that sued you.
  
  Its simple to have 6 thousand clients when you have over 200 people on the sales floor closing 1-3 deals a day on a minimum of 90 days initial agreement.
  
  Number of clients means nothing while most people tuck thier tales in thier legs and run from people who rob them, wouldnt you.

   

• At 3:53 PM,  Anonymous said…

  after 4 months, internet advancement has given my site no discernable results. they made up obscure keywords that got top 20 rankings,but they are feckless. my site has gotten nearly all it's traffic from pay per click advertising, not from natural rankings on the useless keywords they generated for me. to make matters worse,they sent my case to a collection agency for billing without ever contacting me or sending an invoice. i give internet advancement a big fat ZERO for their performance. my google ranking was 110 three months ago on my main keyword. today it is 243. i fear they have gotten my site penalized for spam tactics. i want my money back.

   

• At 9:00 AM,  Dixie said…

  What Internet Advancement did for my website in 4 months cost me over $1000+. Andrew contacted me by phone and verbally "promised" that his company could bring lots of traffic to my website. I never saw more than 10 visitors to my website on the highest traffic days. I would never use them again.

   

• At 11:23 AM,  BANDIT said…

  Well there seems to be A LOT of people who have NOTHING better to do than post comments on blogs in regards to I.A. Lets be honest I.A is,was, and will continue to be the ONLY hope for just about all of smaller based businesses (with the exceptuion of Pay Per Curiosity)which wee all no isn't effective marketing. You tell me who reads from right to left and I'll tell you how to speak Chinese!!! Find something better to do than talk bad about a company who did what they could to help clients who otherwise had NO CHANCE of achieving 1st page ranking on atleast 6 search engines within 108 days. And for those of you who didn't fully read the agreement before signing on I recommend taking Business Management classes at your local community college.

   

• At 3:07 PM,  Anonymous said…

  I'm glad that I found this site before calling back the saleman!! They mey be a good company, but there are way more negative comments then positive ones. That has to be an indication of how good the company is at what it does...

   

• At 12:10 PM,  Anonymous said…

  I'm a former employee and current client of Internet Advancement. I did see a few clients that couldn't get ranked in under three months, but for the most part I saw great results while I was there. I'm looking foward to seeing them go to work on my newest site at www.bluesmokehookah.com

   

• At 5:10 PM,  Anonymous said…

  I have started reselling IA services. So far I have not actually "sold" anything, but the program seems pretty good. My take on it is this...if yor content sucks, your results will suck too. These guys obviously excel in submissions and finding ways to get your site ranked which is untraditional. I am selling this on their stregth of getting the ball rolling, and my strength of beefing up relevant an useful content as well as links. I dont want to babysit submissions, plus the only optimize your homepage. If you have lots of product types and services, there are many ways to take advantage of their submissions and your own knowledge of traditional techniques such as text hyperlinks, header tags where appropriate, etc. If your content is worthless, it doesnt really matter how great your tags or submissions are.

   

• At 5:30 PM,  Anonymous said…

  Thay suck I want my money back

   

• At 10:39 AM,  Anonymous said…

  You guys should know that the people running Internet Advancement - Todd Wickham and Ken Committee- are ex-car salesmen. They both worked at Michael's Toyota in Bellevue. That might explain the high pressure the company puts over its prospects. For their credit, the two guys are super cool, especially Todd Wickham. He's very classy to deal with. However, you should understand that they are trying to sell a service, so conflicts are bound to happen.

   

• At 12:50 AM,  Anonymous said…

  Internet Advancement can do what they claim.... IF.....
  
  You have a brand new website with no presence on the "net". They will submit your site(with their choice of kewords/search terms) and get you in the top positions on some search engines.
  The important thing to consider is just exactly what search engines do you want be targeting. Since Google handles about eighty five percent of all searches, it would seem to be a good idea to target Google. Then, Yahoo, MSN, AOL and the rest follow suit.
  Internet Advancement is a website submission service, with over a thousand affiliate directory sites. IA submits your NEW site to about a kazillion search engines and directory sites, and places you onto their "Directory Information Pages" AKA Directory sites.
  This could be okay if it weren't for the meta tags they have you place on your index page.
  Please visit my story at ...
  http://internet-advancement.dvdplayersonly.com/
  
  I was devastated by what they did to my site. My sales have dropped off almost completely. On Google, I used to be on page two with "DVD Players" and page five with "DVD Player" Now, I don't exist.
  
  Other search terms have vanished also. I think it was the bogus meta tags they suggested. Check out the link above and let me know what you think.
  
  George

   

• At 1:19 PM,  Jerry said…

  Hey all!
  I don't know a lot about SEO, so I'm hoping someone can help me.
  
  I was contacted by IA yesterday. They told me they would change my metatags, submit to a ton of sites every month and then have their staff create multiple URL's with the intent on having traffic come to my site. The cost is typically $2400.00 up front, but they ask for $240.00 per month for the next 10 months. Their guarantee is to get my site on the 1st page of some search engines within 108 days. The monthly cost is $119.00 per month, but that would only start after my site is listed. (what search engine..I don't know)If my site is not listed within 108 days, I would not have to pay any $119.00. But to start this process,I would be paying $240 for 4 months equaling $960.00.
  After reading all of this, I certainly have already formed an opinion, but what is your opinion about creating multiple URL's?
  Any thoughts?

   

• At 11:34 PM,  Anonymous said…

  Naw. I wouldn't. Multiple URLs are kind of useless.

   

• At 3:08 PM,  Anonymous said…

  HELP! I'm in the grips of Internet Advancement. I signed the paperwork, they took my money and now I have decided that I do not want to use their service. NOTHING has been done to my site, but they are saying I cannot cancel. What the hell? He mentioned a Governing LAW that blankly says "This agreement will be governed by the State of Washington in the event of conflicts between the parties." His quote "The 72-hour rule applies in 6.1. (above mentioned statement). There is a national (<-notice he didn't say state) law in practice that all online services purchased have a 72 hour withdraw period allowed. Does anyone know of this law? If so, why didn't they just put the 72 hour rule in plain english on the contract?

   

• At 12:05 PM,  Anonymous said…

  I just had a really bad experience with Internet Advancement. First, the sales person put a lot of pressure on me---saying that they were going to sign up another company in my industry (they already had at least one in my field). I know, that should have been my first tip off...
  
  They were instructed that everything had to be approved before it went up on the site and they ignored that instruction. The copy they wrote for the tag line was so poorly written, I was shocked. I spoke with the head copywriter who said that is the best they can do. I advised that I would be embarrased to have it on my site and it could not go up...But it did!
  The meta tags and key words they added looked like spam according to 2 other web designer--who are not competitors of Internet Advancement. They were instructed not to use a specific key word phrase because I didn't want people coming to the site for something I don't have...they ignored that as well.
  I cancelled the service and they refuse to refund my money and said I will pay for the 120 days outlined in the contract, even if it is through a collection agency!
  Bottom line, in the short time they had access to my site, my traffic decreased substantially.
  Buyer beware!
  April, 2007

   

• At 4:05 PM,  Anonymous said…

  If you think you have been ripped off, go to ripoffreport.com. I followed their tactics and successfully got most of my money back from a company that promised me unlimited income from real estate. I couldn't make a dime and it cost me a fortune. They eventually refunded me 80% of the original cost because they, "couldn't afford to continue paying their lawers to respond to all the letters" that were being sent on my behalf by consumer protection and BBB agencies. Good Luck.

   

• At 9:11 PM,  Anonymous said…

  They just called me out of the blue. My small website is already ranking in the top 10 in all major search engines and I have published articles on how you can optimize a website yourself. Can't believe the guy actually had the nerve to tell me crap that is totally bogus. Internet advancements is fraud, just like traffic-power. There are lots of SEO magazines out there and not one recommends them. Beware....

   

• At 10:00 PM,  TheLiefie1 said…

  People!! You must understand the nature of the beast you are attempting to wrest into your control. Learn about how search engines work, and you will see that paying crazy amounts of money to have a company put you in the top (insert unreal and unbelievable number here) is ridiculous.
  
  Buy this book: Search Engine Optimization for Dummies. Or Idiots, I forget which one. READ. And remember that it takes agonizing *time* to get indexed.
  
  These guys do ONLY what you can and probably already HAVE done. If you had luck with an SEO company -after- you tried to do it yourself, it's likely because you failed miserably to educate yourself about managing SEO strategies.
  
  If you took the time to make a real, solid, content rich website, you can certainly take some time to do proper marketing and advertising.
  
  
  TheLiefie1

   

• At 12:49 PM,  Anonymous said…

  STAY AWAY!!! I made the mistake of signing up with these guys to promote one of my sites. I signed up around September 2006. I never got anywhere near the rankings that they promised. Then, in March, I noticed that the meager rankings I had been getting were slipping away. I called them up only to be told that my account was being purged because it wasn't getting results. I was told that I would be refunded. I was refunded, but only for 1/2 of my original investment. Keep in mind, I never asked to cancel the service. They did this without consulting me. They are evil.

   

• At 7:01 AM,  Anonymous said…

  We signed on with Internet Advancement in March 2007 and in a little over 3 months they have just about ruined our rankings in Google. For this, we paid $1200.00 ($400 per month for 3 months), but that's the least of our financial losses. Due to decreased traffic to our site and declining sales I would estimate they have cost us in excess of $10,000.00 in lost sales and revenue since March.
  
  Whatever you do, DO NOT sign with Internet Advancement!!

   

• At 9:05 AM,  Newbie said…

  Just found this blog on internet advancement.
  Let me tell you they soaked me for well over 3 grand.
  In the beginning, their sales reps were relentless in the pursuance of me as a client.And let me tell you they got me hook , line and sinker...cause I know absolutely nothing about keywords ,meta tags, mirror sites, etc, etc, etc...
  They promised me the world(Number one ranking with their keywords ,meta tags, submissions to umpteen thousands per month, blah, blah, blah!) I wouldn't have to do anything, they guaranteed it!!!My buissness would flourish.
  
  What they did was SCAM me. Took advantage of my lack of knowledge.And did it perfectly legal. I won't go into details on how they SCAMMED me unless someone wants to know. I want to know if I can do anything. I will go to great lengths to put a stop to this company and the way they prey on the ignorant.

   

• At 11:28 AM,  Anonymous said…

  I am currently a client of IA and I must say I am not too compfortable right now with the rankings I have recieved from them. At this point I have been with them for close to 90 days and have not seen any rankings. I was promised to have the top rankings withing 120 days from signing up with them. I have made my concerns known to IA and am hoping for some changes soon. I will keep you posted if I see the results that are GAURANTEED to me.
  
  www.digiframeshop.com

   

• At 2:25 PM,  Rosemary said…

  Internet advancement promised a 100% refund if they couldn't get my website up on the top 10 positions of the major search engines. After more than 120 days the only thing they did was to submit my site to search engines. When I asked for a refund they only refunded 50% of what I had paid them. BEWARE

   

• At 8:35 PM,  Anonymous said…

  The IA guys are very sleazy. I talked to one of their salesmen and he was very pushy. They do 15 minutes of research on your site to point out some legitimate flaws. That sets the hook. Then they show you a few sites that are well ranked to "show you" what they will do for you.
  
  I started typing in "internet advancement" into google and the salesmen instead said to go to the Bellevue chamber of commerce and click on their link there. I later figured out why... If you type in "internet advancement" in google, the #2 hit is about them being scammers.
  
  I had just read "SEO Book", the bible on SEO right before they called me. It soundly debunks their idea of submitting to search engines and web directories. Optimizing keywords is also very 2003 since most engines ignore them.
  
  Avoid these guys at all cost.

   

• At 12:52 PM,  Anonymous said…

  I just read this blog and having recently become a new customer of Internet Advancement I'm deeply concerned, as I should be. I'm strongly considering asking for money back and to be dropped from their program.

   

• At 1:14 PM,  Anonymous said…

  New lawsuit makes internet advancement pay 100,000$ fine,
  
  I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
  1.1 This Complaint is filed and these proceedings are instituted under the provisions of RCW 19.86, the Unfair Business Practices--Consumer Protection Act, and RCW 19.190, the Unsolicited Electronic Mail Act.
  1.2 Jurisdiction of the Attorney General to commence this action is conferred by RCW 19.86.080 and RCW 19.190.030(2).
  1.3 The violations alleged herein have been and are being committed in whole or in part in King County, in the State of Washington by defendants named herein or their agents.
  II. DEFENDANTS
  2.1 Defendant Internet Advancement, Inc., also doing business as 4GreatBuys.com, is a Washington for-profit corporation located at 7901 168th Avenue NE, Suite 101, Redmond, Washington 98052.
  2.2 Defendant Todd Wickham is the Chief Executive Officer of defendant Internet Advancement, Inc., and as such, controls its policies, activities, and practices, including those alleged in the Complaint herein. Defendant Wickham resides at 200 2nd Avenue S., Kirkland, Washington 98033. Defendant Wickham is married to Jane Doe Wickham, and together they constitute a marital community. All actions taken by defendant Wickham as alleged in the Complaint herein are for the benefit of his marital community.
  2.3 Defendant Ken Committee is the President of defendant Internet Advancement, Inc., and as such, controls its policies, activities, and practices, including those alleged in the Complaint herein. Defendant Committee resides at 13896 N.E. 66th Street, #588, Redmond, Washington 98052. Defendant Committee is married to Jane Doe Committee, and together they constitute a marital community. All actions taken by defendant Committee as alleged in the Complaint herein are for the benefit of his marital community.
  2.4 Defendant Ernesto Villamor is the Secretary and Treasurer of defendant Internet Advancement, Inc., and as such, controls its policies, activities, and practices, including those alleged in the Complaint herein. Defendant Villamor resides at 18516 N.E. 25th Way, #D-6, Redmond, Washington 98052. Defendant Villamor is married to Jane Doe Villamor, and together they constitute a marital community. All actions taken by defendant Villamor as alleged in the Complaint herein are for the benefit of his marital community.
  III. NATURE OF TRADE OR COMMERCE
  3.1 Defendants advertise and sell a variety of marketing services to Internet-based businesses across the United States. They advertise their services on their website, www.internetadvancements.com, and also through unsolicited email and telemarketing.
  3.2 Businesses which market and sell their products over the Internet often rely on search engines to lead potential customers to their websites. Defendants offer a “search engine optimization” service which purports to guarantee top 10-to-20 rankings on major search engines such as Yahoo, Google, and AOL. Defendants claim that “90% of all Internet users never view sites listed under #20 on the search engine rakings,” and “the higher (a) search engine ranking, the more traffic (a business) will generate.” http://www.internetadvancements.com/index.shtml, March 4, 2004. In return for payments varying from $980.00 to $1,500.00 in “set-up” fees, in addition to monthly fees varying from $79.80 to $89.95, they offer a variety of search engine optimization packages for their clients. These packages include but are not limited to the following services: researching changes in search engine submission requirements; researching clients’ products, markets, and competition; researching and advising clients about the use and relevance of keywords; providing ranking reports to clients; and offering multiple “directory information pages” to direct Internet traffic to clients’ websites.
  3.3 Defendants are in competition with others in the State of Washington engaged in similar business.
  IV. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION – MISRERESENTATIONS
  4.1. Plaintiff realleges Paragraphs 2.1 through 3.3 and incorporates them herein as if set forth in full.
  4.2 In the context of defendants’ marketing and sale of search engine optimization services, defendants make numerous misrepresentations, including but not limited to the following:
  1. Defendants represent they will be able to secure top 10 search engine rankings for their customers. In fact, in many instances, they are unable to do so.
  2. Defendants represent that they are able to significantly increase traffic to their customers’ websites. In fact, in many instances, they are unable to do so.
  3. Defendants represent that their customers will obtain increased sales by obtaining defendants’ services. They have told customers to expect a “flood of traffic,” have promised thousands of “hits” a day, and have said the customers’ “only concern will be having extra employees to fill the orders.” In fact, in many instances, defendants’ services do not result in increased sales.
  4. Defendants represent that they have a “96% success rate” with their “over 47,000 clients.” In fact, they do not.
  5. Defendants represent that 81 percent of their clients are repeat customers. In fact, they are not.
  6. Clients who are hesitant to enter into a contract with defendants are in some instances pressured to do so through misrepresentations made by defendants. For example, one customer told defendants she wanted to talk with her business partner before agreeing to sign a contract. Defendants told her if she “clicked” on an emailed version of the contract, she would not be obligated to defendants. After “clicking” on the contract, defendants billed the customer and insisted she had agreed to the contract terms. In another instance, defendants told the customer that the monthly fee would be waived for the first six months as an incentive to purchase; in fact, he was charged.
  4.3 The procedure by which defendants contract with consumer fosters their ability to make misrepresentations. After the consumer has spoken with defendants’ telemarketer and has expressed an interest in obtaining services, defendants send an email to the consumer containing instructions on activating defendants’ “guarantee.” By clicking on the link that activates the “guarantee,” the consumer, according to the terms of the email, authorizes defendants to charge the consumer the “set-up” fee. It is only after the consumer has authorized the charge and clicked on the “Activate Your Guarantee” link, that he or she receives a copy of the contract. In some instances, the consumer discovers that the terms of the contract are at variance with the misrepresentations made by the telemarketer. By that point, however, the consumer has already been charged.
  4.4 The conduct described above constitutes unfair or deceptive acts or practices in trade or commerce and unfair methods of competition in violation of RCW 19.86.020.
  V. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION – FAILURE TO HONOR GUARANTEE AND REFUND AS PROMISED
  5.1. Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 2.1 through 4.4 and incorporates them as if set forth herein in full.
  5.2 Defendants offer a “written money-back guarantee” to purchasers of their search engine optimization services. www.internetadvancements.com/seo/services.shtml, April 6, 2004. According to the terms of their contract with purchasers, defendants guarantee that their clients will “obtain at least a top 10 placement on one or more of (the client’s) ‘key words’ or key word phrases’…on at least 6 of the major search engines” for the 6 month term of the contract. The contract goes on to state that if defendants fail to fulfill the terms of their “Warranty and Guarantee,” the client is entitled to a refund.
  5.3 In many instances, consumers who have contracted and paid for defendants’ services have failed to obtain top placement on major search engines. In some instances, these consumers have contacted defendants and requested a refund.
  5.4 In fact, defendants, in many instances, fail to honor their guarantee. Consumers who attempt to cancel their contracts and obtain a refund from defendants are unable to do so as a result of defendants’ unfair practices which include, but are not limited to, the following:
  1. The terms of defendants’ contract provide a window of time during which customers may request a refund, which is “60 days after the company’s initial optimization of keywords” and “within 30 days prior to the end of the 6 month term” of the contract. When consumers call during this period and request a refund, they are told that defendants will deliver the promised results if they are given more time to do so. Consumers who are given this option often wait the prescribed period of time and continue to be unsatisfied. They then contact defendants to cancel yet again, and are told they are outside the window of time permitted for cancellation, and are therefore not entitled to a refund.
  2. Consumers who attempt to contact defendants to cancel their contracts and request refunds are unable to obtain a response from defendants, even after leaving repeated emails and voicemails. In such cases, the consumers have continued to be billed.
  3. Consumers who attempt to contact defendants to cancel within 30 days prior to the end of the 6-month term of the contract are told that cancellation must be made “prior to” the 30-day period before the end of the contract, in contravention of the plain terms of the contract itself. In such cases, defendants refuse to make refunds.
  4. Defendants claim that consumers are not entitled to refunds because they violate a provision of their contract which states, “Client shall not perform or allow any changes to Company’s optimized source code once it has been inserted into Client’s web page specified herein.” In fact, many consumers who have been refused refunds on this basis have not changed their source codes, nor do they have the technical skills or knowledge to do so.
  5. Defendants on occasion promise refunds to consumers who cancel. In some instances, defendants fail to make refunds despite their promises.
  6. Consumers attempt to cancel based on defendants’ failure to obtain top 10 search engine placement using keywords or search terms specified by the consumers. In one instance, a consumer specifically requested that defendants obtain placement for the search terms “above ground swimming pools.” Defendants did not obtain the placement promised for the specified search terms, yet refused the consumer’s request for a refund. In other instances, defendants have refused refunds, claiming that despite representations to the contrary, their contract only specifies top placement for a single keyword, rather than the group of keywords selected by the consumer.
  5.5 The conduct described above constitutes unfair or deceptive acts or practices in trade or commerce and unfair methods of competition in violation of RCW 19.86.020.
  VI. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION – UNAUTHORIZED CHARGES
  6.1. Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 2.1 through 5.5 and incorporates them as if set forth herein in full.
  6.2 Defendants’ payment program provides for automatic monthly charges to customers’ credit cards for the duration of their contracts. Defendants make unauthorized charges to these credit cards in a number of contexts, including but not limited to the following:
  1. When consumers contact defendants and attempt to cancel, they indicate explicitly they no longer wish to pay for or receive defendants’ services. Despite conveying their intent to cancel, either directly to defendants’ representatives, or through an email address specifically designated by defendants to receive cancellation requests, the consumers continue to receive unauthorized charges on their credit cards. For example, in at least one instance, a consumer emailed his cancellation to defendants and received an automated response indicating that he would hear back from them within seven days. He received no further response, but continued to be charged for additional monthly fees.
  2. In one instance, a consumer continued to be charged on his credit card when monthly fees had supposedly been “waived” by defendants.
  3. In one instance, a consumer was charged when she had been told she would not be charged until she had first obtained agreement from her business partner to enter into a contract with defendants.
  4. One consumer was charged after he was told he could get his money back if his website wasn’t highly ranked “by the holidays.” Despite attempting to obtain a refund because of defendants’ failure to perform, his credit card continued to be charged.
  5. One consumer was charged during the first six months even though he was explicitly told he would be charged monthly fees only at the seven-month point of his contract with defendants.
  6.3 In many instances where consumers have disputed defendants’ unauthorized charges or refused to pay them, defendants have continued to place charges on consumer’ credit cards or submitted the alleged debts to collection agencies which continued to bill the consumers.
  6.4 The conduct described above constitutes unfair or deceptive acts or practices in trade or commerce and unfair methods of competition in violation of RCW 19.86.020.
  VII. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION – FAILING TO PROVIDE RANKING REPORTS
  7.1 Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 2.1 through 6.4 and incorporates them as if set forth herein in full.
  7.2 As part of the search engine optimization services provided by defendants, their service agreement promises “quarterly reports listing the six major search engines on which the clients’ web page domain or URL…is ranked the highest.” In fact, in many instances defendants fail to provide the reports, either on a quarterly basis, or at all.
  7.3 The conduct described above constitutes unfair or deceptive acts or practices in trade or commerce and unfair methods of competition in violation of RCW 19.86.020.
  VIII. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION – UNFAIR TERMS OF CANCELLATION
  8.1 Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 2.1 through 7.3 and incorporates them as if set forth herein in full.
  8.2 Defendants’ contract with consumers specifies that it “will remain in effect for six months,” and continue on a month-to-month basis until terminated. The contract goes on to specify that the consumer may cancel the contract after the six-month term upon thirty days written notice to defendants, “which notice shall be effective at the end of the next calendar month after the month in which the notice is received.” In effect, defendants retain the right to bill the consumer the monthly fee during the month in which the notice of cancellation is given. Accordingly, even if the consumer cancels on the day after the expiration of the six-month term, he will be obligated to pay for the seventh month. By structuring their terms of cancellation unfairly, defendants misrepresent the true duration of the contract to consumer, obligating them to a longer period of payment than represented.
  8.3 The conduct described above constitutes unfair or deceptive acts or practices in trade or commerce and unfair methods of competition in violation of RCW 19.86.020.
  IX. SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION – POOR CUSTOMER SERVICE
  9.1 Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 2.1 through 8.3 and incorporates them as if set forth herein in full.
  9.2 In many instances, consumers attempt to contact defendants to complain about various issues, including cancellation, poor service, billings, or other matters. Defendants in some instances, intimidate, harass, or fail to respond to consumers who complain. For example, one consumer was told he would prejudice his ability to get a refund if he didn’t “back off his complaint to the Attorney General.” In another case, defendants’ representative simply hung up on a consumer. In many instances, defendants promise to “get back” to the consumer, and fail to do so. In other instances, despite leaving repeated voicemails and emails, defendants fail to respond to consumers.
  9.3 The conduct described above constitutes unfair or deceptive acts or practices in trade or commerce and unfair methods of competition in violation of RCW 19.86.020.
  XI. SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION – VIOLATIONS OF THE UNSOLICED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL ACT – MISLEADING SUBJECT LINES.
  10.1 Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 2.1 through 9.3 and incorporates them as if set forth herein in full.
  10.2 Computer users are alerted to the existence of electronic mail messages intended for their receipt by an “inbox” display appearing on their computer monitors. The inbox will list each message by its purported sender and a brief subject which generally describes the body of the message. In order to read the actual content of the entire message, the recipient usually must first select the message (by clicking with a mouse) at which point the message text, or body of the email, is displayed.
  10.3 The purpose of an electronic mail message subject line is to briefly describe or summarize the content of the message. This enables a recipient to exercise discretion over whether and when to read the entire text of the message and to determine the importance of the message. Emergency or personal messages, for example, may take precedence over commercial messages. Similarly, work-related messages may take precedence over commercial messages.
  10.4 In addition to contacting potential consumers through telemarketing, defendants market their services by sending unsolicited commercial electronic mail. The emails sent by defendants contain various subject lines, including “Final Attempt!” Defendants’ subject line misleads the recipient as to the true nature of the message. “Final Attempt!” misleads the recipient into thinking that the email may relate to an already-ignored obligation, which if not attended to, will result in some consequence. It creates a false sense of urgency. In reality, the subject line is simply an attempt to entice the recipient into opening a commercial solicitation.
  10.5 The use of false or misleading information in the subject line of a commercial electronic mail message violates RCW 19.190.030(1)(b). Pursuant to RCW 19.190.030(2), defendant’s violation of RCW 19.190.030(1)(b) constitutes a per se violation of the Consumer Protection Act, RCW 19.86.
  10.6 The conduct described above constitutes unfair or deceptive acts or practices in trade or commerce and unfair methods of competition in violation of RCW 19.86.020.
  
  XII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
  WHEREFORE, plaintiff, STATE OF WASHINGTON, prays for relief as follows:
  12.1 That the Court adjudge and decree that defendants have engaged in the conduct complained of herein.
  12.2 That the Court adjudge and decree that the conduct complained of in Paragraphs 9.4 and 10.3 constitutes violations of the Unsolicited Electronic Mail Act, RCW 19.190, and pursuant to RCW 19.190.030(2) constitutes per se violations of the Consumer Protection Act, RCW 19.86.
  12.3 That the Court adjudge and decree that the conduct complained of in Paragraphs 4.2(1)-(6), 5.4(1)-(6), 6.2(1)-(5), 6.3, 7.2, 8.2, 9.2 and 10.4 constitutes unfair or deceptive acts or practices and unfair methods of competition in violation of the Consumer Protection Act, Chapter 19.86 RCW.
  12.4 That the Court issue a permanent injunction enjoining and restraining defendants and their representatives, successors, assigns, officers, agents, servants, employees, and all other persons acting or claiming to act for, on behalf of, or in active concert or participation with defendants from continuing or engaging in the unlawful conduct complained of herein.
  12.5 That the Court assess civil penalties, pursuant to RCW 19.86.140, of up to two thousand dollars ($2,000) per violation against the defendants for each and every violation of RCW 19.86.020 caused by the conduct complained of herein.
  12.6 That the Court make such orders pursuant to RCW 19.86.080 as it deems appropriate to provide for restitution to consumers of money or property acquired by defendants as a result of the conduct complained of herein.
  12.7 That the Court make such orders pursuant to RCW 19.86.080 to provide that plaintiff, State of Washington, have and recover from defendants the costs of this action, including reasonable attorney's fees.
  12.8 That the Court order such other relief as it may deem just and proper to fully and effectively dissipate the effects of the conduct complained of herein, or which may otherwise seem proper to the Court.
  DATED this _____ day of April, 2008.
  CHRISTINE O. GREGOIRE
  Attorney General
  
  
  
  
  _______________________________________
  PAULA SELIS, WSBA #12823
  Senior Counsel
  Attorneys for Plaintiff
  State of Washington

   

• At 4:27 PM,  Anonymous said…

  I have been with IA since 2000. If it wasnt for them I would have never been as successful as I am now! I am sitting here scared to death that they will go away and so will my business. I have been to there offices, I have sat down with them, they are good people!
  
  i just bought a huge commercial building since I am growing, and i owe it all to IA. The only reason I came across this blog was because I went to call them to tell them my credit card was going to expire and that's when I realized their phone number was diconnected and the website was down.
  
  I want to thank all you LAZY people who thought you could make a quick buck and complained when your computer didnt turn into a ATM machine. You ruined it for the rest of us who have had WONDERFUL results with IA!!!! I have 3 websites that have been in the top 3 for over 8 years!!!!! Bitch all you want, but they kept my sites all above my competition and now I have to worry about my future!
  
  THANKS ALOT YOU BUNCH OF WHINERS!!!! BET YOU FAIL AT ALOT MORE THINGS TOO.....

   

• At 11:07 PM,  Anonymous said…

  wow, interesting comments. I got a taste of these guys several years ago. What can I say, they are very smart and savvy but put the sleaze in sleazy used car salesman.I think these guys would sell their grannies if it made them a buck.

   

• At 7:38 PM,  Anonymous said…

  stop all the blah blah blah.
  I worked there and felt slimy doing it. The products don't work and they will deny refunds. I worked right next to the Customer Service Dept. and heard all the lies told to small business owners.
  "Keep everything vague" is the mantra. Yes, Doug is a jagoff. No management training; no professional acumen. It wan't cold-calling. It was lying call after call. I knew they would go under and am glad.
  Egotistical little men who thought they were professionals. Drinking at work and getting high was routine for some employees.
  Ask about the Hawaii company trip and the management person who was sued for sexual harrasment on the trip. And he was kept onboard working from home. The whole experience was negative, dirty, and depressing.

   

Home