In\u00a0Robert’s July 2nd, 2006 post<\/a> you say that you\u2019ve \u201cnever really given Sonos a review before\u201d. Yet in\u00a0his April 8th, 2006 post\u00a0<\/a>, Robert stated the following:<\/p>\n \u201cThis is much much more cooler than I thought,\u201d says Buzz Bruggeman.<\/strong><\/p>\n What\u2019s he talking about? The Sonos music system.<\/strong><\/p>\n First, a disclaimer. They sent me this so I could try it out. It\u2019s one of the things that arrived before I said \u201cno more free stuff.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n I have to admit this is pretty cool. It lets you put a controller in each room in your home.<\/strong><\/p>\n And you control it over Wifi.<\/strong><\/p>\n This rocks. We\u2019re playing my iTunes stuff right now.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Then later in the post\u00a0Robert says:<\/p>\n \u201cTomorrow Chris Pirillo and Ponzi is coming over for brunch. It\u2019ll be interesting to see what they think. (Chris always has the coolest stuff before I do, so if it impresses him it\u2019ll impress everyone).\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Let\u2019s compare some statements in this post with the July 2nd post: Regardless of whether you gave the items away after a few months or not,\u00a0Robert did talk about them on\u00a0his blog and if they had not been sent to you likely would not have talked about them. You then gave Sonos even more buzz again by giving it away at Gnomedex as “hundreds of people witnessed it”.<\/em> Why did\u00a0Robert choose this high profile place to give away this item instead of quietly giving it to charity anonymously?\u00a0 So regardless of whether you reviewed the product on April 8th, you gave it buzz on your blog twice and in front of an entire conference. That my friend\u00a0has value to certain people with your increasing public profile in terms of buzz for Sonos. Disclosure or not\u00a0Robert created significant positive PR here for Sonos by discussing it in\u00a0his blog – when it arrived and again after giving it away as “hundreds of people witnessed it” at Gnomedex.<\/p>\n While the data from yesterday’s mention is not in yet, I would suggest that this Alexa (yes I know Alexa has flaws) graph\u00a0showing the spike in traffic in April around the 8th suggests the buzz impact of this\u00a0mention or review quite well:<\/p>\n
\n1)\u00a0Robert talks about Sonos (with an outbound link to the product no less) in the April 8th post. You then use the terms \u201cI have to admit this is pretty cool\u201d and \u201cThis Rocks\u201d to describe it. Then on July 2nd\u00a0Robert says, \u201cWell, I never really gave them a review until today.\u201d If alongside an outbound link to the product\u00a0it’s stated that something is \u201cpretty cool\u201d and that \u201cthis rocks\u201d isn\u2019t a review, I don\u2019t know what is.
\n2) In that post\u00a0it says that \u201cFirst, a disclaimer. They sent me this so I could try it out. It\u2019s one of the things that arrived before I said \u201cno more free stuff.\u201d\u201d In\u00a0the July 2nd post\u00a0it talks about a new Nokia phone that just arrived. If the \u201cno more free stuff\u201d was truly operational you\u2019d send it back to the shipper immediately or refuse delivery. Which is\u00a0the true policy?
\n3) Does one\u00a0not get value out of something for using it for a few months? In the car industry it\u2019s a called a lease and there are payments involved. Did you pay Sonos or Nokia for value received during usage of these products for a period of time? If not, would you not admit that you got some value out of them?
\n4) In your April 8th post you said the Sonos might impress Chris Pirillo and\u00a0go on to say that if it\u00a0impresses him it will impress everyone. Does one\u00a0gain any personal value out of impressing people with new gadgets that were sent to you?<\/p>\n
![\"sonos_alexa_graph\"](\"https:\/\/www.daviddalka.com\/createvalue\/wp-content\/uploads\/2006\/07\/sonos_alexa_graph-300x170.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n