Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
Narconon and related groups / Re: Will Google's Change Impact narCONon??
« Last post by ethercat on September 15, 2017, 15:36 »
Thanks for the link to the article, BB.   L-O-:

Quote from: MICHAEL CORKERY, New York Times
Search ads for addiction treatment are lucrative. Treatment providers, in some cases, have been willing to pay $70 per ad click, according to an analysis that Mr. Williams’ group conducted and presented to Google executives.

We had a thread about this sort of thing, a while back:
Keyword marketing - "rehab" is #18, "treatment" is #19 Cost: $$$

Prices seem to have gone up quite a bit since then, if Mr. Williams' analysis is correct.

Quote from: MICHAEL CORKERY, New York Times
In a series of phone calls and a meeting in Washington, D.C., Mr. Williams presented the company his research. He highlighted that some of the biggest buyers of ad words related to treatment had been accused of misdeeds related to insurance fraud and sexual assault.

As have some of the Network Partners on his own site.
http://narcononreviews.net/management/per-wickstrom/

Unfortunately, this seems to be only about limiting advertising, and not an attempt to weed out referral sites from the search results.  I'm sure that will help some, but the web is littered with deceptive sites (and not only related to drug rehabs).  I'd be more impressed if they made a better effort on their search results.  I seem to remember google went after affiliate marketers a few years ago, and this referral scam is nothing more than an "in real life" form of that.
12
Narconon and related groups / Re: Will Google's Change Impact narCONon??
« Last post by Mary_McConnell on September 15, 2017, 13:57 »
Google is making some changes. Any thoughts on how this might impact narCONon's money flow?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/14/business/google-addiction-treatment-ads.html

Well... not when you have the undisputed king of deceptive rehab marketing involved. I happened to go to the website of FacingAddiction.org mentioned in the article, and guess who is listed as a Network Partner ( https://www.facingaddiction.org/action-network/partners )

Per Wickstrom's

A Forever Recovery
https://www.facingaddiction.org/partner/a-forever-recovery

Best Drug Rehabilitation
https://www.facingaddiction.org/partner/best-drug-rehabilitation
13
Narconon and related groups / Will Google's Change Impact narCONon??
« Last post by BigBeard on September 15, 2017, 09:10 »
Google is making some changes. Any thoughts on how this might impact narCONon's money flow?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/14/business/google-addiction-treatment-ads.html
14


Add that to his homes in Clearwater, Torch Lake, and the 11,416 square foot home shown above, located within shouting distance of Marne's Serenity Rehab, and you've got quite a colony.

Or a hive.

http://glisteningquiveringunderbelly.blogspot.com/2017/03/homes-boy-national-cherry-festival.html
15
Love to you both... and thank you for your efforts.

We could sure use some moles in Battle Creek, to help speed the process of exposing Per's games over there.

^^^
This!

Meanwhile, Per is raking in the $O$ $$O$$.

Remember that 9,000-sq. ft. pad mansion he purchased?
https://safetyharborconnect.com/owner-6-9-m-safety-harbor-mansion-identified
16
Narconon and related groups / Re: Scientolgy Drug Rehab
« Last post by Mary_McConnell on September 14, 2017, 10:44 »
Ok very nice, thank you
I will be looking around and see what i can learn

 :){}{}{}
17
Oh, please.... Per Wickstrom would  >:D love >:D to have his most diligent critics bickering because of a misunderstanding!! 

Love to you both... and thank you for your efforts.

We could sure use some moles in Battle Creek, to help speed the process of exposing Per's games over there.
18
My comment wasn't aimed at you Miss F., but rather what $cientology would like us to believe: 'The Church of Scientology would like you to believe that Applied Scholastics is an educational program and merely a “Scientology-related entity.” '

That "$cientology-related entity" means it's part of $cientology, whatever they may claim otherwise.
19
So shoot me, I'm not an attorney.
20
I don't think "Related Entities" means the same thing to the IRS that Per thinks it does. The IRS definition:

Quote
Meaning of "Related Entities"

1) The two entities have (i) significant common purposes and substantial common membership or (ii) directly or indirectly substantial common direction or control; or

2) Either entity owns (directly or through one or more entities) a 50 percent or greater interest in the capital or profits of the other. For this purpose, entities treated as related entities under the preceding paragraph shall be treated as one entity.

So when the IRS calls any of the front groups a "$cientology-related entity" in the '93 closing agreement, there's nothing "mere" about it.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10