|
DigMyPics.com Goes Medieval on ScanCafe in Battle of Photo Scanning Services |
|
|
|
|
Written by Scott Baradell
|
|
Friday, 03 August 2007 |
Last month, startup ScanCafe officially introduced its photo scanning and restoration service to the world, followed this week by ProZone, its higher-end service aimed at professional photographers.
Search for ScanCafe on Google, however, and one of the first things you'll come across is a vicious flame war between ScanCafe and a competitor, DigMyPics.com. It's as juicy as any exchange between Rosie O'Donnell and Elisabeth Hasselbeck on The View.
Tags: ScanCafe, DigMyPics.com, photo scanning
Some of the charges leveled against ScanCafe, with excerpts from DigMyPics.com's "Get the Real Truth" attack site:
1. It doesn't want customers to know that their photos are sent to India for scanning.
"Would you trust a tiny, unknown company to manage the transport and processing of your one-of-a-kind photos to India?"
2. It spun a Wall Street Journal story to make it sound like an endorsement of ScanCafe, when it wasn't.
"You probably thought they got an endorsement from an editor at the Wall Street Journal and that's exactly what ScanCafe wants you to believe ... In fact, the article dedicated exactly 8 letters to ScanCafe."
3. It fudges numbers to mislead customers about its pricing.
"The pricing they list for us is outright false just like much of what else they say. There is no doubt that ScanCafe's pricing is low. We can't match their prices and continue to do the work in the USA."
According to DigMyPics.com, ScanCafe has responded with legal threats. The letters are published here.
ScanCafe does have a price comparison chart featuring DigMyPics.com on its Web site, but so far there's been no response on the company's CEO blog. To ScanCafe's credit, it does reference its offices in Bangalore, India, in its press releases.
We don't know if DigMyPics.com's charges are accurate, or if it's just running scared and desperate to bring down a new competitor.
We do know it's compelling to watch.
| Comments () >> |
 |
|