Proof that the Big Review TV business was flawed at the start

Repost of thread #33324759 but with edited last paragraph...

I'm reading alot of excuses on here from users saying if it wasn't for the deceit "this" would have still been successful. Or people saying that they were some how "tricked" into investing in this company and that it wasn't their fault. Seriously, this was clear cut from day 1! All you had to do was to actually "experience" the product and see for yourself what was out there in the marketplace.

Exhibit A). This is an actual review video uploaded by Brandon Evertz on Nov 2, 2014. It is basically a demo video for the business model of Big Review TV. Notice how it's only got 9 views in almost 4 years, just lol. It's reviewing "Wattle Cafe" located at Blackheath in NSW.



Now compare that to other actual review competitors in the marketplace:

"Wattle Cafe" https://www.yelp.com.au/biz/wattle-cafe-blackheath

"Wattle Cafe" https://www.facebook.com/Wattle-Cafe-Blackheath-234818471927/

"Wattle Cafe" https://www.zomato.com/blackheath-nsw/wattle-cafe-blackheath

"Wattle Cafe" https://www.tripadvisor.co.nz/Resta...lackheath_Blue_Mountains_New_South_Wales.html

Fundamentally, I believe that the initial success of this company was down to having "attractive models" in their videos and that was the turning point of gaining market traction. If they had stayed the course of having more "everyday" reviews, i.e. not paid models, in the majority of their videos, it may have worked better for the long term and created a better platform. Or perhaps the plan was to just start with paid models, and then hopefully it would snowball with other users - similar to when Hollywood celebrities set a trend for something. Having watched alot of their review videos it seemed like this was the only way it differentiate itself from it's competitors. However, having a large amount of this type of content created more of a TV show rather than user a generated platform, which would have been a prerequisite for Pillar 3.