job site, monthly rev = $2K, BIN = $6K

[Clinton]

careerexcuse.com is advertised for sale.

Apparently makes $2K per month with an hour or two's worth of work.

Current bid is $5K with an asking BIN of $6K.

PR3

Standard Disclaimer: As usual, this is not a recommendation. Check the books and do your own valuation. As usual, I don't compete with you on any prospective buy I spot and bring to your attention.

[Fergal]

The site sells a service whereby you can get a fake reference from a "company" where you have never worked. Thus it helps their clients to be dishonest. When I see a sale listing for a dishonest business or website I wonder how trustworthy any figures they provide are.

[Clinton]

Agreed.

For the purpose of this BSTE section I'm not making any moral judgements, I'll leave that to individuals buyers.

But for my own portfolio I wouldn't personally touch something like this with a bargepole. What goes around comes around.

[worldlymrb]

Hi everybody,

I am the owner of careerexcuse.com and if anybody has any inquiries, I will answer to the best of my ability and provide any information you request., or email me at <deleted>

[nEquity]

You shouldve told us about the unethical nature of the site prior to posting it and before someone else has to point this out to us.

[Clinton]

nEquity, you could take that up with him by email.

worldlymrb, thanks for posting but how on earth did you spot this thread?

[worldlymrb]

nEquity, you could take that up with him by email.

worldlymrb, thanks for posting but how on earth did you spot this thread?

I have google send me anything about careerexcuse.com that pops up on their S/E

[nEquity]

nEquity, you could take that up with him by email.

worldlymrb, thanks for posting but how on earth did you spot this thread?

Actually I meant you clinton.

I think its important to make sure any listings that go up here are of quality, and not of a questionable nature. Its what this forum is supposed to be about, and after being scorne din the past, I feel those who preach should follow their own edicts.

And dont read into that and get all defensive. I think its a fair comment to keep this section free of crap and only sites taht are clearly worthy

[Clinton]

It's a fair comment in that you're stating that you'd like me to exert my moral preferences before flagging a site here.

But such filtering would exclude a whole lot of sites that others might be interested in - from adult sites to ringtones to myspace templates to ambulance chasers to anything that's using blackhat SEO!

I don't take any responsibility for quality. If I see what looks like a business that may be of interest to any member here then I'll flag it and it'll be up to individual members to decide if the site is for them or not. If I feel it's a scam - i.e. not a profitable business - then I'll post it in gotchas. And you the members can tell me if I got it right. I'm quite happy to move a thread from one section to the other if enough members drop in to say I got it wrong. No hard feelings, promise

We've got one vote already. Give me 4 more and I'll move it.

worldlymrb, ah, Google Alerts. OK.

[hooperman]

I think its important to make sure any listings that go up here are of quality, and not of a questionable nature.

I understood that Clinton was posting sites "of interest", not sites that he'd done due diligence on for us to go ahead and buy. On each site for sale he does give disclaimers similar to:

Standard Disclaimer: As usual, this is not a recommendation. Check the books and do your own valuation.

In performing some filtering at the front end, he's cutting out most of the leg work we have to suffer when sifting through the piles of crap we see on Flippa, DP etc.