[bjtitus]

I'm sure it will. It doesn't change my perception of them. In my opinion, anyone who thinks taking the time to create a web page for an argument or who thinks a product in the same field with a similar name is a copycat doesn't care about me, the customer.

They should be spending their time improving the product, coming up with new ideas, or responding to legitimate support inquiries.

Neither of these companies showed any "brilliant" response. Both end up looking bad.

[melvinram]

You realize that it probably took FreshDesk maybe 2 hrs to create that page with the intention of defending the credibility of their reputation?

And at the same time, by picking (or rather extending) a fight with the industry leader, they are gaining lots of visibility for their product.

Was it worth it for FreshDesk to put in the 2 hours to defend their reputation? Of course. How is that not brilliant?

[bjtitus]

Sure. You can argue the publicity was worth something but I am certainly turned off by the way they went about it.

They could have mockingly made a fo-ZenDesk logo or any number of other things that didn't make it look like they are on the defensive.

Either way, as a customer I am more concerned about either of these companies using ANY of their time on this. Regardless of how much time they spent, it reflects on where their priorities lie.

[drumdance]

I agree. Guy Kawasaki suggests companies should pick fights with better known rivals. Apple vs. IBM back in the day is a perfect example.

I now know who Freshdesk is (didn't before) and might consider them in the future. We used to use Zendesk but found it too expensive for our needs. Plug: we use Tender.

[Legion]

> They should be spending their time improving the product, coming up with new ideas, or responding to legitimate support inquiries.

Oh, that's silly. Writing up and posting a small 1-page website did not take any time at all away from "coming up with new ideas, or responding to legitimate support inquiries".

It's fine if you don't like it, but don't act like they were somehow derelict in their normal duties by making this.

[bjtitus]

The amount of time spent in this specific instance is irrelevant. The fact that they were interested enough to put any effort into such a trivial argument and the way they responded is the issue.

This kind of response is a double-edged sword. The majority of comments in this thread seem to support the idea as a marketing ploy and that is fine. However, the other side of damaging the company's reputation & culture needs to be considered.

I do not want to deal with companies who make it a common practice to respond to slight arguments with long posts and websites instead of dealing with more important support issues, features, and bug fixes.

Time is a tradeoff. It's a finite resource that needs to be used wisely. It reflects poorly on your company (especially an early stage startup) when you publicly spend it doing things like this.

If either of these companies are serious about their products they would not be spending time responding to trivialities like this and would let the customers and product speak for themselves.

[corin_]

> anyone who thinks taking the time to create a web page for an argument

It's marketing, pure and simple. And if you think any company that spends time/money on marketing/PR doesn't care about you, the customer, you're going to have to have trouble finding any companies you want to give your money to.

[tdfx]

If we had to pick a loser here, I'd still go with Zendesk.