Jump to content

NordVPN vs PIA - Why does LTT use PIA as a channel sponsor but not NordVPN?

Go to solution Solved by LinusTech,
2 hours ago, Mr.Other said:

Why would LTT use PIA as a channel sponsor but not NordVPN?

Please correct me if I am wrong, but to me it seems that NordVPN is better choice then the PIA. 

NordVPN operates out of Panama, a prime location for privacy protection, and is available in more countries. It is a no-logs VPN that has undergone four independent audits, with a commitment to annual verification of its privacy practices. Additionally, NordVPN has successfully completed multiple security audits from firms like Cure53 and Versprite. 

PIA has also been audited, the audit was conducted a few months ago by Deloitte Audit Romania. While NordVPN has undergone significantly more audits than PIA, both services have successfully passed at least one audit, which is reassuring. PIA does offer a larger number of servers, though I couldn't pinpoint the exact figure. It also has a more affordable subscription model and allows unlimited connections. However, being based in the US raises some privacy concerns.

1 (1).png

1 (2).png

1 (3).png

1 (4).png

1 (5).png

Both seem to be good choices. I personally have used PIA for many years and have been happy with them.

If PIA screws things up, maybe we'd consider re-evaluating at that time, but for now our partnership is with PIA.

Why would LTT use PIA as a channel sponsor but not NordVPN?

Please correct me if I am wrong, but to me it seems that NordVPN is better choice then the PIA. 

NordVPN operates out of Panama, a prime location for privacy protection, and is available in more countries. It is a no-logs VPN that has undergone four independent audits, with a commitment to annual verification of its privacy practices. Additionally, NordVPN has successfully completed multiple security audits from firms like Cure53 and Versprite. 

PIA has also been audited, the audit was conducted a few months ago by Deloitte Audit Romania. While NordVPN has undergone significantly more audits than PIA, both services have successfully passed at least one audit, which is reassuring. PIA does offer a larger number of servers, though I couldn't pinpoint the exact figure. It also has a more affordable subscription model and allows unlimited connections. However, being based in the US raises some privacy concerns.

1 (1).png

1 (2).png

1 (3).png

1 (4).png

1 (5).png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy and naïve answer would be NordVPN couldn't afford LTT's rates back when it was starting up, and now that their name is out there, doesn't need the visibility anymore as they can just go for smaller, cheaper channels.

 

It's probably more complex than that but I'd like to think it's plausible at least 😅

I've gotten to know some stuff, but am far from omniscient, so don't take my advice as gospel and wait for other opinions - I just like throwing in my two cents when I can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr.Other said:

Why would LTT use PIA as a channel sponsor but not NordVPN?

Please correct me if I am wrong, but to me it seems that NordVPN is better choice then the PIA. 

NordVPN operates out of Panama, a prime location for privacy protection, and is available in more countries. It is a no-logs VPN that has undergone four independent audits, with a commitment to annual verification of its privacy practices. Additionally, NordVPN has successfully completed multiple security audits from firms like Cure53 and Versprite. 

PIA has also been audited, the audit was conducted a few months ago by Deloitte Audit Romania. While NordVPN has undergone significantly more audits than PIA, both services have successfully passed at least one audit, which is reassuring. PIA does offer a larger number of servers, though I couldn't pinpoint the exact figure. It also has a more affordable subscription model and allows unlimited connections. However, being based in the US raises some privacy concerns.

1 (1).png

1 (2).png

1 (3).png

1 (4).png

1 (5).png

Both seem to be good choices. I personally have used PIA for many years and have been happy with them.

If PIA screws things up, maybe we'd consider re-evaluating at that time, but for now our partnership is with PIA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be anything from:

  1. PIA pays more for their ads.
  2. Some beef with NORDvpn
  3. LTT believes in PIA more
  4. PIA was first VPN provider to lock down an exclusive ad contract
  5. Anything else

Desktop: Ryzen 7 5800X3D - Kraken X62 Rev 2 - STRIX X470-I - 3600MHz 32GB Kingston Fury - 250GB 970 Evo boot - 2x 500GB 860 Evo - 1TB P3 - 4TB HDD - RX6800 - RMx 750 W 80+ Gold - Manta - Silent Wings Pro 4's enjoyer

SetupZowie XL2740 27.0" 240hz - Roccat Burt Pro OG Corsair K70 browns - PC38X - Mackie CR5X's

Current build on PCPartPicker

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Mr.Other said:

Why would LTT use PIA as a channel sponsor but not NordVPN?

 

You don't seem to understand advertisement/sponsorship. People or companies get sponsored to get the money, not because they are convinced of the product. 

Do you think a football star appearing in a McDonalds ad really thinks that is the best food in the World? No, it is about who pays them. 

 

Most people/companies will have some ethical standards what not to get sponsored from. Like they won't accept sponsorship from child labor, or Asus. but generally you should never assume sponsorship means they truly believe it is a good product. 

No signature

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, LinusTech said:

If PIA screws things up, maybe we'd consider re-evaluating at that time, but for now our partnership is with PIA.

Except they have messed up.  In the literal sense as well, as I've stated in the Sponsor Complaints the amount their advertising/pricing I feel strongly actually breaks consumers price disclosure laws.  Just highlighted a few of the points as others might not have seen.

 

This was brought up originally in May, and I've followed up a few times already; but I'll put it here as I think it's relevant.

 

1) Specific wording on LTT's PIA pricing: "2 years + 5 months FREE" [they capitalize FREE].  They giant bold pricing "$1.96/month" BUT the amount they will charge is $56.94.  Or in other words charging $1.96 for 2 years, and 5 months.  So you don't get 5 months free, you are paying for it.  This is frankly against Canadian pricing law.

 

2) Says it renews every 12 months after,  absolutely zero price disclosure about the price you will pay after the 12 months is up.  Again this is against the law [Cineplex as an example  was just fined for adding the whole $1.50 when you purchase tickets online and not disclosing it until after you're pretty much ready to pay]

 

3) When using LMG link, the 6 month pricing costs more than a 1 year plan [$45/6 month vs $39.95/12 month].  Following LTT's link though, unless you close out and go to the PIA page you can't see that the 1 year pricing is cheaper.  Having discounts that are more expensive than the regular product is again against Canadian pricing law.

 

4) Now I reached out to PIA's support as I was curious what the renewal price would be at [at the yearly rate].  I was told LTT's plan will renew as a yearly plan for the same amount...If they truly start charging $56.94/year for PIA that is quite frankly gross [i.e. If you let it renew once, if you had purchased the yearly option you would then have only saved yourself ~$6 over the 3 years...if you let it renew twice you will pay ~$10 more for the LTT's discounted plan over a 4 year period].

 

Now on the WAN show there was talking about how MKHB wasn't a "scam" which I agree with that concept, but in the sense of PIA the way they present their pricing and phrasing of pricing/product it IS a scam as many people won't necessarily verify the number...or will assume the number presented is true.  The practice of deceptive pricing goes back years as well.

 

The quality of the service doesn't matter IF they have scummy pricing practices.

 

TL;DR

The biggest highlights of the things I mentioned which I think makes PIA an ACTUAL SCAM as I feel it actually violates Canadian Law.

Using "FREE" which has clear connotations when used in advertising AND not actually having the extra months free.

Using the LTT link you end up with it hiding the 1 year option, which the 1 year option is cheaper than the newly presented 6 month option. [Again it hides the 1 year option when it displays the more expensive 6 month plan!!!!!] [As brought up in a post on June 6]

3735928559 - Beware of the dead beef

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lurking said:

You don't seem to understand advertisement/sponsorship. People or companies get sponsored to get the money, not because they are convinced of the product. 

Do you think a football star appearing in a McDonalds ad really thinks that is the best food in the World? No, it is about who pays them. 

 

Most people/companies will have some ethical standards what not to get sponsored from. Like they won't accept sponsorship from child labor, or Asus. but generally you should never assume sponsorship means they truly believe it is a good product. 

you generally don't accept sponsorship money from products you are not convinced are adequate. 

Im not sure what you mean by "convinced of the product" the product does not have to be the best, but it has to be good enough. 

There may be other VPNs that mee the requirement of good enough, but PIA is one of them. 
Nord may be another, but as Linus pointed out, it has not necessarily been evaluated to be as such since there is no known good reason to drop PIA. 

The football star in all likelyhood very much enjoys McDonalds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, starsmine said:

Nord may be another, but as Linus pointed out, it has not necessarily been evaluated to be as such since there is no known good reason to drop PIA. 

I would say PIA's pricing practices is 100% a reason why PIA should be dropped.  I mean in the literal sense if you go to the PIA website with the LTT PIA link it hides the 1 year option and presents a 6 month option which costs more than 1 year option.  On top of that they use the word "free" but their numbers are based on the "free" months not actually being free.

 

I feel that PIA has illegal pricing practices.  So it doesn't matter how good their service is, the fact PIA is willing to be so scummy with their pricing/advertising of that pricing and really should one trust a company that is willing to do that (when their whole service still requires some trust).

 

The way I will pose the question to you, if you sign up for 2 years using the LTT link...once that 2 years is up how much will you be paying yearly for it?  The answer, $17/year more than a basic 1 year contract if the customer service is correct [from the last time I asked...which was a week or two ago]...btw that's $17/year than the 1 year...the 1 year THAT THEY HIDE FROM YOU when you visit the site using LTT's link

3735928559 - Beware of the dead beef

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

I would say PIA's pricing practices is 100% a reason why PIA should be dropped.  I mean in the literal sense if you go to the PIA website with the LTT PIA link it hides the 1 year option and presents a 6 month option which costs more than 1 year option.  On top of that they use the word "free" but their numbers are based on the "free" months not actually being free.

 

I feel that PIA has illegal pricing practices.  So it doesn't matter how good their service is, the fact PIA is willing to be so scummy with their pricing/advertising of that pricing and really should one trust a company that is willing to do that (when their whole service still requires some trust).

 

The way I will pose the question to you, if you sign up for 2 years using the LTT link...once that 2 years is up how much will you be paying yearly for it?  The answer, $17/year more than a basic 1 year contract if the customer service is correct [from the last time I asked...which was a week or two ago]...btw that's $17/year than the 1 year...the 1 year THAT THEY HIDE FROM YOU when you visit the site using LTT's link

Buy 2 get one free.

free is not free, you are just paying 2/3 the single price on each one.
its just saying 1/3rd off, so long as you buy a minimum of three.

Buy one get one free same deal
the free one is not free, you are just getting two at 1/2 the price each. 
its just saying the price is 50% so long as you buy a minimum of two.

hell I dont even see the 2 year pricing, this is what get
image.thumb.png.3ff11dfaeafdc723ce42f8a8ca6a7150.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, starsmine said:

Buy 2 get one free.

free is not free, you are just paying 2/3 the single price on each one.
its just saying 1/3rd off, so long as you buy a minimum of three.

Buy one get one free same deal
the free one is not free, you are just getting two at 1/2 the price each. 
its just saying the price is 50% so long as you buy a minimum of two.

At least try to follow along.  Free is a well defined term in regards to advertising.

 

If I say, you pay $1/month on a 2 year contract but you get an extra 6 months free.  How much am I paying?  24 months * $1 = $24 total.  I get the service for 30 months, but I am paying only for the 24 months worth.  PIA would be like 30 months * $1 = $30 total.  If you can't see an obvious problem with that then good on you, BUT it's illegal in Canada.

 

Since you brought up BOGO as an example, in Canada we have strict pricing laws.  If you offer BOGO but you raise your price by 2x during the sale it is an illegal act.

To put it in perspective to PIA's offer, it's like they say it's buy 24 and get 5 free for $1.96/month...except when they ring it through the cash register they ring through all 29 months @ $1.96/month.  Actually in Canada if you put an item on BOGO AND you raise the price slightly for the sale, that's still an illegal act as in Canada that second item is no longer classified as free

 

YOU DO NOT GET TO CHARGE FOR "FREE" MONTHS.  Point blank, it's that simple.  I understand pricing and their dynamics that "BOGO" effectively is 50% off...BUT again they don't get to ring through both items and charge the price listed.

 

The correct phrasing is 2 years + 5 month TERM.  Or 29 months @ $1.96.  They do not get to use the word FREE as it has clear connotations in the law.

3735928559 - Beware of the dead beef

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, starsmine said:

you generally don't accept sponsorship money from products you are not convinced are adequate. 

Im not sure what you mean by "convinced of the product" the product does not have to be the best, but it has to be good enough. 

There may be other VPNs that mee the requirement of good enough, but PIA is one of them. 
Nord may be another, but as Linus pointed out, it has not necessarily been evaluated to be as such since there is no known good reason to drop PIA. 

The football star in all likelyhood very much enjoys McDonalds. 

Unless the sponsorship requires you to use the equipment (like a bicyclist who has to ride the bike the sponsor produces), there really is no need to actually like the product. Money paid for praising the product. Not more, not less.

 

But this actually is why sponsorship works... many people think the person advertising actually stands behind the product. 

 

Think of the advertisement during football games. Do you really think the television network (or whoever is in charge of commercials) goes through the list of products and decide to show Pepsi commercials instead of Coca Cola commercials because they really think Pepsi is better? They select whoever pays them more and who doesn't do some egregious things that would come back to the TV network (like slave labor, or hunting Panda bears or so). 

No signature

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Lurking said:

Unless the sponsorship requires you to use the equipment (like a bicyclist who has to ride the bike the sponsor produces), there really is no need to actually like the product. Money paid for praising the product. Not more, not less.

 

But this actually is why sponsorship works... many people think the person advertising actually stands behind the product. 

 

Think of the advertisement during football games. Do you really think the television network (or whoever is in charge of commercials) goes through the list of products and decide to show Pepsi commercials instead of Coca Cola commercials because they really think Pepsi is better? They select whoever pays them more and who doesn't do some egregious things that would come back to the TV network (like slave labor, or hunting Panda bears or so). 

Did you misread me?

Pepsi is good enough. Pepsi is adequate
It is not ever a question of who is better, but who is good enough to meet their standards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, starsmine said:

hell I dont even see the 2 year pricing, this is what get

Like in my statement you quoted.  You have to follow the LTT link. [i.e. their promotional code].  The point still stands on the 3 year one as well though, as if you visit PIA in a new browser you get the whole "+ 3 months free" at least on Canadian websites.  If you click on the one that says + 3 months as well, the billing page switches it back to + 3 months free in the billing item anyways

3735928559 - Beware of the dead beef

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

My issue with VPNs is that when they use Google Analytics and operate from countries with data retention requirements then those VPNs are not really private.

A PC Enthusiast since 2011
AMD Ryzen 7 5700X@4.65GHz | GIGABYTE GTX 1660 GAMING OC @ Core 2085MHz Memory 5000MHz
Cinebench R23: 15669cb | Unigine Superposition 1080p Extreme: 3566
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Used PIA for 8 years, never had an issue with pricing or service.

COMMUNITY STANDARDS   |   TECH NEWS POSTING GUIDELINES   |   FORUM STAFF

LTT Folding Users Tips, Tricks and FAQ   |   F@H & BOINC Badge Request   |   F@H Contribution    My Rig   |   Project Steamroller

I am a Moderator, but I am fallible. Discuss or debate with me as you will but please do not argue with me as that will get us nowhere.

 

Spoiler

  

 

Character is like a Tree and Reputation like its Shadow. The Shadow is what we think of it; The Tree is the Real thing.  ~ Abraham Lincoln

Reputation is a Lifetime to create but seconds to destroy.

You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.  ~ Winston Churchill

Docendo discimus - "to teach is to learn"

 

 CHRISTIAN MEMBER 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Vishera said:

My issue with VPNs is that when they use Google Analytics and operate from countries with data retention requirements then those VPNs are not really private.

I doubt there is privacy since now the VPN has (and sells) your data. 

The point of VPN is to be able to pretend to be from a different region to watch geo-fenced content.

No signature

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, we're not using Tunnel Bear anymore?  Why wasn't I told??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Erioch said:

Wait, we're not using Tunnel Bear anymore?  Why wasn't I told??

LTT stopped advertising Tunnel Bear ever since McAfee bought them in 2018.

On 10/5/2024 at 4:52 AM, Lurking said:

I doubt there is privacy since now the VPN has (and sells) your data. 

The point of VPN is to be able to pretend to be from a different region to watch geo-fenced content.

VPNs have been used for privacy for years, especially people in countries rife with censorship and journalists that don't want the authorities snooping on their sensitive work.

A PC Enthusiast since 2011
AMD Ryzen 7 5700X@4.65GHz | GIGABYTE GTX 1660 GAMING OC @ Core 2085MHz Memory 5000MHz
Cinebench R23: 15669cb | Unigine Superposition 1080p Extreme: 3566
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/4/2024 at 7:35 PM, starsmine said:

you generally don't accept sponsorship money from products you are not convinced are adequate. 

I am not sure what LTT's stance on sponsorship is at this point in time, but they have on several occasions in the past ran sponsor spots for products and companies they have no experience with and that they later pulled because of backlash. 

It seems to me like they try and pick sponsors that are at the very least not awful these days, but I wouldn't really take it as a guarantee that the product is decent. 

 

 

It's a big mistake to assume that, in general, being a sponsor means that it's a quality product.

Sponsors should in my opinion be treated like an ad on TV. Just because an ad for something appears on a channel you like does not mean it is good or even adequate. It just means the company paid to be shown on that channel. 

Sponsors are just ads. Treat them as you do any other ad, even if the ad is being made by an influencer you like. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I am not sure what LTT's stance on sponsorship is at this point in time, but they have on several occasions in the past ran sponsor spots for products and companies they have no experience with and that they later pulled because of backlash. 

It seems to me like they try and pick sponsors that are at the very least not awful these days, but I wouldn't really take it as a guarantee that the product is decent. 

 

 

It's a big mistake to assume that, in general, being a sponsor means that it's a quality product.

Sponsors should in my opinion be treated like an ad on TV. Just because an ad for something appears on a channel you like does not mean it is good or even adequate. It just means the company paid to be shown on that channel. 

Sponsors are just ads. Treat them as you do any other ad, even if the ad is being made by an influencer you like. 

I chose my words carefully. 
I never said of high, or even moderate quality or implied it. 
I said "adequate". I said "good enough". As in it meets a baseline of quality as defined by that creator or even Television station.

A backlash can convinced them that it was not "adequate" or "good enough" as they had previously thought, and a correction was issued.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, starsmine said:

I chose my words carefully. 
I never said of high, or even moderate quality or implied it. 
I said "adequate". I said "good enough". As in it meets a baseline of quality as defined by that creator or even Television station.

A backlash can convinced them that it was not "adequate" or "good enough" as they had previously thought, and a correction was issued.

 

The point is that a sponsor spot does not come with any kind of quality assurance. Some creators might try and have some standards, but that's far from guaranteed, and even those who does might lower their standards from time to time, or mess up and pick a sponsor that is bad.

 

The list of sponsors LTT has pulled is from what I can tell quite long, so even if you view them as "correcting issues" I see it as times when adequate or "good enough" quality was not assured.

Again, just to reiterate, I am not trying to throw shit at LTT here. All I am saying is that if you see something in a sponsor spot and automatically assume a bunch of things like "this must at least be decent because Linus said good things about it" then you are being successfully manipulated and might get screwed over, just like if you watch an ad on TV and think "wow, if this channel I like shows an ad for this product it must be at the very least decent".

 

It's just an ad. Do not trust ads. Their entire purpose is to try and convince you to buy stuff, and in the case of sponsor spots the influencer is getting paid to try and get you to buy stuff. Giving them any kind of trust (even if it's just "this product must be adequate") is most likely a bad idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/4/2024 at 11:05 AM, wanderingfool2 said:

If I say, you pay $1/month on a 2 year contract but you get an extra 6 months free.  How much am I paying?  24 months * $1 = $24 total.  I get the service for 30 months, but I am paying only for the 24 months worth.  PIA would be like 30 months * $1 = $30 total.  If you can't see an obvious problem with that then good on you, BUT it's illegal in Canada.

You are talking about two different things; the amount paid per month with the deal and average that you paid per month when including the total number of months you receive. Those numbers are not the same. Using your example…

 

$1 per month for 24 months+6 months free. That equals $24 for 30 months. Price per month works out to $0.80 per month when you average what you paid over the TOTAL number of months received.

 

Here endeth the lesson.

 

-kp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, kpluck said:

You are talking about two different things; the amount paid per month with the deal and average that you paid per month when including the total number of months you receive. Those numbers are not the same. Using your example…

 

$1 per month for 24 months+6 months free. That equals $24 for 30 months. Price per month works out to $0.80 per month when you average what you paid over the TOTAL number of months received.

 

Here endeth the lesson.

 

-kp

I am aware of what the effective price works out to be, but they can't be allowed to make that giant bold claim of what it works out to per month in hiding the true price.

 

e.g. Sometimes you will see the 3 year + 3 months FREE advertisement [not always].  When you click on the link it says you save 83% and the price is $2.03/month.

By definition if you are making 3 months free, you cannot say the monthly rate is $2.03/month and charge that for the additional 3 months.  It creates a contradictory statement then, either the 3 months are free or it isn't.

 

On top of that, the renewal rate doesn't include that 3 months, so the $/month only applies until the "free" part runs out at which point it actually is a higher effective monthly rate.  Although non of this really is laid out in writing though.

 

It's why I'm stating that the wording is misleading.

No where does PIA state that the averaged out price is the $2.03/month [Or the $1.96/month in the case of LMG's code].  Instead it states x years + z months free.  So it very much is the first example, but in reality they are presenting the second case.

 

The correct terminology would have been "effective rate".

 

Again, when you do a 3 year term, the monthly price is actually ~2.19/month not their giant bold $2.03/month.  $2.03/month is what you would pay including the free months AND assuming you cancel.  If you do not cancel and it auto-renews you will be paying effectively $2.19/month.

 

Wording matters, and PIA's wording is quite literally against the law in my opinion.

 

 

 

So yes, I am talking about 2 different things BUT that's my point PIA incorrectly labels it as being the second thing without disclaimers.

 

Want to know how scummy PIA's advertising is.  You get the 3 years + 3 months FREE ad, click on it and it reads 3 years + 3 months [no more "free"] and lists the price at $2.03/month.  You click on the link and the checkout page has switched it back to "+ 3 months Free".   And guess what, it renews at $79 after the 3 years + 3 months is up...and it renews at the 3 year [without any additional months].  So no way should they be listing it at $2.03/month as that's not the actual pricing when you exclude the "free" months.  If they want to have it as $2.03/month they HAVE to have legal disclaimers about the fact they are doing an effectively monthly rate including the free months.  Again, if they don't they don't get to call the months free.

 

So here is the lesson to you, calling something "free" and presenting pricing that calculates cost per month including the "free" months is illegal in Canada.

3735928559 - Beware of the dead beef

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your responses! You've helped to confirm what I had concluded myself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×