How Eververda checks its prices and specifications

Our journal compares our own prices against other retailers'. An undated price is worse than no price, because a reader cannot tell whether it describes this week or last summer. Every third-party figure in those articles now carries the date it was read at source, and that includes the figures inside comparison tables and inside FAQ answers, which are the ones most often read on their own, away from any date further up the page.

Four articles carry a month rather than a day, because a month is all their own record supports, and they were not given a day they cannot stand behind. One article is left undated on purpose: its single third-party figure is a reanalysis of a decades-old study rather than a price, and no check date for it exists anywhere.

On 12 October 2026 we re-read 14 of those figures at source. Ten were unchanged. Two had moved. One product had been discontinued in that market since our previous check, and one retailer's site could not be read at all, because it gates automated requests.

Where a figure had moved, we changed it. Where the product no longer existed, we marked the listing as withdrawn rather than giving the old price a newer date, because a re-dated price implies the piece is still buyable. Where a site could not be read, the figure stays as it was, dated to the check that produced it, and we do not assert that it is current.

The same re-check overturned three findings of our own. A competitor price we had recorded as a steep increase was the same price shown in a different currency: both figures implied one exchange rate to five significant figures, which a genuine repricing of two numbers cannot do by accident. A caveat we thought a competitor had fixed, they had not. And a review count we had attributed to one size of a tree is shared across every size of that tree, so it describes a product family rather than the single piece we had attached it to.

Eververda does not manufacture the trees it sells. Every product page carries a specification table holding what the manufacturer documented for that piece: materials, dimensions, pot details, leaf counts where they are published, and UV treatment where it is claimed. Where a value was never documented, the table reads "Not specified". In October 2026 we rewrote 375 of those fields across 152 products so that an undocumented value reads as undocumented, instead of carrying a placeholder that looks like data.

We also removed UV treatment claims from eight products whose own documentation makes no UV claim, and we do not publish fire ratings or UV performance figures the manufacturer has not documented. A field that contradicts the page it sits on is worse than an empty field, and it is exactly the thing a careful reader notices.

No customer reviews, and no star rating, review count or rating markup anywhere in the page code. The store has not collected reviews, so there is nothing to show, and a rating we could not substantiate would make every other figure here suspect.

No countdown timers, no "only a few left" badges, and no strike-through price that was never charged. Where a reference price of that kind existed, it was cleared rather than kept as decoration.