Why I hate rebates, episode 246
James Gifford
for my dislike; I've expressed a few in here. I try to avoid buying
rebated products, but sometimes one comes along that I can't - either
it's the product I want anyway, or the deal is exceptional enough not to
pass up, and I'm not going to throw away $30 or $50 or $100 just-cuz. (I
do often toss lesser rebates if I've shopped carefully in the first
place.)
I always regret it. No exception on this one.
Norton AntiVirus Pro, 2-license pack, suited my needs perfectly as I
needed a new license for a server and my current main workstation version
was a couple years old and about to expire.
I'm meticulous when I do bother with a rebate: read the fine print, make
sure I've got the right bit of the package cut off, fill out the form in
my best handwriting, keep copies of everything, etc.
The rebate was for $30 (on a $59 purchase). I included the receipt, the
proof of purchase, the prior-product proof, and the rebate form, all
taped to a sheet of paper and copied. The rebate window was for purchases
between 7/29/03 and 12/31/04. The rebate had to be filed within 30 days
of purchase.
I bought on 01/05/04 and mailed the rebate on 01/08/04. Yesterday I got a
little, grimy, half-readable postcard - o so easy to lose! - that said my
rebate had been invalidated because of "Invalid Postmark Date."
Rebates are a fuckin' *scam*. The process is so convoluted, and the rules
and enforcement so arbitrary, and the return correspondence (including
the check, eventually) so poorly done that it's easy to lose, that it's
like playing a casino game without knowing the rules.
Yes, I'm sending a followup in the *three day* window I have to reply.
Won't they be surprised that I kept copies, etc. and am not one of the
poor fools who sent it all off and missed the tiny postcard notice...
--
| James Gifford * FIX SPAMTRAP TO REPLY |
| So... your philosophy fits in a sig, does it? |
| Heinlein Pages Updated! See www.nitrosyncretic.com |
Opus the Penguin
> The rebate was for $30 (on a $59 purchase). I included the
> receipt, the proof of purchase, the prior-product proof, and the
> rebate form, all taped to a sheet of paper and copied. The rebate
> window was for purchases between 7/29/03 and 12/31/04. The rebate
> had to be filed within 30 days of purchase.
>
> I bought on 01/05/04 and mailed the rebate on 01/08/04. Yesterday
> I got a little, grimy, half-readable postcard - o so easy to lose!
> - that said my rebate had been invalidated because of "Invalid
> Postmark Date."
Something like this happened to me with a product I bought at Fry's. I
took all my documentation to Fry's and they handed me the refund right
there.
I've done two or three other rebates for Fry's stuff, always
successfully. My one Staples rebate went fine too.
CompUSA, on the other hand, stole $60 from me nine years ago and I've
bought nothing from them since. (I said. So he wrote it in himself.
CompUSA's rebate center rejected my rebate form that had been filled
out by their own employee for a product the employee had specifically
gotten in response to my request for the product that had been
advertised as having a $60 rebate. The customer service counter
shrugged and told me to take it up with the rebate center. The rebate
center ignored my letters on the subject.)
--
Opus the Penguin (that's my real email addy)
You snipped my sig!
Al Yellon
news:Xns94857F06755BEni...@216.168.3.44:
I understand your frustration, and you are right that they are convoluted
in many instenaces, and that's what the manufacturers are counting on.
However, I have had no trouble with rebates and I have gotten them from
many different sources.
I did have trouble at one point with a $50 rebate I was supposed to get
from Maxtor when I bought a new hard drive. They responded with a postcard
stating I had not bought it within the specified time period. They
conveniently gave an 800 # to call, which I did. Of course, the phone rep
was rude. On speaking to a supervisor, he immediately agreed that the
postcard was a mistake.
I had my rebate within a week.
I also bought a product from Micro Center, *one day* after the rebate
period expired. The people at Micro Center were nice enough to take the
rebate price off of what I paid at the register, since they still had the
rebate signs posted in the store.
--
"The only thing that would jinx an animated feature film nomination for
'Finding Nemo' is the unexpected interference of a Chicago Cubs fan."
-- Michael Mallory, Daily Variety, December 10, 2003
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Rants, comments, reviews: || To contact me use the following:
http://www.yellon.org/links.htm || itghtfr02 (at) sneakemail (dot) com
Kim
>The rebate window was for
> purchases between 7/29/03 and 12/31/04. The rebate had to be filed
> within 30 days of purchase.
>
> I bought on 01/05/04 and mailed the rebate on 01/08/04.
Did I read this right? The rebate was for purchases between 7/290/03 and
12/31/04 - you bought on 1/05/04 - doesn't that invalidate the rebate? Or -
does the 30 days for filing actually extend the time to purchase?
And I've only dealt with rebates infrequently - unless it was one of those
"instant rebate" things they often have at Best Buy and such. My monitor
came with a rebate, which I got back no problem after filling out the forms,
and I think our refrigerator came with a rebate, and I don't remember any
hassle getting that check, either. Actually I go into it not really
"counting on" the rebate - if I get it, bonus, if not, oh well. I've heard
so many people complain about the whole process, I guess I just expect not
to get it.
--
Kim
* I'm glad that life isn't like a Christmas song, because if my friends and
I were building a snowman and it suddenly came alive when we put a hat on
it, I'd probably freak and stab it to death with an icicle. (Matt Perry)*
James Gifford
> James Gifford wrote:
>> The rebate window was for
>> purchases between 7/29/03 and 12/31/04. The rebate had to be filed
>> within 30 days of purchase.
>>
>> I bought on 01/05/04 and mailed the rebate on 01/08/04.
> Did I read this right? The rebate was for purchases between 7/290/03
> and 12/31/04 - you bought on 1/05/04 - doesn't that invalidate the
> rebate?
The rebate period, as specified on both the form (which I have a copy of)
and the box sticker (which I don't have) was for nearly a year and a
half. If they've decided that's a typo or something, it was in at least
two places, including the form, and was a strong reason I bought that
particular package from among several other combinations of Norton
software. If it's a screwup, it's a great big one and they will honor it
or I will never buy another Symantec/Norton product
> And I've only dealt with rebates infrequently - unless it was one of
> those "instant rebate" things they often have at Best Buy and such. My
> monitor came with a rebate, which I got back no problem after filling
> out the forms, and I think our refrigerator came with a rebate, and I
> don't remember any hassle getting that check, either. Actually I go
> into it not really "counting on" the rebate - if I get it, bonus, if
> not, oh well. I've heard so many people complain about the whole
> process, I guess I just expect not to get it.
It's one-half step up from a scam, IMHO, because they're selling you the
product at a drastic discount - which makes you buy it over other choices
and pay a price you wouldn't otherwise - and then they make claiming the
rebate a series of difficult jumps through hoops. Miss any of them, and
no rebate. Since some of the hoops are the next thing to hidden, it's
very easy to screw the pooch.
In particular, communication from the rebate center is usually in the
form of tiny, grayish postcards printed in microscopic type, with a
zillion chances of getting lost, misdirected or thrown away as junk mail.
The checks are often just as junky... and, of course, if you never
respond to an "invalid" notice or cash the check, it's $30-150 they don't
have to pay out.
This is *after* reading the 4-point type that lists all the steps of the
rebate, making sure you cut the right tab off the box, ensuring that you
have copies of the right receipt with the the item circled, and filling
out the information legibly in 1/8-inch tall handwriting.
Lalbert1
<n...@nitrosyncretic.kom> writes:
>Rebates are a fuckin' *scam*. The process is so convoluted, and the rules
>and enforcement so arbitrary, and the return correspondence (including
>the check, eventually) so poorly done that it's easy to lose, that it's
>like playing a casino game without knowing the rules.
>
>Yes, I'm sending a followup in the *three day* window I have to reply.
>Won't they be surprised that I kept copies, etc. and am not one of the
>poor fools who sent it all off and missed the tiny postcard notice...
>
Rebates are not a scam. A lot of people complain about them, but the problems
that they have (and that you had) are almost always due to the people who are
handling the paperwork that is sent in. The rebate and check issuing is
usually contracted out to companies located in East Oatmeal, Minnesota or
similar places, and I suspect that the people in the company who handle the
rebates are typical of the work force that is available in those areas at the
wage rates that such jobs offer.
I keep copies of rebate paper, as you do, and when they go one day past the
date I am supposed to get the check I call them, and call them, and call them
on their 800 number. I have never been flummoxed out of a rebate. But I
dislike them also.
Les
James Gifford
> Rebates are not a scam. A lot of people complain about them, but the
> problems that they have (and that you had) are almost always due to
> the people who are handling the paperwork that is sent in.
Yes, they are a scam in that the offer is an overwhelming inducement to
buy, but the actual rebate process is entirely the responsibility of the
buyer to follow a difficult and convoluted process that will be aborted
(with no payback) if any of several steps are not done precisely.
If they were not a scam, companies wouldn't offer them in the first place
- they'd just discount the product - and they would make claiming the
rebate more straightforward and likely to be completed.
To start with: when was the last time you saw a rebate form that didn't
have teeny-tiny spaces requiring your smallest and most precise hand to
fill out? When was the last time you saw a rebate form that had the
crucial information printed distinctly - that is, in a readable font size
and not buried in a long stream of micro-text? When was the last time you
got a rebate check that looked like something substantial enough to pick
out of the junk mail and keep, and not like a grotty little supermarket
coupon?
If rebates were meant to be an honest process, none of these elements
would be like this. They can sure as hell make the rebate signs and
stickers large, colorful and readable at ten feet... so what possible
reason would they have for making the forms and checks so tiny, unusable
and invisible? And why can't they include an addressed envelope for
return of the rebate form?
No, to restate: Rebates combine an enormous, overwhelming, well-targeted
come-on with a difficult and intentionally obfuscated claim process. The
sum equals "scam."
Lalbert1
<n...@nitrosyncretic.kom> writes:
>lalb...@aol.com (Lalbert1) wrote:
>> Rebates are not a scam. A lot of people complain about them, but the
>> problems that they have (and that you had) are almost always due to
>> the people who are handling the paperwork that is sent in.
>Yes, they are a scam in that the offer is an overwhelming inducement to
>buy, but the actual rebate process is entirely the responsibility of the
>buyer to follow a difficult and convoluted process that will be aborted
>(with no payback) if any of several steps are not done precisely.
>If they were not a scam, companies wouldn't offer them in the first place
>- they'd just discount the product - and they would make claiming the
>rebate more straightforward and likely to be completed.
>To start with: when was the last time you saw a rebate form that didn't
>have teeny-tiny spaces requiring your smallest and most precise hand to
>fill out? When was the last time you saw a rebate form that had the
>crucial information printed distinctly - that is, in a readable font size
>and not buried in a long stream of micro-text? When was the last time you
>got a rebate check that looked like something substantial enough to pick
>out of the junk mail and keep, and not like a grotty little supermarket
>coupon?
I have never experienced the teeny-tiny spaces, the lack of crucial
information, or a hard to read font size in the rebate material that I have
used. The checks are kind of junky looking, but I open all the mail including
the junk mail (just in case there is a coin, or a dollar, or some return
address labels in them). I guess you have been hanging out with the wrong
rebate crowd.
Les
Greg M
news:Xns94859786059...@130.133.1.4:
> I also bought a product from Micro Center, *one day* after the rebate
> period expired. The people at Micro Center were nice enough to take
> the rebate price off of what I paid at the register, since they still
> had the rebate signs posted in the store.
I rather like Micro Center.
A couple of their managers even breathe through their noses. :0
I rarely have any problems with returns, and there's a good scratch and
dent table.
--
"Mountains cannot be surmounted
except by winding paths."
Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe
Al Yellon
news:Xns9485D2857...@216.196.97.132:
> - Al Yellon <m...@privacy.net> - spluttered in
> news:Xns94859786059...@130.133.1.4:
>
>> I also bought a product from Micro Center, *one day* after the rebate
>> period expired. The people at Micro Center were nice enough to take
>> the rebate price off of what I paid at the register, since they still
>> had the rebate signs posted in the store.
>
> I rather like Micro Center.
>
> A couple of their managers even breathe through their noses. :0
>
> I rarely have any problems with returns, and there's a good scratch and
> dent table.
I would agree. Not knowing where your local Micro Center is, the one in
Chicago does all of those things, I have talked to salespeople there who
actually seem to know something about computers, and their prices and
selection are pretty good.
Greg M
news:Xns9485AE478791Bni...@216.168.3.44:
> lalb...@aol.com (Lalbert1) wrote:
>> Rebates are not a scam. A lot of people complain about them, but the
>> problems that they have (and that you had) are almost always due to
>> the people who are handling the paperwork that is sent in.
>
<snip>
> If rebates were meant to be an honest process, none of these elements
> would be like this. They can sure as hell make the rebate signs and
> stickers large, colorful and readable at ten feet... so what possible
> reason would they have for making the forms and checks so tiny,
> unusable and invisible? And why can't they include an addressed
> envelope for return of the rebate form?
>
> No, to restate: Rebates combine an enormous, overwhelming,
> well-targeted come-on with a difficult and intentionally obfuscated
> claim process. The sum equals "scam."
I know where you're at. I had a Norton one bounce back at me last year. The
Sam's Club was displaying a bunch with rebate stickers on them. So I did
the did the same as you.
But the problem I didn't notice, the rebate had already expired. Needless
to say I was pissed at Sam's Club for leaving the tags on! And let them
know.
Al Yellon
news:20040204202541...@mb-m26.aol.com:
>
> I have never experienced the teeny-tiny spaces, the lack of crucial
> information, or a hard to read font size in the rebate material that I
> have used. The checks are kind of junky looking, but I open all the
> mail including the junk mail (just in case there is a coin, or a
> dollar, or some return address labels in them). I guess you have been
> hanging out with the wrong rebate crowd.
The latest rebate I have filed for, which was for a monitor I bought at
Best Buy last weekend, was for $50. Best Buy printed out a rebate receipt,
a form with plenty of room to write the pertinent information, clear
instructions on what to include and when and where to mail it.
I mailed this on Monday of this week. I will report back when I receive it.
James Gifford
> I have never experienced the teeny-tiny spaces, the lack of crucial
> information, or a hard to read font size in the rebate material that I
> have used. The checks are kind of junky looking, but I open all the
> mail including the junk mail (just in case there is a coin, or a
> dollar, or some return address labels in them). I guess you have been
> hanging out with the wrong rebate crowd.
Could be - it is universal for tech gear, software, etc. It may well be
less scammy for appliances, home products, etc.
But in general, the whole concept is still a scam. It would be far easier
for manufacturers to issue a discount directly than to set up and support
a rebate process. The *only* benefit to a rebate over a discount is that
manufacturers know, absolutely for certain, that some significant portion
of buyers will fail to claim the rebate. So they get all the sales
benefits of offering a whopping discount but at a significantly
ameliorated cost to their bottom line.
(And before anyone makes any arguments about how rebates put the onus on
the manufacturers instead of the resellers, consider that few rebates are
offered "standalone" - they involve special packaging, the inclusion of
forms etc., store displays, and in general more reseller impact than a
simple discount would. Rebates that are offered standalone - that is, not
directly connected to a specific package, but consist of a form that can
be obtained and used with any corresponding product - are not common in
tech products (except at Fry's, it seems) and may be more the province of
grocery and department store products.)
James Gifford
> But the problem I didn't notice, the rebate had already expired.
> Needless to say I was pissed at Sam's Club for leaving the tags on!
> And let them know.
I think Sam's buys and sells a lot of excess and outdated stock - if you
check the models of the DVD players, TVs, vacuum cleaners, etc. you'll find
that they're "last year's" models being sold by no one else. (And that you
can buy the current model, with better features, for only a little more or
the same price at other discounters.)
That they would buy and shelve products with a minimal portion of a long
rebate period left is entirely in line with what I understand of their
buying and marketing practices.
Bill Turlock
Yeah, Fry's has gotten better about that in the past few
years. Bought a monitor that had a $50 rebate, after almost
a year I called the monitor company, and they gave me a ½
hour run-around, basically said I was out of luck 'cause I
didn't inquire soon enough, they threw all the paperwork
away (when actually, the only rebates they pay are the ones
that you call up and bitch about).
So, went to Fry's told 'em my sad story, they gave me a $50
credit to my card. Hee hee--then about 18 months after the
purchase, there magically appears in my mail a $50 check
from the monitor co!?!? I kept it. For the hassle.
Then just last Sunday, they were handing out forms that you
had to fill in so they could _mail_ you the rebate form
itself. Said they'd mail it in two days. I thought Ahah,
here we go again, and was almost going to post here and in
ba.internet about it. But, there it was in the mail today.
Humph, now I can't bitch.
Don't get me started on Compusa. Their voice jail is
specifically designed to prevent you from ever talking to a
human being. Infinite loops, etc.
There is only one person there who knows anything, and he's
not a Red Shirt. He wears a Grey Shirt, and Steve Jobs signs
his checks.
Seriously, in every Compusa store there's an Apple employee,
and he'll help you with _anything_, even tell you how to
beat Apple's ridiculous prices on G5 memory. I love him!
Bill
Mary Shafer
<n...@nitrosyncretic.kom> wrote:
> I hate rebates with a passion and have a number of well-founded reasons
> for my dislike; I've expressed a few in here. I try to avoid buying
> rebated products, but sometimes one comes along that I can't - either
> it's the product I want anyway, or the deal is exceptional enough not to
> pass up, and I'm not going to throw away $30 or $50 or $100 just-cuz. (I
> do often toss lesser rebates if I've shopped carefully in the first
> place.)
Costco now does rebates on the Web, if you wish. You click a few keys
and they mail you a check. It's virtually painless. I was astounded.
So does someone else, like Staples, maybe. There's a little more
typing, because it's not a membership store, but it's still pretty
easy.
Mary
--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer
mil...@qnet.com
Austkin
>making sure you cut the right tab off the box,
I have sent in rebates for laptops that ask for the actual upc code from the
box of which there's usually more than one. Since I don't know which one is
*the* one, I just cut & send all of them.
Greg M
> Greg M <xxxo...@iBx.EER.netcom.com> wrote in
> news:Xns9485D2857...@216.196.97.132:
>
>> - Al Yellon <m...@privacy.net> - spluttered in
>> news:Xns94859786059...@130.133.1.4:
>>
>>> I also bought a product from Micro Center, *one day* after the rebate
>>> period expired. The people at Micro Center were nice enough to take
>>> the rebate price off of what I paid at the register, since they still
>>> had the rebate signs posted in the store.
>>
>> I rather like Micro Center.
>>
>> A couple of their managers even breathe through their noses. :0
>>
>> I rarely have any problems with returns, and there's a good scratch and
>> dent table.
>
> I would agree. Not knowing where your local Micro Center is, the one in
> Chicago does all of those things, I have talked to salespeople there who
> actually seem to know something about computers, and their prices and
> selection are pretty good.
Cleveland.
Agree on the salespeople. I rarely go into Circ City, Comp U or BestB.
Maybe to prowl the junk racks.
I bought an unopened scratch+dent table mobo from Micro last year. Wouldn't
boot. The return guy *didn't even blink*. I thought I might have to argue
my case in court or something. <wipes brow>
Micro's book rack and their damn <sic> magazine selection. I've gotten
awesome cheap discounted books. And, well, Half-Price Books is right around
the corner too.
Greg M
> Greg M <xxxo...@iBx.EER.netcom.com> wrote:
>> But the problem I didn't notice, the rebate had already expired.
>> Needless to say I was pissed at Sam's Club for leaving the tags on!
>> And let them know.
>
> I think Sam's buys and sells a lot of excess and outdated stock - if
> you check the models of the DVD players, TVs, vacuum cleaners, etc.
> you'll find that they're "last year's" models being sold by no one
> else. (And that you can buy the current model, with better features,
> for only a little more or the same price at other discounters.)
Eeh, maybe. I think they have to a have a large lead time to obtain their
discounts. And that sort of works against them.
I bought a HP fancy-shmancy handheld last year. $300-$400 priced job. And
stared at it a while, unopened.
I have a OZ-770 Sharp organizer that I'm very happy with, btw.
I decided I wouldn't spend the money and returned it, maybe 20 days later.
The gal immediately opened the package, it was never opened, and inspected
the contents. Later I talked with another Sam's person, their return window
is very tight because of the quickly changing market. 30 days on comp
related stuff, I think - tops.
> That they would buy and shelve products with a minimal portion of a
> long rebate period left is entirely in line with what I understand of
> their buying and marketing practices.
I don't agree, but I'm pretty satisfied with the one I deal with.
There's an Office Max next door that I bought ny HP laser printer from. On
sale, mind you, but about $60 less than what Sam's regularly charged.
Greg M
news:qef3201btjuk32dk7...@4ax.com:
Office Max offers tracking of them.
Greg M
> Best Buy printed out a rebate receipt,
> a form with plenty of room to write the pertinent information, clear
> instructions on what to include and when and where to mail it.
Office Max started doing the same, the first of the year.
David J. Martin
>
> lalb...@aol.com (Lalbert1) wrote in
> news:20040204202541...@mb-m26.aol.com:
>
> >
> > I have never experienced the teeny-tiny spaces, the lack of crucial
> > information, or a hard to read font size in the rebate material that I
> > have used. The checks are kind of junky looking, but I open all the
> > mail including the junk mail (just in case there is a coin, or a
> > dollar, or some return address labels in them). I guess you have been
> > hanging out with the wrong rebate crowd.
>
> The latest rebate I have filed for, which was for a monitor I bought at
> Best Buy last weekend, was for $50. Best Buy printed out a rebate receipt,
> a form with plenty of room to write the pertinent information, clear
> instructions on what to include and when and where to mail it.
>
> I mailed this on Monday of this week. I will report back when I receive it.
We got a Best Buy card just before Christmas. They had this deal where
if you charged $100 on the card you'd get a gift card. They called it a
rebate program. Their registers printed out all of the forms including
a rebate receipt. On the rebate form it said you couldn't use the
rebate receipt, you had to use a copy of the original receipt. This is
all internal to Best Buy and they couldn't make it straight forward.
I think such programs are at least part scam as they figure only some
percentage of the rebates will get turned in. That way they get the
come on from the rebate and only pay part of the price.
David
Al Yellon
> - Al Yellon <m...@privacy.net> - spluttered in
> news:Xns9485C8AF9E6...@130.133.1.4:
>
>> Best Buy printed out a rebate receipt,
>> a form with plenty of room to write the pertinent information, clear
>> instructions on what to include and when and where to mail it.
>
> Office Max started doing the same, the first of the year.
Office Depot has done the same for a while; I have received rebates from
them using this procedure.
So does Menard's.
Al Yellon
news:4022551F...@tamu.edu:
> I think such programs are at least part scam as they figure only some
> percentage of the rebates will get turned in. That way they get the
> come on from the rebate and only pay part of the price.
There is no doubt this is true. The only question is, whether you call this
idea a scam or not.
Al Yellon
news:20040204234510...@mb-m19.news.cs.com:
Do you get the rebate checks from these?
Greg Goss
>"David J. Martin" <david-j...@tamu.edu> wrote in
>news:4022551F...@tamu.edu:
>
>> I think such programs are at least part scam as they figure only some
>> percentage of the rebates will get turned in. That way they get the
>> come on from the rebate and only pay part of the price.
>
>There is no doubt this is true. The only question is, whether you call this
>idea a scam or not.
One concept we haven't mentioned is that rebate schemes all inolve
destroying the box. The postmark must be within X days of the
purchase, even if the store allows return by whim up to Y days of the
sale. So if I buy a USR router, and all my friends tell me I should'a
bought a Linksys, it is too late. I've already cut out the UPC code.
hymie!
James Gifford <n...@nitrosyncretic.kom>, who said:
>The rebate window was for purchases
>between 7/29/03 and 12/31/04. The rebate had to be filed within 30 days
>of purchase.
This seems like an awfully long window, especially for something like a
virus scanner that needs frequent, if not constant, updating. I wonder
if this was a typo, and the rebate expired on 12/31/03 .
hymie! http://www.smart.net/~hymowitz hy...@lactose.smart.net
===============================================================================
Bill Turlock
Don't forget the part where it says that they won't it send
to P.O. Boxes, and you don't find this out until _after_
you've bitten on the scam!^W^W^W bought the product
James Gifford
> Don't forget the part where it says that they won't it send
> to P.O. Boxes, and you don't find this out until _after_
> you've bitten on the scam!^W^W^W bought the product
Oh, why thank you ever so much for reminding me. :P
I've used a PO Box for decades and hate giving out my home address. So now
I use the corporation office address for this kind of stuff. Nyah nyah.
James Gifford
> I think such programs are at least part scam as they figure only some
> percentage of the rebates will get turned in. That way they get the
> come on from the rebate and only pay part of the price.
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. They get all the benefit of bannering
"WOW! LOOK! 50% OFF! BUY ME AND SAVE $100!" but at a greatly ameliorated
bottom-line cost for doing so over a straight discount. There is absolutely
no reason at all for rebates over discounts, and even less reason to make
them so intentionally difficult to claim.
Lalbert1
<david-j...@tamu.edu> writes:
>We got a Best Buy card just before Christmas. They had this deal where
>if you charged $100 on the card you'd get a gift card. They called it a
>rebate program. Their registers printed out all of the forms including
>a rebate receipt. On the rebate form it said you couldn't use the
>rebate receipt, you had to use a copy of the original receipt. This is
>all internal to Best Buy and they couldn't make it straight forward.
>I think such programs are at least part scam as they figure only some
>percentage of the rebates will get turned in. That way they get the
>come on from the rebate and only pay part of the price.
Of course the companies realize additional profit from the un-claimed rebates,
but why is that a scam, or even a part scam?
When companies lose class action lawsuits, and have to return dollars to
claimants, there are many people who are elligible but just don't bother to
fill out the paperwork to make a claim. As a result, the companies don't have
to pay out as much. Would you consider that a scam?
Les
Boron Elgar
>Greg M <xxxo...@iBx.EER.netcom.com> wrote in
>news:Xns94864688...@216.196.97.132:
>
>> - Al Yellon <m...@privacy.net> - spluttered in
>> news:Xns9485C8AF9E6...@130.133.1.4:
>>
>>> Best Buy printed out a rebate receipt,
>>> a form with plenty of room to write the pertinent information, clear
>>> instructions on what to include and when and where to mail it.
>>
>> Office Max started doing the same, the first of the year.
>
>Office Depot has done the same for a while; I have received rebates from
>them using this procedure.
>
>So does Menard's.
I prefer the way Costco does it...you go online & type in your
membership number & the number of the receipt and they send you the
rebate.
You can also call the 800 number and do it.
Of course, this does not work with manufacturer rebates, but Costco's
are very often theirs.
boron
James Gifford
> One concept we haven't mentioned is that rebate schemes all inolve
> destroying the box. The postmark must be within X days of the
> purchase, even if the store allows return by whim up to Y days of the
> sale. So if I buy a USR router, and all my friends tell me I should'a
> bought a Linksys, it is too late. I've already cut out the UPC code.
It occurs to me that we could make one hell of a long list of reasons why
rebates are a bad idea (on tech gear, at least - most of the people who
seem happy with them are referring to appliances, office supplies and
grocery-store items).
I think most people who think well of rebates, or at least don't think
badly of them, are much like my eldest offspring. He's 21, quite bright
(3rd year at Cal Poly, physics major), and a total tech wonk. His
arguments for rebates go as follows:
1) The savings are just too good to pass up;
2) He's still in a life phase where half an hour of kindergarten cut,
paste, assemble and write real tiny is no drag on his life;
3) When the checks show up, it's like found money.
I think rebates succeed because #2 applies to so many buyer and because
of consumer naivete (1, 3 and the general impression of saving lotsa bux
combined).
James Gifford
> Eeh, maybe. I think they have to a have a large lead time to obtain
> their discounts. And that sort of works against them.
That's part of it, but I've been a heavy, heavy Sam's shopper for six or
seven years. (With a very large family, it's the only way to keep a
household stocked economically. I used to go once a week to one about
five miles away; then the tricky bastards found my home address and built
one almost within walking distance... and next to the post office. I shop
there 3 times a week or more. We also now have a Costco within about the
same range.)
I usually shop pretty carefully for tech gear, doing my online homework
at a minimum. Sam's has rarely had current models in stock, always last-
year's - not quite obsolete, but almost always superseded. Make a list
next time and compare it to, say, Circuit City's stock, or look online at
manufacturer's catalogs.
> There's an Office Max next door that I bought ny HP laser printer
> from. On sale, mind you, but about $60 less than what Sam's regularly
> charged.
Sam's is a good place to buy stuff, especially commodity stuff, and
you'll rarely go too wrong buying printers, cartridges, and such from
them. But a little homework and shopping for bigger items will pay off -
they aren't a universal (heh heh) best-buy.
James Gifford
>> The rebate window was for purchases
>> between 7/29/03 and 12/31/04. The rebate had to be filed within 30
>> days of purchase.
> This seems like an awfully long window, especially for something like
> a virus scanner that needs frequent, if not constant, updating. I
> wonder if this was a typo, and the rebate expired on 12/31/03 .
That may well be, but the box sticker and the form both said "04" and I
have the latter in hand. I also bought four days after the end of the year,
and based on the rebate offer. They *will* honor this one or I will give
Symantec's customer service department a very bad day.
Opus the Penguin
> I rather like Micro Center.
>
> A couple of their managers even breathe through their noses. :0
Next you'll be claiming that when they scratch their butts, the hand
stays outside the pants.
--
Opus the Penguin (that's my real email addy)
You snipped my sig!
StarChaser Tyger
>In our last episode, the evil Dr. Lacto had captured our hero,
> James Gifford <n...@nitrosyncretic.kom>, who said:
>
>>The rebate window was for purchases
>>between 7/29/03 and 12/31/04. The rebate had to be filed within 30 days
>>of purchase.
>
>This seems like an awfully long window, especially for something like a
>virus scanner that needs frequent, if not constant, updating. I wonder
>if this was a typo, and the rebate expired on 12/31/03 .
You have to update it when you get home anyway. The stuff on the CD is
probably weeks out of date when you buy it ...I still use Norton AV 4.0
that I got from Staples's cheap bin for a five spot a few years ago, the
updates still work and it still catches the new viruses.
--
Visit the Furry Artist InFURmation Page! Contact information, which artists
do and don't want their work posted. http://web.tampabay.rr.com/starchsr/
Address no longer munged for the inconvenience of spammers.
(Yes, this really is me.)
David J. Martin
>
> In article <4022551F...@tamu.edu>, "David J. Martin"
> <david-j...@tamu.edu> writes:
>
> >We got a Best Buy card just before Christmas. They had this deal where
> >if you charged $100 on the card you'd get a gift card. They called it a
> >rebate program. Their registers printed out all of the forms including
> >a rebate receipt. On the rebate form it said you couldn't use the
> >rebate receipt, you had to use a copy of the original receipt. This is
> >all internal to Best Buy and they couldn't make it straight forward.
> >I think such programs are at least part scam as they figure only some
> >percentage of the rebates will get turned in. That way they get the
> >come on from the rebate and only pay part of the price.
>
> Of course the companies realize additional profit from the un-claimed rebates,
> but why is that a scam, or even a part scam?
They are _designed_ to reduce the likelihood of successful participation
after purchase. They are frequently processed in a way to reduce
payoffs to those people who attempt to participate. It's not three-card
Monte, but, then again, in some ways it is a shell game.
> When companies lose class action lawsuits, and have to return dollars to
> claimants, there are many people who are elligible but just don't bother to
> fill out the paperwork to make a claim. As a result, the companies don't have
> to pay out as much. Would you consider that a scam?
Class action suits are a different kettle of fish. I think they serve
two primary purposes. They punish corporations for the actions they
took leading to the suit and they enrich law firms. The benefit to
consumers is indirect, in that we really only benefit to the extent to
which those lawsuits discourage companies from acting in a way that
would lead to such suits.
But to answer your direct question, yes. I think the consumer portion
of class action lawsuits are also a bit of a scam. Rarely do they
"return dollars to claimants" directly. Or at least, that's been the
case in the ten or so suits to which I've been a party. For example,
the price fixing for airlines. You got a certificate good for 10% of
the full fare of a plane ticket, or some such thing. I was in another
where I had to keep filling out paperwork to stay in the suit.
Somewhere in the third or fourth round I missed a deadline.
David
James Gifford
> I prefer the way Costco does it...you go online & type in your
> membership number & the number of the receipt and they send you the
> rebate.
>
> You can also call the 800 number and do it.
>
> Of course, this does not work with manufacturer rebates, but Costco's
> are very often theirs.
Which begs the question: why would Costco or any other seller bother to
do this? Why not just offer the discount right there at purchase? Most of
the legit arguments for rebates have something to do with putting the
onus of the discount on the manufacturer, or permitting the mfr to
collect buyer data, or forcing buyers to register software, or some such.
If all Costco is doing is offering a discount, why screw around with the
rebate process? Unless... it's to get the marketing benefit of the
discount while ameliorating the bottom-line impact? [Which tattoos
*S*C*A*M* on it, for me.]
James Gifford
> Of course the companies realize additional profit from the un-claimed
> rebates, but why is that a scam, or even a part scam?
Because it's a form of bait-and-switch. You don't *really* get a discount
on the product unless you are willing to walk a fine and uneven line to
get it - my mental movie screen is playing the "Word of God" scene from
the last Indiana Jones movie right now - and a significant percentage,
perhaps even majority of buyers may not be able to complete that process
and claim the discount. When the store and manufacturer throw up every
roadblock on the claim road they can, it's even more so. And when they
arbitrarily reject some percentage of rebates in the expectation/hope
that the buyers will not notice (either at all or until it's too late),
which seems to be some rebater's active practice, it's 100% scam.
I've heard the arguments for rebates, and in the cases where it's to
permit the manufacturer to reward someone for buying a larger than normal
quantity (at once or over a short time), or for buying a package deal,
it's one thing. But a simple discount rebate on a single item is a scam
in that a time-of-purchase discount has exactly the same sales effect but
is a 100% loss for the seller, while a rebate gains the seller advantage
at a strong and definable disadvantage to the buyer.
> When companies lose class action lawsuits, and have to return dollars
> to claimants, there are many people who are elligible but just don't
> bother to fill out the paperwork to make a claim. As a result, the
> companies don't have to pay out as much. Would you consider that a
> scam?
Some are, but for entirely different reasons. Socking Microsoft in the
balls and then distributing the proceeds in the form of discount vouchers
for more Microsoft products; socking a company for a substantial penalty
and then spending half of it to distribute the other half in uselessly
small amounts; all of these are, if not scams, frauds on someone in the
game. If you mean the few cases where a CA participant has a fair chance
of getting meaningful recompense for a real injury and chooses not to
participate, no, of course not. I have opted out of several CAs because I
did not think my injury was worth being paid for. It's a form of honesty.
James Gifford
> You have to update it when you get home anyway. The stuff on the CD is
> probably weeks out of date when you buy it ...I still use Norton AV 4.0
> that I got from Staples's cheap bin for a five spot a few years ago, the
> updates still work and it still catches the new viruses.
The product I bought was NAV 2004, which is tightly locked and has to be
activated within 15 days to keep working. This was a two-license deal,
which suited me fine.
My shelf product is NAV 2002, which will work for a year on any machine
it's newly installed on. I've stretched that a little, but I pay for annual
renewals on a dozen machines - and quite happily. $20 a year for the
absolutely necessary and absolutely first-rate protection of NAV is one of
the biggest bargains around.
James Gifford
> The rebate was for $30 (on a $59 purchase). I included the receipt,
> the proof of purchase, the prior-product proof, and the rebate form,
> all taped to a sheet of paper and copied. The rebate window was for
> purchases between 7/29/03 and 12/31/04. The rebate had to be filed
> within 30 days of purchase.
>
> got a little, grimy, half-readable postcard - o so easy to lose! -
> that said my rebate had been invalidated because of "Invalid Postmark
> Date."
Just as a followup, if it's a typo, it's a doozy. The rebate form clearly
says "12/31/04" and what's more, says that the rebate request must be
postmarked by "1/31/05". So any claim that this was a year-error is
laughable, even if they did intend it to be a shorter period.
I'm going to waste time driving up to the store I bought this at and ask
for a photocopy of the box with the sticker, since mine long ago went in
the dumpster.
Boron Elgar
<n...@nitrosyncretic.kom> wrote:
>Boron Elgar <boron_elg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I prefer the way Costco does it...you go online & type in your
>> membership number & the number of the receipt and they send you the
>> rebate.
>>
>> You can also call the 800 number and do it.
>>
>> Of course, this does not work with manufacturer rebates, but Costco's
>> are very often theirs.
>
>Which begs the question: why would Costco or any other seller bother to
>do this? Why not just offer the discount right there at purchase? Most of
>the legit arguments for rebates have something to do with putting the
>onus of the discount on the manufacturer, or permitting the mfr to
>collect buyer data, or forcing buyers to register software, or some such.
>
>If all Costco is doing is offering a discount, why screw around with the
>rebate process? Unless... it's to get the marketing benefit of the
>discount while ameliorating the bottom-line impact? [Which tattoos
>*S*C*A*M* on it, for me.]
But why not? What is the problem? SOme places offer coupons that you
have to clip, or others make you use a club card or others make you
call in or send in or fill in...these are all marketing methods to get
people to buy the product and also maybe gather information from the
purchasers in some way so that the marketing can be honed.
Wait'll Wal-Mart puts those chips into your toilet paper.
boron
Al Yellon
news:Xns94865E3A8689Ani...@216.168.3.44:
> Bill Turlock <"Bill Turlock"@sonnic.net> wrote:
>> Don't forget the part where it says that they won't it send
>> to P.O. Boxes, and you don't find this out until _after_
>> you've bitten on the scam!^W^W^W bought the product
>
> Oh, why thank you ever so much for reminding me. :P
>
> I've used a PO Box for decades and hate giving out my home address. So
> now I use the corporation office address for this kind of stuff. Nyah
> nyah.
I wonder why they won't accept a PO Box as an address. I have seen this
requirement as well, and it makes no sense.
What also makes no sense is "one rebate per household". If I buy two of the
product, why can't I get two rebates?
Example: I bought a Logitech Cordless Optical Mouse, which had a 20% rebate
(amounts to $10 at the price I paid). Still waiting for this one, though
it's only been four weeks.
But I have three computers and might buy another one. So what's the
rationale behind me not being able to get another rebate, as long as I do
it during the specified time period?
Boron Elgar
<n...@nitrosyncretic.kom> wrote:
>Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
>> One concept we haven't mentioned is that rebate schemes all inolve
>> destroying the box. The postmark must be within X days of the
>> purchase, even if the store allows return by whim up to Y days of the
>> sale. So if I buy a USR router, and all my friends tell me I should'a
>> bought a Linksys, it is too late. I've already cut out the UPC code.
>
>It occurs to me that we could make one hell of a long list of reasons why
>rebates are a bad idea (on tech gear, at least - most of the people who
>seem happy with them are referring to appliances, office supplies and
>grocery-store items).
>
>I think most people who think well of rebates, or at least don't think
>badly of them, are much like my eldest offspring. He's 21, quite bright
>(3rd year at Cal Poly, physics major), and a total tech wonk. His
>arguments for rebates go as follows:
>
>1) The savings are just too good to pass up;
Sometimes they are, assuming it is a product you were in the market
for.
>2) He's still in a life phase where half an hour of kindergarten cut,
>paste, assemble and write real tiny is no drag on his life;
Nah. It never takes longer than 4-5 minutes. It just doesn't.
>3) When the checks show up, it's like found money.
I like it when any checks show up.
>
There are consumers who buy a product only because there is a rebate
and then just don't send it in for some reason. That makes no sense to
me. There are also fulfillment companies who pay peanuts, get monkeys
and some rebates get screwed up. Other things in life get screwed up,
too...no more than rebates.
I also have to add that I have never, ever not received a rebate that
I sent for.
Oh..one more thing from the other post. - as to why a company does not
just put the product on sale, rather than offer a rebate -
The cost of the promotion is calculated at sumnum buyers redeeming and
sumnum not. If you give the discount right up front, the promo costs
more and you miss the opportunity to find out some marketing data,
too.
boron
Opus the Penguin
> I wonder why they won't accept a PO Box as an address. I have seen
> this requirement as well, and it makes no sense.
Sure it does. It helps them enforce the "one rebate per household"
rule.
> What also makes no sense is "one rebate per household". If I buy
> two of the product, why can't I get two rebates?
1. Some of the rebated products are loss leaders.
2. Sometimes a big company will want to buy a hundred. In general,
they'd buy the product anyway because they need it.
Opus the Penguin
> But why not? What is the problem? SOme places offer coupons that
> you have to clip, or others make you use a club card or others
> make you call in or send in or fill in...these are all marketing
> methods to get people to buy the product and also maybe gather
> information from the purchasers in some way so that the marketing
> can be honed.
>
> Wait'll Wal-Mart puts those chips into your toilet paper.
Listen here, missie! NOBODY'S puttin' chips in my toilet paper but me.
Blinky the Shark
> lalb...@aol.com (Lalbert1) wrote:
>> Of course the companies realize additional profit from the un-claimed
>> rebates, but why is that a scam, or even a part scam?
> Because it's a form of bait-and-switch. You don't *really* get a discount
What's B&S about:
Price 100
Rebate 25
Net Cost 75
?
--
Blinky T. "$260 in the rebate pipe right now" Shark
James Gifford
> I wonder why they won't accept a PO Box as an address. I have seen
> this requirement as well, and it makes no sense.
>
> What also makes no sense is "one rebate per household". If I buy two
> of the product, why can't I get two rebates?
You just answered your own question. Us evil consumers might set up a slew
of PO Boxes so that we can collect multiple $20 rebates on mice and
monitors.
As for "one rebate per household," it's an indication that one goal of the
rebate is to collect premium marketing data. Rebates are often offered as
payment for the data, even if the targets are clueless about that...
Opus the Penguin
> Nah. It never takes longer than 4-5 minutes. It just doesn't.
Sure it does. If you're doing it at your office or have an office at
home, maybe not. But a lot of people have to rummage around to find
envelopes and stamps and scissors and tape and a pen, to say nothing of
a flat surface where they can spread out and get it done. And sometimes
they have to find their old version of the product so they can send
that in as part of the rebate condition. (Norton did this to me.) And
they have to go somewhere to photocopy all the stuff so they can prove
they really did do it right when the rejection letter comes. And if the
resultant package seems like it might weigh more than an ounce, they've
got to find a postal scale to weigh the thing on or suck it up and
stick on an extra stamp.
It's kind of like doing your taxes but without the dramatic tension to
make it fun.
James Gifford
>> Because it's a form of bait-and-switch. You don't *really* get a
>> discount
> What's B&S about:
>
> Price 100
> Rebate 25
> Net Cost 75
I think I've adequately explained it in other posts. Yes, you get the
discount... eventually, if you're lucky, and if you put in a bunch of
pointless, intentionally difficult effort. It looks as if my whopping $30
discount on NAV is going to go up in smoke, after it was a factor that
influenced me to buy that version (I would have bought a single-license
copy for $40 instead of the dual at $60 were it not for the rebate), and
after I've put in significant effort trying to claim the rebate. My time
is valuable: that fifteen minutes (and more now, trying to counter their
stupid postmark claim) is worth more, generally, than $20-30 total and
the net $10 or so I save over buying the non-rebated product next to it.
And it's gone up in smoke for an arbitrary, incorrect reason, not because
I forgot to follow instructions and tape the UPC label upside down with a
2-degree tilt on the form with pink-tinted tape.
I have five rebates in my pending file, all for products I would have
pretty much bought anyway and for which I would have rather gotten half
that much straight discount than this much rebate. (I've been doing a lot
of system building and upgrade lately.)
Patrick M Geahan
> You just answered your own question. Us evil consumers might set up a slew
> of PO Boxes so that we can collect multiple $20 rebates on mice and
> monitors.
Right, but every rebate I've filled out recently requires the original
UPC, which would make that quite difficult.
--
-------Patrick M Geahan---...@thepatcave.org---ICQ:3784715------
"You know, this is how the sum total of human knowledge is increased.
Not with idle speculation and meaningless chatter, but with a
medium-sized hammer and some free time." - spa...@pffcu.com, a.f.c-a
Incredible Rhyme Animal
>There are also fulfillment companies who pay peanuts, get monkeys
See, I thought if you paid peanuts, you got elephants. For monkeys, you had to
offer bananas. Man, no wonder my business went under.
Dutch "it's like a jungle sometimes" Courage
Richard R. Hershberger
> The *only* benefit to a rebate over a discount is that
> manufacturers know, absolutely for certain, that some significant portion
> of buyers will fail to claim the rebate.
Don't forget the interest earned between the time the manufacturer
gets paid and the rebate check gets deposited. Whether this is
evidence that the whole deal is yet more of a scam or evidence that
the manufacturers have a reason for the whole exercise apart from
unclaimed rebates is left as an exercise for the reader.
Richard R. Hershberger
Blinky the Shark
> James Gifford <n...@nitrosyncretic.kom> wrote in
> news:Xns94865E3A8689Ani...@216.168.3.44:
>> Bill Turlock <"Bill Turlock"@sonnic.net> wrote:
>>> Don't forget the part where it says that they won't it send to P.O.
>>> Boxes, and you don't find this out until _after_ you've bitten on
>>> the scam!^W^W^W bought the product
>> Oh, why thank you ever so much for reminding me. :P
>> I've used a PO Box for decades and hate giving out my home address.
>> So now I use the corporation office address for this kind of stuff.
>> Nyah nyah.
> I wonder why they won't accept a PO Box as an address. I have seen
> this requirement as well, and it makes no sense.
It makes sense if POs are popular with scammers . It may inconvenience
nonscammers, but that doesn't mean it's without reason. There probably
isn't any walk of life that hasn't been made less pleasureable or
workable because of policies/procedures that are only in place because
of system abusers. "This is a pain" and "there is no reason for this"
are not the same thing.
> What also makes no sense is "one rebate per household". If I buy two
> of the product, why can't I get two rebates?
With a particularly good deal, they're probably trying to guard against
Joe Noskills buying all 200 of them from Circuit City and selling them
from his trunk or eBay et al. They'd rather build their own customer
records from individual sales, probably. It also works a small bonus
for the store, I'd think, in that if the deal is advertised, Joe doesn't
clean them out at store opening on the first day of the offer, causing
199 customers to get turned away (and possibly pissed off at the store)
for lack of stock. That's not a good thing for the store's reputation.
"Don't bother, man -- they never have anything they advertise."
Sure, that's a judgement call -- why not a maximum of two, or three, or
five? I don't think there's any science to that, so I'd not waste any
time looking for some. Anyway, you can have a friend buy the second one
for you, if you really need it.
> Example: I bought a Logitech Cordless Optical Mouse, which had a 20%
> rebate (amounts to $10 at the price I paid). Still waiting for this
> one, though it's only been four weeks.
Most rebates I've read and/or used say something like a minimum of ten
weeks. Four weeks is nothing, and I suspect yours said something like
the ones with which I'm familiar.
--
Blinky Linux RU 4892F
Stolen SCO Code: http://snipurl.com/stolen
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>>> Because it's a form of bait-and-switch. You don't *really* get a
>>> discount
>> What's B&S about:
>> Price 100
>> Rebate 25
>> Net Cost 75
> I think I've adequately explained it in other posts. Yes, you get the
> discount... eventually, if you're lucky, and if you put in a bunch of
I think getting them is the default, and doesn't actually take any luck.
Have you *really* had that many rebates that didn't show up?
> pointless, intentionally difficult effort. It looks as if my whopping $30
> discount on NAV is going to go up in smoke, after it was a factor that
> influenced me to buy that version (I would have bought a single-license
> copy for $40 instead of the dual at $60 were it not for the rebate), and
> after I've put in significant effort trying to claim the rebate. My time
Okay, I get it. You've had problems with one rebate.
> is valuable: that fifteen minutes (and more now, trying to counter their
> stupid postmark claim) is worth more, generally, than $20-30 total and
IOW, you sent it in late, despite the cutoff undoubtedly being shown on
the offer?
> the net $10 or so I save over buying the non-rebated product next to it.
> And it's gone up in smoke for an arbitrary, incorrect reason, not because
That reason is...er...actually reasonable enough that you didn't want to
share it and weaken the rant?
> I forgot to follow instructions and tape the UPC label upside down with a
> 2-degree tilt on the form with pink-tinted tape.
> I have five rebates in my pending file, all for products I would have
> pretty much bought anyway and for which I would have rather gotten half
> that much straight discount than this much rebate. (I've been doing a lot
> of system building and upgrade lately.)
Have they been pending longer than the promised periods?
Blinky the Shark
> Boron Elgar <boron_elg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Nah. It never takes longer than 4-5 minutes. It just doesn't.
> Sure it does. If you're doing it at your office or have an office at
> home, maybe not. But a lot of people have to rummage around to find
> envelopes and stamps and scissors and tape and a pen, to say nothing of
> a flat surface where they can spread out and get it done. And sometimes
> they have to find their old version of the product so they can send
> that in as part of the rebate condition. (Norton did this to me.) And
> they have to go somewhere to photocopy all the stuff so they can prove
> they really did do it right when the rejection letter comes. And if the
> resultant package seems like it might weigh more than an ounce, they've
> got to find a postal scale to weigh the thing on or suck it up and
> stick on an extra stamp.
The horror.
Ope, do you *really* think finding a stamp, an envelope, a pen and a
cutting tool is torture?
Opus the Penguin
Come on over to my cramped apartment where the four penguins live.
Not everybody is organized or even has the space or time or skills to
get that way. The rebate people count on this.
This kind of thing always takes me longer than it seems like it ought
to. And yes, I hate this kind of thing in a way that doesn't resonate
with you. Lots of people do. The rebate people count on this.
James Gifford
>
> Ope, do you *really* think finding a stamp, an envelope, a pen and a
> cutting tool is torture?
In my office, which is a little untidy but oriented towards writing,
publication, graphics work and digital photography, it takes me a good
twenty minutes to:
- Read the rebate form;
- Make copies of items that need copying;
- Find and cut off the right UPC tag or whatever;
- Fill out the form (I have rotten handwriting, especially at microscopic
font sizes);
- Tape everything to a sheet of paper, carefully, so that nothing is
covered or concealed and crucial little package bits don't get lost by
the procesing monkeys;*
- Make the additional record copy of the submission;
- Type up an envelope or mailing label and print it out;
- Stuff and stamp.
"Five minutes" almost certainly means you're going to screw up some
aspect of it, from writing the address info illegibly to failing to read
step 7a(1), which dictates some crucial detail, to failing to keep an
adquate copy of the submission.
*I once had a rebate invalidated because I put tape across a crucial part
of the receipt. It was a thermal paper document, and the tape somehow
acted to erase the type. I actually got the whole packet back - the
receipt was in perfect shape, except for the immaculately blank section
under the tape where either the datestamp or product ID line once was.
James Gifford
> I think getting them is the default, and doesn't actually take any
> luck. Have you *really* had that many rebates that didn't show up?
Yes. Of perhaps 20 in the past two years, at least two significant ones
never showed up and three others were rejected for reasons as stupid,
arbitrary and wrong as the current one. And at least two more were
rejected and had to be resubmitted. And I am (perhaps overly) *careful*
about my rebate submissions. I don't just scribble, stuff, mail and hope.
> Okay, I get it. You've had problems with one rebate.
No, many.
> IOW, you sent it in late, despite the cutoff undoubtedly being shown
> on the offer?
No, the offer extends until this December and the claim period into
January of '05. Unless they're now going to claim that's an error, in
which case I'm going to raise holy hell... as the rebate packages are
still on the shelf at CompUSA.
>> the net $10 or so I save over buying the non-rebated product next to
>> it. And it's gone up in smoke for an arbitrary, incorrect reason, not
>> because
> That reason is...er...actually reasonable enough that you didn't want
> to share it and weaken the rant?
As someone so recently said to me, how's about reading the fucking thread
before making stupid comments? I've established with great, even
excessive clarity what happened. For our viewers coming in late, the
stated rebate period is 7/03 through 12/04. All events depicted took
place in 01/04. The rebate was rejected for "Invalid Postmark Date."
Al Yellon
news:4022800E...@tamu.edu:
>
> But to answer your direct question, yes. I think the consumer portion
> of class action lawsuits are also a bit of a scam. Rarely do they
> "return dollars to claimants" directly. Or at least, that's been the
> case in the ten or so suits to which I've been a party. For example,
> the price fixing for airlines. You got a certificate good for 10% of
> the full fare of a plane ticket, or some such thing. I was in another
> where I had to keep filling out paperwork to stay in the suit.
> Somewhere in the third or fourth round I missed a deadline.
I agree with this completely. Even when there *has* been cash returned,
it's been less than $10, hardly worth the paperwork and time.
Al Yellon
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>> I think getting them is the default, and doesn't actually take any
>> luck. Have you *really* had that many rebates that didn't show up?
>
> Yes. Of perhaps 20 in the past two years, at least two significant
> ones never showed up and three others were rejected for reasons as
> stupid, arbitrary and wrong as the current one. And at least two more
> were rejected and had to be resubmitted. And I am (perhaps overly)
> *careful* about my rebate submissions. I don't just scribble, stuff,
> mail and hope.
It's possible the post office is at fault here, too. You have mentioned,
and it is indeed true, that the rebates often come in flimsy postcard form,
easy to throw out with junk mail, or even if you haven't done that, it
could have gotten lost or not delivered or stolen.
Boron Elgar
<n...@nitrosyncretic.kom> wrote:
>In my office, which is a little untidy but oriented towards writing,
>publication, graphics work and digital photography, it takes me a good
>twenty minutes to:
>
>- Read the rebate form;
>- Make copies of items that need copying;
>- Find and cut off the right UPC tag or whatever;
>- Fill out the form (I have rotten handwriting, especially at microscopic
>font sizes);
>- Tape everything to a sheet of paper, carefully, so that nothing is
>covered or concealed and crucial little package bits don't get lost by
>the procesing monkeys;*
>- Make the additional record copy of the submission;
>- Type up an envelope or mailing label and print it out;
>- Stuff and stamp.
>
>"Five minutes" almost certainly means you're going to screw up some
>aspect of it, from writing the address info illegibly to failing to read
>step 7a(1), which dictates some crucial detail, to failing to keep an
>adquate copy of the submission.
Truly, my home office is a jumble & a mess, but there are pens, tape,
envelopes & stamps at the ready, as well as some sort of box cutter or
knife that makes it easy to slice the UPC or equivalent. And either a
fax/copier or scanner to make a dupe of the paperwork. Honest, 5
minutes is tops.
May I recommend some donations to dubious charities that spend your
hard earned cash on fancy address labels that they send you every
other week in their search for additional funds. They fit perfectly on
a lot of those little rebate forms.
Boron
Al Yellon
news:Xns94867CE7E3C4Aop...@127.0.0.1:
> Al Yellon <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> I wonder why they won't accept a PO Box as an address. I have seen
>> this requirement as well, and it makes no sense.
>
> Sure it does. It helps them enforce the "one rebate per household"
> rule.
>
>> What also makes no sense is "one rebate per household". If I buy
>> two of the product, why can't I get two rebates?
>
> 1. Some of the rebated products are loss leaders.
>
> 2. Sometimes a big company will want to buy a hundred. In general,
> they'd buy the product anyway because they need it.
OK, this last I understand. But if a consumer wanted to buy *two* of them,
why not allow this, especially for something like a cordless mouse?
Al Yellon
> Al Yellon <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> I wonder why they won't accept a PO Box as an address. I have seen
>> this requirement as well, and it makes no sense.
>>
>> What also makes no sense is "one rebate per household". If I buy two
>> of the product, why can't I get two rebates?
>
> You just answered your own question. Us evil consumers might set up a
> slew of PO Boxes so that we can collect multiple $20 rebates on mice
> and monitors.
I suppose. However, I could always have my second rebate sent to my work
address.
>
> As for "one rebate per household," it's an indication that one goal of
> the rebate is to collect premium marketing data. Rebates are often
> offered as payment for the data, even if the targets are clueless
> about that...
I had never considered that, but you are probably right. I do try to avoid
putting my phone number on rebate forms unless it is *required*. It's easy
to throw out junk mail, not so easy to avoid junk phone calls, even though
I am on the new federal do-not-call list.
And I *NEVER* give an e-mail address on a rebate form. That's like inviting
someone to send you spam.
Al Yellon
news:slrnc25bpu....@thurston.blinkynet.net:
> Al Yellon wrote:
>
>> Example: I bought a Logitech Cordless Optical Mouse, which had a 20%
>> rebate (amounts to $10 at the price I paid). Still waiting for this
>> one, though it's only been four weeks.
>
> Most rebates I've read and/or used say something like a minimum of ten
> weeks. Four weeks is nothing, and I suspect yours said something like
> the ones with which I'm familiar.
That's correct, and normally, I'd say I do wind up getting them in 8-12
weeks.
Undoubtedly, that's because they have to be delivered by horse and carriage
to Lake In The Muck, Minnesota, where minimum-wage workers dressed like Bob
Cratchit are losing their eyesight every day trying to read those tiny
letters we all write on the forms.
Al Yellon
> part of the receipt. It was a thermal paper document, and the tape
> somehow acted to erase the type. I actually got the whole packet back
> - the receipt was in perfect shape, except for the immaculately blank
> section under the tape where either the datestamp or product ID line
> once was.
>
I'm amazed you got the packet back. On the one occasion that I had a rebate
(wrongly) rejected, all I got was a postcard. Luckily, the phone supervisor
at the 800 number given to call on the postcard looked up the record of
what I had sent in, agreed that I was right and I received my rebate within
a *week* of that phone call.
James Gifford
> Truly, my home office is a jumble & a mess, but there are pens, tape,
> envelopes & stamps at the ready, as well as some sort of box cutter or
> knife that makes it easy to slice the UPC or equivalent. And either a
> fax/copier or scanner to make a dupe of the paperwork. Honest, 5
> minutes is tops.
Maybe I'm just slow.
> May I recommend some donations to dubious charities that spend your
> hard earned cash on fancy address labels that they send you every
> other week in their search for additional funds. They fit perfectly on
> a lot of those little rebate forms.
The solution is not to buy rebated products, or to buy so that the rebate
is of no consequence. I try to hold firmly to this, and am happier when I
do.
James Gifford
> It's possible the post office is at fault here, too. You have
> mentioned, and it is indeed true, that the rebates often come in
> flimsy postcard form, easy to throw out with junk mail, or even if you
> haven't done that, it could have gotten lost or not delivered or
> stolen.
Oh, of course. Making the notices and checks extremely tiny and flimsy
increased the likelihood of loss or destruction while in the USPS's hands.
Gee, I bet they never thought of it! :)
Boron Elgar
Hershberger) wrote:
That float is true of any for any business that sends out payments,
whether they are to customers or other businesses.
If a person does not think the rebate forms amount is worth the time
and effort, don't bother. No one forces a customer to send in the
paperwork, and anyone who buys a product specifically FOR the rebate &
then doesn't mail in, is not a careful shopper.
I do understand anyone who is irate over a rebate that never shows up
or seems to be disallowed for the wrong reasons, but as we have seen
in this thread, a lot of people have had luck with them and some have
not. Shit happens.
Rebates are not inherently evil. They are not bait and switch, nor
scams. They are discounts that take some effort to acquire. SOme
folks have the time & desire to play with them, some don't, but it
cannot be a surprise to anyone that they take some effort to send in
proofs of purchase.
Boron
James Gifford
> I'm amazed you got the packet back.
This was a long time ago, maybe ten years or more.
I've also seen rebates that had fine print to the effect of "incomplete or
incorrect submissions will be discarded." In other words, you never even
get a chance to fix it.
I've also gotten notices that simply said, "Sorry, bud, ya fucked up!" with
no followup or correction invited or possible.
Scam. Scam scam scam scam scam.
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote in
> news:slrnc25bpu....@thurston.blinkynet.net:
>> Al Yellon wrote:
>>> Example: I bought a Logitech Cordless Optical Mouse, which had a 20%
>>> rebate (amounts to $10 at the price I paid). Still waiting for this
>>> one, though it's only been four weeks.
>> Most rebates I've read and/or used say something like a minimum of ten
>> weeks. Four weeks is nothing, and I suspect yours said something like
>> the ones with which I'm familiar.
> That's correct, and normally, I'd say I do wind up getting them in 8-12
> weeks.
Wouldn't really worry about the four weeks you have on that one, then.
> Undoubtedly, that's because they have to be delivered by horse and carriage
> to Lake In The Muck, Minnesota, where minimum-wage workers dressed like Bob
> Cratchit are losing their eyesight every day trying to read those tiny
> letters we all write on the forms.
That's probably down the street from New America(n), MN.
Al Yellon
> I've also gotten notices that simply said, "Sorry, bud, ya fucked up!"
> with no followup or correction invited or possible.
You really got a notice that said that? Now, that would almost be worth
losing the rebate if it were worded that way!
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
> Yes. Of perhaps 20 in the past two years, at least two significant
> ones never showed up and three others were rejected for reasons as
> stupid, arbitrary and wrong as the current one. And at least two more
> were rejected and had to be resubmitted. And I am (perhaps overly)
> *careful* about my rebate submissions. I don't just scribble, stuff,
> mail and hope.
Yep, you've had some bad luck, unless your very careful isn't quite up
to par.
>>> the net $10 or so I save over buying the non-rebated product next to
>>> it. And it's gone up in smoke for an arbitrary, incorrect reason,
>>> not because
>> That reason is...er...actually reasonable enough that you didn't want
>> to share it and weaken the rant?
> As someone so recently said to me, how's about reading the fucking
> thread before making stupid comments? I've established with great,
> even
Okay. Say, then, you just wasted some time this new explanation (which
you could've spend sending in some new rebates), since I'm complying
with your request and going upthread.
Blinky the Shark
> I bought on 01/05/04 and mailed the rebate on 01/08/04. Yesterday I got a
> little, grimy, half-readable postcard - o so easy to lose! - that said my
> rebate had been invalidated because of "Invalid Postmark Date."
Well, *that's* a pain in the ass, unless the purchase window actually
closed 12/31/03.
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>> Ope, do you *really* think finding a stamp, an envelope, a pen and
>> a cutting tool is torture?
> Come on over to my cramped apartment where the four penguins live.
> Not everybody is organized or even has the space or time or skills to
> get that way. The rebate people count on this.
Well, okay. Just figured that all of that stuff would be on or in,
like, you know, the desk.
I forgot to send in a $20 rebate on a fax machine, last fall. I don't
think I've ever done that, before. Nobody to blame but me: see "I
forgot".
James Gifford
>> I've also gotten notices that simply said, "Sorry, bud, ya fucked up!"
>> with no followup or correction invited or possible.
> You really got a notice that said that? Now, that would almost be worth
> losing the rebate if it were worded that way!
:) No, they were written in corporationese. Maybe: "We were unable to
complete your request for rebate on the Frimzit S-6000 because required
documentation was not provided."
Period, end, no description of what was missing, no useful reply address,
nothing. My first interpretation is more accurate.
Greg M
news:Xns94865789B358Bop...@127.0.0.1:
> Greg M <xxxo...@iBx.EER.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> I rather like Micro Center.
>>
>> A couple of their managers even breathe through their noses. :0
>
> Next you'll be claiming that when they scratch their butts, the hand
> stays outside the pants.
When you got cooties, yeah got cooties!
--
"Mountains cannot be surmounted
except by winding paths."
Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe
Opus the Penguin
> Opus the Penguin wrote:
>
>> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> Ope, do you *really* think finding a stamp, an envelope, a pen
>>> and a cutting tool is torture?
>
>> Come on over to my cramped apartment where the four penguins
>> live. Not everybody is organized or even has the space or time or
>> skills to get that way. The rebate people count on this.
>
> Well, okay. Just figured that all of that stuff would be on or
> in, like, you know, the desk.
Only one desk. I gave it to the boy for schoolwork. I have a table with
a computer and a scanner and a printer and a boombox and a big fan on
it.
Blinky the Shark
> publication, graphics work and digital photography, it takes me a good
> twenty minutes to:
> - Read the rebate form;
> - Make copies of items that need copying;
> - Find and cut off the right UPC tag or whatever;
> - Fill out the form (I have rotten handwriting, especially at microscopic
> font sizes);
Me to. Thus, I print.
In fact I *always* print, except for sigs. It's hardly slower, by now,
than cursive writing, after many years of this. Very brief example at
http://blinkynet.net/ -- that was done at my full writing speed; if I was
filling out a form, I'd take a *bit* more time for the critical data.
> - Tape everything to a sheet of paper, carefully, so that nothing is
> covered or concealed and crucial little package bits don't get lost by
> the procesing monkeys;*
Reading that with this...
> *I once had a rebate invalidated because I put tape across a crucial part
> of the receipt. It was a thermal paper document, and the tape somehow
> acted to erase the type. I actually got the whole packet back - the
> receipt was in perfect shape, except for the immaculately blank section
> under the tape where either the datestamp or product ID line once was.
...makes me glad I don't tape, staple or otherwise mutilate anything.
And so far nobody's written me back about anything having been lost.
I mentioned elsewhere that I have $260 in rebates out on an item, right
now -- I hope I'm not jinxing that by reporting that I've never had a
rebate problem. Urk.
Greg M
news:Xns9486A4D2B37...@130.133.1.17:
> I had never considered that, but you are probably right. I do try to
> avoid putting my phone number on rebate forms unless it is *required*.
> It's easy to throw out junk mail, not so easy to avoid junk phone
> calls, even though I am on the new federal do-not-call list.
>
Works like a charm. It goes on all required phone fields.
Greg M
news:Xns94866C00F89EEni...@216.168.3.44:
> Boron Elgar <boron_elg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I prefer the way Costco does it...you go online & type in your
>> membership number & the number of the receipt and they send you the
>> rebate.
>>
>> You can also call the 800 number and do it.
>>
>> Of course, this does not work with manufacturer rebates, but Costco's
>> are very often theirs.
>
> Which begs the question: why would Costco or any other seller bother
> to do this? Why not just offer the discount right there at purchase?
> Most of the legit arguments for rebates have something to do with
> putting the onus of the discount on the manufacturer, or permitting
> the mfr to collect buyer data, or forcing buyers to register software,
> or some such.
>
> If all Costco is doing is offering a discount, why screw around with
> the rebate process? Unless... it's to get the marketing benefit of the
> discount while ameliorating the bottom-line impact? [Which tattoos
> *S*C*A*M* on it, for me.]
If nothing else, there's allways a certain percentage of "not-takens" or
whatever. Probably in the 18-20% range. Same thing with gift $ cards. I'm
guessing, but the lost, unused percentage is probably 15-18% on those.
That's straight cash for the seller.
And of course, the f-ers have gotten real wise by small-printing those.
Void in 6 months or a year wording.
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>>> discount
>> What's B&S about:
>> Price 100
>> Rebate 25
>> Net Cost 75
> I think I've adequately explained it in other posts. Yes, you get the
> discount... eventually, if you're lucky, and if you put in a bunch of
> pointless, intentionally difficult effort. It looks as if my whopping $30
It's not "pointless effort" if it's what it takes to get the refund. The
point is the refund.
But there's no switch. The sign says this minus this equals this. What have
they "switched" you from? Nothing. What have they baited you with? The very
product you took home. I think you're just jumping on a buzzphrase, here, for
its negative value.
> discount on NAV is going to go up in smoke, after it was a factor that
> influenced me to buy that version (I would have bought a single-license
> copy for $40 instead of the dual at $60 were it not for the rebate), and
> after I've put in significant effort trying to claim the rebate. My time
> is valuable: that fifteen minutes (and more now, trying to counter their
> stupid postmark claim) is worth more, generally, than $20-30 total and
> the net $10 or so I save over buying the non-rebated product next to it.
> And it's gone up in smoke for an arbitrary, incorrect reason, not because
> I forgot to follow instructions and tape the UPC label upside down with a
> 2-degree tilt on the form with pink-tinted tape.
I agree that if you live up to all of the requirements (windows met,
proofs enclosed), you should get the rebate. I agree that you've had
some bad luck and/or not been as careful as you felt you were being
and/or have shot our own foot off by overproducing the whole operation
(like taping over the data[1]).
But I think calling rebates "bait and switch" is like calling
*retailing* bait and switch, because once in a while something you buy
breaks after that one-year warranty, and had you bought the equivalent
from the competitor, that one probably wouldn't have.
[1]I can see not thinking about the chemical reaction, but it's also not
*their* fault that the data was destroyed -- and if they put a "do not
apply adhesive tape over important data" warning in the instructions, I
have a feeling that you'd count that as "another unnecessary rule" (or
surely would have before you destroyed your own data that way).
Blinky the Shark
> The product I bought was NAV 2004, which is tightly locked and has to be
> activated within 15 days to keep working. This was a two-license deal,
You had to take the time to activate it for it to work?
Hey, that's just like a rebate -- there's *another*
bait-and-switch!!!!! you've got yourself into.
Greg M
> Greg M <xxxo...@iBx.EER.netcom.com> wrote:
>> Eeh, maybe. I think they have to a have a large lead time to obtain
>> their discounts. And that sort of works against them.
>
> That's part of it, but I've been a heavy, heavy Sam's shopper for six
> or seven years. (With a very large family, it's the only way to keep a
> household stocked economically. I used to go once a week to one about
> five miles away; then the tricky bastards found my home address and
> built one almost within walking distance... and next to the post
> office. I shop there 3 times a week or more. We also now have a Costco
> within about the same range.)
>
> I usually shop pretty carefully for tech gear, doing my online
> homework at a minimum. Sam's has rarely had current models in stock,
> always last- year's - not quite obsolete, but almost always
> superseded. Make a list next time and compare it to, say, Circuit
> City's stock, or look online at manufacturer's catalogs.
>
>> There's an Office Max next door that I bought ny HP laser printer
>> from. On sale, mind you, but about $60 less than what Sam's regularly
>> charged.
>
> Sam's is a good place to buy stuff, especially commodity stuff, and
> you'll rarely go too wrong buying printers, cartridges, and such from
> them. But a little homework and shopping for bigger items will pay off
> - they aren't a universal (heh heh) best-buy.
I agree. Sam's isn't *everything*, 'specially on comp hdwe. But
sometimes... they had some big ass hdds *with* an IDE cards that were
cheap.'Course, I didn't have any need of them, and I went the next day and
they were all gone. They've got comp books and (yeah) printer carts and
stuff.
But the scatch and dent/ returns stuff, Ooo-eee. (I've been known to
dumpster dive too). I still kick myself for not pulling a perfectly good-
looking refrigerator, with probably a lift truck dent in it. I've got a
crane on my truck. ;)
Blinky the Shark
> Just as a followup, if it's a typo, it's a doozy. The rebate form
> clearly says "12/31/04" and what's more, says that the rebate request
> must be postmarked by "1/31/05". So any claim that this was a
> year-error is laughable, even if they did intend it to be a shorter
> period.
As for my own comment on this being a window that ended 12/31/03, I
wasn't thinking about a printing error -- I was thinking about a reading
error, as I believe you've also been grousing about tiny printing.
James Gifford
> Hey, that's just like a rebate -- there's *another*
> bait-and-switch!!!!! you've got yourself into.
Go swim upthread, sharky-boy.
Greg Goss
>
>But the scatch and dent/ returns stuff, Ooo-eee. (I've been known to
>dumpster dive too). I still kick myself for not pulling a perfectly good-
>looking refrigerator, with probably a lift truck dent in it. I've got a
>crane on my truck. ;)
If I ever buy a truck with a crane on it and start eyeing dumpsters,
the truck will probably keep getting cut hydraulic hoses or some such.
Or she might just divorce me.
Greg M
news:kqn52018s5c3e7put...@4ax.com:
Well... I guess I could settle for one of those, instead of the truck. ;)
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>>James Gifford wrote and then snipped:
[about having to put a little effort into NortonAV to get *it*
activated, too]
>> You had to take the time to activate it for it to work?
>> Hey, that's just like a rebate -- there's *another*
>> bait-and-switch!!!!! you've got yourself into.
> Go swim upthread, sharky-boy.
Actually, I posted that after I'd already upthreadread[1] your
original explanation of This Week's Missing Rebate. :)
I stand by the comparison, above.
[1]Nice rhyme with Drop Dead Fred, a very forgettable film.
James Gifford
> Actually, I posted that after I'd already upthreadread[1] your
> original explanation of This Week's Missing Rebate. :)
>
> I stand by the comparison, above.
Actually, the box was very clearly labeled as to this regard - a large,
clear panel warned about the need to activate the utility after
installation. Anyone who has a problem with it is fully and clearly
forewarned. And the registration process took a matter of seconds -15? -
for each installation.
I appreciated both aspects very much, as I appreciate most aspects of
Symantec's mature and polished products. Their marketing division, now...
Al Yellon
> Al Yellon wrote:
>
>> Undoubtedly, that's because they have to be delivered by horse and
>> carriage to Lake In The Muck, Minnesota, where minimum-wage workers
>> dressed like Bob Cratchit are losing their eyesight every day trying
>> to read those tiny letters we all write on the forms.
>
> That's probably down the street from New America(n), MN.
I was being silly, but I think the place you are thinking of is Young
America, MN.
Al Yellon
> James Gifford wrote:
>
>> I bought on 01/05/04 and mailed the rebate on 01/08/04. Yesterday I
>> got a little, grimy, half-readable postcard - o so easy to lose! -
>> that said my rebate had been invalidated because of "Invalid Postmark
>> Date."
>
> Well, *that's* a pain in the ass, unless the purchase window actually
> closed 12/31/03.
Or, perhaps, another postal problem, where the postmark was unreadable by
the low-wage worker at the rebate slave desk.
Al Yellon
news:Xns9486C0130...@216.196.97.132:
> - Al Yellon <m...@privacy.net> - spluttered in
> news:Xns9486A4D2B37...@130.133.1.17:
>
>> I had never considered that, but you are probably right. I do try to
>> avoid putting my phone number on rebate forms unless it is *required*.
>> It's easy to throw out junk mail, not so easy to avoid junk phone
>> calls, even though I am on the new federal do-not-call list.
>>
>
> 1-800-555-1212
>
> Works like a charm. It goes on all required phone fields.
Thanks. I'll remember this.
Boron Elgar
<n...@nitrosyncretic.kom> wrote:
>Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>> Actually, I posted that after I'd already upthreadread[1] your
>> original explanation of This Week's Missing Rebate. :)
>>
>> I stand by the comparison, above.
>
>Actually, the box was very clearly labeled as to this regard - a large,
>clear panel warned about the need to activate the utility after
>installation. Anyone who has a problem with it is fully and clearly
>forewarned. And the registration process took a matter of seconds -15? -
>for each installation.
>
>I appreciated both aspects very much, as I appreciate most aspects of
>Symantec's mature and polished products. Their marketing division, now...
As Les said, though, the stuff is outsourced & you wound up at the
mercy of some dunderhead or smartass.
You can certainly let Symantec know what happened & I would be that if
they got kept getting complaints above the normal grumble level, that
the fulfillment company will hear about it, too.
Or better yet, tell them to call Rajeesh at Lexar.
Boron
tooloud
> On 5 Feb 2004 13:18:31 -0800, rrh...@acme.com (Richard R.
> Hershberger) wrote:
>
>> James Gifford <n...@nitrosyncretic.kom> wrote in message
>> news:<Xns9485B4EAF705Cni...@216.168.3.44>...
>>
>>> The *only* benefit to a rebate over a discount is that
>>> manufacturers know, absolutely for certain, that some significant
>>> portion
>>> of buyers will fail to claim the rebate.
>>
>> Don't forget the interest earned between the time the manufacturer
>> gets paid and the rebate check gets deposited. Whether this is
>> evidence that the whole deal is yet more of a scam or evidence that
>> the manufacturers have a reason for the whole exercise apart from
>> unclaimed rebates is left as an exercise for the reader.
>>
>> Richard R. Hershberger
>
>
> That float is true of any for any business that sends out payments,
> whether they are to customers or other businesses.
>
> If a person does not think the rebate forms amount is worth the time
> and effort, don't bother. No one forces a customer to send in the
> paperwork, and anyone who buys a product specifically FOR the rebate &
> then doesn't mail in, is not a careful shopper.
>
> I do understand anyone who is irate over a rebate that never shows up
> or seems to be disallowed for the wrong reasons, but as we have seen
> in this thread, a lot of people have had luck with them and some have
> not. Shit happens.
>
> Rebates are not inherently evil. They are not bait and switch, nor
> scams. They are discounts that take some effort to acquire. SOme
> folks have the time & desire to play with them, some don't, but it
> cannot be a surprise to anyone that they take some effort to send in
> proofs of purchase.
That's actually pretty refreshing, Boron. Someone that understands that
something requiring a voluntary effort on their own part should not be
considered a scam, bait-and-switch, etc. If you don't like how rebates work,
your best bet to ensure a happy life is to simply avoid them.
I personally don't care for rebates, so I don't purchase items that require
rebates, even though I can get an 80 GB hard drive for $19.99 this way...and
I'm OK with that.
> Boron
--
tooloud
Remove nothing to reply...
tooloud
> Boron Elgar <boron_elg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I prefer the way Costco does it...you go online & type in your
>> membership number & the number of the receipt and they send you the
>> rebate.
>>
>> You can also call the 800 number and do it.
>>
>> Of course, this does not work with manufacturer rebates, but Costco's
>> are very often theirs.
>
> Which begs the question: why would Costco or any other seller bother
> to do this?
Presumably they want to offer a great deal to the consumer.
> Why not just offer the discount right there at purchase?
Because they can't advertise as good of a deal that way. If stores stopped
offering rebates, rest assured we'd soon see bitching about why stuff costs
so much and "Remember rebates? Those things sure could make things cheap
because some idiots forgot to send them in. Not me though--I never forgot."
> Most of the legit arguments for rebates have something to do with
> putting the onus of the discount on the manufacturer, or permitting
> the mfr to collect buyer data, or forcing buyers to register
> software, or some such.
Or a couple of statisticians realizing that because X% of people forget to
send in those forms, you can actually sell an item for cost and still make a
profit.
> If all Costco is doing is offering a discount, why screw around with
> the rebate process? Unless... it's to get the marketing benefit of the
> discount while ameliorating the bottom-line impact? [Which tattoos
> *S*C*A*M* on it, for me.]
I think they do it because "Hey, we couldn't even begin to think of selling
this item so cheap normally, but if you're willing to send in some stuff to
us proving that you bought this item, we'll bank on the fact that a lot of
people will be too lazy to do the same, virtually ensuring that in the end,
you're paying the absolute bottom dollar for this thing" doesn't fit on the
signage.
>> James Gifford * FIX SPAMTRAP TO REPLY |
>> So... your philosophy fits in a sig, does it? |
>> Heinlein Pages Updated! See www.nitrosyncretic.com |
--
tooloud
> "David J. Martin" <david-j...@tamu.edu> wrote in
> news:4022551F...@tamu.edu:
>
>> I think such programs are at least part scam as they figure only some
>> percentage of the rebates will get turned in. That way they get the
>> come on from the rebate and only pay part of the price.
>
> There is no doubt this is true. The only question is, whether you
> call this idea a scam or not.
I suppose it would entirely depend if you're the kind of guy that falls into
the "remembers to send the rebate in" category or the "damn! I forgot
again!" category.
tooloud
>
>>
>> But to answer your direct question, yes. I think the consumer
>> portion of class action lawsuits are also a bit of a scam. Rarely
>> do they "return dollars to claimants" directly. Or at least, that's
>> been the case in the ten or so suits to which I've been a party.
>> For example, the price fixing for airlines. You got a certificate
>> good for 10% of the full fare of a plane ticket, or some such thing.
>> I was in another where I had to keep filling out paperwork to stay
>> in the suit. Somewhere in the third or fourth round I missed a
>> deadline.
>
> I agree with this completely. Even when there *has* been cash
> returned, it's been less than $10, hardly worth the paperwork and
> time.
I recently got more than $60 back from a class-action against Progressive
Auto Insurance. The lawyer did all the homework for me and basically said
"We show you had policies from this date to this date. Is this true?" and I
checked "Yes", signed my name, and deposited my check when it came a couple
months later.
Incredible Rhyme Animal
>Presumably they want to offer a great deal to the consumer.
Well, I guess, sure, but I think they're counting on a certain portion of the
purchasers forgetting or just never bothering to send in the rebate at all, or
doing so in such a way the company doesn't have to send back their money, as
opposed to just discounting the merchandise when it's originally sold.
I don't exactly call it a scam, but I don't think you can deny that's part of
the business model under question, either. You know, the idea of getting much
of the benefit of discounting the price without actually having to make good on
the offer, or at least not totally so.