Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Sells IPAQs for $10
TomHoward writes "In a pretty huge blunder, amazon.co.uk have put the HP IPAQ H1910 (RRP about £300) for sale for just over £7.32 (plus postage and packing). It's very hard to get through to their site right now, but if you're quick you can have a look at their blunder here." Don't bother clicking through, Amazon has taken the items down.
Bill
bamph
So, as this is one of the most pointless articles you could ever imagine (Amazon puts wrong price on thing, pulls thing, Slashdot posts article about it), what shall we all talk about instead?
I mean, go ahead and try to discuse this if you want, but what are you going to do; post witty quips about the prices of things? Anecdotes about how you once ordered something at the wrong price, and it wasn't delivered? Seriously, what is there to discuss?
Anyone got any interesting and funny tech anecodotes they want to share? Are we at war yet? What's the weather like in your part of the world? Some new trolling material? Anyone actually paying for this crap?
Ah, but that was under US law. This is under UK law.
Though I still doubt it'll be honoured.
What if you were going to sell your $12000 car and the ad in the newspaper printed $1200 by mistake?
Would you sell it for $1200? Doubtful. I love hypocrites who say a business should do what they wouldn't do themselves.
What if it were a company you owned stock in and you were going to lose part of your dividend? Bet you'd change your mind then too.
A company has no reason to "honor" mistakes, that's why they print those little disclaimers about erronious listings.
Surely this isn't quite right - it's the same in the UK - but the shopkeeper is not obliged to sell you anything at all.
I.E. Can't they just refuse to sell the item at *ANY* price...
Mistakes like these are out there - you just have to find it and hope the vendor will go along with it. I have a friend who got a flat panel LCD monitor from Amazon that usually goes for about $700, for $150. Amazon actually honored the transaction!
The differences with this story are probably (1) the price markdown to 2% is way too drastic for a vendor to honor (that would bring the term "bargain hunter" to a whole new level), and (2) if you find a minor blunder to take advantage of, sharing the love with the rest of world probably isn't a good idea. At least not before you get the product! (-;
I remember that because I also placed an order for a $99 RCA 36" TV from Amazon and received a letter back from them stating that they are under no obligation to honor "price mistakes".
Could someone explain why Amazon and other on-line retailers are not held to the same standards as their brick-n-mortar counterparts with respect to this? It still sounds like "bait-n-switch" to me...
Chris
Come on, if it's an honest mistake and you are an honest person, why would you insist on robbing them?
This has to be the stupidest and most misleading Slashdot story I have seen in ages. Amazon is not selling IPAQs for $10 as the headline read. You wrote the headline, so if they are selling them at that price, then let's see a shipping receipt, michael. The headline should have been Amazon Typo Discovered.
This is just journalistic sensationalism and Amazon should sue Slashdot for publishing something that misleading and damaging. Now Amazon customer service will have to deal with every bottom-feeder that read the story on Slashdot and then demanded an IPAQ for $10. The end result: No one gets an IPAQ for $10 and Amazon just raises prices to cover the expense of handling the mess that Slashdot's inaccurate headline generated.
About two years ago Amazon (US) accidentaly put a book for sale at 10 cents. I ordered it for that price and got it delivered without problems.
Perhaps it's only recently they've changed their price policy? Ff you've got a receipt with the "faulty" price and money drawn from your account they should also deliver it. Their mistake.
Ciryon
imo Bush needs to be ousted from power as well, but that will happen before too long anyway. (I mean seriously, this guy starts off by raping the environment and finishes by raping foreign countries...)
Either 1) you are lying and you are not an American or 2) you are an idiot that doesn't understand how democracy works in America.
A president can not be "ousted" period. There are no recall procedures for federal offices. A president can be impeached and then forced from office, but considering everything the president does has to be passed by the majority of our elected representatives (and often by 60 in the senate) then he is acting in concert with the people. A 'high crime' has to be committed to begin an impeachment. There has been no crime whatsoever.
The vast majority of people agree with President Bush. Period. All this FUD about most disagreeing with him is just that, FUD. He has enjoyed the highest approval ratings in history. Higher than FDR. (read your history). You may disagree, and that is fine, but you need to clearly realize that you are in the minority. You have the right to disagree. This doesn't make your FUD true.
As to raping the environment, this is so unfounded its rediculous. This is straight out of the Democratic handbook. Unsubstantiated and FUD. Anwr? Yes, we should drill there. Look at the results of drilling in other areas of Alaska. So far, the most damage it has done is to create a population explosion of carabu. Really. Once again, check your facts. I could go on and on, but it really doesn't matter. You don't care about the truth.
But then again, it doesn't matter to people like you. You are not anti-war. You are not pro-environment, you are just anti-Bush. Facts don't matter. Reality doesn't matter. You just are so filled with hate for this man that no logic, facts or reality could ever matter.
Oh, for the record. I didn't vote for Bush. That doesn't make him a bad person and doesn't make everything he does wrong. In retrospect, I wish I had voted for him. I still don't agree with him all the time, but I respect him and believe he is doing what he feels is the morally correct thing to do.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
As a US citizen (stop booing), why is a ruthless dictator in Bagdad, any of my business. Two hundred and some odd years ago, we had a similar problem with a dictator here. We kicked his ass out of our country. Yes, we had help, but the key is that we wanted it bad enough that we took the risk. We did it. We did not have some other country decide it was time for us to change our government.
I do not have a problem with the fighting for what I believe in, but what exactly is it that we are supposed to believe in, in this situation? Yes Saddam and his ilk (yes I used a word that I am not sure what it means) are sadistic SOBs, but what makes him any different that 100 other tyrants around the world.
Are we trying to prevent future terrorism or Saddam's support of terrorism? I believe in America we call this prior restraint. If there are crimes that Saddam has committed against us, let's define them.
Are we punishing Saddam for 9/11? It is relatively common knowledge that Saddam had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. Ossama Bin Laden thinks Saddam is almost as evil as he thinks we are.
Are we trying to get rid of the newly coined WMD? Then we probably need to go after other unstable governments that have them, like India, Pakistan, Korea, and Russia. Where to we get off telling people that can't have the same toys we have anyway? Who the hell do we think we are?
Do we need more oil? Then, raise the price of gas. I am happy to pay more at the pump, if it prevents people from dying.
Why is W declaring war on this guy? I thought only congress had the ability to declare war. Yes, Yes. War Powers Act...yadda..yadda..yadda..blah..blah..blah. The War Powers act was meant to be used in a situation like Peal Harbor, where we are attacked outright. It was not meant to be used so that the President could kill whoever he wanted for 90 days.
What ever happened to snipers? Why are we sending in a quarter of a million soldiers to wreak havoc on this country? If the real goal is to get rid of Saddam, wouldn't six SEALS and a couple of sniper rifles to just as good a job for less money.
Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels.