Slashdot Mirror


1300 Unopened Fry's Rebate Forms Found In Dumpster

blackmonday writes "The Consumerist is reporting a find of 1,300 unopened rebate submissions in a dumpster belonging to Vastech, a rebate processor hired by Fry's Electronics. Vastech's management blames it on a bad employee."

433 comments

  1. Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by eldavojohn · · Score: 2, Funny
    Excerpt from the enclosed rebates:

    Congratulations on the purchase of your new Intel Core 2 Duo! To apply to recieve your $100.00 rebate in 6 to 8 weeks, please enclose your original reciept, this completed form & the original UPC from the product in a self addressed stamped envelope and send it to:

    INTEL CORE 2 DUO REBATE OFFER LONG NAMED CLEARINGHOUSE PLACE
    c/o Vastech
    888 Bestgate Road
    Suite # The Dumpster Behind Denny's
    Annapolis, MD 21401 Yeah, be sure to check the address on those things. Also, I believe the Vatican uses Vastech to handle all their "Children's Letters to God" mail.
    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Excerpt from the enclosed rebates:

      Congratulations on the purchase of your new Intel Core 2 Duo! To apply to recieve your $100.00 rebate in 6 to 8 weeks, please enclose your original reciept, this completed form & the original UPC from the product in a self addressed stamped envelope and send it to:

      INTEL CORE 2 DUO REBATE OFFER LONG NAMED CLEARINGHOUSE PLACE
      c/o Vastech
      888 Bestgate Road
      Suite # The Dumpster Behind Denny's
      Annapolis, MD 21401
      Yeah, be sure to check the address on those things. Also, I believe the Vatican uses Vastech to handle all their "Children's Letters to God" mail.

      Actually it was a bad employee. The employee was supposed to shread them first.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by hpotterjr · · Score: 2, Funny

      WOW! I guess the dumpster was full of frys.

    3. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      To shreds you say?

    4. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by maybenot · · Score: 5, Informative

      I once had a boss that said dont pay the rebates unless they write or call to complain. Nice ehh? I did what I was told, I needed the paycheck.

    5. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by TheLink · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Good at following orders?

      What are you doing working for a rebate company? Try the Mafia next time, even if they are a bunch of crooks they have some honour. :).

      --
    6. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, you still broke the law. How long ago was it that you particpated in fraud?

    7. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by purduephotog · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've learned: This time I took PHOTOS of all my rebates before they were stuffed in the letter. I like hearing that they didn't receive what they needed because now I can fax them a photo with all the material in it...

    8. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by slashbob22 · · Score: 2, Funny

      To shreds you say? Well, how is Vastech holding up?

      To Shreds you say?
      --
      Proof by very large bribes. QED.
    9. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by PitaBred · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've learned even better: Stop dicking with mail-in rebate bullshit, and buy my stuff online. I'm not an animal to be trained to jump through hoops, thank you very little.

    10. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by wizzahd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because no online store offers mail-in rebates.

    11. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      The base price online is still MUCH better than the normal retail price at a big-box type store. Even if I don't ever get the rebate, I still feel I've paid a fair price, and it's HALF as much from newegg as it is from Best Buy. 1/3rd the price if I get the rebate. I win either way, and I don't feel like I have to "recover" any money from when I paid too much for the product in the first place. Rebates are a scam, and I never buy a product based on the price after a rebate.

    12. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by spun · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm not an animal to be trained to jump through hoops, thank you very little. Not yet married, eh?
      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    13. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Not yet married, eh?
      Dude, he's posting on Slashdot. What do you think?
    14. Re:Fry's Merely Chose the Wrong Company by Trogre · · Score: 1

      I think you've just summed up what is wrong with our culture, and why nonsense like this goes on unchecked.

      I'm willing to bet your boss was doing what he thought he needed to do to get a paycheck too.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  2. Bad employee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Obviously a good employee wouldn't have gotten caught!

    1. Re:Bad employee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      There was SUCH a long line at the shredder that day. I really needed to get down to the pub for a few pints.

    2. Re:Bad employee by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      There was SUCH a long line at the shredder that day. I really needed to get down to the pub for a few pints.

      Notice it's Some guy, or some lazy employee, or some relative, but no names. Then, the manager's name was Tan, perhaps the employee's name was Sum Gai, or Sum Laytse-Emploie. His credibility stinks. Again with the, complaints have been coming in for ages, but he appears to have no oversight of these things and suddenly their all found in the trash. Yuh. The cheque is in the mails.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:Bad employee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Notice it's Some guy, or some lazy employee, or some relative, but no names.

      Also, notice that in TFA, it's a 'lazy employee', in keeping with th Chinese ethic that if you're not working yourself to death, you aren't shit.

    4. Re:Bad employee by SnapShot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A good employee would have opened the envelopes, copied all the personal information into the junk mail, telemarketing, and spam lists and THEN shredded the rebate forms.

      What do you think these rebates are for, anyway?

      --
      Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
    5. Re:Bad employee by amuro98 · · Score: 0, Troll

      That's Japanese work ethic. The Chinese work ethic is "cut as many corners as possible, then apologize when caught."

  3. a bad employee... by SC-James · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How does someone not notice when you walk out to the dumpster with 1300 envelopes?

    1. Re:a bad employee... by orkysoft · · Score: 0, Redundant

      The employee was supposed to burn them and SAY he dumped them in a dumpster.

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    2. Re:a bad employee... by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Look at the picture in the article. 1300 envelopes actually isn't that big. You could put them in a medium sized box and I'm sure no one would notice if you tossed an old box into the trash.

    3. Re:a bad employee... by bean123456789 · · Score: 1

      He was incognito, 1 per smoke break.

  4. Executives by Das+Auge · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Executives are employees, too.

  5. So that's why by thrashee · · Score: 5, Funny

    So that's why it takes so long to get rebates back! And here I was blaming the post office.

    1. Re:So that's why by Joebert · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, if they'd have kept their mouth shut it could have been assumed that a new postal employee just wasn't familiar with what a mailbox looks like, or a genius.

      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    2. Re:So that's why by Octopus · · Score: 1

      Steps to get your rebate:
      - Fill out this form.
      - Send it in to Vastech.
      - Vastech will bury it in a landfill in Maryland.
      - The rebate form will die and go to Heaven.
      - There it will whisper your wish for a rebate directly to God.
      - You will receive your rebate when the Lord gets around to it, you greedy mortal.

  6. Re:Maybe you should have done a fucking search of by you-nix-boy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh good! A member of the Fry's customer service team has joined the discussion!

    --
    --- Pork is not a verb.
  7. Smackdown by Stanistani · · Score: 0

    Bad employee! Bad employee! No biscuit!

    1. Re:Smackdown by Flipao · · Score: 1, Interesting

      lol, that's exactly what I thought when I read that. What the hell does "bad" employee mean anyway?

    2. Re:Smackdown by JohnnyGTO · · Score: 1, Funny

      Dang I was going to do the no soup thing.... awww I never get to have fun!

      --
      Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
    3. Re:Smackdown by Cafe+Alpha · · Score: 1

      You can still do the no soup thing.

    4. Re:Smackdown by binarybum · · Score: 1

      it means he should have recycled them.

      --
      ôó
    5. Re:Smackdown by JohnnyGTO · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh Cool! BAD Employee, NO SOUP for YOU!!!

      --
      Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
    6. Re:Smackdown by cHiphead · · Score: 1

      We need a new mod level, (Score: -1, Seinfeld Reference)

      Cheers. ;)

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    7. Re:Smackdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In this case, "Bad Employee" translates to "Plausible Deniability". Unfortunately for this clown, this involves the U.S. mail which puts him up for Federal mail fraud charges.

      Can't wait to see the finger-pointing when Mr. "Bad Employee" gets put on the witness stand.

    8. Re:Smackdown by JohnnyGTO · · Score: 1

      But it was the only episode I liked!

      --
      Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
    9. Re:Smackdown by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      Yes, but you still like one episode too many.

    10. Re:Smackdown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Starting Score: 1 point
      Moderation -1
          100% Overrated

      Mod Rating: Cowardly.

  8. That's the reason by Judg3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ..that I don't send in rebates any more unless they are $50 or higher. Seems like 9 times out of 10 I never hear from the company again if the rebate is a smallish amount - now I know why.

    It truly is brilliant though, how hard would you try to get a small $3.50 rebate back, but it was the reason you picked that product over a competitor. So they win twice, once on getting your business and again when they don't send you the check and you don't really care.

    --
    Looking for hardware (Currently need: Large Etch-a-Sketch) Have one? See my journal!
    1. Re:That's the reason by Mattintosh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't buy things with mail-in rebates. If retailers want to play games, they can find someone else. If they want me to buy stuff, they can put the real price on the shelf instead of the after-rebate price. Instant rebates are a different matter...

    2. Re:That's the reason by EvanED · · Score: 1

      Maybe what we need is to actually start trying to hold companies to account.

      I've been documenting whenever I send one in (photocopies of all the forms and such), I should start paying attention to whether I get them back.

    3. Re:That's the reason by gravos · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When a manufacturer decides they want to offer a rebate, they almost always come to some agreement with a third party (like Rebate-zone) who prints up forms, handles submissions, and mails out checks. Typically I think this agreement involves a lump-sum payment based on the number of rebates that could potentially be redeemed (but less than [number of rebates] * [rebate value] because a significant number will never be mailed in).

      Surely you see the conflict of interest here. The rebate operation has no business with you, the customer, except that they have to mail you part of their lump sum if you mail in your goodies. They don't really care if they make you angry, because you are not their customer. They are "Rebate Operation Inc.", and "Sony" or "Toshiba" or whoever the heck you actually bought your product from is who gives them their dough. Since they couldn't care less if they inconvenience you, the guy who is trying to steal a chunk of their change, it is exceedingly common that you will get a rebate denial with some bogus explanation like "No UPC included" or "Receipt illegible" or the world-famous "Postmark date incorrect" even if you've followed the directions perfectly and submitted well before the deadline.

      These headaches, combined with the possibility of the postal service losing your check, make it largely worthwhile to ignore any product with a mail-in rebate unless you are willing to pay the full price.

    4. Re:That's the reason by Fozzyuw · · Score: 1

      That's the reason that I don't send in rebates any more unless they are $50 or higher. Seems like 9 times out of 10 I never hear from the company again if the rebate is a smallish amount - now I know why.
      It truly is brilliant though, how hard would you try to get a small $3.50 rebate back, but it was the reason you picked that product over a competitor. So they win twice, once on getting your business and again when they don't send you the check and you don't really care.

      Sorry to hear about your rebate problems. I, nor my father (who's a real rebate and coupon junky), have never had a problem getting ours back, be it $5, $10, or $100. I've recently gotten probably over $400 in rebates the last few months. With new AT&T DSL service, I had to mail back a postcard with a sticker attached. That was $50. Then they gave me another $50 rebate for some reason. And then offered me another $25 rebate. All of which I received. My fiancee just got back a $5 rebate for some pet food or something.

      Though, I recall seeing a breakdown of rebate returns based on rebate price and I think anything under $50 was like less than 20% return rate. Even at $100, the return rate was like 50%. I found that pretty amazing and hard to believe. Though, I cannot recall the study. I think it was a rebate firm trying to get some business from a company and tempting them the same way you point out.

      Here's an interesting Wikipedia page.

      Cheers,
      Fozzy

      --
      "The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
    5. Re:That's the reason by dougmc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I should start paying attention to whether I get them back. Yes, you should. I've had a number of cases where I didn't get my rebates, and so I called them, and either 1) they magically found it, or 2) they wanted me to send in copies of my copies, and I got my rebate. I've only had a handful of cases where I didn't get my rebates, and it couldn't be blamed on me (like sending it in too late.)


      Personally, I keep an Excel (well, oocalc) spreadsheet of all my rebates, what, where, how much, when sent in, when to check, when received, etc. It's quite helpful. (Wow! I just added up my `how much' field -- $1723.)

    6. Re:That's the reason by The+-e**(i*pi) · · Score: 1

      I do the same, unless the pre-rebate price is lower, which it usually is not.

    7. Re:That's the reason by Gospodin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They don't really care if they make you angry, because you are not their customer.

      Well, they should care, because if they make me angry at the company that hired them, it's less likely that company will hire them again. The company I am doing business with usually has some interest in good PR.

      Incidentally, I bought a printer in May that came with a $100 mail-in rebate. I just received the check this week. I had written that one off a month ago!

      --
      ...following the principles of Heisenburger's Uncertain Cat...
    8. Re:That's the reason by hedwards · · Score: 1

      You want the best buy rebates then. On the occasions where they aren't instant, they allow you to do them entirely electronically. Of course you have to wait a minimum of 30 days before they send them out, but you can track them electronically the entire time without having to worry about them being lost in the mail.

      The only exception is when they are manufacturers rebates, in which case they may or may not be electronic. I know that there are a few outfits right now that handle shortcutting rebates for manufacturers.

    9. Re:That's the reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've always thought that rebates are a scam and ignored them when pricing an item, and I know quite a few other people who feel the same way. I'm honestly a little surprised that there haven't been more fraud or deceptive advertising charges over rebates - since this seems to be fairly common knowledge.

    10. Re:That's the reason by IdleTime · · Score: 1

      One word to describe the whole mail-in rebate system: FRAUD!

      Which probably explains why the rest of the 1st world don't have anything like it. It would not even be legal where I come from. All rebates to be given, has to be included in the price displayed and payed in the store. This is nothing but a cheap way for spammers to buy verified mailing addresses and phone numbers. If they want to give you a rebate, take it off the price and give everyone the same rebate without additional work.

      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    11. Re:That's the reason by NotPeteMcCabe · · Score: 5, Funny

      No offense, but if you have to add up your "how much" field, you may want to get a new spreadsheet.

    12. Re:That's the reason by ShakaUVM · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah, I handle all the rebates for our company, and even with all the correct documentation, the return rate on rebates is around 50%. When you call, they magically start processing it.

      I think the entire industry is a scam, though I have a friend that works in it, and says that they, like casinos, don't need to cheat to make money.

    13. Re:That's the reason by mh1997 · · Score: 1

      I don't send in rebates any more unless they are $50 or higher.
      Which is exactly why retailers/OEMs will continue with rebates. They work on a large percentage of the population and almost an equally large number won't send in the rebate forms.
    14. Re:That's the reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how many cycles did you burn keeping track of all those small rebates? Not just filling out the forms, but mailing, checking, calling....Seems it's nearing the old days of the Publisher's Clearinghouse Sweepstakes where people meticulously read all the instructions, placed the stickers in all of the critical spots, and mailed back the forms in hopes of possibly making it to the next round of the same old shit.

    15. Re:That's the reason by InvalidError · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Mail sometimes gets legitimately lost.

      Given the expenses incurred when applying for rebates, I have made it my policy not to buy into rebated items unless the list price matches the normal list prices of no-rebate stores. Another reason I rarely bother hunting for rebates is that they are often precursors to price reductions and new product introductions. For technology products, I generally consider them as blinking and screaming "End-Of-Life / Discontinued" tags, indicators that I should avoid buying the stuff or at least be particularly wary.

      I have applied for rebates only twice ($15 on a $40 DI-524 and $45 on a $100 Audigy 2ZS) and got both back 2-3 months later. In both cases, the counter prices were already lower than other stores and in line with what I considered to be a fair price so I did not care too much whether or not the rebates came back... but I certainly would have made it a point to make it known to as many potential customers as possible if they did not.

    16. Re:That's the reason by vondo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, they should care, because if they make me angry at the company that hired them, it's less likely that company will hire them again.

      These rebate companies bid for the original company's business by emphasizing their low payout rates. If the finances work the way the OP suggests, then the company that rejects the most can underbid the competition. If the manufacture pays the rebate plus processing fee, it's also less expensive for the manufacturer.

      I buy things with rebates, notably Canon camera gear where the rebate can be hundreds of dollars. But, I always make sure I'll be happy with my purchase if I get bupkis. And, for these large rebates save all the documentation and fight like hell if they try to deny you. You will get it eventually.

    17. Re:That's the reason by LordSnooty · · Score: 1

      Thankfully rebates are rare here in the UK and I'm glad we never took up such an unnecessary system. What really is the point? Just sell the product at a marginally lower price, you crooks.

    18. Re:That's the reason by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      I bought some hardware a couple of years ago, and the rebate form clearly stated that only originals of the UPC sticker would be accepted ... no copies. So I sent in the original. Waited a few weeks, no rebate. So I call up and complain, "we'll check it out and get back to you." I get a letter in the mail a few days later saying to send in my UPC sticker ... only originals, no copies would be accepted.

      Idiots.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    19. Re:That's the reason by griffjon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is a better strategy, nonetheless, if the mail-in is high enough, I'll go through with it. Filing Better Business Bureau complaints is a great way to get service.

      --
      Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
    20. Re:That's the reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've had two that I followed the instructions to a T and got screwed over. (Of course, lazy ass me hasn't bothered to nag them for the $5-$10 I'm due.)

      One was for a a pair of Belkin surge supressors, advertisement clearly stated buy two, get $20 back, even the rebate forms I believe (I'll have to check.) Couple weeks later I get a pair of cards, one for $10, the other stating it's only one rebate claim per household. (And to top it off, I never got around to cashing that rebate, so it's already expired.)

      The other was for a SD card to USB converter by Digital Concepts. I noticed the rebate form only asked for the form itself and the UPC code, but not the store receipt. So I tested the waters and sent in exactly what they asked for. Few weeks later I got an email denying the rebate since I didn't include the receipt, but if I sent it in now I could still get it. So I sent that in with a friendly note stating that I indeed followed their original instructions. Never did get my 5 bucks due.

      That aside, I've had a good record of getting all my due rebates over the years. But as a sort-of rule, I now avoid anything with a rebate. If the advertised price isn't what I'm paying in the store, I'll wait for another sale to come along.

      ...and don't bother with Digital Concepts, their stuff is butt ugly, and the cover cap on my device broke off less than a week after I purchase.

    21. Re:That's the reason by Mantorp · · Score: 1

      My health insurance company randomly won't pay medical bills hoping that I'll pay them without paying attention. Not sure who I hate more insurance companies or rebate processors. That should be a poll.

    22. Re:That's the reason by EdZep · · Score: 1

      I've enjoyed reading in this thread about rebate operations. I'm sure it helps explain the one rebate problem I've ever had -- out of dozens and dozens. I had bought a nice garage door from the big home improvement chain. The manufacturer was offering graduated rebates -- $50 up to $200, depending on the model of door. Mine qualified for a $150 rebate in the form of an in-store gift card, which would be fine, since I would be buying more stuff there.

      When I got the rebate, it was for $50. I was pissed, and I would do anything to avoid going through telephone hell. So, I went to the customer service counter at the store. The manager went through hell for me. Considering the difficulties he had, with some pull and ready references, I know I would have had more trouble.

      When I got the additional rebate card, it was for $50, leaving me still short $50. I spoke to the manager again. Of course, he didn't want to go through telephone hell again, so he gave me a $50 card on the spot.

      Fortunately, the door was worth it, and it was competitively priced even before the rebate. $150 was a significant bonus.

    23. Re:That's the reason by brre · · Score: 1

      I agree. You want me to buy, mark the price down, honor the markdown at the counter, and we're done. Nice and simple. You want to play games with mail-in coupons, rebates, other complications: I won't buy even if the un-rebated price was still lower than the other product. I'm that tired of stupid games.

    24. Re:That's the reason by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Idiots. They're not idiots. They're fraudsters. And you got taken. Don't purchase products because of the rebate price. Too much hassle, and just encourages fraud. If they really want to mark down the price, they can do so at the register, not via some mail-in bullshit.
    25. Re:That's the reason by fishbowl · · Score: 1


      >I think the entire industry is a scam

      Of course it is. If it weren't, a competitor could simply mark his price point slightly below the others' rebate point.
      If the system was legitimate, they could just as easily give you $30 off the price as a $30 rebate.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    26. Re:That's the reason by seebs · · Score: 1

      Don't be silly.

      Record them when you send them, scan them, and call in once or twice if needed -- and sue if needed.

      If even a few people do this, the cost of screwing around gets huge, and rebate processors shape up.

      BTW, the thing about "lost, damaged, or misdirected mail"? Last I heard, it was up to them to prove that they didn't get it; the law assumes that, if you deposited something in the mail, it arrived. Bad luck for them.

      --
      My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
    27. Re:That's the reason by Mr+Tall · · Score: 1

      I've never seen this sort of scam in the UK - is it even legal here? Am I reading this right - you buy a product at a certain price, then you have to send a form away to get some money back? Sounds ridiculous!

    28. Re:That's the reason by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      "No offense, but if you have to add up your "how much" field, you may want to get a new spreadsheet."
      It seems it wasn't a problem with the application. It was an IO error ;-)

      Hint to the OP: The spreadsheet will automagically calculate that field for you if you work out one problem with your setup. The problem is between the keyboard and chair. g00d 1uck
      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    29. Re:That's the reason by Kumiorava · · Score: 1

      No mail just don't get lost, that is very very rare. Post office gets too much bad press because of these shady practises in rebate. It's like blaming the ISPs when half of the PUG group gets DC in WOW once second boss is down and looted.

    30. Re:That's the reason by NMerriam · · Score: 2, Insightful

      they, like casinos, don't need to cheat to make money.


      It took a LOOOONG time for casinos to learn that there was more money to be made over the long term from unquestionable integrity than there was from rigging games. I don't believe the rebate industry has learned this yet, because it's too tempting to just sit on a few percent more of the rebates and add them to profit. If someone calls to complain, process theirs, but most people will never call.
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    31. Re:That's the reason by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      "a few percent more of the rebates"

      ^few^50

      =)

    32. Re:That's the reason by massysett · · Score: 1

      Wow, that is crazy meticulous.

      I think rebates are such a scam that I no longer figure them into purchase decisions. I assume they will never be redeemed. That is, if item X costs $50 with no rebate, and similar item Y costs $50.01 with a $30 rebate, I will buy item X.

      Sometimes under this analysis I still end up buying the item with the rebate. Then I *might* send the forms in, depending on the value of the rebate and how much of a hassle it is (how much Xeroxing, cardboard-box cutting, writing on small slick pieces of paper is involved, etc.) After that I do not keep track of the rebate at all. I just don't want to deal with them at all, but I figure the odds of it getting redeemed are good enough that I will spend a few minutes on paperwork if there's enough money involved. But that few minutes is my limit.

      I admire your tenacity, but I am just too jaded about rebates to ever give them more than a few minutes of my time.

    33. Re:That's the reason by jridley · · Score: 1

      Actually, I do dozens of rebates a year, from $5 to $200, and I keep track of all of them, and I have never been stiffed on one in the last 5 years since I've been keeping track. They have all come back. Probably easily over 100 rebates.

    34. Re:That's the reason by lazy_playboy · · Score: 1

      Lots of mobile phone contracts have cash-back offers here in the UK. You need to send off 3 or 4 months worth of phone bills to get the cheque, obviously they're relying on people forgetting. Canon have done several cashback offers on their eos Digital cameras in the UK too.

    35. Re:That's the reason by barzok · · Score: 1

      Buy at Staples and use their EasyRebates program. You submit the paperwork to Staples online (IIRC you only needed a code from your receipt, that was it), they advance you the money within a couple weeks and then Staples goes to the manufacturer and gets the money from them.

    36. Re:That's the reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is a rebate?
      We don't have such a thing in Finland..

    37. Re:That's the reason by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 1

      Surely you see the conflict of interest here. The rebate operation has no business with you, the customer, except that they have to mail you part of their lump sum if you mail in your goodies.
      The solution to this is easy. Instead of outlawing rebates, congress should pass a Sarbanes-Oxley like law that makes it very expensive to do the acounting for rebates. The processing company should be criminally liable for not honoring rebates, and the original company should be on the hook if the outsourcer they hired goes bankrupt. Also, if a form isn't filled out correctly, they should use their dime to get the right information. A simple law like that would end all but the most expensive rebates. (As a side note, look at automotive rebates. The last & only time I had one, I didn't have to fill out and send in anything, the dealership handled it. Why do the offer them then, you ask? Because they don't want to devalue their cars. Using a rebate you can sell the customer a $30,000 car for only $25,000 and the customer can still think he's driving a $30,000 car. If supply dries up, the car company can quietly reduce or end the rebate program, and make $30,000 on each car.
      --
      All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
    38. Re:That's the reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Mail sometimes gets legitimately lost."

      Sure. Junk mail mysteriously arrives in my mailbox on time every week in droves yet my rebate forms get lost and that's "legit?"

      *cough* bullshit *cough*

    39. Re:That's the reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Personally, I keep an Excel (well, oocalc) spreadsheet of all my rebates, what, where, how much, when sent in, when to check, when received, etc. It's quite helpful. (Wow! I just added up my `how much' field -- $1723.)"

      Cool!

      Do you have a "how much time" field to divide that by so you can know your hourly rate?

      I guess about $2 if you are efficient.
    40. Re:That's the reason by ScrappyLaptop · · Score: 1

      Actually, in California, CompUSA was held accountable (or was it Circuit City?). The manufacturer went under and a court held that since the retailer advertised at the after-rebate price ("$xxx.xx - $yy rebate = $zzz.zz low price for you!"), they were responsible for fulfilling the rebates.

    41. Re:That's the reason by InvalidError · · Score: 1

      I did say ***sometimes*** and depending on context, this can be anywhere from more than 1/10 of the time while in others, it can be less than 1/1000. It happened to my 2005 tax refund: two months after everybody else I knew had received theirs, I still did not have mine. Called the revenue agency, asked whether or not they issued it, they re-issued the check and I got it a 3-4 business days later. AFAIK, this is the only piece of my mail that got lost.

  9. Of Course They Do.... by asphaltjesus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Bottom of the barrel wage earners working an admittedly unglamorous job tosses a few out. Where's the crime? Who's going to prosecute? Which State regs apply?

    Rebates are a racket, always have been. I know from experience because I admin'd them years ago for a peripherals manufacturer.

    Back to work!

    --
    Got Trader Joe's? friendwich.com RSS feeds work now!
    1. Re:Of Course They Do.... by Squalish · · Score: 1

      A few class action suits with serious punitive penalties assessed on the retailer advertising the lower price (in retailer-created rebates) would not be out of turn here.

      --
      People in Soviet Russia, however, appear to be afflicted with amusing juxtapositions of the aforementioned situation
    2. Re:Of Course They Do.... by Squalish · · Score: 1

      Whatever responsibility the employee had internally, it had the effect of causing the company to steal money. You go after the company for stealing money, the company can do whatever it wants with the employee, including criminal negligence.

      --
      People in Soviet Russia, however, appear to be afflicted with amusing juxtapositions of the aforementioned situation
    3. Re:Of Course They Do.... by thetable123 · · Score: 1

      If they traveled via USPS, then it would be federal and not state.

      As to which reg:
      "Advertising must be truthful and non-deceptive;"

    4. Re:Of Course They Do.... by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Bottom of the barrel wage earners working an admittedly unglamorous job tosses a few out.

      And as we all know, the best way to get a better job is to royally fuck up at your current one. I'm sorry, throwing out rebates in indefensible.

    5. Re:Of Course They Do.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bottom of the barrel wage earners working an admittedly unglamorous job tosses a few out. Where's the crime? Who's going to prosecute? Which State regs apply?

      Not state. Mail fraud (if he received the mail) and tampering with the mail (if he was an intermediary who was supposed to deliver it to someone else) are both Federal felonies. The "disgruntled employee" is in a world of trouble (eg: 5-20 years x 1300 counts).

    6. Re:Of Course They Do.... by mikelieman · · Score: 1

      What's the crime???

      LITTERING!

      ( Well, Unlawful Dumping in someone else's waste can, but that's a violation it is! )

      --
      Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
    7. Re:Of Course They Do.... by pedestrian+crossing · · Score: 1

      And as we all know, the best way to get a better job is to royally fuck up at your current one.

      Hey, I see you work for the government, too!

      --
      A house divided against itself cannot stand.
    8. Re:Of Course They Do.... by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      And that's supposed to make it all ok?

      Sure, not much will happen to the min wage patsy other than maybe lose his job, which he damned well should. But the company he works for is responsible for his actions. Bottom line is a rebate company was found to be throwing out rebate submissions. Fraud would be the state reg. And anyone with enough balls, time, and money to stand up against this (self admitted by you) racket is who is going to prosecute.

      How this got modded +5, and why you proceeded to tear a strip off someone else that replied to this post below for absolutely no reason whatsoever...

      --
      No Comment.
    9. Re:Of Course They Do.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if the rebate operation can't be nailed with a crime, they can certainly be nailed by Fry's and perhaps other retailers and manufacturers for damaging the effectiveness of the rebate system. I think that once a person reads this article, he will be much less likely to consider rebates in his purchasing decisions, especially when shopping at Fry's. The sales profits that Fry's has lost because of this is surely much greater than the amount the rebate operation failed to mail out.

      Granted, if Fry's sues the rebater, the people who filed for rebates may never see their money. But a crackdown on the rebate system will either lead to an improvement in the system or its elimination, either of which would be better for consumers.

  10. Not surprising by nine-times · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've gotten into the habit of completely ignoring mail-in rebates because I've never once received one. Over the years, I've sent in maybe as many as 10 rebates, and never gotten any kind of a response.

    Of course, in the fine print of every rebate is something along the lines of, "We have no legal obligation to actually send you a rebate, even if you send this in. If we believe any piece of information is wrong for any reason, we reserve the right to trash your rebate application."

    It's a scam. If they really intended to give you the discount, they'd have an "instant rebate", meaning a price-cut in the store. The whole point of a mail-in rebate is to trick people into thinking things are cheaper than they are. They advertise "$199 w/ mail-in rebate (normally $299)". So you start thinking the product is $199 even though you'll give the store $299 when you buy it. Then, either you forget to send the mail in rebate, or they find some excuse not to honor it. You've just bought the item for $299.

    1. Re:Not surprising by multisync · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's a scam. If they really intended to give you the discount, they'd have an "instant rebate", meaning a price-cut in the store. The whole point of a mail-in rebate is to trick people into thinking things are cheaper than they are.


      I'm of the opinion that the whole point of these "rebates" is to harvest the customer's name, address and whatever other information is typically requested.

      I never mail them in. I base my purchasing decisions on the price I pay at the till.
      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
    2. Re:Not surprising by Surt · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm always shocked by the number of people who report this. I mean, surely if you're not a rebate mailer, you learn at some point not to factor the rebate into the purchase price?
      I've also never had a problem with a rebate. Maybe because I have easy access to a photocopier, and always include a note that indicates that I kept a photocopy of everything in the event that there is a problem with the rebate. I've done about 20 rebates of $10 or more over the last 5 years with zero failures.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    3. Re:Not surprising by EvanED · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's a scam. If they really intended to give you the discount, they'd have an "instant rebate", meaning a price-cut in the store.

      People always say this, but I'm not convinced. I've sent in and received a whole bunch of rebates over time, and I don't immediately recall sending one in and never getting it back. I'm also very careful to follow the instructions to the letter.

      However, it still is better for them because people forget about or don't bother with the rebates. When I got my monitor, it was $300 with a $50 rebate. However, I didn't send in the rebate immediately, it got buried and forgotten about until I unearthed it a few months later, and they kept their $50.

      I think this is probably the biggest reason that they offer rebates instead of in-store discounts. I also wouldn't be surprised that they have people looking out for any procedural issues that would give them an excuse to deny the rebates, but I've never heard any evidence that there's an active conspiracy to defraud or anything.

      (Rebates also means that, if you cut the UPC out, you are probably going to have a hard time returning it to the store.)

    4. Re:Not surprising by radish · · Score: 1

      I've done a bunch of rebates over the last couple of years and got my money in all but one case (I sent the wrong paperwork by mistake and had thrown out the correct one so I couldn't reapply - my fault). Most recently I just got a check for $200 from Tivo. I ignore the "$2.50 off a $20 mouse" rebates as they're not worth the effort, but $200 off a $600 unit? Too much to ignore!

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    5. Re:Not surprising by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

      So you *don't* think they're a scam, but you also don't think it's odd that

      a) you're one of the few people who routinely gets them honored
      b) you put warnings in the envelope

      Naive me, the one time I tried mail-in rebates, I *did* keep copies for that reason, but *didn't* think I'd have to threaten them.

      Of the two:

      1) No response at all.
      2) Sent a little postcard claiming that I needed to try again because the barcode on the proof of purchase (or something like that) wasn't readable. *looks up backup copy* *Could not possibly be clearer* *calls number to complain* *gives up after being on hold for an hour, figuring they don't actually use that line to honor rebates*

      The second, as I recall, was a Samsung monitor, and I *really* wish respectable, well-established companies knew better than to associate with such gutter trash.

    6. Re:Not surprising by lena_10326 · · Score: 1

      Over the years, I've sent in maybe as many as 10 rebates, and never gotten any kind of a response.
      Odd. I've sent in maybe 100 to 150 rebates over the last 4 years and I know of only one that I didn't get back (about $10-15). My rebates were from $2 to $75 for various items, shampoo to hard drives. I've always had good luck with them. I always use the email notification if they offer it.
      --
      Camping on quad since 1996.
    7. Re:Not surprising by bzipitidoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are other reasons. Can't return the product after cutting out the original UPC. Sometimes products break down after a few days, or are not as advertised. And time is money, so the longer they can use your money, the better for them.

      If the rebate system can't be tightened up, it should be outlawed. Bad for the honest merchants, but the system is just too easy to abuse. All this nonsense of sending "proof" of purchase is, as you said, a cover for getting your info, and also a hope that the hassle will discourage some, and generation of excuses for not honoring the rebate. Plus, the inordinate delay is just that much longer they get the use of your money. It's so easy to have much more efficient ways to verify and honor rebates. Like, why not have a nice credit card service that handles the proof of purchase and the rebate, posting the rebate amount to your account the instant you've had the product for 30 days?

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    8. Re:Not surprising by nategoose · · Score: 0

      And since most states collect extra taxes when there's a rebate because they tax the price it's sold for they don't care much about outlawing them.

    9. Re:Not surprising by rastoboy29 · · Score: 1

      Are you sure you never actually received one because you never actually sent one in?

      All the ones I've sent in, I've gotten.  Sadly, there are quite a few I've forgotten about.

    10. Re:Not surprising by multisync · · Score: 1

      The only problem I would have with that is I like to pay in cash and not be on record with every manufacturer and retailer I do business with. I suppose if the credit card service acted as the intermediary, and protected your information rather than use it as a revenue source, it could work. Just the same, if it's not an "in-store rebate," I'm not interested.

      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
    11. Re:Not surprising by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      I'm wary too, but I can only think of one rebate that I didn't get, and I know I've sent in at least a couple dozen rebate things, even one for $300 through Epson for a projector, which they DID honor.

    12. Re:Not surprising by noidentity · · Score: 1

      "It's a scam. If they really intended to give you the discount, they'd have an "instant rebate", meaning a price-cut in the store."

      Damn good point, because the instant rebates are the ones the store sends off, so if those aren't redeemed, you have an angry store whom you owe thousands and who won't just ignore the matter.

    13. Re:Not surprising by bhalter80 · · Score: 1

      More importantly by the time I get the rebate check I've been without the rebate cash for so long that it no longer has the effect of lowering the purchase price and is more of a free cash for me kinda thing. If you put it on a credit card (assuming its not a 0ish% interest card) its entirely possible that you would outstrip the value of the rebate with interest charges in the interim. This is why I base my purchasing decisions on cost today and am happy when I get some free cash in the mail.

    14. Re:Not surprising by JoelKatz · · Score: 1


      I almost never buy products that have rebates. I think they are basically a scam, for three reasons:

      1) You pay sales tax on the amount rebated to you. So when you buy something with a $20 rebate in an area with 7% sales tax, you are basically having $1.40 stolen from you. A $199 rebate steals $14 from you.

      2) The rebates are often not sent. You could wind up spending as much as an hour or more getting the rebate processed, and you still may not get it.

      3) Too often, a product will have a higher price but a rebate at an office supply type store. The idea is that you buy the more expensive product, get reimbursed for the full price on the receipt by your employer, and then keep the rebate for yourself. The companies that promote these more-expensive products with-rebate sold next to less-expensive no-rebate products know exactly what they're doing and why they're doing it.

      4) You often have to consent to your contact information being used for all kinds of marketing purposes. This often includes the manufacturer selling it.

    15. Re:Not surprising by seebs · · Score: 1

      I've never seen anything like that in the fine print.

      I've also had exactly one case, ever, where a company didn't cough up when confronted. That was Soyo, and I sued them and won.

      The problem here isn't that it's a scam, it's that you're an idiot who doesn't even TRY. I've collected $2,821.80 in rebates since I started tracking them, and probably at least a thousand dollars more before I got in the habit.

      --
      My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
    16. Re:Not surprising by ganley · · Score: 1

      They don't just discount the product because they have no way to make sure the retailer then passes that markdown on to the customer. If they drop the price $100, the retailer could drop their price $50 and keep an extra $50 profit. By offering it in the form of a rebate, they guarantee that the full $100 savings is passed on to the consumer.

      Assuming, of course, that the consumer can successfully collect. I hear all sorts of horror stories about rebates (such as the many here), but I've never had any problem at all collecting on them.

    17. Re:Not surprising by muellerr1 · · Score: 1

      Another reason they offer rebates is to get the purchaser for businesses to buy their product over another. Let's say I work at a company that needs to buy a printer: I head to OfficeMax, check out all the printers and buy the one with the largest rebate regardless of price. I pay for it on the corporate credit card but apply for the rebate in my own name, reaping the entire rebate amount for my trouble. My company need never know there was a rebate, and they were paying for a printer anyway so likely they don't care. It's a lot like the airline miles programs.

    18. Re:Not surprising by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Which explains why at least a few stores (Staples, Best Buy) come to mind, have been printing extra "rebate receipts" with basically everything you need for the rebate.

      Actually, it fails to explain that, but they're nice nonetheless.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    19. Re:Not surprising by yoyodyne · · Score: 1

      I've bought several things from Newegg recently with rebates and followed instructions to the letter. Haven't gotten one yet, but got two rejections for sending a copy of the serial number/UPC from the box instead of the originals as required. My recourse is to send in the original. Of course, I don't have the original because I sent it in the first time.

      Pure scam.

    20. Re:Not surprising by Mikachu · · Score: 1

      I also wouldn't be surprised that they have people looking out for any procedural issues that would give them an excuse to deny the rebates, but I've never heard any evidence that there's an active conspiracy to defraud or anything.

  11. Rebates are a scam by mcelrath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Rebates are a scam that allows a company to pad their ledger with artificial profits that get refunded some time later. It's an accounting scam. They make money by having more money in the bank, earning interest, while you don't. They also count on a good fraction of people simply not filling out the rebate form. So it's a form of false advertising that allows them to advertise one price when in fact you have to give them a different amount of money.

    Don't do business with companies that offer rebates. Pay for what things are worth and screw this stupid shell game. I've not gotten my rebate many times, without explanation.

    This crap should be illegal.

    --
    1^2=1; (-1)^2=1; 1^2=(-1)^2; 1=-1; 1=0.
    1. Re:Rebates are a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Not all of them are a scam. You just have to be willing to stand on top of them and demand with a lot of distasteful language that they pony up.

      It took me 8 months to get a 50 $ rebate once. They got so sick of me ( I went to the top of corp too) that they accidentally paid me twice to make me shut up.

      Rebates are really very simple. You just have to CATALOG every move you make, save every email, every letter, copy every form and receipt, and then mail it certified. Easy schmeesy, the law is on your side when you do that.

    2. Re:Rebates are a scam by SandwhichMaster · · Score: 1

      I usually choose not to buy products offering a mail-in rebate, but when I do get scammed,I file a complaint with the Better Business Bureau (bbb.org). Its free, and they almost always get results.

    3. Re:Rebates are a scam by mcelrath · · Score: 1

      I've got better things to do with my time than play this shell game with scammers for a piddly $50. They know this, and that's why they make more money by offering rebates.

      --
      1^2=1; (-1)^2=1; 1^2=(-1)^2; 1=-1; 1=0.
    4. Re:Rebates are a scam by thue · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This crap should be illegal.

      In my country, Denmark, it is indeed illegal. From what I understand, I am glad it is so.

      Did I mention that we have never had your problem with telemarketing either? Or that email and SMS spam is strictly illegal and swiftly and harshly prosecuted?

      Or that we actually have an efficient and respected state department which looks after consumer rights in cases like deceptive marketing and defective products? For example they recently went after Apple when Apple refused to repair faulty macBooks.

      Sometimes, more and more frequently lately, I am glad I don't live in the US.

    5. Re:Rebates are a scam by Larus · · Score: 1

      No, it's hard to make anything in business illegal these days. E.g., insurance policies that pay less than the promised amount, restaurant owners that count customer tips as part of the minimum wage, government contractors that fail to deliver to the low expectations of their buddies in the government, mutual funds that charge premiums for the right to invest your money recklessly, telemarketers, subprime lenders, etc. Even the insider trading, Enron-esque incompetence, LBO disasters, and golden parachutes don't seem to raise eyebrows anymore. I believe these practices never backfired - because we as a whole become a nation of consumers, with no more brainpower than to select the flavor of the day. Because we are part of the system that expect high stock returns for our retirement. Because we also want to slack off in our work. Because we would rather admire wealthy people who blindsighted us, in the vain wish to emulate or become one of them. So we allow rampant greed and outright lies in business, and we would rather every citizen does well while the society as a whole goes to hell. I am a geek, and I haven't shopped at Fry's for four years mainly because of the ludicrous rebates. But I'm not their intended customers anyways. Every business thrives by conquering the weakest minds first: the compulsory shoppers, the gadget fanboys, the whining kids, the fear factors, the easy-to-impress, the wannabes. So by thriving, a business invariably alienates the ones who question its practices. If you value your brain, and I'm sure /. readers do, use your judgment.

    6. Re:Rebates are a scam by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Is it true that Americans pay the same amount to private companies that people in other countries pay in taxes, and thus don't actually get to keep any more of their paychecks?

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    7. Re:Rebates are a scam by nsayer · · Score: 1

      I am glad I don't live in the US.

      Good, that works for us too. BTW, I hope you enjoy those 61% tax brackets.

    8. Re:Rebates are a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been to Denmark. What *should* be illegal there are the hot dogs sold by street vendors. And is that ketchup or some weird sauce scraped from the sewer? Cuz it sure didn't taste like any ketchup I know.

    9. Re:Rebates are a scam by BrewDad · · Score: 1

      We need a class action lawsuit against this company. Then we can really stick it to them when the courts award us rebat...er....vouchers. That'll show 'em!

    10. Re:Rebates are a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the heck do you prosecute most spammers? I can't imagine that there are dozens of serious ones located in easy reach of Denmark law. You're not saying that Denmark has little to no spam, are you?

    11. Re:Rebates are a scam by mechsoph · · Score: 1

      That's a strange way of looking at it. After I pay my taxes, I can do whatever I want with my money where whatever I want consists basically of buying stuff (ie paying money to private companies) or investing it. However, I get to choose where I buy and the ratio of buying and investing which I cannot (directly) do with my taxes.

      So when you say "keep any more of their paycheck," do you must know mean whatever is left after taxes to be spent or saved as one chooses. Do you only mean what's saved? Do you mean what I have left after spending for the basic necessities?

      The better question is whether the government can provide better service per dollar/euro than private industry. For rival/exclusive goods in competitive markets, I don't there there's anybody (reasonable) who would say government can do a better job. Things get more complicated with other goods, uncompetitive markets, or when people try to define something as a public good.

    12. Re:Rebates are a scam by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      I'd rather choose which private company gets my business instead of paying that same money to a government.

    13. Re:Rebates are a scam by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1
      Restaurants are supposed to count tips towards your hourly wage. This is not a bad thing. Margins in the restaurant business are already poor enough, they shouldn't need to prop up poor staff.

      http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs2. htm

      Tips may be considered as part of wages, but the employer must pay not less than $2.13 an hour in direct wages and make sure that the amount of tips received is enough to meet the remainder of the minimum wage.
    14. Re:Rebates are a scam by Myopic · · Score: 1

      You mean, buy our products and services in the open market instead of from the government? The idea is you get to keep the money for any services you don't use, so, no, it isn't true that Americans pay the same amount to companies. Many of us enjoy considerable savings. Not to say my taxes aren't sky high. I hate give one out of every four of my hard-earned dollars to the wasteful bastards running this country.

    15. Re:Rebates are a scam by griffjon · · Score: 1

      to balance the USA-OK jingoist crowd, I'll have to check out this Denmark place as a good long-term residence, now that the USA has forgotten some basic tenets of its constitution which made it such a nice idealistic place.

      --
      Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
    16. Re:Rebates are a scam by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      So when you say "keep any more of their paycheck," do you must know mean whatever is left after taxes to be spent or saved as one chooses. Do you only mean what's saved? Do you mean what I have left after spending for the basic necessities? Somewhere between those two.

      Suppose that Sven pays 2/3 of his income in taxes and gets free health care, free daycare and education for his kid, and "an efficient and respected state department which looks after consumer rights in cases like deceptive marketing and defective products" as the GGP mentioned.

      Suppose also that Brad pays only 1/3 of his income in taxes, but then has to spend an additional 1/3 of his income paying for health insurance, day care, tuition, and the various costs of being deceived and scammed by companies because his consumer rights aren't being looked after.

      My point is that Sven and Brad are in the same boat, so it's stupid to complain about the amount Sven pays in taxes. Sure, Brad could choose not to have health insurance or send his kid to college... but, like most people, he doesn't. And sure, Brad could receive more value for his money from the private sector... but real-world comparisons show that he probably doesn't.

      The better question is whether the government can provide better service per dollar/euro than private industry. For rival/exclusive goods in competitive markets, I don't there there's anybody (reasonable) who would say government can do a better job. Well, that's a question, but not the only one. You might also ask whether the government can be more responsive to people's needs and desires than private industry. A private company will only do what can be done profitably, which is why it took government subsidies to provide phone and electrical service to rural areas that otherwise wouldn't be profitable. The government, however, does what voters ask for, even if it has to operate at a loss.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    17. Re:Rebates are a scam by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 2, Funny

      In my country, Denmark, it is indeed illegal. From what I understand, I am glad it is so.

      Did I mention that we have never had your problem with telemarketing either? Or that email and SMS spam is strictly illegal and swiftly and harshly prosecuted?

      Or that we actually have an efficient and respected state department which looks after consumer rights in cases like deceptive marketing and defective products?


      Also, due to clever science, the weather is never bad in Denmark, and delicious apples grow from lampposts. (Needless to say, the lamps never burn out as well!) And robots rise from the ground every thursday and wash our cars for free!

      (Christ, get over yourself, Denmarkians.)

    18. Re:Rebates are a scam by Mantorp · · Score: 1

      Most people don't have a say in which health insurance company they shell out cash to, and all the co-pays, percentages of coverage depending on procedure, and in and out of network BS makes me long for govt control.

    19. Re:Rebates are a scam by Mantorp · · Score: 1

      So instead of getting taxed to pay for healthcare we pay the insurance companies, I dislike them as much as the wasteful bastards running our country. Interesting comparison between US and Canada health systems

    20. Re:Rebates are a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't they get a whole bunch of 'free stuff' for that? Like guaranteed health-care, edumacation (up to and including university level) and social security? And a government who seems to serve in the people's best interests?

    21. Re:Rebates are a scam by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      So, with the cost of registered mail, as well as all the time you spent (8 months) getting that rebate, was it really worth the $50? If you had just paid the extra $50 and got a comparable product, without the rebate, you probably would have had much more time to enjoy whatever it was you bought, instead of running around chasing rebates.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    22. Re:Rebates are a scam by mechsoph · · Score: 1

      And sure, Brad could receive more value for his money from the private sector... but real-world comparisons show that he probably doesn't.

      Please show me any any such comparisons. I would be very interested in a formal study comparing private/government efficiency. All anecdotal evidence I've heard, and my personal experience, is that government tends to be much less efficient than private industry.

      My point is that Sven and Brad are in the same boat, so it's stupid to complain about the amount Sven pays in taxes. Sure, Brad could choose not to have health insurance or send his kid to college... but, like most people, he doesn't.

      A private company will only do what can be done profitably, which is why it took government subsidies to provide phone and electrical service to rural areas that otherwise wouldn't be profitable.

      Telecomm/utilities are a natural monopoly, so you do need some type of regulation to keep the customers from getting screwed by the local monopoly. Healthcare, though, should operate like a normal commodity, but our clusterfucked regulatory system here has put a stop to that. Since that AMA controls the number of new doctors, the supply side for healthcare is kept artificially low. Trivial patents keep drug prices high. And I'm sure the rampaging malpractice lawyers don't help much either. Whether the solution to these problems is more regulation is left as an exercise for the reader. Whether all citizens should have the same level of healthcare is an icky moral question with no easy answer.

      The government, however, does what voters ask for, even if it has to operate at a loss.

      Unfortunately, I think both major parties here are competing over who's better at operating the government at a loss.

    23. Re:Rebates are a scam by Myopic · · Score: 1

      I guess so. I dunno. I'm not so interested in government-provided services (I'll pay for my own retirement, thanks very much), but I would sure be interested in a government that served my interests. Do they really have that in Denmark?

    24. Re:Rebates are a scam by Myopic · · Score: 1

      agreed. they are all bastards. the medical system in America is a clusterfuck of mythic proportions, and one of the only things I can imagine which would be worse than our system, would be our system but run by the government. kudos if it works out in Denmark, though, maybe their government is less dumb than ours. bummer they don't even get to spend a majority of their money, though.

    25. Re:Rebates are a scam by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      you are correct, but there are some more rules to the "game" if you will. The minimum wage is supposed to be "per shift" if you don't get enough tips, they have to chip in to get you to "minimum" ... many places have started cheating by making it "per week", meaning that other than weekends you don't work for minimum wage so good nites tips are subsidizing the resturant. Another scam is the trend to make waitresses claim actual tips based off reciepts (including the bill for walk offs!) or 10-15% instead of the legaly required 8%. This was put low on purpose, if you've been to DC you'd know tipping is very heavy there and the law is a nod to all those people that wait on congresscritters. It does benifit the workers by increasing their taxable income and thru that things like Social Security benifits later down the road. But who wants to pay taxes they don't have to just to pad the employers books?

    26. Re:Rebates are a scam by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Please show me any any such comparisons. I would be very interested in a formal study comparing private/government efficiency. All anecdotal evidence I've heard, and my personal experience, is that government tends to be much less efficient than private industry.

      I'm not sure whether any formal studies have been made (they probably have), but take a look at the privatization of British Rail for a horror example. Or the privatization of a lot of Europe's telecom and electricity industry.

      I guess it also depends on what you mean by "efficient". If a service costs the same for the end-user after privatization, but maintenance is cut by 50%, thereby lowering operational costs and providing more pay-out to the stockholders, is it truly more "efficient"? To the end-user, I'd say it isn't.

      Consumerism will, invariably, lead to the lowest possible quality the consumers will accept at the highest possible price that the consumers will pay. Whereas a government provided service might cost less OR more, and have higher OR lower quality, independent of the market. And in many cases, the quality of services is far better than the minimum that a free market is willing to pay for. And in some cases worse. Thing is, people tend to only mention the latter.

      In my experience, large corporations have as much fat if not more as the governments. The typical US corporation most certainly isn't any leaner, with its armies of paper pushers, lawyers and lobbyists. If as many as one out of three people in major corporations did actual work (as opposed to meta-work), I'd be surprised.
    27. Re:Rebates are a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Sometimes, more and more frequently lately, I am glad I don't live in the US."

      Funny: I've always been ecstatic about that. It's often said the US is THE consumer nation. That's not strictly speaking true. What is true is that it's the number one nation for selling consumer products. Big difference. You want to get screwed and treated like shit? Move to the US. They've got a political system that sucks like no other and an overwhelming assault on the senses to buy buy buy. People in the US don't have lives. They have money to spend and that's it. No consumer protection, no civil rights, etc. Denmark is a lovely exemplary country where almost everything is done right: no censorship at all since the late 1960s, beautiful women, and yes: a government that works. They've also got pølser and that alone should sell you.

    28. Re:Rebates are a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Is it true that if I get run over in the USofA, I have to pay the ambulance to wipe my ass off the road ? That you have to pay for contraception and abortion? That your taxes pay for 48% of your prisoners locked up soley due to the War On Some Drugs and not healthcare? That 45% of you beleave in creationism? (lol) That you can't show a tit on broadcast TV?

    29. Re:Rebates are a scam by Mr2001 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Please show me any any such comparisons. I would be very interested in a formal study comparing private/government efficiency. All anecdotal evidence I've heard, and my personal experience, is that government tends to be much less efficient than private industry. Health care is the one that comes to mind. Most western countries with national health care systems spend less of their GDP on health care, yet they cover more people, have lower infant mortality and longer lifespans, and overall, get a lot more for their money than we do. Even in the US, Medicare has much lower overhead than private insurers: something like 6% vs. 30%.

      (I don't have citations off the top of my head. I suppose I could look them up if you want them, but they shouldn't be too hard to find.)

      I see that you mentioned health care later in your post, but I don't think the factors you mentioned are enough to explain the sorry state of our system compared to others. We're hardly the only country that regulates doctors or allows malpractice suits.

      Telecomm/utilities are a natural monopoly, so you do need some type of regulation to keep the customers from getting screwed by the local monopoly. It's not just about monopolies, it's about providing services even when there's no profit incentive. The problem with small communities that couldn't get phone service wasn't that it'd be too expensive to run multiple sets of wires for competing phone companies... it was too expensive to run even one set. Phone service could not be provided there at a price that would allow the phone company to turn a profit. Without government intervention, it simply wouldn't have been available there, but we the people decided telecom was important enough to subsidize.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    30. Re:Rebates are a scam by thue · · Score: 1

      They can of course only prosecute the spammers who live in our jurisdiction, i.e. Denmark.

    31. Re:Rebates are a scam by thue · · Score: 1

      The Danish government did however recently create a "antiterror law" saying that ISPs must retain a database of all connections made by their customers, and be able to match the connections to computers. Unpleasantly Orwellian :(. This database is then available to the police with a subpoena from a judge (better than the US where a subpoena seems currently to not be required, but still). Try doing something equivalent that people could understand, such as requiring book and newspaper sellers to keep a list of all people they sell their books/newspapers to, and I think (hope) there would be an uproar.

      I think Denmark has also been helping USA in the Echelon program.

      Perhaps Sweden is better in that regard?

    32. Re:Rebates are a scam by thue · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nice out of context quoting.

      And I don't see what connection there is between the quality of the consumer laws and the tax bracket. You could have the same laws, while retaining your current tax rate, if you just were better at electing your politicians.

    33. Re:Rebates are a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      if you just were better at electing your politicians.


      oh now you're just harsh, they can't be blamed for voting wrong, their system is broken.
    34. Re:Rebates are a scam by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      Please show me any any such comparisons. I would be very interested in a formal study comparing private/government efficiency. All anecdotal evidence I've heard, and my personal experience, is that government tends to be much less efficient than private industry.


      There are about a hundred different university, government, and think tank studies easily available with Google that show Medicare's administrative costs are in the 3%-6% range, while private insurers are more like 15-30%+ (all depending on whose numbers and the necessary "guesstimates" to compile such a single number you believe). That means that for every trillion dollars we spend on private health insurance each year, 25+ billion dollars is being spent on the insurance company itself, unnecessarily. To put that in perspective, you could build a dozen new space shuttles every single year with the money that people pay for medical insurance that doesn't go to anything remotely medical.

      Economies of scale are not crazy new economic concepts, nor is uniformity in billing, paperwork, etc. Having hundreds of insurance companies all with completely different systems, all with completely different purchase agreements, and all with the shareholder's requirement to avoiding spending any money on actual health care they can possibly avoid spending, is not a recipe for efficiency.
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    35. Re:Rebates are a scam by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      whoops, I totally spaced when doing that math. 1% of a trillion is not a billion, it's ten billion. Health insurers eat up 250+ billion dollars a year, or twice as much as we're now spending annually on military operations in Iraq.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    36. Re:Rebates are a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, that's not ketchup..I believe it is some other sauce(where it has been scraped from, I don't know :-)).
      I've tried it too, and yes, it does not taste like Heinz.
      However, I found it quite tasty and not as sweet as "normal" ketchup.

    37. Re:Rebates are a scam by mechsoph · · Score: 1

      I see that you mentioned health care later in your post, but I don't think the factors you mentioned are enough to explain the sorry state of our system compared to others. We're hardly the only country that regulates doctors or allows malpractice suits.

      The point is not that healthcare is regulated at all. The point is that it is regulated by CURRENT DOCTORS who have a strong incentive to keep supply low so that they will receive higher pay. The AMA is a private, unelected group. An independent set of standards for medical schools that the public had some at least indirect control over would be better. Competing private raters without governmental force of law may work (it does in the bond industry), but healthcare is a more dangerous game. This is an all too common example of crappy regulation causing higher costs. An example of more decent regulation promoting competition is the forcing of dsl monopolies to let competitors colo their equipment; this is what let SpeakEasy work. Also I do believe we tend to be more litigious in this country, and while I don't know whether our patent system is more broken than others, it is broken.

      Phone service could not be provided there at a price that would allow the phone company to turn a profit. Without government intervention, it simply wouldn't have been available there, but we the people decided telecom was important enough to subsidize.

      Should I have to pay for my (very far away) neighbor's phone? Or should he move closer to other people so it wouldn't cost so much? Though if an entire small community wants to pool their resources to provide service for all of them, that's a different story.

    38. Re:Rebates are a scam by Fraser · · Score: 1

      No problem with telemarketing? How does that explain my weekly phonecall asking me if I want to subscribe to Jyllandsposten? Or the regular "We're offering an insurance check up"?

      F

    39. Re:Rebates are a scam by nsebban · · Score: 1

      (I don't live in the US neither) Denmark, Sweden and Norway have such policies, and a pretty fast and efficient justice system. All this works very well because those countries have at most 10M citizens. In bigger countries like the US for instance, population is close to 30 times bigger, which makes things sower and harder to manage I guess.

      --
      ____
      nico
      Nico-Live
    40. Re:Rebates are a scam by argStyopa · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I'm not going to disagree with you - Denmark's a really wonderful country.

      However, I will take a slight issue with your comparison. It's one thing to have a set of rules governing and supporting an homogenous* population of 5 million. It's entirely another thing to have a set of rules that apply to an ethnically and culturally diverse state of 300 million. Not just a matter of scale, there are intrinsic differences that make the problem far more than (only) 60x bigger.

      Denmark
      91% Danish descent - not simply by skin color, but from a common ethno-cultural background
      83% of them are Lutheran

      The US?
      More than 31 ethnic groups number over a million members.
      White 74.67% --- and this includes Danes, Germans, Swedes, British, Italian, Russian, French, Spanish, Hungarian, etc, etc, etc....
      Hispanic 14.50%
      Black 12.12%
      Asian 4.32%
      Indian 0.82%
      Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 0.14%
      Other/multiracial 7.92%

      No, I envy your society in many ways. I live in Minnesota and while I'll probably be accused of being a racist for saying so, I believe a lot of the reasons Minnesota has (had) such a historically high 'quality of life' has been our overwhelming Nordic homogeneity as well...but now as we're absorbing ever-increasing numbers of Somalis, Hmong, and a host of culturally-foreign emigrants from Chicago, well, Minneapolis/St Paul is becoming just another shitty crime-ridden and emotionally empty American city.

      --
      -Styopa
    41. Re:Rebates are a scam by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      I've seen first hand what government control does to benefit systems, and I don't wish that upon anyone.

    42. Re:Rebates are a scam by churchcomposer · · Score: 1

      Yes it should be illegal. But since the States make out like bandits with rebates, don't expect any reforms any time real soon. Why? Assume a 7% sales tax. You buy a REALLY good deal - a $1,000 item with a $500 rebate. WHATTA DEAL!!, you think. OK, even assuming the crooks and scam artists eventually send you your rebate, you paid $70 SALES TAX for a $500 item. The State just collected 14% sales tax on your purchase, and they collected it UP FRONT, they didn't have to wait for their money. You don't get a rebate on sales tax. Remember that. If it's an instant rebate, that's different. But as long as the States are essentially partners with the rebate scammers, they have a huge disincentive to do ANYTHING that would reduce their sales tax windfall. I would require that the merchant provide you with pre-filled out rebate forms, postage-paid, machine-printed at point-of-sale, with an extra copy of EVERYTHING given to the consumer, have it mailed by the merchant THAT DAY, require that rebate checks be mailed to the consumer within 21 days of the date of sale, and mandate a minimum $500 penalty (or twenty-five times the rebate amount, whichever is greater), payable directly to the consumer, if the consumer doesn't receive the rebate within the specified time, and make it a felony criminal offense if any rebate processor fails to comply with the requirements of this more than ten times in any one month. And that law will be delivered from the legislature to the governor by flying pigs.

    43. Re:Rebates are a scam by Floritard · · Score: 1

      Oh yea? How's the apple pie over their asshole!?







      It's better isn't it? {sniffle}

    44. Re:Rebates are a scam by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      OHNOES! The richest people are being heavily taxed! Ye gods, no! The humanity of it all! What ever will he do???

    45. Re:Rebates are a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is one of those situations where you really want to get there vs. their right, unless you're into some really kinky stuff.

    46. Re:Rebates are a scam by Myopic · · Score: 1

      Social issues are not tax related. American social policy is contrary to my wishes. But, it is in line with the wishes of the majority, and since I believe in democracy, I tolerate the stupidity of the majority.

      But as for government-provided services, yes, it's true that people are expected to pay for their own mistakes and preferences. Actually, that's only partially true, but should be totally true. Jaywalking in front of trucks? Well then yes, we expect you to pay for your own ride to the hospital. Make bad decisions about family planning? Well then yes, we expect you to pay for your own medical care. Do you really find that weird? You really find it weird that people should do for themselves? I mean shit, we have welfare here, we provide medicine for the poor and elderly, we publicly fund education, infrastructure, and defense. How much does someone else really have to do for me? Do you want a government agent to wipe your ass and spoon-feed you? Maybe, but over here we think that would be crazy.

      If Denmark has a magical government which perfectly represents all of its people and makes no mistakes and functions with greater efficiency than the free market, then damn that's really great, and I totally see why Denmark would want to nationalize everything under the sun. But over here in America we have a backwater government full of hypocritical assholes who couldn't balance a budget if it were put on a scale, so we prefer to give them as little of our hard-earned money as possible. It's pretty simple, really.

      Anyway, to my original point: economic freedom is second only to freedom of conscience; so a sufficiently high tax rate is a barrier to freedom.

    47. Re:Rebates are a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, how accommodating to ignorant, spoiled U.S. citizens is Denmark's immigration policy?

      To think, being able to live in a country where people don't deny the existence of evolution and global warming, where your children can attend public schools with textbooks that aren't 40% pictures of children, where people don't bitch incessantly about having to pay for social programs while thumping the chest in delight of massive spending on the military industrial complex, and no one hassles you for being an atheist.

      Oh well, as appealing as idealistic fantasies such as that are, it's time for some more will-crushing Americana.

    48. Re:Rebates are a scam by rtechie · · Score: 1

      As an American who has spent a lot of time in Denmark I can tell you the fundamental difference between Denmark and the United States is the strong sense of egalitarianism in Denmark. The Queen rides around town every Sunday in a procession. If you want to meet you MOP you can just walk into their office. Read the papers sometime, they're filled with social commentary.

      Whenever anyone talks about "class" in the United States they're immediately accused of communism and inciting "class warfare". But the massive class divisions are real and palpable in the USA. When was the last time that the President went outside without an army of security? Haven't we gotten used to the idea of gated communities and armies of Mexican servants?

    49. Re:Rebates are a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That you can't show a tit on broadcast TV? Oh we CAN show tits, but its actively discouraged.
    50. Re:Rebates are a scam by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      The point is not that healthcare is regulated at all. The point is that it is regulated by CURRENT DOCTORS who have a strong incentive to keep supply low so that they will receive higher pay. The majority of the UK's General Medical Council members are doctors too. Again, I don't think this is something that really sets the US apart. And who better to judge the competence of a doctor than another doctor, anyway?

      Should I have to pay for my (very far away) neighbor's phone? Or should he move closer to other people so it wouldn't cost so much? Well, considering that this actually happened, most people seem to agree that you should have to pay for your neighbor's phone, just like you also pay for his schools, libraries, parks, etc. (and he pays for yours). The whole "why should I have to spend a dime to help anyone else?" line of argument has not been very successful.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    51. Re:Rebates are a scam by mechsoph · · Score: 1

      The majority of the UK's General Medical Council members are doctors too. Again, I don't think this is something that really sets the US apart. And who better to judge the competence of a doctor than another doctor, anyway?

      The GMC is part of the UK government, so they are sort of accountable to somebody. I'm not aware of anyone that the AMA is accountable to.

      Well, considering that this actually happened, most people seem to agree that you should have to pay for your neighbor's phone, just like you also pay for his schools, libraries, parks, etc. (and he pays for yours).

      Education is a public good and anybody can go to a public park. The only people who benefit from a Universal Service Fee are the people who live out in the boonies. The total cost to society would be less if they lived closer to a population center. Making them pay the true cost for service, or even a differential price, would encourage them to live closer.

      The whole "why should I have to spend a dime to help anyone else?" line of argument has not been very successful.

      You're right, there are plenty of people seeking handouts and they've pushed through laws to provide them. Now, I think it's great to help out the less fortunate, but what I strongly dislike is when people demand part of my earnings for purely their own benefit through force of law.

      Also, thanks for the point about medicare costs. It does seem that they are close to 5%, though private insurance costs may also be close to 9%(pdf warning). I will have to look into this further.

    52. Re:Rebates are a scam by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      The GMC is part of the UK government, so they are sort of accountable to somebody. I'm not aware of anyone that the AMA is accountable to. The AMA doesn't license doctors, though; they're a lobbying group. Licensing is done by state medical boards, whose makeup and accountability are presumably similar to the GMC. For example, California's medical board is made up of "12 physicians and 9 public members appointed by the Governor; 1 public member appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly; and 1 public member appointed by the Senate Rules Committee".

      Education is a public good and anybody can go to a public park. The only people who benefit from a Universal Service Fee are the people who live out in the boonies. Anyone can go to a public park, but anyone can move out into the boonies too. If you choose not to visit the parks you're paying for, that money doesn't benefit you any more than the USF benefits someone who chooses to live in the city.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    53. Re:Rebates are a scam by mechsoph · · Score: 1

      he AMA doesn't license doctors, though; they're a lobbying group.

      The AMA accredits med schools, seldomly.

    54. Re:Rebates are a scam by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      I guess I rest my case, then. That page says there are 125 accredited MD programs in the US, and that the AMA is only a half-sponsor of the LCME anyway. They don't seem to have the power to restrict the supply of doctors, the results don't indicate that the supply is being successfully restricted, and even the idea that they're trying to restrict supply is just a conjecture.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    55. Re:Rebates are a scam by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 1
      I'm interested why should I pay out of my pocket to run a phone line to some shithole little town
      in the middle of nowhere? Let me guess now that internet access has been declared a human right all
      the nice people in small towns and rural communities expect me to pay for their broadband as well?

      But maybe, just maybe they'll one day realize that everything has both benefits and disadvantages.
      Low crime rate, low pollution, friendly neighbors but on the other hand no phone and internet.
      Let them exercise their freedom of will and make informed choices for themselves.

      --
      US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
  12. Not a problem where I live by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rebates are a scam that thankfully has not become common in Finland.

    1. Re:Not a problem where I live by trailerparkcassanova · · Score: 1

      Just wait till we bomb you into becoming good consumers. Those Iraqis just haven't come around but they will once they get their first rebate check.

  13. arrest warrant for key managers by EMB+Numbers · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is so clearly fraud that the MD attorney general should have completed the arrest warrant for key members of Vastech's management by tomorrow morning. With arraignment hopefully postponed until Monday morning, the managers will be well motivated to correct the situation after they post bail.

    In all seriousness, rebate letters that contain irreplaceable original receipts should be handled with the same care as bank deposits, and the same penalty should apply as would apply if a Bank manager discarded all of the night deposits for a bank branch.

    I call this fraud and criminal negligence, and if nobody is prosecuted, it will be a travesty of justice.

    1. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by MobyDisk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Everybody here hates CEOs and likes to hold them liable for everything. I want to hold the individuals responsible. A CEO can't track every little thing every employee does. If I have a company with 10k employees and an employee trashes somebody's rebate form, you can't hold the CEO responsible. Hold the employee responsible.

      This is especially true when I hear of engineers writing rootkits or spyware for a company. I want the balls of the engineer who wrote that code. Likewise, if somebody trashes rebate forms, take it out of their pay checks. These are cases of malicious, intentional damage to a customer and the individual should be held responsible for their actions.

    2. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by bjorniac · · Score: 1

      True, you can't hold a CEO responsible for the actions of all employees, but they are responsible for having procedures in place so that this doesn't happen. Of course, sometimes things are going to slip through, but the CEO is responsible for hiring and firing the people that do it (or some level of abstraction of the people that hire and fire). The employee should have a supervisor who should notice some of the 1300 forms going missing. Hell, even putting one fake test form in with all the others would be a good way to catch this (kinda like putting your own name on a mailing list you pay an external company to handle). So IMHO the CEO holds some responsabilty.

    3. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      If I have a company with 10k employees and an employee trashes somebody's rebate form, you can't hold the CEO responsible.

      The thing is we all find it a bit hard to believe that this is an isolated incident. Do you really think someone investigated this rebate processor and just happened to catch them on the day they threw out 1300 rebate forms?

      People not getting rebates after having filled them out is commonplace. The idea here is this is the smoking gun about what's happening to these rebates.

      If you really buy the line that this was just "one bad employee", then I've got some nice swampland in Florida right in front of the Brooklyn Bridge I'd like to sell you for real cheap.

      --
      AccountKiller
    4. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by Myopic · · Score: 1

      true. on the other hand, in order for companies to consciously hire responsible workers, there must be an incentive to do so. if you only blame the employee, then the companies will just hire minimum wage workers to handle all that stuff.

    5. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by rossz · · Score: 1

      On board a naval vessel, the captain is ultimately responsible for anything and everything. The captain's job is to put the right people into command positions who make sure everything runs smooth. No, the captain can't notice everything happening, but the people he chooses do that for him and report to him.

      A corporate CEO is no different. He should be treated no different. When a low level store manager does something illegal or questionable, the CEO is responsible because he hired (or did not fire) people who allowed it to happen.

      Oh, and keel-hauling the Fry's CEO seems reasonable to me.

      --
      -- Will program for bandwidth
    6. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      "Everybody here hates CEOs and likes to hold them liable for everything. I want to hold the individuals responsible."

      Give me a break, the management is most CERTAINLY in on it. The next time you go into wal-mart or blockbuster whenever the clerk asks you a question ask her or him, DID YOUR MANAGER / BOSS TELL YOU TO SAY THAT TO ME? 99% of the time they will answer 'YES'.

      Don't believe for a second the CEO is NOT responsible, just look at the inflated CEO pay, CEO's are robbers plain and simple. They are probably the worst kind of fucking parasites capitalism has created in modern society.

    7. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      CEO is RESPONSIBLE for all his companies actions. if the CEO is such a tool that he does not know what is going on and does not have a competent management team underneath him to make sure things are done right then the pampered ass needs to be fried.

      That is what they get those huge incomes for, it's not for their witty banter or great story telling.

      Fry a CEO or two really hard and you will see the corporate world straighten up overnight. nothing put in line an overpaid prima donna like a real threat of being jailed with icky poor people.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    8. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by scribblej · · Score: 1

      Whoever modded this insightful has never heard, "Do it or we'll fire you and find someone who will."

    9. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He didn't say CEOs -- he said managers.

      Managers hired the employees. Managers know what their employees are likely to do -- whether they'd cheat, or whether they're honest people. Managers get paid a lot more in part to take risk like this.

      I've been in leadership positions before where I knew I was taking on more risk, precisely because I was in charge of the situation. After all, if the jerk's manager isn't in charge, why is he called "the manager" and paid more?

      Charges against the CEO? Maybe not. Charges against a couple managers? Sure.

    10. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      "This is especially true when I hear of engineers writing rootkits or spyware for a company. I want the balls of the engineer who wrote that code".

      Who writes their paychecks again? Yes, programmers shouldn't be writing root kits, but managers and companies shouldn't be asking them to. Being ordered to isn't an excuse, but that's no excuse for ordering it either.

    11. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by phliar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why would the CEO not be responsible for the actions of his company? I didn't send the rebate form to that disgruntled employee, and it's no concern of mine why my rebate ended up in a dumpster. And not the CEO of that outsourced firm, but the one that sold the original item to the consumer. (Just like that rootkit writer -- if he did it for a company, the company is responsible. Sure, the writer needs lessons in ethics, but the company that paid him is the true villain.)

      But taking responsibility is so out of style! Just hire a PR firm to fix up the bad publicity, grease a few politicians' palms, and give that CEO another bonus!

      --
      Unlimited growth == Cancer.
    12. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by bhalter80 · · Score: 1

      If you were a peon and you acted alone you should be punished, if you were told to do so by your manager or several peons worked together then the manager should get pulled in with the peons. Basically I'm advocating that if you misbehave in a way that a reasonable person would know is wrong at the behest of a supervisior then everyone should get some kind of punishment.

    13. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by number11 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Everybody here hates CEOs and likes to hold them liable for everything. I want to hold the individuals responsible. A CEO can't track every little thing every employee does. If I have a company with 10k employees and an employee trashes somebody's rebate form, you can't hold the CEO responsible. Hold the employee responsible.

      The company is the one that pockets the profit. I say, hold the company responsible. Don't be any harsher on them than on an individual. If stealing that amount would put an individual in jail for 30 days, incarcerate the company for 30 days. Send the marshals around to freeze their bank accounts and padlock their doors for 30 days. First time that happens to a Fortune 500 company, that will make people sit up and pay attention.

    14. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "This is so clearly fraud that the MD attorney general should have completed the arrest warrant for key members of Vastech's management by tomorrow morning."

      Fraud is deliberate. Unless you have some key information proving that their "rogue employee" is false, there's this pesky little clause in the Maryland Constitution's Declaration of Rights that boils down to "innocent unless proven guilty," and you'd have the attorney general's office wasting taxpayer money on a lost cause (and if he won, most of the victims weren't Maryland citizens), something that the voters will likely remember next election day.

    15. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by rtaylor · · Score: 1

      The CEO is directly responsible for morale and hiring practises. If they employee was hired/retained due to dollar concerns, then its his problem.

      If dollars saved on salary is less than dollars lost due to issues from low salary employees (bad PR, lost clients, etc.); CEO made a bad decision.

      --
      Rod Taylor
    16. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      if somebody trashes rebate forms, take it out of their pay checks

      Unfortunately, in a lot of places you aren't allowed to do this. Where I work, we had an employee who would do just this sort of thing, who ended up costing us more money than he even made, and legally all we could do is fire him, which itself took months longer than it should've (yay for nepotism). Really pissed me off, since I had to do all the work he refused to do, and almost a year later I'm still dealing with customers he pissed off and equipment he broke.

      The best you can do in a lot of cases is to get rid of the bad employee ASAP and put in measures to keep it from happening again. I'm surprised there wasn't any sort of system to check that the rebate forms got processed after they were received; that seems like a pretty obvious thing to have when at least part of your business is processing thousands of rebates worth tens of thousands of dollars.

    17. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by EMB+Numbers · · Score: 1

      I didn't say the CEO should be arrested. I said "key managers" should be arrested. IF a rouge employee at a bank trashed 1300 deposit slips before the transaction were completed, it would be called grand theft. The rogue employee would be arrested, but criminal and or civil justice would pursue the manager who failed to maintain reasonable security for deposits. There must be a process in place to prevent fraud and theft. If there isn't such a process, it is managers who are culpable.

    18. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by KKlaus · · Score: 1

      Probably their customers. I know I would be pretty pissed off if suddenly the place I bought my groceries, or software, suddenly had to shut down because some asshole at the flunky level in the company did something illegal.

      --
      Relax I just want some peanuts.
    19. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by fm6 · · Score: 1

      This is so clearly fraud that the MD attorney general should have completed the arrest warrant for key members of Vastech's management by tomorrow morning.
      That's nice. Be sure to thank him for me. But Vastech's a really tiny company, so they're probably incorporated in-state (California). Assuming they're incorporated at all.
    20. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      do you have any documentation of that or are you pulling it out of your ass because you don't like managers?

    21. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by massysett · · Score: 1

      Send the marshals around to freeze their bank accounts and padlock their doors for 30 days.

      Yeah, the CEO goes to play golf for 30 days. The janitor doesn't get paid for 30 days. Small businesses supplying the company don't get paid for 30 days. The only ones hurt are those who can least afford it.

      Better to just go for the CEO.

    22. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by MobyDisk · · Score: 0

      didn't send the rebate form to that disgruntled employee You just fell into the very trap you are trying to avoid: People can now hide behind the company and not be held responsible. I can now throw away the rebate forms into the trash and "ha ha" I'm not responsible because now the CEO is responsible!

      Why would the CEO not be responsible for the actions of his company? Because there may be nothing the CEO could have done about it, and no way for him/her to know. As I said, if there is a company with 10k employees, and somebody's marriage is on the rocks and they throw out the rebate forms, that's not the CEO's fault.
    23. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      Captain != CEO. Captains don't have 10 thousand people working for them, some of whom he/she has never met, who work in a different building in a different area of the world. The rebate forms example is like holding the president responsible for a bar fight by a soldier stationed in Taiwan. Fine - hold the manager of the individual responsible. That makes complete sense because that manager should fire the person, be aware that it happened, and clean it up. But that's a far cry from the CEO.

    24. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      It sounds like you trying to argue, by analogy, that the CEO is personally responsible for every bad thing in a company because they personally told each person to do the bad thing? If that was true, I would agree with you.

      First thing, the CEO isn't the one who told the Blockbuster employee to say that. More likely, the immediate manager and/or their manager. Hold those managers responsible then, if they had personal involvement. But don't automatically hold the CEO responsible if the CEO is in Texas and the employee is in Canada and they've never met.

    25. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      If there was some evidence that the CEO told the person to throw away the forms, that would apply. But we don't have any indication of that.

      Responsibility starts with an individual. If that person can then say "my boss told me to do it" then fine: hold the individual AND the manager responsible. But the individual still did it and is responsible. If that manager says "it is company policy" then walk up the chain. But rarely is the CEO the one who made the policy. In a 50-person company: perhaps. But the company in question here is a multinational, and that isn't likely.

      The problem with "Do it or we'll fire you and find someone who will" is that this absolves the person from actual responsibility. I've been in situations where I've had access to data and been told to send it to someone who should not have it according to the company privacy policy (and basic morality). I refused. Because _I_ am the one turning the key, entering the password, and copying the data. I won't do that just because somebody tells me to. If your boss said to do something blateltly immoral or illegal you would do it, and expect them to be held responsible and you to get off scott free?

      Holding CEO's responsible isn't fixing these problems. Because CEO's don't know they are happening, and the only way they have to solve them is micro-management. Really, it's impossible at that level. The best thing to do is hold responsible the people who did it, and stop letting them hide behind the corporation and absolve their conscience. Companies are made up of people, not mindless automatons, and not a single figurehead who puppets all their actions.

    26. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      I almost agree with you: Are you saying the immediate managers who ordered it should be held responsible too? I'm all for that. Don't let the middle managers get away either if they are responsible (they probably are). Responsibility starts with the individual, and works it's way up.

      Ex:
      Joe wrote the code.
      Sally, Joe's boss, said "make a rootkit"
      Herman, Sally's boss, said "make it secure"

      Sounds like Joe goes to jail for doing something illegal, Sally goes to jail for the same crime for coordinating it, and Herman is fired and maybe Fined because he can't manage his employees properly.

    27. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      The CEO is the company. The CEO is the only one who can unilaterally define how and why the company does something. Every CEO has the power to require and enforce quality assurance at every level. He or she also generally gets paid commensurate with the size of the company. A person is not worth a couple thousand dollars an hour to sit on his or her butt and say "it's somebidy else's fault." (That's the job of the US president, and he only gets $250/hr for that).

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    28. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "First thing, the CEO isn't the one who told the Blockbuster employee to say that. More likely, the immediate manager and/or their manager. Hold those managers responsible then, if they had personal involvement."

      Not all companies are the same. CEO's and managers are in cahootz a good part of the time there buddy. Somebody gives the order and it's just "understood" (unspoken) rules of what you have to do usually. For instance, I've lived and I've worked in many places and not all workplaces are the same.

    29. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by number11 · · Score: 1

      The only ones hurt are those who can least afford it.

      Isn't that true whenever you punish any criminal? Send Shifty Dick to the pen for six months, people that he owes money to don't get paid, his wife and kids don't get supported, the paperboy and the kid who mows the lawn don't get paid. And most B2B payments have deadlines and a provision for stiff (18% or more) interest to be charged if the payment is late, so they will get something in exchange for the slow payment.

      Corporations are treated as "people" in the US. I think that's a stupid idea, but that's what the law is. But while they get the ability to own property, and have free speech, and be responsible for their own actions, that responsibility doesn't anywhere near meet what a "natural person" has. Like doing time if they do crime, or getting the ability to "serve their country" if there's conscription (if businesses would get nationalized for the duration, we'd never have a war).

      Frankly, the idea here is to punish the company's owners. That would be the stockholders, usually. Stockholders don't usually give a damn what a company does, crime or no, so long as it makes money, they go with whatever management wants, they put the people on the board that management tells them to. A fine that would be staggering for you or I is just petty cash for most corporations, but a day in jail is equally burdensome (and expensive, proportionately). I think if the company was liable to get 30 days in the pen, stockholders would pay a lot more attention to the ethics and honesty of their employees (that is, management et al.). And as a practical matter, this avoids the problem of determining exactly who knew (or should have known, or did) what. If HP hires somebody to fraudulently obtain telephone records, why should HP's punishment be any different than what the punishment would be if you or I did the same?

    30. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IMHO, you are both wrong... The CEO would be responsible to the shareholders for making the company valuable. A consumer should be able to keep a company responsible for its actions (which may affect the company value, only indirectly affecting the CEO, because the shareholders can hold the CEO responsible for what the consumer actions are doing to the value of the company), and the _company_ is the only one that can hold the employee responsible. As a consumer, you should never have to take action against an individual when your dealings are with the company, your actions should be for and/or against the company as its own legal entity.

    31. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by number11 · · Score: 1

      The CEO is the company.

      Sort of. But the CEO is not (usually) the owner.

      I'd be perfectly happy to hold the CEO personally responsible for the acts of the corporation, but it seems to me that's a much harder step than just to hold the corporation responsible. That avoids the whole question about whether the CEO knew, whether he should have known, etc. We have created a legal monster, the "corporation", and it's high time we applied to it the same rules that apply to the rest of us organisms.

    32. Re:arrest warrant for key managers by rossz · · Score: 1

      No, I don't expect a CEO to get thrown into jail because of one crooked employee. However, the CEO should be held fully responsible if he allowed a "culture of corruption" to exist in his corporation. One time is a fluke, a bunch of times is company policy.

      --
      -- Will program for bandwidth
  14. No surpise... by jak10900 · · Score: 3, Informative

    To my knowledge most rebate handling companies are given x amount of dollars to in turn give out y dollars to the customers. Whatever is leftover is theirs to keep.

    x - y = profit

    So they're not really inclined to process every single rebate form that comes through there.

  15. I always treat rebates as chance to win. by netsavior · · Score: 4, Funny

    Buy this RAM and you have a chance to win 50 dollars by mail!

    Price comparison should always be done while ignoring rebates.

    1. Re:I always treat rebates as chance to win. by jak10900 · · Score: 1

      Oh man, and if you get a receipt with the web survey with another chance to win $500... we're high rollin'!

    2. Re:I always treat rebates as chance to win. by Loconut1389 · · Score: 1

      +5, sad but true

      I always look at it at the store price and decide if that's a good deal, then tell myself if I get the rebate, it'll be really nice.

    3. Re:I always treat rebates as chance to win. by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      You must be exceptionally disorganized. I've not received 2 out of about 100 or so rebates in the last ten years. It usually takes me about 5 minutes to compile and photocopy the rebate submission, date it, and put it in a file folder in my desk. I wrote off a $5 rebate from (forgot the vendor) and a $5 rebate from Disney, as there was no cotact info on the form to call. Oh, actaully, I didn't get a third one for about $100 last winter...I contacted the seller, who refunded my credit card for the non-hornored rebate. Oh, did I mention that I print a copy of the web page or ad from the seller, so if there's a problem, they know they are facing a false-advertising claim? Most disputes take about 5-10 minutes of time, and most of that can be spent on hold while I do something useful (like post on /.)

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  16. Toothpaste for dinner.... by dashslotter · · Score: 2, Funny
    --
    I was flipping bits on an abacus, newb.
  17. Whereas I disagree by PCM2 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Seems like half the equipment sitting on my desk right now I bought with the aid of a rebate. I got two rebates on my desktop CPU, I got a rebate on my laptop, a rebate on my wireless router, one on my Wacom tablet, another on my monitor ... all of them have been honored.

    In fact, if you want to go into details, the manufacturer of my laptop actually offered a rebate on it about two months after I bought mine. That pissed me off, so I doctored up a copy of the store receipt with a later date. It was honored, and I'm not sorry.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
    1. Re:Whereas I disagree by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      What is the point of rebates anyway?
      why not just lower the price in the first place... Cut the admin overhead and hassle for the customer.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    2. Re:Whereas I disagree by Bigbutt · · Score: 1

      1. Advertise $199.
      2. 100% pay $199.

      or

      1. Advertise $199, pay $299.
      2. 50% either don't send in rebate forms, they are lost in the mail (or dumpster), or are disallowed.
      3. 5% don't bother to come in (bait and switch, address harvesting, etc...)
      4. Profit!

      Sounds like a no-brainer.

      [John]

      --
      Shit better not happen!
    3. Re:Whereas I disagree by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      3.5 Float the extra $100 x 20,000 buyers x 2 months and collect the interest.

    4. Re:Whereas I disagree by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1
      Which isn't chump change:

      $100 x 20,000 buyers x 2 months (assuming 5% money market account): $16,667

    5. Re:Whereas I disagree by acvh · · Score: 1

      A few legit reasons for rebates:

      1 - Accounting practices. Retailer already paid for product. Manufacturer already recognized income. If retailer lowers price it looks like lower margin, or even a loss. If manufacturer gives money to retailers profits go down, or other retailers scream "collusion" or "price-fixing." WITH rebates the retailer gets original price and margin, and manufacturer can write off amount as marketing expense.

      2 - Test marketing. Product selling fair quantity at $100. Offer $10 rebate. Sales remain flat. Don't lower price. Sales increase? Lower price and make more. (no, YOU do the math)

  18. 1300 * $X is no longer a misdemeanor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's getting into grand theft range if not already there.

    BC

    1. Re:1300 * $X is no longer a misdemeanor by asphaltjesus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'll go with your assumption that there is somewhere a statute that is violated. What's the penalty for this crime? Probably a slap on the wrist.

      I'll go with you one further and assume there is a serious crime, with lots of precedence that some prosecutor can win:

      Let's say the rebates are for $20: $26,000 is the amount of the crime. Let's say the rebates are for $50: $65,000 is the amount of the crime. What's the cost to prosecute? Way more than $65,000 after judges, courtrooms and prosecutor costs are estimated. That's not even considering what happens when the rebate processor lawyers-up and drags this thing down and out.

      The company gets a day of bad press and that's about it. HP's CEO/board members got away with far, far worse with practically no penalty whatsoever. Certainly nothing that won't be forgotten in a couple of years.

      Laws are to prosecute the individuals and corporations without enough money to lawyer-up.

      --
      Got Trader Joe's? friendwich.com RSS feeds work now!
    2. Re:1300 * $X is no longer a misdemeanor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Unless the rebates were for more than $100, it'll be 1300 misdemanor counts of petty theft. Still bad, with a jail term of up to 1300 years.

    3. Re:1300 * $X is no longer a misdemeanor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      > Let's say the rebates are for $20: $26,000 is the amount of the crime. Let's say the rebates are for $50: $65,000 is the amount of the crime. What's the cost to prosecute? Way more than $65,000 after judges, courtrooms and prosecutor costs are estimated. That's not even considering what happens when the rebate processor lawyers-up and drags this thing down and out.

      Sounds like an interesting opportunity for someone with too much money and 10% of their time on their hands. "beta.robolawyer.google.com", anyone?

    4. Re:1300 * $X is no longer a misdemeanor by cgenman · · Score: 1

      Don't forget: by sending in your rebate form you agree to binding dispute resolution in the state of Virginia at your cost.

  19. A fitting punishment. by Erris · · Score: 1

    Fry's gets a Vas[tech]ectomy.

    --
    DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
  20. Class Action, anyone? by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    Ok, i'm waiting for the class action lawsuit for fraud.

    1. Re:Class Action, anyone? by Nimey · · Score: 1

      Why, so the lawyers can make millions and the people defrauded can get another $19 rebate?

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    2. Re:Class Action, anyone? by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      and a message can be sent to the rebate companies that that will not be tolerated.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    3. Re:Class Action, anyone? by Nimey · · Score: 1

      That's what the *criminal* court system is for.

      Jesus Christ.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    4. Re:Class Action, anyone? by rts008 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, and they will taunt you again.

      Perhaps we could build a large wooden badger.....

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    5. Re:Class Action, anyone? by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      That's what the *criminal* court system is for.


      That's also what class action lawsuits are for.
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
  21. Can't be. by rk · · Score: 4, Funny

    He was far too polite for that.

    1. Re:Can't be. by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Funny
      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:Can't be. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was far too polite for that.


      Nah. He's an imposter.

      How do I know? No jazzed mentions of short-arms inspections and/or cavity searches.

      "To protect you I must search all packages and bodily cavities, bwaba-san. It is as the special forces big=guy taught when I was a young nubile sprat, in the jungles of southeast asia, sweat glistening on my firm, taught, young muscles, silhouetted in the fading sun. Strung tight, and yet plump ... I don't see that Snickers bar listed on this register tape; oh wait, there it is.

      Thank you benficient sir! Come in tomorrow for a $5,000 plasma TV and I will give you the prostate exam you deserve."

      Which is why I personally love Frys. All the tech in one place and you get the happy ending you can afford. All behind a blood cult facade!
  22. ...which I plan to return to him...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Tan requested the unprocessed rebate forms, which I plan to return to him."

    So he can properly shred them?

    These forms should be turned over to police or other authorities,
    not given back to the fraudulent company.

  23. Related to Fatwallet's crazy rebate scheme? by Organic+User · · Score: 2, Insightful

    About a month ago the fatwallet community produced a crazy rebate scheme where you profit off bundled software. The scheme originated in this thread. The scheme has since been used for many more deals. I am just wondering if it is related? The rebate T&C say the rebate can not be for more than the cost of the product. The scheme worked by claiming rebates from the retailer (by buying a hardware and software bundle) and the software distributor at the same time and assuming they don't realize your the same person (i.e. lack of communication from the retailer and distributor). To sweeten the scheme you could buy competing software packages and use them for the upgrade rebate. If this is related then Frys must of caught onto the scheme.

    1. Re:Related to Fatwallet's crazy rebate scheme? by Ecuador · · Score: 1

      You clearly have not read TFA, otherwise I can't explain this highly irrelevant post. Nobody's "caught on" to any "scheme" and in fact TFA isn't really about Fry's (and neither is the FatWallet thread of course).
      In any case, I found the FatWallet thread very amusing (still highly irrelevant). It is a game of cats and mice. The manufacturers try to trick buyers with their "Free after rebate" offerings and some buyers actually take on the risky task of beating them at their own game. And of course the July thread you linked on is certainly not one of the first such threads - although it is one of the most impressive ones. People have been doing this for years (at least since 2000 on FatWallet for example), but it is definately nothing like a "get rich" scheme. It requires a lot of work for rather small an not guarranteed returns. However I do understand how some people like to "beat the system". And the annoying (euphemism) rebate system is something that needs to be beat and abandonded by all.

      --
      Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
  24. Annoying, but they usually work for me.... by PeterChenoweth · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I hate mail-in rebates as much as the next guy, and try to purchase things from vendors that don't use them whenever I can, but I have to say that I don't think I've ever had one *not* work. I totally agree that it is just some accounting trick that should be banished, but none-the-less, they've always worked for me.

    Over the years I've mailed in probably two dozen rebates for various products at brick-and-mortar places like Best Buy, Circuit City, Office Depot, Staples, AT&T/Cingular, etc. I'm referring to $25-$200+ back on things like laptops, TV's, Tivos, software, cell phones, etc. I had a Cingular rebate once that was 4 weeks overdue. One 10 minute phone call and the rebate was re-issued and arrived 3 days later. I've even done a couple of the 'come test drive the new Mazda Whatever and get a $25 gift card' rebates, and those have always arrived as well.

    OTOH, I've never bothered with the '$3.50 rebate on a $5 pack of CD-R' type things, as it's just not worth my time.

    FWIW, I've always carefully followed the directions and have received the rebates within roughly the correct time period as stated. I keep a copy of everything I sent and make a note in my calendar for 6,8,12,whatever weeks away that I should have received it and then just forget about it until then. My point is, rebates suck, but they aren't *always* a scam....

    1. Re:Annoying, but they usually work for me.... by rokii · · Score: 1

      Worked mostly for me too.... until one rebate from "MGE Company" for something I got at Frys. The company's rebate web site had all my information with red: Rebate Disqualification Reason: Missing reciept Mind you, the rebate form was one of those rebate receipts, you know, where the rebate form is the receipt.... I never heard back from the company's "Customer Service". So, I will never buying anything from MGE Company, and I avoid anything with a rebate, especially from Frys, with few exceptions. (Staples and Costco have been pretty good about their rebates.)

    2. Re:Annoying, but they usually work for me.... by timeOday · · Score: 1

      My point is, rebates suck, but they aren't *always* a scam....
      And then there are companies like Amp'd. I hounded them for months for my $100 rebate. The last time they finally agreed to credit my account with $100 worth of airtime. That, coincidentally (I think not), was the day before they went out of business and ceased operations.
    3. Re:Annoying, but they usually work for me.... by sconeu · · Score: 1

      So you're the guy who forced them out of business!

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    4. Re:Annoying, but they usually work for me.... by fm6 · · Score: 1

      I totally agree that it is just some accounting trick that should be banished...
      No, it's not an accounting trick. At least not for small-ticket items. Unless a rebate is for thousands of dollars, many consumers will never claim it: they'll forget, or lose the paperwork. That allows the retailer to advertise a price that is much lower than what many consumers will pay. And retailing is not about what a thing actually costs, it's about what consumers perceive as the cost. That's why prices are usually odd figures and rarely include sales tax.

      Anyway, despite your experience, many companies are not honest about rebates. They know they can reject a rebate, or just "forget" to process it, and very few people will find it worthwhile to call them on this fraud.

      If rebates were just an accounting trick, they wouldn't be as widely hated as they are.
  25. Compusa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rebate central - hence the reason I don't choose to do business with them anymore..

    1. Re:Compusa by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      At least CompUSA has e-rebates that you can submit online just by typing in a few numbers from your receipt. I just sent in a couple Newegg rebates, and I had to print a copy of my multi-page invoice, cut out the bar codes, and even enclose the original packing list from the box. Good thing the two products came in separate boxes!

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
  26. It was done on purpose by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

    Next time you file for a rebate, remember to read the clause in fine print.

    Not responsible for late, lost, damaged, or misdirected mail.

    So they throw it in the trash. Sounds legal to me. My advice would be to avoid them unless you're feeling lucky.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re:It was done on purpose by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      IANAL but I have had a contract management course, and clauses like that in a contract (a rebate is a form of contract, offer and acceptance is all that are required) are considered. It's along the lines of saying "I'm not liable" when you clearly are. If you were to press teh issue you'd almost certainly win, just depends on what it's worth to you.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    2. Re:It was done on purpose by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      D'oh! Preview button, gotta remember that. Such clauses are usually considered unenforceable by the courts, and the rebate company would have to honor it regardless.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
  27. My 2 cents (after $2 rebate) by sizzzzlerz · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I've stopped buying products advertised at a price after rebate. It simply isn't worth the hassle to assemble the appropriate documentation, photocopy it, file the photocopy, and then send it in. Then, 6 to 8 weeks later, start phoning the company asking where my rebate is. All that to save a few bucks on some cheap piece of Chinese-made crap simply isn't worth my time. I'll continue to review the ads and buy something I want when it is truly on sale. As a result, I've pretty much stopped going in to Fry's since nearly everything has some sort of rebate attached to it. I never go to Best Buy either, partly for the same reason, but mainly because their prices are always high and their service sucks so bad.

    Does this matter to a place like Fry's. Admittedly, no it doesn't, but I feel better about it.

  28. I sometimes forget things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like I know I've done two rebates in the past year that I never received. I decided I would do a search on Google, rebate status was the search. I started entering in my info on each site and guess what, I did find my info on one site and it was one of the items in question. I just wrote them an inquisitive email pointing out that this story spurred me to check. Apparently they never received my info. This would literally be the first time that the USPS ever lost mail that I sent. Somehow I'm guessing that just really wasn't the case.

  29. And this is why..... by Roskolnikov · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When shopping for tech toys I always treat the rebate as secondary, the price has to be the lowest before the rebate, if the rebate is instant even better but you just can rely on the companies servicing these things
    to come through; read the fine print on most of the rebates and you will find that you are responsible for making sure the company has received and processed your rebate, once its sent you've more than likely sent the only copy you have along with the original qualifying UPC/product label, once that's lost your chances at getting the rebate fulfilled are next to nil.

    This kind of news just amuses me, it is obvious though that the company didn't do this intentionally, that kind of move would have involved shredding.

    --
    Unix, an obscure operating system developed by bored researchers in an attempt to get a better game playing experience.
  30. I'll bet... by ShatteredArm · · Score: 1

    I'll bet they don't ever have this problem with payments.

    I can see it now... "1300 Unopened Liberty Mutual Insurance Payments Found In Dumpster." Yeah, if they can keep track of the letters they actually want, they should be able to keep track of the ones they don't want.

    1. Re:I'll bet... by sricetx · · Score: 2, Funny

      "1300 Unopened Liberty Mutual Insurance Payments Found In Dumpster." It would be from 1300 people who had filed big insurance claims, of course, so the company could get out of paying the claims by arguing the customers hadn't paid their premiums. Never trust an insurance company, all of them are crooks.

  31. Why's this news? by tuxlove · · Score: 1

    I don't think I've ever had a rebate form honored by Fry's. I've given up submitting them, and treat the money as lost if/when I buy the item in the first place. I think it's a bit unfair to blame a single "bad employee", when by all indications the problem seems systemic and widespread. Does anyone really think that suddenly this problem will just go away now that they've found and fired the single bad apple employee responsible for disposing of the rebate forms?

    1. Re:Why's this news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All 1300 are yours. Someone there really hates you.

  32. I do a lot of rebates by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

    and other than a company that went out of business I have not had problems.

    Still I will pay $10 bucks more to avoid a $50 rebate.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  33. Grammar Nazi in the House by The+Monster · · Score: 5, Funny

    If this is related then Frys must of caught onto the scheme.
    Please stop killing English.
    --

    [100% ISO 646 Compliant]
    SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.

    1. Re:Grammar Nazi in the House by onion_joe · · Score: 0, Troll

      what are you, some damn snob-assed English student? I'm from the South, where we speak whatevah the hell we wanna!

      --
      sig sig sig siggy sig
    2. Re:Grammar Nazi in the House by AeroIllini · · Score: 1

      Why, are there mysterious deaths in England?

      --
      For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
    3. Re:Grammar Nazi in the House by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      "You all" is contracted Y'all, not Yawl. "Must have" is verbally contracted as Must've, not Must of.

    4. Re:Grammar Nazi in the House by onion_joe · · Score: 1
      Troll mod?

      Jumpin' Jesus on a pogo stick, sarcasm escapes you uptight Blue Staters.

      --
      sig sig sig siggy sig
    5. Re:Grammar Nazi in the House by onion_joe · · Score: 1

      actually, its "ya'll." You are correct regarding the latter.

      --
      sig sig sig siggy sig
    6. Re:Grammar Nazi in the House by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, you'll find that both "y'all" and "ya'll" listed in the dictionary. (no, not just in "bubba's dictionary.")

    7. Re:Grammar Nazi in the House by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, the dictionary. The most useless book since How to Speak French was translated into French.

    8. Re:Grammar Nazi in the House by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Why should ya'll be valid? What is omitted between the a and ll to warrant an apostrophe?

      kvite kun tio. Mi estas movanta Esperanto.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  34. Me too! by AmazingRuss · · Score: 1

    Are you listening, you bait-and-switch retailers?
    (shakes tiny fist)

    1. Re:Me too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you listening, you bait-and-switch retailers?
      (shakes tiny fist) (tiny fist matched with very tiny cock)
    2. Re:Me too! by Tiny+Fist · · Score: 5, Funny
      (shakes tiny fist)

      Cut it out.

    3. Re:Me too! by kent_eh · · Score: 1

      Me too ... too.

      Sheesh, this is starting to sound like a usenet thread...

      --

      ---
      "I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
  35. Let's Play "Rumor"! by fm6 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yes, Fry's is the worst retailer on the planet, and rebates are an evil scam. But...

    I read the original Mercury-News story earlier today. It's version is that Vastech is a computer accessories company that distributes through Fry's (among other retailers) and that processes its own rebates (hey, throwing them out is "processing" isn't it?). The dumped envelopes were discovered by an employee at a neighboring company, who gave them to his boss, who gave them to Dean Takahashi, who wrote the Mercury-News story.

    The story was quoted in an article on Consumerist, which in turn is quoted in this article. By the time Slashdot had posted it, the envelope's had been retrieved by the reporter, and Vastech had morphed from a flaky hardware reseller to a Fry's rebate processing contractor!

    Ok, it's natural that a story should change a little as it passes from ear to ear. But to get so many facts wrong after just two iterations? Come on, people!

    Another thing that bothers me is Takahashi's outrage over those 1300 envelopes. Not that I don't share his hatred of rebates. But the big offenders are not little companies like Vastech (which would probably have gone out of business soon anyway, even if Fry's hadn't just cancelled all their orders). It's big companies that go through the motions of honoring rebates, but almost always have an excuse for not paying or an indefinite "processing delay". If we're going to be pissed off, let's be pissed off at the right people!

    1. Re:Let's Play "Rumor"! by heson · · Score: 1

      No the consumer is to blame. If consumers refuse to play the rebate scam game, real prices will lower instead.

    2. Re:Let's Play "Rumor"! by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Customers don't "play the rebate game". Customers mostly loathe rebates. Rebates are about lowering the perceived price of the product. Whenever I see an advertised price and then see the magic words "(after rebate)", I have to remind myself that I can't count on actually getting the rebate (especially since I'll probably forget to fill out the form and send it in), but there's still that moment when I'm associating the bogus price with the product. This psychology is all the more interesting because I haven't applied for a rebate in years. Planting that bogus price in our consciousness is the whole point of the system.

  36. mistakes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When someone makes a mistake that puts money in their pocket, do not be suprised when that mistake is made over and over and over again.

  37. In Canada... by p0tat03 · · Score: 1

    We have this store called Future Shop, which is about equivalent to your Best Buy in the US. I've noticed that over the last year or so they've started processing all rebates at the checkout counter and submitting electronically. I suppose that is a more secure way to ensure your money does arrive - after all, the clerk did it himself, and if they "lose" it, it's their own fault.

    Maybe retailers should start fronting the rebate and recovering it from the processors at a later time...

    1. Re:In Canada... by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      Best Buy belongs to Future Shop, which explains it all...

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    2. Re:In Canada... by Dorceon · · Score: 1

      It's the other way around, actually.

      --
      What sound do people on rollercoasters make? Hint: it's not Xbox 360.
    3. Re:In Canada... by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      CompUSA was doing something similar the last time I bought a rebated item there (roughly a year ago). They told me to go to their website and enter a code number printed on the sales receipt, no form to fill out, no UPC, just a website entry and everything else was automatic. The site said "Allow 6-8 weeks for delivery" and of course it took exactly 8 weeks, but they did pay.

      rj

    4. Re:In Canada... by Mad+Merlin · · Score: 1

      We have Best Buys as well. Despite being basically the same store, they often vary (significantly) on prices for the same item.

    5. Re:In Canada... by p0tat03 · · Score: 1

      I often favour FS over BB. Best Buy advertises that none of their staff are on commission, and thus are not likely to get aggressive trying to sell you things - but I've found that in my local BB this is taken to the other extreme - I couldn't get a straight answer out of anyone, trying to find an item. The staff bounced me from one to another just trying to find a goddamn USB hub.

      At least at Future Shop if I tell a guy I need a USB hub, he will bust his ass and show me the selection.

  38. Scam? by kir · · Score: 1

    I bought $3300 dollars worth of appliances (fridge, washer & dryer) that came with a 15% mail in rebate from Sears in January. Of course, the day I made the purchase I sent the paperwork in with my receipts. It's now September and I still have no rebate. I've been told numerous times by "Mark" or "Craig" or "Andy" (really, how many Indian guys have names like that?) that they never received the rebate paperwork. They also kindly mentioned that since it's passed the required postmark date I am no longer entitled to the rebate. I have been fighting this battle on and off now for months.

    Today, I was finally given a new address to send my rebates. Supposedly, this place will not deny me because of the postmark. I sent it off at lunch. Something tells me that address goes to the postal system's equivalent of /dev/null.

    Lessen learned - When dealing with a mail in rebate THAT'S EFFEN $400+, send the damn paperwork via certified mail. I probably wouldn't be dealing with this crap if I did.

    So basically... Fry's partner doing this doesn't surprise me.

    --
    3cx.org - A truly bad website.
    1. Re:Scam? by The+Salamander · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You could try contesting the charge on your credit card... (If you used one..)

      I got the run-around on a $100 rebate on a $2000 fujitsu laptop, and my CC company happily took back the entire $2k until I finally got it.

      Strangely enough, just days after the chargeback they seemed very interested in fulfilling the rebate.

    2. Re:Scam? by kir · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, I put it on my shiny new Sears card (set up the day of the purchase). They also had 0% interest deal for 12 months on a Sears charge card. At least I didn't get screwed over on that. Couple more payments and it's paid off.

      --
      3cx.org - A truly bad website.
    3. Re:Scam? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, ever heard of certified mail or something else with a tracking number or delivery confirmation? My math shows 15% of $3300 being somewhere near $500. I would think that it would be worth the $2.50 or whatever it is to ensure delivery.

    4. Re:Scam? by kir · · Score: 1

      Try READING the damn post next time asshole.

      --
      3cx.org - A truly bad website.
    5. Re:Scam? by amaiman · · Score: 1

      Certified mail is one idea (if you're willing to pay the few bucks), but it doesn't always work. There's one particularly annoying rebate company that I've dealt with the specifically says that "certified/return receipt requested mail will not be accepted". This is after making you register on their web site for a "rebate redemption code", writing it all over the envelope, pasting on their special mailing label, etc.

  39. Almost never sent in rebates until.... by stix213 · · Score: 0

    I almost never send in rebates, because I never receive the cash. Until, a few years back when I was broke. Even though I was totally broke, I still wanted a new laptop. So, I bought a new Dell Inspiron 5100 (new at the time) which had a $50 mail in rebate.

    A month or so later I was $50 short on rent, just 50 freaking dollars.... I didn't know what to do, no friends had money to borrow.... Then on the day my rent was due, that $50 rebate check came! My bank puts small amounts like that instantly into my account when I use the ATM, so I barely made it. I've never had a late rent check before or since. So, I can't hate on Dell's rebates because they have actually saved my butt.

  40. I have also noticed... by BlurredOne · · Score: 1

    I have also noted that mail in rebates frequently require you to send in the original UPC from the box to qualify for the rebate. Also a good scam, because if you ever need to send the item back for RMA, they wont honor it because you don't have an unaltered box with the original UPC.

    1. Re:I have also noticed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm you can still RMA warranty defects to the original manufacturer without a upc symbol. The only thing sending the rebate+box UPC does is "confirm" to the manufacturer/retailer that you now can't return the item to the retailer; Which is what rebates are really all about.

  41. Fry's mail-in rebates are worthless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fry's mail-in rebates are worthless!

    I have approximately $1,200 in Fry's mail-in rebates outstanding that are still owed me.
    The only rebate I actually received from Fry's was uncashable. The rebate came months late (2 days from expiration on check) from an out-of-country bank account that would cost more to process in bank fees than the rebate itself.

  42. offtopic but rebates are bs by micromuncher · · Score: 1

    I don't know why anyone is surprised by this because How many people follow up on a rebate? Most people forget, and those that don't aren't usually bothered to waste the time to follow it up.

    Offtopic:
    Personally, I will never buy a Symantec product again because the last two I bought (norton antivirus, partitionmagic) had "upgrade rebates", upon which sending in the rebates and original UPCs, I got letters back from the rebate company saying 1) I didn't supply the original UPC and 2) I didn't provide the original sales invoice (one was an electronic purchase.) Of course how can I argue; as I no longer had my UPCs... Symantec says its not their problem, its the rebate company...

    --
    /\/\icro/\/\uncher
    1. Re:offtopic but rebates are bs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Symantec did the same thing to me. Although this is a big company, my experience is that they are a bunch of sleazeballs.

    2. Re:offtopic but rebates are bs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why the hell would you buy the horrible bloatware that is a Symantec product anyways?

      And with the added discouragement of a mail in rebate?

      Are you stupid?

    3. Re:offtopic but rebates are bs by micromuncher · · Score: 1

      Try not be anonymous; makes it easier to ridicule you. Anyone who posts a comment that obviates content just to namecall is has a bit of the asshole...

      --
      /\/\icro/\/\uncher
    4. Re:offtopic but rebates are bs by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      FWIW, I had no problem getting a $50 rebate from Symantec for a $49.99 purchase of the Norton Antivirus 3-user pack from Fry's.

      And while you couldn't pay me to install SystemWorks or Internet Security, NAV 2007 isn't that bad. My impression is that they had to remove some of the bloat from 2006 in order to get it to work on Vista. Helpful tip: don't bother with the CD in the box, just download the demo from Symantec's web site and enter the serial number within a week or so.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  43. There Ought to Be A Law by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    I view rebates as fraud plain and simple. If a company tells me "This item is $x but has a $y mail in rebate," I translate that to "We're advertising this at $x - $y in order to defraud you, the customer." Note that lately they don't advertise at the "rebate price" anymore. Too many bait and switch lawsuits, I guess. So they just advertise the rebate separately. Nonetheless the attitude at the store that you're actually likely to get anything back still rubs me the wrong way. I will go out of my way to not shop at stores that make a habit of it and I will not purchase an item that has a rebate offer associated with it even though I expect to get nothing back. At the very least it indicates that the company wants me to waste my time jumping through hoops for them, at worst it indicates that they were actually hoping to deceive me. In either case, I don't want to give them my money.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  44. Gullible is no longer in the dictionary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    No offense, but what really amazes me are people like yourself who actually believe that the CEO didn't do this himself. Honesstly, just because he calls himself the CEO doesn't mean a thing; and yet people get snowed over by titles.

    We're talking about a small shop here. If you've ever worked in one, everybody knows what everyone else is doing. The so-called CEO could well have done it himself in order to spare himself from potential blackmail in court with a witness.

    1. Re:Gullible is no longer in the dictionary by Original+Replica · · Score: 5, Insightful

      what really amazes me are people like yourself who actually believe that the CEO didn't do this himself.

      Regardless of if the CEO actually did the physical work,the CEO should be held responsible. Here's how I see it, if an employee does something good and the company makes $$$, what share of that does the employee get and what share does the CEO and other upper management get? Why should the distribution of criminal guilt be any different? All of the rewards and none of the responsibility just doesn't ring true to me.

      --
      We are all just people.
    2. Re:Gullible is no longer in the dictionary by virgil_disgr4ce · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think words like "CEO" and "employee" are pretty out of context here for good old Vastech. I think the words we want are "hey you" and "that guy that's that other guy's cousin."

      OT: Vastech? Did they used to sell Vaseline or do vasectomies or something? Did someone tell them, "hey, rebates man, that's where the REAL money is!"

    3. Re:Gullible is no longer in the dictionary by StikyPad · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh man.. there's a vas deferens between rebates and surgery.

    4. Re:Gullible is no longer in the dictionary by TheRealBurKaZoiD · · Score: 1

      Agreed. It's called the "doctrine of command responsibility".

    5. Re:Gullible is no longer in the dictionary by loxosceles · · Score: 1

      Regardless of if the CEO actually did the physical work,the CEO should be held responsible. Here's how I see it, if an employee does something good and the company makes $$$, what share of that does the employee get and what share does the CEO and other upper management get? Why should the distribution of criminal guilt be any different? All of the rewards and none of the responsibility just doesn't ring true to me.

      They do not get all the rewards. Their percentage stake in the company is independent of their role as CEO, and their salary is determined by the board, not directly by corporate profits.

      If the company makes money, the company's shareholders make money, not (just) the CEO. The CEO gets paid as determined by the board, and the board is elected by the shareholders. CEOs often have a good chunk of stock, sometimes even a majority stake, but that's not always so. If you want to punish the CEO for bad actors inside the company simply because the CEO profits when the company profits, you should also want to punish each and every shareholder.

      No CEO wants bad actors inside a company. A bad actor, in severe cases, can generate enough loses, or enough bad press, to sink the company. No CEO wants that, because it would reflect badly on his/her reputation. Holding a CEO personally liable for actions of an employee is not reasonable. Companies have too many employees for someone to bear personal liability for anything bad done by any employee. Simple probability dictates that the liability would be too great, and all the good CEOs would flee their jobs.

      CEOs have enormous responsibility, especially after the recent SEC changes designed to avoid future Enron/Worldcom debacles. Executives have more government-mandated liability and duties than ever before. They have duties to their boards, and to all their shareholders by proxy. They have duties to maintain a healthy work environment, or employees will flee and the company will tank. What they do not, and should not have, is responsibility for every crazy thing done by every crazy employee.

      Maybe corporations need to be reformed to be more accountable. Maybe there needs to be more oversight at all levels. But ask yourself whether we'd have the internet at all if corporations were much more constrained than they are now. Without places to invest large amounts of money with isolation from (often frivolous) liability, few people would be building infrastructure or producing products with high r&d costs. Be careful what you wish for.

  45. Re:Pretty sure they can't do that by J'raxis · · Score: 1

    I see no conflict there: Perhaps his moral values don't include obeying laws he doesn't agree with. Mine don't, either. Or are you one of those people who think that what's legal and moral or the same thing?

  46. "The Consumerist is reporting"? by Mumei+no+koshinuke · · Score: 1

    You mean "copying verbatim from the Mercury News?"

    If you read the article-
    Vastech is not really a "rebate processor for Fry's".
    They made the equipment for which the rebates were being offered.

    But of course I agree that rebates are a waste of everyone's time,
    I've been screwed countless times by Fry's rebates...

  47. Especially when you have a PO Box by quanta · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Where I live, the US Post Office doesn't send a uniformed employee to my house with the mail. I have to drive down 2 miles of dirt road and dial into my box at the local Post Office.

    Needless to say, this cuts out a LOT of rebates, which demand sending the check by US Mail to your street address. Which in my case will just get bounced.

    Occasionally, the form will accept the 9 digit zip code, so I can sneak that in and hope for the best.

    I've offered to write a small database to match the PO boxes with the actual street addresses, but they (the PO), couldn't care less.

    Always wondered if it's legal to force US mail to a non-deliverable address, but I haven't found out anything which describes this situation.

  48. What you do by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    Is just send them in via certified mail. That's where the post office tracks the letter and keeps a record of delivery. Also, keep a photocopy of all the filled out forms. Most of the time, you'll get your money no problem, it just takes a long ass time (8 weeks usually). If you don't, well you just call them and explain the situation. They'll no doubt say they didn't get it and aren't responsible. You then say "Well the post office says you did, and who do you think a judge will believe?" They'll then hem and haw and say they'll "push it through for you". In the event they don't, that's why there's small claims court. You don't need a lawyer, minimal fee to file ($20 here). You sue them for the amount of the rebate and the cost of filing the claim. Supposing they don't fold and actually do show up, you just give the judge the info from the post office and the copied forms. You'll have a judgement in your favour in minutes.

    I've never had to go to small claims, and I've gotten all the rebates I've sent via certified mail paid. Only once did a company try the "Uhh we never got it," trick and when I explained that, indeed they did get it and the post office had a record, they sent the money.

    The reason they do rebates is precisely because of people like you. You don't take the time to do it, so they make more money on you.

    1. Re:What you do by nine-times · · Score: 1

      The reason they do rebates is precisely because of people like you. You don't take the time to do it, so they make more money on you.

      When you say I "don't take the time to do it" you mean that I "don't take the time to sue them in small claims court"? See, because what I said was that I did send in a bunch of rebates. I didn't take the time to devise a whole plan to thwart the scam artists, including certified mail, hours on the phone, and small claims court...

      But then that's my whole point-- if it weren't a scam, you wouldn't have to go through all that just to get your money.

  49. from personal experience... by mseidl · · Score: 1

    A company I used to work for, would have rebates and do them internally. The lady that handle rebates was bonus based on redemption rate. So she would constantly hold rebates or not fund them depending on what time of the month/quarter it was.

    1. Re:from personal experience... by 6Yankee · · Score: 1

      she would constantly hold rebates or not fund them depending on what time of the month/quarter it was.
      So, I didn't get my rebate because your colleague was PMSing?
  50. Often not the retail that plays the game by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You'll find items on Newegg or Zipzoomfly often have rebates. However you'll notice it's never a rebate from them, it's from the manufacturer. Manufacturers like to run promos sometimes to try and get people to buy their brand. Well, you can't fault the providers for helping you know about this and how to take advantage of it. You'll also notice, at least in the case of Newegg, they list the primary price as the actual price you pay.

    Just don't go getting mad at the wrong party.

    1. Re:Often not the retail that plays the game by RobFlynn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's something I really like about NewEgg. Oh, this Hard Drive is only $70.00. Oh, neat, it also comes with a $30.00 rebate! I don't buy for the rebate, if I like the $70.00 price then I knew right up front that's what I'll be paying. If the manufacturer actually pays out the $30.00, then that's a bonus.

      --

      ---
      Rob Flynn
      Pidgin
    2. Re:Often not the retail that plays the game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, out of all the rebates I've applied for that was offered with the Newegg purchases I've made, I've recieved exactly zero checks. I've seen some that want you to provide your life history, sign up for some stupid web thingy with your "real" email account, and hand print close to a kilobyte worth of text including the envelope in a specific format. By the time you are done, you would have made more working at Wally World part time for the few hours it takes to prepare and ship the application, and you would probably have your pay in 2-3 weeks.

    3. Re:Often not the retail that plays the game by v1 · · Score: 1

      Been awhile and memory's fuzzy but I seem to recall being quoted that only 35% of all available rebates are applied for. What they do is they companies "buy the debt" from a manufacturer, say at 40 cents on the dollar. They agree to send the prescribed amount to anyone that properly fills out the forms, in exchange for money. Naturally these sharks take any advantage they can to deny your rebate since every rebate they respond to cuts into their margin. Also rebates always have a long delay before fulfillment, usually around 8-10 weeks, during which time they can play the stock market or whatnot investments etc and make money on your rebate before they have to surrender it to you. They play the odds and hope that not too much more than 35% of the customers submit a proper rebate on that contract. If the margin starts to get much above 35%, I bet those boxes of envelopes DO start finding their way into dumpsters.

      I'd also be interested in the statistics of how many rebates are rejected or lost on the first submission and require a second, and how many people bother to resubmit them. Or CAN resubmit them. I got into an argument once over a $50 rebate where they wanted the original UPC symbol cut out of the packaging. And in this case the UPC symbol was printed onto the hard drive's top label. Or, ever try to REsubmit your "original upc symbol"? Yes they really ask for you to do it again. duh? Anyway this is why it's important to scan your submission form with UPC taped to it before you send it in. My experience is odds of a rebate being rejected is about 25%.

      Makes me wonder if some of them are like telemarketers that are trained to require three "no"'s before letting you off... it would not surprise me if some of the sharks require one "incomplete/failed/lost" submission before fulfilling it. Technically there's nothing saying they CAN'T do that to every one, as long as they have a functional resubmission policy. Think about it... if only 35% of the people send in the rebate in the first place, what percentage of THOSE people are able and willing to REsubmit it, even once? I'd bet 40%. That doubles your proffit if you play that game.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    4. Re:Often not the retail that plays the game by Razed+By+TV · · Score: 1

      Can't the manufacturers run instant rebates?

    5. Re:Often not the retail that plays the game by Mattintosh · · Score: 1

      And since it's not the retailer (NewEgg) offering the mail-in rebate through their special rebate center (usually a company with a large dumpster), it's not a problem. And also, since they list the actual selling price on their "shelf" (e-shelf maybe?), then that is also not a problem since they're being quite up-front about the actual immediate cost of the item.

      In short, NewEgg rocks.

    6. Re:Often not the retail that plays the game by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      The only problem is that rebates become less and less attractive to consumers, as even the dimmest ones begin to realize the futility of the exercise, to the point where they are worthless because everyone assumes that they will get jerked around and never get their rebate in any case. I never let rebates influence a purchasing decision and even if there is a rebate on an item that I would have bought anyway I do not send it in. How much is your privacy worth? Even if you do get the rebate your info will be sold and resold ad infinitum to every scumbag marketing / call center boiler room on the face of the plant. Is that really worth $10-50 to you? Perhaps, but not to me.

  51. It's a numbers game, twice over by VorlonFog · · Score: 1

    Then when you call, they spin the wheel of excuses (BOFH, where are you?) to tell you any of:
    -- You didn't submit the UPC code
    -- You didn't mail it soon enough
    -- You didn't include the original receipt
    -- You didn't sign your name
    -- You didn't provide your e-mail address

    In reality, they know, they don't care, and they will quickly agree to send you the rebate just to shut you up. If you think the percentage of customers who correctly complete and successfully submit the rebate forms is low, you need a microscope or jeweler's loupe to see the number of people who call in asking, then threatening. It's a numbers game, and they're drawing the numbers.

    Which reminds me, I checked the $200 in two rebates before purchasing a new HP laptop from OfficeDepot last week. One went to Young America, MN, a reasonably reputable and well-known rebate processor. The other went to HP directly. I told the sales drone if either one of those had ridiculous terms or conditions, I wasn't going to purchase it. He courteously brought up both forms from their website, allowed me to review them, and printed them for me on the spot. He got the sale. Extra copies of everything are kept, original documents are taped and/or stapled to 8.5x11 letter-size paper, and every last detail on the form is highlighted, checked, and circled as specified. Now I just gotta wait two months.

    1. Re:It's a numbers game, twice over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > He courteously brought up both forms
      > from their website, allowed me to review
      > them, and printed them for me on the spot.
      > He got the sale.

      Congratulations, you are a true humanitarian.

  52. *cough* by msimm · · Score: 1

    I like Fry's. Best return policy ever. Plus I'm cheap enough to read and submit more rebates (at least for personal purchases so the system works for me)...

    Carry on. :)

    --
    Quack, quack.
    1. Re:*cough* by fm6 · · Score: 1

      They can afford to have a liberal return policy, because they have a liberal recycling policy.

    2. Re:*cough* by sponga · · Score: 1

      I agree, I have never had a problem with their rebates and their return policy is one of the best around with the thousands of dollars I have spent their.

      People on deal sites like Slickdeals.net/fatwallet.com loathe that we live by a Fry's for the insane deals we get on electronics.
      Also they are nice enough to print you out an extra receipt for the rebate which other stores normally make you go use your own copy machine to do the work.

    3. Re:*cough* by msimm · · Score: 1

      Agreed. But I think that's fair too and aside from a few items have no problem buying their resealed packages. I know what should be inside them and know I can return it which really beats everything for me. I realize some people don't really like it but I was the same with record (*cough* cd) shops. Forget the packaging, I'm more concerned about being happy with what's inside. :)

      --
      Quack, quack.
  53. My bad rebate experiences by Plocmstart · · Score: 1

    My previous bad rebates include the one (and only) time I signed up for DSL (back in 2000). At the time I was supposed to receive a $250 rebate I had paid to purchase the DSL modem as part of signing up. The modem arrived and service was great, but the rebate never arrived after about 3 months. I started calling and was assured that it was being processed, and about a week later when I called again it was supposedly sent out. About 2 weeks later my DSL serive abruptly was cut off, and in calling the company I ended up reaching full voicemail boxes, and a couple days later a general message stating that the company was no longer in business. Needless to say I never received that rebate, and really had no recourse.
    One other rebate gone bad (actually two rebates) were for two separate PNY products I had purchased from TigerDirect. I had bought some PNY memory and a PNY video card. Both of them had completely separate rebates: one for the video card that in no way mentioned the memory rebate, and another for the memory that in no way mentioned the video card rebate. I sent them both in with the required documentation and instead of rebate checks, eventually I received two letters that explained that since I had submitted more than one rebate for a product that it would not be honored. I tried calling the number listed on the rebate, but it was only where you could check your rebate status or get instructions on how to submit a rebate, no way to talk to anyone, and the email address also did not ever result in a response.
    Since this happened I had begun to scan every piece of each rebate, including the envelope with the address I write on it.
    Finally, I have purchased two Syntax Olevia TVs in the last couple years, both from Microcenter. For the first one I was to receive a $200 rebate. This is one I scanned in, but for this one I had cut out the incorrect barcode. The rebate wanted the UPC, but it was hidden in a less obvious place on the box and instead I had sent in the product/serial number set of barcodes (which should have been more than adequate if not even better). Luckily, since I had scanned everything in and through multiple emails, phone calls, and faxes I was able to eventually receive my rebate (though it did take quite a bit of work).
    When I purchased my second Syntax TV as a Christmas gift, it also came with a $250 rebate that I sent in (I figured I messed up the first time, maybe it will go smoother the second time). About the time the rebate was to arrive I was getting ready to graduate, move, start a new job, etc. so I actually forgot about this one. This rebate I sent in November eventually showed up at my new address around October of the next year.
    Well that's been my rebate experience. Glad I could get that all off my chest! I wish there was more protection for the consumer and an easier process to get help or support when things aren't going quite so smoothly. I do suggest making a copy of EVERYTHING though so at least you have some physical proof of submission that you could use when fighting poor rebate fullfillment.

  54. Damn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I must have spent days photocoping that receipt and UPC. Now they think they can just throw out my rebate forms and not send me my $130,000!!! I for one will never shop at Fry's again!

  55. Small claims court. by Hamster+Lover · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've posted this story before so I won't go into a lot of detail, but my brother (the anal retentive one in the family) against my advice bought one of those too good to be true CD-R spindle deals where the rebate is just about as much as the purchase price of the spindle pack.

    Months later and after much friendly teasing from me without even the hint of a rebate, my brother got angry and filed a small claims suit against them that was ultimately successful. After maybe an hour or two of research and an afternoon at the courthouse he received his rebate along with all of the expenses incurred in pursuing his claim. I was actually surprised at how simple the process was and effective the outcome.

    My point is, there are ways you can get that rebate without incurring any cost to you.

    1. Re:Small claims court. by glwtta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My point is, there are ways you can get that rebate without incurring any cost to you.

      Unless you count time and dignity.

      (Oddly enough, I place both of those above a nigh-free CDR spindle)

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
  56. Save copies by SamShazaam · · Score: 1

    My experience is that you must keep two copies of every paper you send for the rebate. That includes rebate application, receipt, UPC bar codes, etc. My experience is that about two out of every three times they will claim to have not received some part of the required papers within the proper time. At this point you call them up and get a name to send your first copy to. Let them know that you have a second copy to send to your local consumer complaint agency. This is a lot of trouble but it works. I have never had any one deny the rebate after that. Once they learn that you are serious about this they will give the money and go find some one easier to cheat.

  57. No surprise! by markwelch · · Score: 5, Informative
    There is NO VALID BUSINESS REASON for rebates in the 21st century. Given the high cost to process and issue small-value rebates, and the damage to reputatin, the ONLY real business reason is the expectation that a substantial number of the rebates will not be paid. A rebate offer is a way of denying some consumers the advertised price. After the many disclaimers and contradictory terms in the rebate language, and the nit-picking and deliberate indifference of rebate processors, deliberate misconduct or gross negligence (1,300 unopened rebate envelopes in a trash can) is just the "icing on the cake."

    I can't understand why some enterprising state legislators don't introduce a bill to prohibit the use of mail-in rebates entirely, or to create a "rebate death penalty" whereby no retailer or manufacturer could advertise rebates after proof that valid rebate requests were rejected. Of course, one issue is that states collect sales tax on the rebate amount (since the consumer pays the full price, and gets a rebate for the purchase price but not for the extra sales tax).

    I recently returned a laptop computer ("$549 minus $200 rebates = $349") to Circuit City (this was really a $400 laptop marked up to $549 so they could boast a price of $349 "after rebates"). It was a "sham" offer. First, the two rebates ($50 and $150) were BOTH to be sent to Circuit City (at two different addresses in two different states), but although both were advertised together, each form clearly stated that only ONE rebate would be paid "at most." Then I read on, and found a complete and total disclaimer of ANY duty by Circuit City or any other entity to process or pay any rebate; there was even a provision requiring that I wait 120 days for the rebate to be issued, along with another provision provided that any claims regarding unpaid rebates would not be considered unless they were be presented to Circuit City within 90 days after purchase. When I called for clarification, I was given many reassurances that contradicted the paperwork, but a flat refusal to put anything in writing; when I returned the computer to the store, they insisted that my concerns were unfounded, but again would not put any of their reassurances in writing. Of course, Circuit City took $80 out of my refund as a "restocking fee," despite the fact that their fraud and their refusal to honor their promise was the sole basis for my return.

    Fry's is certainly a "bad actor" in the rebate space; over the past 20 years, I've caught them many times advertising rebates that have expired or combining mutually-exclusive rebates together. But in fairness, Fry's Electronics seems to offer FEWER "deals" that include rebates than the larger chains like Best Buy, Circuit City, and CompUSA. I have lots of reasons to dislike Fry's, but I can only think of ONE product that I purchased at Fry's that had a rebate -- and I bought it because the price before rebate was still lower than the competing products. (I probably wouldn't have spent the postage to mail the rebate form if the purchase weren't on behalf of our 12-year-old child; getting the crumpled-postcard $5 check four months later was a nice, unexpected bonus.)

    In terms of fairness and honesty, one of the new "scams" is the use of "debit cards" to fulfill rebate promises; these are a huge hassle and are intended to create additional profit, and I was outraged to receive one of these instead of a check (as promised) from Symantec a couple years ago; I won't buy another Symantec product.

    I now mentally edit out rebates whenever I look at any offer. In the cell-phone store, I ignore the large bold price because I know it reflects the application of one or more rebates which might or might not be paid.

    --
    -- http://www.MarkWelch.com/ Pleasanton California
    1. Re:No surprise! by Faux_Pseudo · · Score: 1

      Is that the same Circuit City that decided that it didn't need its
      most experienced personnel and decided to can them? The Circuit City
      that a lot of slashdoters and people who don't like the way corporate
      America treats its staff?

    2. Re:No surprise! by asdfghjklqwertyuiop · · Score: 1

      Of course, Circuit City took $80 out of my refund as a "restocking fee," despite the fact that their fraud and their refusal to honor their promise was the sole basis for my return.


      If you didn't, you should have bought the laptop on a credit card and before returning photocopy all of that contradictory rebate legalease and the ad, then dispute the remaining $80 on your creditcard. It should be a pretty easy dispute since circity city itself not-so-plainly said in writing that they are not willing to give you what you paid for.

    3. Re:No surprise! by danfromsb · · Score: 1

      I think a primary reason why States don't have a huge interest in eliminating rebates is because you still pay tax on the before rebate price. That is a whole lot more money to bring in versus offering at register discounts.

    4. Re:No surprise! by illumin8 · · Score: 1

      I recently returned a laptop computer ("$549 minus $200 rebates = $349") to Circuit City (this was really a $400 laptop marked up to $549 so they could boast a price of $349 "after rebates"). It was a "sham" offer.
      You know that you, as a consumer, have a simple way that you can get companies to "honor" deals like this when they try to scam you. Call your credit card company. Tell them you were overcharged. They will issue a chargeback, and you'll get your money. If enough people did this, shady merchants will go out of business, because if Visa or Mastercard get too many chargebacks from unhappy customers, they will actually pull their merchant account, which will mean they can't take credit cards at all. Having your merchant account cancelled is a death sentence for a retailer in this day and age.

      Don't forget you have this power as a consumer. Buy everything with a credit card. If they don't honor the rebate, call the 1-800 number on the back of your card and tell them you were overcharged.
      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    5. Re:No surprise! by markwelch · · Score: 1

      Nope. I called my credit-card company, and they insisted that a dispute regarding a rebate was NOT something that would justify reversing the transaction or any part of it. In fact, they insisted that I couldn't complain until after I'd applied for each rebate and not received payment -- and of course, the time to dispute the transaction would expire long before then. So I'm out the $80 that Circuit City charged as a "restocking fee," and Circuit City lost our patronage at the exact time that we received a financial windfall, which we've happily spent at other retailers.

      --
      -- http://www.MarkWelch.com/ Pleasanton California
    6. Re:No surprise! by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      In terms of fairness and honesty, one of the new "scams" is the use of "debit cards" to fulfill rebate promises; these are a huge hassle and are intended to create additional profit, and I was outraged to receive one of these instead of a check (as promised) from Symantec a couple years ago; I won't buy another Symantec product. I agree, the debit card rebate is a hassle... but Symantec claims they're doing it because their customers think it's easier, and I can see how it would be, for someone who doesn't have a bank account, which is apparently a surprising number of people.
      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  58. So ... do I need to refile my rebate form or what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So ... do I need to refile my rebate form or what?
    Let me know. I need that $20 for beer.

  59. ah memories .... by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 1

    reminds me of my old paper route

  60. Bad Employee! by n6kuy · · Score: 1

    Those envelopes were supposed to go in the incinerator ...

    --
    If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
  61. My only fry's rebate experience... by merreborn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I bought an HP laptop from Fry's a bit over a year ago for $900, and was told there was a $100 rebate.

    At the register, I was told that they didn't have the rebate form, and that I'd receive one in the mail.

    3 copies in separate envelopes showed up in my mail several *weeks* later. Weeks after the rebate period had expired.

  62. Bad Employee? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The Consumerist is reporting a find of 1,300 unopened rebate submissions in a dumpster belonging to Vastech, a rebate processor hired by Fry's Electronics. Vastech's management blames it on a bad employee."

    Yeah. Any half-decent employee should be able to 'process' way more submissions than that!
  63. This is why by AJWM · · Score: 1

    This is why I never pay attention to the "after mail-in rebate" price, and no longer even bother shopping at stores that advertize that price heavily (with the rebate details in teeny tiny print).

    Instant rebate or nothing, baby. Of course there's no Fry's around here, so I don't even have to worry about all the other issues with shopping there (I generally shop Microcenter.)

    --
    -- Alastair
  64. Stop Shopping at Fry's by FuzzyL0g1c · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually, I bought a computer for my wife from Fry's in Fremont, but then she got one from her Dad for her bday. So we called and they said we could return the computer to the Fry's in Menlo Park. After waiting for a long time, we were given a refund for all but 6$. They said that this was due to the fact the tax in Fremont and Menlo Park is different. I questioned this, as it doesn't make sense. I can buy a shirt at Gap in CA and return it to Gap in UT and get the same refund. Anyway, the manager there, was very rude to my wife and I. My wife was shaken up, so I took her to the car, then came back and went to go talk to the Manager again. He blew up and threatened me the moment he saw me; he kept asking if I wanted to fight. It was like somebody in Jr. High, he did the whole head bob thing and kept saying: wanna fight? wanna fight? I said no,(and he said "sure you do!") and left discouraged while he egged me on. I was unable to beleive what I just endured. He then followed me out of the store and said his name and said not to forget it; which just added to my disbeleif. The manager followed me out of the store and called me out in the parking lot? Anyway, I discovered tigerdirect.com and microcenter and all sorts of other online shops and haven't shopped at a Fry's in 2 years. I suggest the same to everyone else. Oh, the manager's name was Joel Byers; he's the fighter from the Menlo Park Fry's. ("Joel Byers, don't forget the name" he said out front) I wrote a complaint (the first time I ever did to anyone) to Fry's corporate and never received a reply. That's just how they are.

    1. Re:Stop Shopping at Fry's by Rainbird98 · · Score: 1

      All will enjoy the old and hilarious "Ad Nauseam" webpage on shopping at Fry's Breakfast at Fry's

    2. Re:Stop Shopping at Fry's by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      I've never been treated rudely at Fry's (although I've never been to the one in Fremont), and I shop there all the time because of their return policy. Full refund, no restocking fee, for any reason at all. Shopping online is great, but it's only cheaper if you're willing to wait several days for shipping, and returns are a pain.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    3. Re:Stop Shopping at Fry's by markwelch · · Score: 1

      About 10 years ago, I purchased a new power supply from Fry's, and it FRIED my computer's motherboard because the wires were mis-marked. I attempted to return the power supply, and the store manager (at the old Fremont location) absolutely refused to pay for anything, and he was belligerant and actually said "go ahead and sue, we won't give you a penny" or something like that. My letter of complaint to Fry's HQ was ignored. So I went ahead and filed suit in small claims court in Fremont, and within 48 hours I got a call from their legal department, agreeing to pay the full amount I'd requested, including court and process-serving costs. I got the money a day or two later, and dismissed my suit. I didn't check, but I suspect that there have been many thousands of small-claims lawsuits filed against Fry's since they began selling electronics products. I'm sure that they earn a huge profit since 90% of people won't sue. Note that in my case, the defect was absolutely a manufacturer's problem, but a retailer is equally responsible for what they sell, and in this case there was no manufacturer name, just a "made in ----" label (I'm not certain which country). To its credit, Fry's actually is quite generous in accepting returned products, probably because they know that they're playing with fire by re-shelving defective items, and not bothering to even check returned items. I've returned many dozens of products at Fry's over the past 20+ years. Why do we keep shopping at Fry's? Perhaps because of their product selection: my wife and I just bought iPhones and we're planning a trip to Fry's this evening to look at cases and car chargers. (There was once a time when Fry's offered the best prices on most products it sold, but that's long ago, and now their prices are frequently higher than the big-box electronics and office-supply retailers on many products.)

      --
      -- http://www.MarkWelch.com/ Pleasanton California
    4. Re:Stop Shopping at Fry's by FuzzyL0g1c · · Score: 1

      Fry's is awful. There are plenty of places to go that actually offer better prices than they do and better service. You may have to go to 2 stores instead of just one, but I know I could go to a combination of MicroCenter, Circuit City, CompUsa, RadioShack, Best Buy, etc. and build a computer with more power for less money and have a more enjoyable experience than shopping at Fry's. MicroCenter's book selection rocks. And RadioShack has a lot of what I need for building robots. CompUsa/Circuit City have much better deals on hard drives. And I can beat them all by shopping online if I'm willing to wait. Fry's might have been great at one time, but they're not anymore,and it's because my experience is not unique.

    5. Re:Stop Shopping at Fry's by FuzzyL0g1c · · Score: 1

      People keep shopping at Fry's because they don't know any better. After my experience, I found there were several retailers, online and brick-and-mortar, that carried the same products, for much less money, and with much better service. If I'm willing to wait a couple of days, I've found phenomenal deals online. So by that manager being extremely rude and threatening me, they did themselves a great disservice. I'm an engineer and have spent probably 10k in the last two years since this happened that could've been theirs. And then there's the ~20k my father-in-law spent elsewhere. He was a Fry's die-hard, but after hearing from his daughter how rude the mgr was to her, he's listened to me and also worked himself to find alternate channels for his purchases. Finally, being intelligent, somewhat charismatic, and running within circles of people who are potential Fry's shoppers, they lost a valuable Brand Advocate. What's amazing is...they don't care, about who they hurt, or the money they lose.

  65. I believe them by taustin · · Score: 1

    It obviously is a bad employee. Probably the CEO, who ordered his slaves to throw those peskey envelopes away.

  66. Responsibilities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    There is a chain of responsibility and ultimately the buck ends somewhere - with the CEO.

    Yes, the employee should be fired for doing this because they didn't do the work properly.

    Now someone managed that employee. If an employee was able to do that and their manager didn't notice, isn't their manager also being negligent because they haven't been paying attention to what their employees are doing?

    Recurse back up the tree and ultimately you get to the CEO. It all starts with the CEO through his choice of employees.

    What's not clear in situations like this is whether or not the employee was indeed being lazy or following some "company policy". From the comments I've read here, it doesn't sound like laziness to me, so it becomes policy. Someone approved that policy and that approval ultimately rests with the CEO. He needs to appoint competent people to do their jobs. If he can't do that then he needs to be excused, along with the others in the chain that are also incapable of doing their job.

    This type of rationale is why people will call for political leaders to resign when things go awry and is why 'W' should resign.

    1. Re:Responsibilities by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      I agree entirely then. So long as it starts with the individual and works the way up. It doesn't always necessarily end with the CEO. People seem to want to hit the CEO first, and let the individual go - which lets people hide behind the company. Walking the chain of command/responsibility makes sense. In some cases, it is the CEO.

      Abu Grahib / Iraq is definitely an example of something that goes all the way to the top. Throwing out some paperwork probably doesn't.

  67. a bad employer by the_fat_kid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    no one notices it because they saw you do the same thing last month, and the month before that, and every month since they were hired.

    rebates are a BS way of advertising. If they want to lower the price of some thing, great! I'm all for that.
    Just don't tell me that if I pay full price now you will give me some money back in 6 to 8 weeks.

    I try to ignore the false price they like to post on the shelf, that includes the rebate, and look closely to see how much I'm realy paying.

    --
    -- Sig under construction...
    1. Re:a bad employer by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've only sent in for a few rebates, and I received every single one. Usually I don't figure it into any buying decision because I'm always suspicious, but those on things I happened to be buying anyway, I've always received them.

      In fact in one case they screwed up and gave me the money twice.

    2. Re:a bad employer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      Yes, you may have received the rebates, but did you receive a rebate on the tax you paid when you bought the item?

      e.g. Buy an item for $1000 + sales tax (around here that would be $90). . . . get a rebate for $200 . . . . you paid sales tax on $1000, not $800, so where's the rebate for overpayment of that tax?

      That's why rebates will never go away. The government collects sales more tax than they would normally collect. It's a ripoff, courtesy of your greedy politicians.

    3. Re:a bad employer by misleb · · Score: 1

      Whaaaa?? Rebates are supported by greedy politicians? That's a new one.

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    4. Re:a bad employer by CastrTroy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My biggest pet peeve with rebates (other than not receiving them) is that in Ontario, we have 14% sales tax. And we have to pay sales tax, and don't get it refunded on the amount of the rebate. This can add up to quite a bit ($14 on a $100 rebate for those who can't do math). Whereas if they just take the rebate amount off the extra purchase price, then you don't have to pay the tax.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    5. Re:a bad employer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, I purchased a $300 mobile phone that was offered for free by signing up for a plan. However I ended up paying tax on it on the online form. The form showed $300 for the phone, -$300 for the rebate, and $25 sales tax... At least it was only ~8% instead of 14%.

    6. Re:a bad employer by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 1

      That is the most asinine argument against rebates I've ever heard.

      So I paid 6% tax and my rebate means I'm only technically getting $16 instead of $20... Well boohoo.

  68. Why my clients (and sometimes I) like rebates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I'm posting this anonymously, but I can tell you that I don't mind rebates, and I have many consulting clients who just love them.

    It has to do with taxes and claimed expenses.

    Suppose my client buys $200 worth of utility software, but it comes with a $100 rebate.

    The client files the receipt away for his accountant showing a business expense of $200 for the software. That's a $200 business expense come April 15. Business expenses can really add up.

    The $100 rebate check arrives 3 months later. It gets deposited. There's no associated W2 or Form 1099 from the rebate company declaring this income to the IRS. The recipient is supposed to declare this rebate check, but it almost never happens.

    The result is a win-win for the client: a $200 business expense deduction for $100 worth of software. They'll just have the office manager stay on top of the rebate company and keep track of the paperwork.

    It gets even better when things are "free" after multiple rebates: a $30 deduction for a $30 blank DVD spindle that actually cost them nothing. After taxes they actually *make* money from that purchase.

    *I* declare all such rebates on my taxes, of course.

    I'm not saying such activities are legal. Just that they happen.

  69. I worked at a rebate processing company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I worked as an lead architect for software system used by one of the largest rebate processing companies. I can honestly said, the company tried to always pay out all the rebates that were received. I know from first hand that there were some clients (e.g. one of the popular networking companies), which hand picked rebates which were paid and shredded the rest. These clients were fired to my knowledge.

    Of course there were cases where the system didn't work as expected due to software bugs, operational errors or because the clients setup the rules the rebate should follow incorrectly. In one such case we had to reprocess rebates for one of the largest office supplies retailer for 6 months. After we were done we were still left with several tens of thousands of customers that received incorrect amount. Management decision was of course to let it be.

    On the other hand the customer service department was top-notch. If you had issues with your rebate and you followed the rules, it was always resolved.

    That said, rebates are trick to make you purchase. You are making calculated risk of not receiving your money or going through the hassle of complaining.

  70. send as registered mail. by 0xC2 · · Score: 2, Informative

    You are either lucky or a rebate mole. Keeping track is not always enough. I followed the t-mobile sidekick II rebate to the letter, and even took precaution to photocopy everything. Waited requisite 8 weeks for official response that never came. The SOBs gave me the royal runaround. Rebaters claim they never received the forms. T-mobile said I would have to resubmit (with photocopy bar code), so the rebaters could deny, before t-mobile could acknowledge my complaint. Weeks later I'm officially denied due to missing the original bar code. Now t-mobile can officially act on my complaint, which was basically "f--- you". Moral: photocopy everything AND SEND BY REGISTERED MAIL!

    --
    Be heard || Be herd
    1. Re:send as registered mail. by holistah · · Score: 1

      no, the moral of the story is don't count on rebates... most of them don't let you send by registered mail exactly for plausible deniability...

    2. Re:send as registered mail. by dougmc · · Score: 1

      You are either lucky or a rebate mole. Keeping track is not always enough. I followed the t-mobile Rebate mole? Cute. No, I just buy a lot of loss-leader items. As for T-Mobile, funny that you should mention them -- as they're the big `not paying their rebate' people that I'm dealing with right now. Though in my case, the problem was originally that `the rebate doesn't apply to phones bought at Wal-Mart' -- but the rebate form I filled out did not say this. The print-it-out one did, but the online version did not. And then their tactic switched -- they say they already paid the rebate. And when I asked `paid to who?' ... they just ignore me.

      Moral: photocopy everything AND SEND BY REGISTERED MAIL! I don't think registerred mail is worth the trouble, unless it's a really big rebate.
  71. Dont Forget the Tax Scam by chrisG23 · · Score: 1
    I have always felt like it was illegal for the rebate company to not mail you back the sales tax you paid on the rebated amount. (For non US type Americans out there sales tax is an amount imposed on every purchase at the merchant level, sort of like VITA I am told (but dont know for sure).

    So lets say I buy an item advertised for $80 ($100 item with a $20 mail in rebate) and the sales tax in my state is 8%. I pay $108 dollars to the merchant, i get $20 dollars back if the rebate goes through, and the total cost to me is $88. Now $88 is not the advertised price plus sales tax. It is a little bit higher. I dont know what the law says, but this sure feels like im getting screwed. And I won't even mention the interest I could have earned if that $20 was invested somewhere for the 4-12 weeks it takes for a rebate to go through. It nickel and diming on multiple levels, which isnt much on the individual level but huge when taken as an aggregate sum of all consumers.

    1. Re:Dont Forget the Tax Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, never really noticed that before ... that really should be illegal.

  72. This is why I shop locally mostly at Best Buy by jbarr · · Score: 1

    Since Best Buy revamped their pricing strategy, most items no longer carry mail-in rebates (yes, there are exceptions, but they are few and clearly marked.) And combined with their Rewards program, it really is win-win. I've successfully received lots of rebates over the years, and I've been burned several times also. But now that Best Buy makes it easier, they have me as a customer, and I don't have to jump through any rebate hoops.

    --
    My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
  73. I knew it! by SwellJoe · · Score: 1

    Those bastards owe me about 300 bucks! I finally gave up on rebates. In fact, now if it's got a rebate offer on it, I buy a competing item.

  74. Here is another problem solved by Outsourcing by kpainter · · Score: 1

    If these 1300 rebates had turned up in a New Delhi dumpster, nobody would have ever heard about it.

  75. Wow... all the horror stories by NitroWolf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wow, I'm surprised at all the horror stories about the rebates. I'm sure some of them, maybe a lot of them are true to an extent.

    However, I've sent in hundreds (Close to 300) of rebates over the past 3 or 4 years, and I've had exactly 6 come up with problems, which were resolved with a call to the company or to send in copies of my rebate submission.

    One company in particular, which I'm not sure what name they use, though, so they might actually be part of the retailer itself, as opposed to a rebate company proper, has been the lions share of problems. They claim part of my submission was not included... Well, I always keep copies, so I know what is included and what isn't, but on more than on occasion, they claim they got the receipt, but not the UPC or something... the funny thing is, the submission has the UPC and receipt on the SAME PHOTOCOPIED PAGE... so it's physically impossible not to receive one without the other... yet they claim it is so. Obviously they try to scam some people... Either way, once I send them in another copy of the SAME page, they send me my rebate.

    But, I digress. My point is that out of the nearly 300 rebates I've sent in, a very small percentage has ever given me a problem, and a large part of that very small percentage has been from one company in particular. Otherwise, I've always received my rebates without hassle, even if it takes 4 or 5 months for them to arrive.

    There's a program out there called "Rebate! Rebate!" that keeps track of your rebates. I don't have a link, but it works pretty well.

    I like rebates... kind of a pain to send in, but they do offer some really good/incredible deals now and then and are worth the effort, so long as you follow the requirements exactly, which usually isn't that hard.

    1. Re:Wow... all the horror stories by SnapperHead · · Score: 1

      You have better luck then me, over the past few years I have send in over 50 rebates and to date I have received about 5. They are a total scam, it wouldn't surprise me if the rebate processor gets a "bonus" when the number of rebate requests are low.

      --
      until (succeed) try { again(); }
    2. Re:Wow... all the horror stories by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      So, how do you identify this company and what do you know of their, um, identity?

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    3. Re:Wow... all the horror stories by NitroWolf · · Score: 1

      I wasn't trying to be secretive about the company or anything. The rebates I've had problems with come from Microcenter. The rebate company that is in charge of it actually appears to be Microcenter itself, as opposed to an outside company, but I could be wrong about this.

      I get a little postcard with Microcenters logo and some cryptic identifying information and I have to call and figure out what's wrong with the rebate.

      I am very pleased with Microcenter as a whole and buy from them whenever I can - they are one of the best B & M computer stores I've ever been to, customer service is excellent, product selection is excellent, and most of the time, rebate response is excellent... but I find it suspicious that they claim they didn't receive part of the rebate submission, but received other parts when they are on the same page. If it wern't for that, I would have chalked it up to legitimate errors, either on my part, the postal service, or some other human error, since the incident rate has been so low... but when there's evidence that is irrefutable such as that, you know something fishy is up. Either way, once I fax the information in, they send my rebate out within a week. It's sneaky and underhanded, but I'm not sure what else I can do, other than not buy their products.

    4. Re:Wow... all the horror stories by lopgok · · Score: 1

      I have sent in several hundred rebates. A few (mouse systems) were not honored. The retailer (CompUSA) paid me for those rebates, and told me they stopped carrying mouse systems products. Then I bought two items from Vastec at fry's. I got neither rebate back. I emailed the company. They ignored me. I called the company (nobody ever answered). This is not an isolated incident. This is corporate policy. I ended up giving copies of the rebates to fry's. They sent them to fry's corporate, and they say I will get my money back. I noted this at http://weasel.com/comp-rebate.html#vastech . By the way, Microsoft always pays their rebates, and does so quickly. I have the results of my rebates by company at http://weasel.com/comp-rebate.html

  76. Contact information for Frys Electronics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From http://shop3.outpost.com/template/help/index/FE30/ Service3/Assistance/Left_Topics/A12ContactUs

    Sales and Customer Service -service@outpost.com
            Toll-free (within U.S.):
            1-877-688-7678 or 1-800-856-9800
            International: +1-408-350-1484
            Sales/Customer Service Fax: 1-408-487-4700

  77. Rebates are Weird by TychoCelchuuu · · Score: 1

    I sent in a $5 rebate for a joystick once. My name's "Danny." I got a check a few months later addressed to "David." (Same last name and all though.) Go figure.

    --
    Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain.
  78. Misleading Summary by borderpatrol · · Score: 5, Informative

    As a Fry's employee (while no fanboy), I thought I would point something out.

    Vastech is NOT a "rebate processor hired by Fry's Electronics", it is the manufacturer who offered the rebate. They make small PC mods and accessories such as case fans and USB harddrive enclosures.
    You can see their webiste at http://www.vastechinc.com/

    Fry's Electronics does not offer any rebates themselves. All the rebates are though the manufacturer of the item you are purchasing. We even have a rebate department in each store to try and help you force though rebates or resubmit them.

    While everyone likes to poke fun at Fry's (the Walmart of electronics stores, I call them), they were not really in the wrong here, it really should be Vastech found at fault. I do hope Fry's sees this as an opportunity to put in some good will and issue their own refund checks to all affected customers.

    --
    Yeah I've been starving them, teasing them, singing off key. Me may mah mo, me mo ma me.
  79. Postive Aspects of Mishandling Rebates by __aatfqo5802 · · Score: 1

    I'm sure a lot of people have missed out on receiving their rebates, but I've actually never had a problem. In fact, one time I bought a $1200 Maytag Washing Machine at Lowe's on clearance (a repair return) for $500. I filled out the rebate form to get $100 back from Maytag. A few weeks later, I received a check for $100...a few weeks after that, I received ANOTHER check for $100. WOOHOO!

  80. Isn't mail fraud FBI? by doug141 · · Score: 1

    I hope this is 1300 cases of FBI administered misery.

    1. Re:Isn't mail fraud FBI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mail fraud is handled by the US Postal Inspectors.

  81. Did not work with TigerDirect by walterbyrd · · Score: 3, Informative

    I used to do the same thing, and it worked with CompUSA, and BestBuy.

    But, not TigerDirect. TigerDirect swore up and down that they would honor the gaureenty that they proudly display on their web-site, if I sent them all the receipts and photocopies of certificates via. certified mail.

    So I spent another $3.50, stood in line at the post office, etc. When I called back, they acted like they had no idea what I was talking about. Unless I wanted to take them to court over $80, I had no recourse.

    TigerDirect also require an insanely bothersome online process before you even mail in the receipts.

    That was the one-and-only time I ever did business with TigerDirect.

    Read rippoff-report about TigerDirect, I wish I had.

    1. Re:Did not work with TigerDirect by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Unless I wanted to take them to court over $80, I had no recourse.

      Well that's my whole point. A whole industry that makes it's money based on "unless you want to take them to court over $80, you have no recourse." Warranties are the same thing sometimes. You know, where they push you to buy a warranty for $20 when you buy a $100 piece of electronics at CompUSA? A lot of times, they'll simply refuse to pay it because they know most people won't want to take them to court over $100. Hell, I'll admit that I value my time at far over $100 a day, so I realized that spending much time on this isn't worth it.

  82. YOU FORGOT LETTER TO SANTA CLAUS.... by soccer_Dude88888 · · Score: 0

    also being handled in the same manner.

  83. Belkin = permanant ban list for this by Growlor · · Score: 1

    Belkin pulled this same stunt on me and I've read here of others getting the same rebate behavior from them. This has earned them a spot on my "never, ever buy from again and encourage others to do the same" list. Its too bad because they have had several products I would have otherwise considered in purchases since that time.
    I really hope the $5.00 was worth it to them.

  84. IN SOVIET RUSSIA.... by soccer_Dude88888 · · Score: 0

    Rebate claims YOU!

  85. The Real Story by SageMusings · · Score: 1

    I think the real story is not that an unscrupulous company is defrauding customers of their rebates. What is interesting to me is that people seem to still shop at Fry's!!

    That is one of two places I refuse to ever step foot in again. You should see the customer returns go right back to the shelf. And don't forget the frisk at the door. Yeah, they really value their customers.

    --
    -- Posted from my parent's basement
    1. Re:The Real Story by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      I think the real story is not that an unscrupulous company is defrauding customers of their rebates. What is interesting to me is that people seem to still shop at Fry's!!

      That is one of two places I refuse to ever step foot in again. You should see the customer returns go right back to the shelf. And don't forget the frisk at the door. Yeah, they really value their customers. Some of those returns that are going right back on the shelf are items I've returned myself, that work perfectly fine, but for some reason it turns out I didn't need. For example, I just bought a SATA hard drive with a SATA controller card for an old PC, but it turns out my BIOS is too retarded to let me boot from the SATA controller, so I've decided to take the card and the drive back to the store. They both work fine, but it turns out that they don't suit my needs right now.

      The ability to do this is the main reason I keep shopping at Fry's. And, sometimes I buy those returned items - I just bought an expensive Intel dual-port gigabit server NIC that had been previously returned, and I'm perfectly happy with it (no more kernel panics, yay!).
      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    2. Re:The Real Story by markwelch · · Score: 1

      "You should see the customer returns go right back to the shelf" is absolutely right. I once purchased a product at Fry's that was shrink-wrapped with no "returned product" label. It did not work properly, and after a day or so I was talking with the manufacturer's top-tier support, who advised that there was a firmware upgrade on their web site, but I explained that my product had that firmware upgrade already (based on the version number). The technician was quite surprised, since they had not yet begun shipping any products with that new firmware upgrade. Clearly, someone else bought the product and went through this process, then found that the product was defective, and returned it -- and Fry's just put it back on the shelf. When I returned it, I insisted that they affix the "defective/return to manufacturer" label while I watched (though it wouldn't surprise me if they either peeled it off or covered it up with a "returned in good condition" label).

      --
      -- http://www.MarkWelch.com/ Pleasanton California
  86. Just Stop by asphaltjesus · · Score: 1

    Your comment is imperious at best.

    There aren't even consequences if a warm body gets fired. Reputation means practically nothing to the next employer.

    Your comments suggest you've never been forced to scrape the bottom of the wage barrel before or have any awareness at all of how an HR office complies with laws or how a low-wage worker is hired.

    Count yourself lucky.

    --
    Got Trader Joe's? friendwich.com RSS feeds work now!
    1. Re:Just Stop by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1

      There aren't even consequences if a warm body gets fired. Reputation means practically nothing to the next employer.

      I'm saying being a general fuckup is how you get in that job in the first place. That said, I've not seen many situations where doing a really good job at your job, whatever it is, won't get you noticed by someone. Someone who might help get you a better job eventually.

      Your comments suggest you've never been forced to scrape the bottom of the wage barrel before or have any awareness at all of how an HR office complies with laws or how a low-wage worker is hired.

      I know enough to know that if you're waiting for HR to do something for you, you'll be waiting a very long time indeed.

      Also, it's been a while but I've done shit work before - sure, it's no treat, but the point is that your coworkers tend to be about as responsible as the moron who tossed the rebates. If you show up to work sober and on time, you stand out from the crowd.

      And I still maintain that effectively throwing away people's money makes this guy a class 1 asshole.

  87. 20 rebates of $10 or more over the last 5 years by SeeSchloss · · Score: 1

    So you received between 200 and, say 1000$ in 5 years ? Woah, that's almost 20$ a month ! Or three dollars, in the likely event that there were many more 10$ rebates than 100$ ones.

    1. Re:20 rebates of $10 or more over the last 5 years by Surt · · Score: 1

      I would guess the total was about $400-$500. Or about $8/month overall.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  88. If something I want has a mail-in rebate on it... by Jon.Laslow · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...I ask the sales person to take the amount of the rebate off the price. They are argue that they can't, and when I go to leave they just end up getting authorization from their manager. I get the rebate, instantly, and without the tax worries (I live in BC, so I know your pain).

    And if they try to call my bluff, I grab a flyer and go to one of the other stores in town to get a 'price match', in which I get them to factor in the rebate. So far I've been lucky and haven't lost yet!

  89. Semantics by Minwee · · Score: 1

    "Vastech's management blames it on a bad employee."

    Of course it was a bad employee. Good employees don't get caught.

  90. Rebate companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I worked for a software company that occasionally had rebates.
    There were always problems.

    Some details:

        The software company didn't actually handle the rebates, a rebate company was hired to do that.

        All the complaints about the rebates not being fulfilled came to the software company.

        The customer service people at the software company couldn't do anything about it since the rebate company was supposed to be handling it.

        As you can guess, our bosses yelled and screamed at the rebate companies bosses for hours on end. Rebate fulfillment rate still sucked and we got badmouthed because of it.

        I can guarantee that if our customer service people were allowed to handle the rebates, they'd be taken care of in short order. (If it was marketing, I don't know, those guys needed regular clue x 4 sessions.)

        Guess what happened next time we offered a rebate... We used a different rebate company and the same thing happened.

    I hate rebates. Not the idea, but rather the rip-off companies that dominate the scene, and usually aren't even known to the cheated consumer.

    Oh yes, second thing, never count on getting the rebate. I've had several "denied for not following instructions" when everything they asked for had been done. Thats a slightly less obvious way to roundfile it rather than just dumping them in the trash and pretending you never got them.

  91. Not a big surprise by PenguinGuy · · Score: 1

    I think rebates are a scam anyhow so it doesn't surprise me that this happened. But the CEO blaming a "bad employee"..yeah, sure...

    --
    Computers are like Old Testament gods; lots of rules and no mercy.
  92. You accept this corruption? ! by fantomas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the manufacturer actually pays out the $30.00, then that's a bonus

    Heck that's shady business practice. You accept this kind of corrupt behaviour in your country? Hmm, your place is more messed up than I thought it was. Personally I'd be hassling my political representative to get the law changed so said companies get hauled over hot coals metaphorically speaking if they don't honour their promises.

    Actually, I don't really get the 'rebate' idea really - how does it work legally? Why don't they just get told by the law to sell the 70 dollar hard drive with a 30 dollar rebate for 40 dollars at point of sale? I understand how it works from their point of view - that not everybody will claim their rebate, so they win - but this seems very dodgy business practice. How is it structured? do you buy the drive for 70 dollars and inside the box is a slip you post off and they supposedly post back the rebate? Is this common practice?

    cheers

    1. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by darthflo · · Score: 1

      You buy it for $70 and get attached to or in the box a little flyer telling you what (UPN, proof of purchase, slice of pizza) where to get a check for $30 in the next few months.
      According to some (can't link to the source, stupid forgetfulness), about 80% (sometimes even more) of these rebates won't be paid out (usually because they aren't sent in or are sent in without the necessary information). On average this $30 rebate will have cost the manufacturer $6 per item while they could advertise $30 in savings.

    2. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by DDLKermit007 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Rebates have two purposes. One, they don't lose any money really on these (few really send them in on time, and correctly), and if someone is buying one of these rebate items they rip the UPC code off right away. Once you rip your UPC code off it's extremely hard to return it. Making sure customers can only exchange if defective seems like a pretty good reason unto itself to do a $10-$20 rebate for a $60 HD.

    3. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by bentcd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A mail-in rebate is one manifestation of the concept of market segmentation. The basic idea is that you have a product that costs you $10 to manufacture and distribute and figuring in your fixed costs and such you break even at $12, so you can sell it at, say, $15 and be profitable. What irks you, however, is that you /know/ that there are people out there that would buy it at $25 because it's so useful. If you set the price at that level, however, you lose all those customers that wouldn't pay more than $15 (because they're poor or whatever). So what you do is set the price at $25 and include a $10 mail-in rebate. The rich people will buy it at $25 and probably ignore the rebate (money isn't that valuable to them) while the poor people will find it opportune to spend the time to mail in the rebate request, spend some time on the phone to nag about not having received the money etc.

      It would have been more ideal to have two different formal markets, of course, one for poor people and one for rich people and then have different prices in those two markets. This is often not feasible in practice.

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    4. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by ShiNoKaze · · Score: 1

      Also keep in mind the politicians don't mind as you pay sales tax on the full amount.

    5. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by boriquajake · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You are like spoiled middle class twits who think everything you have is owed to you and you have no idea what your Daddy (that would be the U.S. in this analogy, idiot) has to go through to keep you in new shoes and unfiltered cigarettes. You only have the luxury of living in the soul-sucking welfare states you live in because the individual American worker produces and consumes enough to foot the bill. If it were not for our shielding you from the consequences of your stupidity you would have long ago sunk into war and depression under the weight of your ridiculous governments. Cheers

      --
      I only scored 35% on the Nerd Test, I'm sorry.
    6. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by LMacG · · Score: 1

      The rebate company also gets the customer's name and mailing address (and any other information that is "mandatory"). This information will more than likely be packaged up and sold to lots of direct-marketing companies.

      --
      Slightly disreputable, albeit gregarious
    7. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      I like your solution - it's a grand idea to get the government involved in every little detail of life so that things are constantly held to some arbitrary ideal of fair promulgated by some dude who lives in another country. That's clearly a road to happiness.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    8. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It also helps their numbers, sales revenue is $70, and $30 marketing expense vs a $40 revenue with $0 marketing expense. The former looks better to investors as they are increasing revenue.

    9. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think puertoricans don't suck welfare? OMG, get a clue you fucking boricua.

    10. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by eison · · Score: 1

      Legally, of course they're required to honor their promises.
      In practice, it never reaches the government level, because if you complain they will pay you so no need to go to government. They generally rely on people not complaining to them, they will either not send in the rebate form in the first place or else send it in and then forget about it.

      --
      is competition good, or is duplication of effort bad?
    11. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by jwiegley · · Score: 1

      Yes. It is wildly common here in the US. And there is nothing illegal, immoral or unethical about it.

      First you buy the product. Then you fill out a form with your address and other info (usually provided by the store or obtained on-line). Then you clip the UPC code off the box and send it and a copy of your receipt to prove you made the purchase back to the manufacturer with the form. After about three to six months your check arrives.

      I can't see anything immoral or unethical about this type of business deal. But I don't like them. Like many other posters I would rather see a lack of hoops to jump through. Manufacturers need to make a profit to stay in business. If a manufacturer sells a $100 product with a $20 rebate and they still make a profit then the following is true: They might lose a little profit on the $80.00 sales when people turn in the rebates but the larger profit from people who fail to follow-up covers these losses. And the company is admitting that more people will buy the product at a lower cost. That means that the "sweet spot" for the product is less than $100.00. I.e. If the company would drop their price to $95.00 more people would buy the product and the company would make more profit due to higher volume and the consumer wouldn't have to be hassled.

      Same thing with coupons. All I can think of is... Why don't you just forget all this hassle and simply reduce the cost of the item by the amount that is saved by not having to deal with advertising trickery, actuarial costs and the labor wasted processing these stupid coupons??

      --
      I will never live for sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
    12. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by cnock · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A third purpose: to gather names, phone numbers, email address, and physical addresses of people who buy their products. Then their spam and telemarketing are legal due to the "established business relationship".

    13. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't see anything immoral or unethical about this type of business deal.

      That's because you're not looking hard enough: the check doesn't arrive.
    14. Re:You accept this corruption? ! by Arterion · · Score: 1

      Or just do away with poor people and rich people. :)

      --
      "That which does not kill us makes us stranger." -Trevor Goodchild
  93. fry? rebate? by polar+red · · Score: 1

    obligatory:
    let's spend it all on coffees.

    --
    Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
  94. Isn't the renumeration of the CEO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    based on having to have the best person for the job and that the job is a risky one? Well, one risk is that if you aren't competent and making the company act correctly, you are responsible for the failure.

    The last act of the CEO before being fired could be to fire the manager responsible for the peon.

    If this happens, you'll find that a lot of "accidents" like this will not happen. They happen now because the only person who gets it in the shorts is the person who cannot stop it happening (the peon will be fired if they don't, and the bad will happen anyway).

    In any case, with a CEO earning 1,000,000 per year, working for three years will be enough to retire on, so they won't be badly hurt. They may have to lose the holiday home in California.

  95. Wonder if anyone will get the reference... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Navin: "Pay to the order of Mrs. Wilbur Stark, one dollar and NINE CENTS!"

    ds

  96. Re:If something I want has a mail-in rebate on it. by ShadowsHawk · · Score: 2, Informative

    Most stores in the US will not honor a 'rebate' price. Sales prices are fine, but they often sell rebate items below cost figuring that the majority of people will not cash in the rebate.

  97. i think i understand... by martin_henry · · Score: 1

    Does the practice of mail-in rebates work because of the time-value of money? i.e. the company gets more income from products initially, is able to use those funds, then has to shell out later (hoping that they are making even more than when the process began)...

    --
    www.purevolume.com/martyd
    1. Re:i think i understand... by DigitalSorceress · · Score: 1

      Actually, its simply that the product sells better when the store has a sign with a BIG BOLD price $100 lower than normal and in really tiny print, it says "after mail in rebate"

      People buy the product, but due to lazyness or incomplete following of the byzantine rules, fail to properly file for their rebate. Oh yeah, not to mention, almost all rebates require that you rip the UPC off the box the product came in. Guess what? you now can't return the product... period.

      --

      The Digital Sorceress
  98. 1300 down, 99 billion to go by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 1

    Now all they have to do is find the other 99 billion rebates that never got sent out... I know I only ever got about 1 rebate that I sent in, and it was some Microsoft legal one that if they didn't send it to me, I think got to sue them.

    --
    stuff |
  99. I totally forgot... by Floritard · · Score: 1

    That reminds me! Fuck you CompUSA. It's been like 3 months. Liars!

    1. Re:I totally forgot... by markwelch · · Score: 1

      10+ years ago, I bought something at CompUSA which had advertised a $50 rebate. When the store clerk handed me the rebate form, I immediately noticed that it had expired, but was reassured by the clerk AND by store manager that the expiration date had actually been extended, and the rebate would be paid (it was a CompUSA rebate, not a manufacturer's rebate). Of course, that was absolute BS, and the rebate was denied as "expired." So I posted a web page describing my experience, and within a few weeks it came up in the top few search results for "CompUSA rebate" on AltaVista, which was then the most popular search engine. Someone from CompUSA called, and asked me to take the page down; I said no. They offered to give me the $50 if I would take the page down, and I said no. Then they mailed me a $50 check, which I cashed (since they owed me $50 for the promised rebate). Then they mailed me ANOTHER $50 check, which I returned. Then they sent me a $100 check, which I returned. (It was several years before that web page disappeared in a site transition.)

      --
      -- http://www.MarkWelch.com/ Pleasanton California
  100. Why are there rebates? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Marketing. And not just to lower the price to get you to buy the product. When you buy at Fry's (or anywhere else), the store may or may not get that much information about you. However, these "Rebate Centers" often make money off the INFORMATION YOU SEND IN that's on the rebate form. Then the manufacturer and others know you shop at Fry's, the kinds of items you purchase, etc so they can sell your name address to others.

  101. I don't believe in rebates... by Zarf · · Score: 1

    ...I think they are just a myth. I've never actually gotten a rebate. I fill out the forms, send them off, and never hear about them again. I'm fairly certain SOP is dump rebates in a dumpster or mine the addresses for spamming purposes. I fill out rebate cards and get spam but never money... what's up with that?

    --
    [signature]
  102. Re:Scam? MOD PARENT UP! by illumin8 · · Score: 1

    You could try contesting the charge on your credit card... (If you used one..)

    I got the run-around on a $100 rebate on a $2000 fujitsu laptop, and my CC company happily took back the entire $2k until I finally got it.

    Strangely enough, just days after the chargeback they seemed very interested in fulfilling the rebate.
    This is exactly what people should be doing if their rebate isn't offered. Hit them where it hurts, in their merchant accounts.
    --
    "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
  103. Rebates on Tax Preparation Software by cnock · · Score: 1

    A corollary to your pet peeve: In the US, we can deduct the cost of tax-preparation software from our income. These always seems to come with deep rebates. So I figure I can deduct the original ~$50 cost from my income, despite the fact that I ended up eventually getting a $20 rebate (albeit after a long painstaking submission and wait process).

  104. Try your luck with late reabates, can't hurt by Neuticle · · Score: 1

    Especially when it's not your fault.

    As stated by some Fry's employee here, Fry's doesn't offer any rebates themselves, Fry's merely provides copies of manufacturer's rebates as a courtesy.

    That being said, it is misleading to offer to mail you a rebate form when they didn't have one on hand (and then mail it late), but you could have called up the company and asked for one direct, checked the internet or checked a different Fry's store if you didn't get the mail promptly.

    My guess is that if you had mailed in the rebate late, with the envelope from Fry's and a note explaining why it was delinquent, they would have honored it anyhow. I once found a stamped and sealed rebate envelope I'd forgotten. I mailed it in ~2 months late with "Oops, just found this in the car" written on the envelope. I still got my money :-) Trying is worth the cost of a stamp anyhow.

    --
    "Cheeze it!" - Bender
  105. Re:Great, another anti-Christian post by dstrek · · Score: 0

    Awesome, another ignorant Christian who doesn't know what Allah means.

  106. umm you have a record of it too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm well your government has justified this as the reason for invading/toppling governments ^H^H^H providing support to democratic groups in other countries on more than one occasion over the last 50 years or so leaving trashed anarchies and evil dictators around the place...

  107. Why the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Rebate coupons / forms are no good without original UPCs.

    So the manufacturer isn't being hurt by these forms.

    Fry's already decided to dump them, so they aren't losing any sales they missed already.

    The consumer, if they have UPCs from somewhere other than Fry's, can collect a rebate, but it won't hurt the manufacturer.