Website Checkout Glitches: Two Very Different Corporate Responses

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Website Checkout Glitches: Two Very Different Corporate Responses

Posted by timothy on Saturday December 28, 2013 @05:09AM from the and-you-pay-the-stamp dept.

Freshly Exhumed writes "On the morning of December 26th, 2013, an error on the website of Delta Air Lines' produced impossibly low fare discounts of as much as 90% for about 2 hours before the problem was corrected. Delta, to their PR benefit, have swallowed the losses, and the lucky customers have shared their delight via social media. Unfortunately for many buyers of goods from The Brick furniture retailer, no such consumer warmth is forthcoming. The Brick's website checkout had awarded them an additional 50% off, over and above all other costs, but the official corporate response has been to demand the money be returned. Affected customers are now lashing The Brick with social media opprobrium and drawing direct comparisons with Delta's response. So, given that these are not small, mom-and-pop companies, have we reached a point at which online retailers are expected to just swallow such costs for PR purposes, as part of doing web business?"

45 of 303 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Same rules apply by sbassett · 2013-12-28 05:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

If a brick and mortar left a sign up in their windows advertising X percent off consumers would expect it. Just because they are online doesn't give them a pass for sloppy practices.

--
OOOOH, the internet.
1. Re:Same rules apply by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-28 05:29 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  In fact, the laws in some states demand that brick and mortar stores to honor the prices that they advertive. This includes prices that are in error! Why should online stores be treated any different?
2. Re:Same rules apply by Maritz · 2013-12-28 05:36 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  They wouldn't chaise you for longue.
  
  --
  I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
3. Re:Same rules apply by mysidia · 2013-12-28 05:39 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  If a brick and mortar left a sign up in their windows advertising X percent off consumers would expect it.
  Yes.... but I belive that's more about HONORING What you advertise. If the printed price they stuck on the goods says "$300" on a $3000 on a brand new Macbook pro; they better honor it.
  On the other hand... if the price said $3000, BUT the cash register rings up $300, they need not honor the $300 price: if the clerk catches the error, before finalizing the transaction. If the clerk doesn't catch the error --- tells the customer this is what their price is: then the deal is final after the customer pays.
  Similarly IF THE WEBSITE advertises $1000, but when you got to checkout, your total shows $100. The customer should expect the store won't honor the $100 price; if their online shopping cart disagrees with the advertised price.
  The store should call the customer and inform them of the error --- give them the option to pay the expected price, or cancel the transaction.
  If the online store goes ahead with the sale, then they have accepted the error. Once they ship the goods, it is now too late for them to back out of the deal, and escape without causing the customer undue harm.
4. Re:Same rules apply by msauve · 2013-12-28 05:39 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  In your haste to comment early, it seems you didn't read the article. They offered items at a discount - but when customers checked out, they were given a 50% discount beyond what had been advertised/offered. They never advertised that additional 50%, never offered it, never did anything which would make a customer expect it. It was an error, and came as a surprise to both the seller and buyer.
  
  This differs from the Delta case, where the low prices were offered before the buyer accepted the offer and went through checkout.
  
  Your comparison fails, because they were (and still are) willing to honor the advertised prices. But, there are people who were charged less than they expected who are complaining that it's somehow unfair for the business to correct this obvious error. Those same people would no doubt be screaming for relief if they didn't get the offered discount when they got to the checkout - "fair" apparently only works in one direction.
  
  --
  "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
5. Re:Same rules apply by just+fiddling+around · 2013-12-28 05:45 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  If the register malfunctions and the retailer stops the transaction, it's OK. If the register malfunctions and the retailer still makes the sale, that's the retailer's problem.
  A sale is a contract which binds BOTH parties. And EULA's are subject to the law of the land, which says: if a contract is non-negociable, it has to be interpreted has widely as possible in favor of the party who did not draft it.
  
  --
  You're not old until regret takes the place of your dreams.
6. Re:Same rules apply by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-28 05:57 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  More so, the company has already completed the transaction. They offered a certain price for the goods, they accepted the money, and they handed over the goods. They have no recourse now to demand more money.
7. Re:Same rules apply by beelsebob · 2013-12-28 05:58 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  No, they're not. The transaction is complete. They offered a certain price for the goods, they accepted the cash, and they gave you the goods. They have no expectation of getting the money out of you now.
  Reposting what I posted above, because I failed to log in.
8. Re:Same rules apply by youngatheart · 2013-12-28 06:00 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  My daughter convinced me to take her to Kohl's for some basic shopping. I checked in on 4square and was surprised to find that it got me a discount. Then at the register, when they rang me up, it was less than expected even with the discount. I was happily surprised to discover after paying, that the receipt showed another discount which I commented on to the cashier. I was happy to hear that they often give those kinds of discounts.
  The point is that when you get extra discounts, you don't assume they're made in error, you assume that you are being given a treat, probably something they are advertising and you just didn't see, by the seller.
9. Re:Same rules apply by mwvdlee · 2013-12-28 06:04 · Score: 2
  
  These were not advertised prices, but only appeared on checkout (after clicking on the "buy" button with the higher prices listed).
  It's like the cash register being off by a factor of 10. In this case it was in favor of the customer. What if it was if favor of the shop?
  Regardless; the way they're "paying" for customer's troubles by giving them 10% off a future purchase is just laughably pathetic.
  If they said "Hey, we gave you 50% extra bue to an error, would you please return the 40% (keep the 10% as expenses) or return the items for a refund (will pay back 10% extra for your trouble)", it would have been very different. Instead they say "Hey, pay us more. As a thank you, we'll let you buy stuff from us again".
  
  --
  Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
10. Re:Same rules apply by Immerman · 2013-12-28 06:26 · Score: 2
  
  Two things:
  The online store has a *huge* advantage over brick-and-mortar stores in terms of cost savings and transaction volume. If they don't want to invest some of those savings into proofreaders and early-warning systems to defend against such problems then that's *their* choice. They chose increased profit over risk protection, and that's nobody's fault but their own.
  The purchase at price X is a non-neogtiable contract, and thus by law must be interpreted as generously as possible in favor of the party who didn't draft it (i.e the customer). If the problem is discovered before the transaction is complete (in this case before the thing ships) then they are free to cancel the order or offer people the option of re-purchasing at the intended price. Once the transaction is complete all bets are off, though an honorable customer would certainly be understanding of the error, just as an honorable company would correct the error if you pointed out that they overcharged you and you didn't notice at the time.
  In this case though it sounds like the error was caught before the transaction was complete - they took customers money, but realized the error before shipping the items, so it seems to me it's purely a PR decision. Is it better to swallow the cash loss from completing the transaction, or the PR loss from failing to do so. Thy made their choice, and now they have to live with it.
  Of course you've got to be a special kind of spoiled to throw a tantrum because the cashier say "Hey wait a minute, this rang up wrong. Do you want to pay the sticker price, or should I give you your money back?
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
11. Re:Same rules apply by itsdapead · 2013-12-28 07:34 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  In fact, the laws in some states demand that brick and mortar stores to honor the prices that they advertive. This includes prices that are in error! Why should online stores be treated any different?
  because (even with such a law) there are practical limitations on how may $99 products can walk out the door of a bricks & mortar store for $0.99 before the error can be caught and corrected.
  For an an online store, the error can go viral on social networking and by the time a human being spots the situation, there can be so many orders that they'd need to build a couple of new factories to fulfil them.
  Now, if the retailer takes your $0.99 and delivers the product that's one thing (analogous to the shop taking your money and letting you walk out the door) - but when these stories crop up it is usually people whining because the retailer just refuses to honour the order (in this case, TFA is somewhat vague on whether money has been taken or products delivered).
  Try and compel stores to honour those orders and I guarantee that the only winners will be the lawyers.
  
  --
  In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
12. Re:Same rules apply by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-28 08:11 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  For an an online store, the error can go viral on social networking and by the time a human being spots the situation, there can be so many orders that they'd need to build a couple of new factories to fulfil them.
  1) Then they should double-check all prices before they go live.
  2) Then they should only accept as many orders as they have stock. That at least limits the damage to what they have on-hand. just like brick-n-mortar stores.
13. Re:Same rules apply by mysidia · 2013-12-28 08:35 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  So, I guess the whole thing comes down to: When is an online order 'complete'?
  After the buyer has both paid for and taken delivery of the item.
  If they discover that the amount has been paid any time before that, the seller can suspend delivery of the goods (cancel before shipping, or delivery intercept)
  With no goods in hand by the buyer, the sale is not yet completed.
  As soon as the shipping company deposits the goods on the buyer's doorstep however --- the items are now at the buyer's property, and the transaction has concluded; can no longer be cancelled or revised, without the buyer's consent.
14. Re:Same rules apply by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-28 08:58 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  TV reports indicated that the orders were completed by the system, but shoppers received a call the next day to tell them that they would have to pay the original amount. So they cancelled all orders after accepting them. Other news source.
15. Re:Same rules apply by Runaway1956 · 2013-12-28 09:44 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I don't believe so.
  Everything on the website is under the vendor's control. The listing, the price in the listing, the checkout, everything. The ONLY part of the process under the customer's control, is the decision to enter financial information. Just like any brick and mortar store, once the transaction is concluded, and the customer has a receipt in hand, the vendor is obligated to deliver the goods.
  We've just had Black Friday, where damn near everything in the world was advertised at 50% to 80% off. With their bogus sales running like that, how is the customer to know that the store didn't mark the item up 600% so that he could then mark it down 80% and STILL make a huge profit? That is standard procedure today, after all.
  And, if there WERE a problem with the checkout, then the vendor most certainly should have caught it before he shipped the items. He is still obligated to deliver them, at the price he charged - but if he caught his mistake before he shipped, he could at least negotiate with the customer. "Look, Pal, I made a serious mistake, and I sold this item so far below cost that my boss is going to fire me. Can we meet in the middle? No? How 'bout you pay for the shipping, and you'll still be way ahead of the ballgame! Alright - if that sounds good to you, I'll just charge another ten bucks to your card, and ship it out today!"
  The vendor cannot arbitrarily cancel a sale, or arbitrarily add a charge to the sale. The customer has his receipt, the property is his. All you can do is beg him to meet you in the middle. And, doing that may well cost you a return customer.
  It's best if the vendor just swallows the loss.
  
  --
  "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
16. Re:Same rules apply by mysidia · 2013-12-28 10:57 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  So, what you're saying is, the business can take my money, 'ship' the product (Ground, of course), then, on the last day before it's delivered, cancel the shipping and have it returned to them, all that time keeping my money in their bank accounts, earning them interest, and only then refund me?
  Probably not. If you paid by credit card, and they void/reverse the transaction --- the business won't be earning any interest. There won't be any interest to earn -- and if there was any: it will be banks that are earning the transaction float, not retailers.
  The only way they would be earning interest would be with cleared funds -- which doesn't happen in 5 days, unless you paid by check or wire. Which just doesn't happen with online e-commerce sales.
17. Re:Same rules apply by thegarbz · 2013-12-28 12:03 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Similarly IF THE WEBSITE advertises $1000, but when you got to checkout, your total shows $100.
  The customer should expect the store won't honor the $100 price; if their online shopping cart disagrees with the advertised price.
  The store should call the customer and inform them of the error --- give them the option to pay the expected price, or cancel the transaction.
  If the online store goes ahead with the sale, then they have accepted the error. Once they ship the goods, it is now too late for them to back out of the deal, and escape without causing the customer undue harm.
  False. They need not ship the goods for them to be too late to back out of the deal. This is basic contract law. A contract was written up (offer), it was accepted (check out), and at least one way consideration was made (payment). What you have now is a fully legally binding contract that says one person exchanged x dollars for y goods. Failing to deliver on the y goods is grounds for legal challenge.
  Now if the error was caught before the credit card actually got billed, i.e. the checkout process then went through a sanity check where someone caught the error then no consideration has been paid and thus we don't have a legally binding contract and either party can back out. Offer and acceptance isn't normally enough to form a contract which is why when I sign a contract to purchase a house I must put down a few hundred $ purely to satisfy the legal requirements of a binding contract, money I get back if any part of the contract falls through and I don't buy the house.
  *Note: My knowledge of contract law is based on the laws of a few countries, but maybe not yours.
18. Re: Same rules apply by MadAhab · 2013-12-28 13:25 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  If repeat business is overrated (and this is a bold, unsupported assertion), then I'm the customer Brick would want, because I haven't shopped them before. And I won't, because I have a reasonable expectation I won't get the price I agree to.
  There's bad PR, and there's bad rep.
  
  --
  Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
19. Re: Same rules apply by lucm · 2013-12-28 20:09 · Score: 2
  
  I have a reasonable expectation I won't get the price I agree to.
  That's preposterous. Do you typically shop online with the intent of paying half of the posted price because of a buggy shopping cart? If you see a TV on sale at $500 and you add that TV to your shopping cart, you should "expect" to pay $500, not $250.
  That's exactly what happened in this situation. Brick did not post a price then came back later to cancel orders after figuring out that it was not cost-effective for them to sell at that price (something Best Buy did a few times in the past). There was a bug in the checkout process, that's a whole different story.
  You must be one of those people who ask for a free apple pie at McDonalds when you get a regular Coke instead of the Diet Coke you asked for. Guess what: being a customer does not put you on a pedestal, and if you think that a company that does not agree to let people get away with an invoicing error deserves a "bad rep" you are correct that Brick (or any other company) does not need you as a customer.
  You know what con artists say about their marks: if someone is too stupid to hold on to their money it's ok to take it from them. Basically when someone knowingly pays 50% of the posted price during an online transaction and expects that there will be no follow-up from the seller they are applying the same logic, and to add insult to the injury they dare come out publicly and throw a fit because the other party is not bending over to let them enjoy the spoils of victory.
  The issue here is not that Brick needs PR lessons, it's that people need to learn that abusing a broken system is wrong. Until then it will remain necessary to bolt park benches to the ground and to put chains on the pens at the DMV. Thank you for making the world such a nice place.
  
  --
  lucm, indeed.
20. Re: Same rules apply by Cyberax · 2013-12-28 22:06 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  If you see a TV on sale at $500 and you add that TV to your shopping cart, you should "expect" to pay $500, not $250.
  Nope. There is no such expectation - the advertised price can be different from the actual sale price for a lot of reasons: sales taxes, special discounts, etc. For example, 20 minutes ago I bought an Audible audiobook for 10% of its normal price because I have its Kindle counterpart.
  
  I have a story - 10 years ago we were supporting a website for a small online outlet. One smart-ass user tried to game the checkout by pasting 16384 spaces into the "Coupon code" field that caused the discount multiplier algorithm to malfunction and return zero. So the total checkout price for a large purchase became zero.
  
  We canceled this order and threatened the "buyer" with a lawsuit after talking with our lawyer. It turns out that there were two significant factors:
  
  1) Since the total price was zero, it couldn't be classified as a sale. So no consumer protection laws kick in. However, even if the buyer had paid $0.01 then it would be a different story.
  2) The fact that the buyer entered a very long sequence of spaces can be classified as an attempt at wire fraud.
  
  As I understand, none of this applies in this case. The Brick should shut up and pay up.
21. Re:Same rules apply by mpe · 2013-12-29 03:46 · Score: 2
  
  They only have to honour it (at least in the UK) when they send a confirmation order to your email as a receipt and take payment.
  
  This hasn't stopped cases of online retailers doing things like cancelling orders after the fact. In some cases after money has been transfered by banks. Just because they can do so.
  
  The contract is made when money passes hands and you get your receipt,
  
  A "receipt" dosn't have to be an email. It possibly isn't even necessary at all if you other proof of the seller accepting the money.
  
  until then they can advertise the prices as what they want as much as they want.
  
  The advertised price in the UK has the definition of "an invitation to treat". A starting point for negotiations. The price you pay is that you have negotiated with the seller. Which need not be the advertised price. Even though the "checkout" part of a web store is a machine. The essential steps of "I'd like X of Y"; That'll be Â£Z, how do you want to pay?"; "Forget it/I'll pay in this way..." are still there.
22. Re:Same rules apply by mpe · 2013-12-29 05:21 · Score: 2
  
  So, I guess the whole thing comes down to: When is an online order 'complete'? When they say 'thanks for your order', and email you a confirmation? (That's what I'd say.) Or when they actually ship? Or when you get the order delivered?
  
  It's complete when the "law of the land" says it is complete. Which varies. Further complicted by it being very easy for buyer and seller to be in different legal jurisdictions. Even for the "seller" to be in multiple jurisdictions.
23. Re:Same rules apply by AthanasiusKircher · 2013-12-30 09:45 · Score: 2
  
  This is more like the cashier rang up the sale, and then noticed while loading the cart (waiting to ship) that the sticker price didn't match what the register had rung up, and gave you the choice of either paying the sticker price or not buying the item.
  This isn't a good analogy. An online transaction is much more formal than checking out in person with a cashier. Often, a customer has to go through multiple pages being presented with a detailed bill, and then being asked to go forward and "confirm" and/or "submit a final order."
  So, it would be more like if you were at a store, the cashier worked out your bill, then formally presented your bill to you (perhaps multiple times), you agreed with the cashier on the prices, then the cashier asked you for your payment. But before taking your credit card, the cashier put out his/her hand, looked you in the eye, and said, "Do we have a deal? If so, please confirm formally by shaking my hand." And then you shook the hand as you handed over the credit card.
  Then, just as the cashier was about to run the card through, a manager walks by and sees and error and says, "HOLD UP!! There's an error there. Sorry, no deal."
  That's a better analogy to this situation. And in this case, while I believe the store may legally have the right to say "no deal" after it asked you to submit and confirm your order, it would be good business practice to honor the confirmed sales agreement that the consumer made. The "cashier" here is the automated system that accepted orders -- and it did NOT catch the error. Someone else later on did and then interrupted the normal process.
  
  It takes a special kind of spoiled brat to throw a tantrum in such a situation.
  I don't know that I'd "throw a tantrum" in this situation. But I do think it might be worth at least raising an objection.
  Why, you ask? Because aside from all the formal "confirm your order" and "please be sure to check before you submit your final order" (and sometimes even "no cancellation after this" text), many businesses clearly act as though the placing of an online order is in fact some sort of contract... regardless of whether payment has been processed or the item has been shipped.
  My personal experience dealing with cancelling orders shows this. I think I've had to cancel about 4 orders in my lifetime because they became significantly backordered after I ordered them -- so they wouldn't be delivered within the time the business said they would.
  In two of those cases that I recall, it was easy to cancel. One asked me whether I wanted to cancel at the point they realized it was backordered, and another went ahead and did it easily when requested.
  But I had two encounters with businesses who really treated my "confirm your order" as though I had agreed to sit and wait to receive the item for as long as it might take -- they went ahead and charged my card, and they just expected me to wait for months to get my stuff.
  In one case, I had to threaten to dispute the charge, etc., but in the other, where the item had been "backordered" for over two months after they charged my card (and I had no reason to expect they'd ever fulfill the order), I had to dispute the charges and report the business to state consumer agencies before they finally refunded my money. They claimed that my order was "final" and there would be no refunds issued since I had confirmed the order. And this was for an established internet business with quite a few positive reviews on a reputable site.
  So -- my experience is that when you hit the "confirm" button, that's pretty much when many businesses treat your transaction as completed. Legally, businesses may have the right to modify it afterward, but my experiences suggest that many treat it as "final." And if they treat it as final, why shouldn't a consumer be able to??
Honor your screwups. by JWSmythe · 2013-12-28 05:16 · Score: 2, Insightful

That's part of business. If you screw up, you'd better honor them, and make sure you don't do it again.
I've seen places give away merchandise over accidents like that. ok, so you lost $10k in product, big deal. You also made some very happy customers, who will likely come back.
The opposite is true too.. If you try to come after the customers who bought in good faith, now they won't come back, and neither will their friends.. "friends" has expanded over the last decade or so, goign from "oh, what, a dozen people?" to thousands of Facebook friends who may in turn share your experience with millions. I don't know who "The Brick" is, but I won't even bother shop there now.

--
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
1. Re:Honor your screwups. by MickyTheIdiot · 2013-12-28 05:20 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Satisfied customers tell one or two people, while angry customers tell dozens of people. Right now you have a massive black-eye situation for this "The Brick" place.
  I hadn't heard of them before now. They have created a bad first impression for thousands of people. It's a big screwup and another example of how so many corporate people live in their own little manufactured reality. They have just screwed up something basic that every small shopkeeper learns on the first day.
2. Re:Honor your screwups. by ColdWetDog · 2013-12-28 05:22 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  They bricked themselves?
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
3. Re:Honor your screwups. by jaymz666 · 2013-12-28 05:33 · Score: 2
  
  Good Faith? Really?
  There are many people who find these "good deals" and abuse them. Airfares are one thing, where you can't really buy a dozen of them and resell them on ebay, but physical goods like whatever the Brick sells, some "enterprising" individuals can take advantage of.
  No, I am not making excuses for anyone, but there's always more than one side to any story like this.
  They should have offered to pick up and refund the purchase price, not ask for more money.
4. Re:Honor your screwups. by Your.Master · 2013-12-28 05:37 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  The Brick is a large Canadian store, mostly for furniture, mattresses, and appliances. The submitter may not even be aware that it's only Canadian. They are infamous for advertising that you can purchase their shit for a very long deferred payment (as they put it, for $0 down, $0 payments, 0% interest for 2 years, back when interest rates were high). These adds have gone on for over 20 years, perhaps much longer.
  They got dinged recently for actually requiring down payments despite their advertising, because you pay tax up front, and "administrative fees", and delivery, etc. etc., so they kind of have a reputation for welching on their advertised prices already.
5. Re:Honor your screwups. by Attila+Dimedici · 2013-12-28 05:45 · Score: 2
  
  I was taught, back when I worked retail, that studies showed that people influence the buying behaviors of, on average, 250 other people. I doubt this has changed by a large number, but 250 lost customers per dissatisfied customer is a pretty steep price to pay. This is especially true when the positive publicity in a situation like this probably exceeds any value you could spend on advertizing.
  
  --
  The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
6. Re:Honor your screwups. by fermion · 2013-12-28 05:55 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  For walk in sales, that is probably correct. A price is mis-marked, a few customers get the deal, yes you have happy customers. However it is not clear that online customers have such loyalties. They will tend to go where the low prices are, as there is little opportunity cost for doing so. That is why Amazon has what much a loss leading Amazon Prime program. To keep customers coming back not just for low prices, but other perks. Same thing for airlines.
  So no, the rules for online are not to fullfill orders that have clearly incorrect prices. If I go into a big grocery store like Krogers, and some disgruntled employee has put a a 50 dollar bottle of wine on sale at $10, they are not going to sell it to me for $10 when it rings up for 50. There is a secondary check there for price, the human element. Likewise, if a computer glitch, maybe put in by a disgruntled employee, allows me to check out for half price, then this is an admitted grey area. My payment has been accepted.
  I would say, however, that until a product is formally charged to a customers card, which often happens as it is shipped, and maybe even until it is delivered there the retailer has an opportunity to cancel the order. Possession is, of course, paramount. This is why I would say one the product is delivered the price must be honored. This is a grey area as well, and we have seen cases where retailers have demanded delivered products back, but this to me is clearly bad manners.
  So why is Delta honoring the price? I think it is because of delivered product. When I buy a ticket, my card is charged, and I immediately get a confirmation that I am guaranteed a seat on that flight. If something happens and I do not get a seat on the flight, I at minimum am sure to get a seat on a similar flight, often with financial compensation above and beyond that seat. Also, unlike most small retailers, the airlines have algorithms that continuously adjust the price of seats to maximize the total revenue on each flight. Therefore it is harder for airline to use the 'disgruntled employee' excuse.
  
  --
  "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
7. Re:Honor your screwups. by beelsebob · 2013-12-28 06:02 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  No, they shouldn't. The deal is already done. If they have delivered the goods and accepted the cash, they have no recourse to decide that they either want to magically undo the contract they've already agreed to, or to decide to alter the contract for more money.
  Plain and simple, once the deal is done, they can not go back on it, in any way.
8. Re:Honor your screwups. by MikeKD · 2013-12-28 11:20 · Score: 2
  
  So why is Delta honoring the price? I think it is because of delivered product
  Nope. It's because the Dept. of Transportation makes them honor the fare:
  
  Delta's contract of carriage states that in the event of an "erroneous" fare, " Delta reserves the right to cancel the ticket purchase and refund all amounts paid by the purchaser or, at the purchaser's option, to reissue the ticket for the correct fare." But rules set forth by the Department of Transportation state otherwise, saying that an airline must honor a purchased ticket, mistake fare or not.
9. Re:Honor your screwups. by JWSmythe · 2013-12-28 18:39 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Groupon logic is horribly flawed. They actively encourage vendors to sell under cost, with the hope that customers will return. There's always a chance they will, especially if you treat them well. There are numerous stories online about how the vendors are totally screwed.
  http://posiescafe.com/wp/groupon-in-retrospect/
  In this blog post, Groupon takes 100% of the sale, promising that customers will always buy more than the ad (and they didn't), and wouldn't limit sales, so they were giving away everything for every Groupon customer for months.
  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/22/groupon-cupcake-deal-need-a-cake-bakery-rachel-brown_n_1108676.html
  In this story, the story is similar, where far too many customers were sent in, and the vendor was pressured to sell at materials cost, which almost killed them.
  Now, in The Brick case (TFA for those not paying attention), the company made the mistake. They were able to limit their losses by resolving the discount problem.
  There were several other comments here. One says "what if they bought 100 mattresses?". Well, there's no indication of that in the story. Others are first-hand accounts of the way the company operates, which has included blatant false advertising and other deceptions. That would indicates the real truth behind TFA was intentional. If I, an average consumer, see that I get an outrageous discount, I'll probably go add more items so I can get the better deal. Great. But their plan is to now bill me for the difference.
  Some people have said the problem was caught before anything shipped. Great. So cancel the order, and work with the customer. I have seen that happen before. It's not unreasonable. "Sorry, due to a technical error, your order has been cancelled. Please place your order again."
  The Brick went totally the other way with it. "Hey, we screwed up and applied the wrong discount, pay this new amount. We don't care about the receipt being the legally binding contract. You owe us." I have seen that before too, usually with con artists who get to exert some sort of leverage. I've mostly heard this with moving companies. "It will be $5,000 to ship your belongings from Point A to Point B." When the day comes for delivery, since they have all of your possessions in their storage yard they demand more for whatever fees they decide to apply.
  You get it at car dealerships too. "$22,500 out the door" and hours of dealing with them over paperwork becomes "$22,500 plus tax, tag, dealer prep, showroom fees, and whatever else is now $33,999."
  I've heard many stories about car dealerships taking your trade-in car, which they offer to "wash, detail, and inspect", and when it comes time to close the deal and you're presented with a new price *and* an insulting trade-in value, your car is no longer on the lot. It's been "sold", which usually means moved to another lot. So before you've signed the paperwork, you're stuck between walking home or accepting their offer. I've known people who had to go as far as to call law enforcement to report their car stolen, just to get their old car back.
  Personally, I've never had to go that far with a car dealer. I trust them less than a thug who says he wants to steal my wallet. At least the thug is up front about what they're going to do. I demand to know what they will give me for my trade-in before I do anything else. Once I was offered $100 trade-in on a $10,000 car. Ok, so you're a crook. I'll go buy elsewhere.
  Of course, all of those are dirty tactics, and the company will deny any knowledge of such activity ever happening, but they still do it. So TFA about The Brick isn't some sob story about a company being screwed by the customers. It's a sob story of a con gone bad.
  
  --
  Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
Demand? by HornWumpus · 2013-12-28 05:16 · Score: 3, Insightful

Someplace sold me something, then they demand more money?
Can you guess my answer?

--
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Re:Point of no return by JWSmythe · 2013-12-28 05:20 · Score: 2

Of course they have legal redress. Well, maybe not totally legal, but accepted in the current environment. You tell the customer to pay what you think they owe, even though they have the product. If they don't pay, you can file with the local courts, which cost money, or stick it on their credit report. It may be dirty, but not illegal. They'll get a world of bad press from it though.
They should have sucked up the GOOD press about it. "Wooo, we screwed up and gave stuff away for free! Enjoy! And here's our latest offer, 25% off new purchases! Coupon code: WESCREWEDUP"
Someone didn't pass the customer relations portion of their training.

--
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
The Brick stinks by grub · 2013-12-28 05:27 · Score: 3, Informative

People outside of Canada have probably never heard of The Brick until now. It's one of the stores I refuse to go in to. The salespeople jump on you the moment you step in the door and don't stop.

--
Trolling is a art,
Government consumer protection agencies by just+fiddling+around · 2013-12-28 05:40 · Score: 4, Informative

The Brick is known in Canada for deceptive business practices, so the consumer protection agencies have taken to the media to inform that customers do NOT have to give the money back.
The retailer advertised those prices, and tries to trick the customer into cancelling the sale to wiggle out of the sales. That's a tactic known as bait-and-switch, and it's illegal.

--
You're not old until regret takes the place of your dreams.
Personal Responsibility has become this. by geekmux · 2013-12-28 05:54 · Score: 3, Insightful

"...have we reached a point at which online retailers are expected to just swallow such costs for PR purposes, as part of doing web business?"
Uh, yeah, I do. It's called personal responsibility. If you've screwed up and cost the business even millions of dollars, then hold the person who screwed up accountable to try and eliminate the chances of it happening again.
THAT is what I expect. Not some weak-ass horribly worded excuse to attempt to make the consumer somehow feel guilty about a providers mistake that they happened to capitalize on.
Re:fair? by msauve · 2013-12-28 06:18 · Score: 2

"unless there is an agreed upon terms to correct a mistake."

Say, for instance, website terms of sale which specifically allow them the right to "correct any error, inaccuracy or omission at any time without prior notice or liability to you or any other person" and "reject, correct, cancel or terminate any order, including accepted orders for any reason?"

--
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Re:fair? by TechyImmigrant · 2013-12-28 06:48 · Score: 2

Nordstrom sold us a rather fancy linen handkerchief for a bizarrely low price last year. The item wasn't labeled. We asked the price. They looked on the computer and it was 10% of what we and the guy behind the counter were expecting. He called a manger. They agreed it was on the computer so they had to bite it and sell it to us at that price. He suggested we buy the other one as well, since they were that cheap but we only needed one so declined.
Some places understand that biting it is better in the long run. It doesn't give people another reason to hate them and avoid shopping there.

--
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Amazon Did it Too by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2013-12-28 06:48 · Score: 3, Interesting

Here's a little story about Amazon doing the same thing.
http://slashdot.org/story/07/02/15/1356226/amazon-adjusts-prices-after-sales-error
Some of the details in the Amazon story are missing though:
(1) It was a 2-for-1 sale on DVD box sets where they double-discounted the price of the cheaper DVD set. Some people bought identically priced sets and so paid $0, but a lot of people bought two sets with different prices so they paid the nominal difference.
(2) Amazon corrected the error on the website within hours, but continued shipping some of the orders for up to 4 days later so they clearly knew about the error and still choose to let merchandise ship rather than make the effort to put an internal hold on it.

--
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Re: Yes by dryeo · 2013-12-28 07:20 · Score: 2

We're talking about "The Brick" where their total business model involves taking advantage of stupid people who can't do math, don't understand interest and don't read the fine print on the contract. Considering they've been using this business model for at least 20 years and are still in business I doubt that more pissed off potential customers would faze them.

--
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Re:Simple. by mark-t · 2013-12-28 10:43 · Score: 2

Except the 50% discount they received was *not* what was advertised... in fact, the products were advertised at one price, and the only ended up getting the discount at checkout time.
It falls into the exact same category as a cashier accidentally giving you too much change... except instead of a few cents that don't matter, it's measured in terms of hundreds of dollars, which do.

--
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Re:fair? by Dahamma · 2013-12-28 18:26 · Score: 2

Moral of the story is...
Wait, you bought a FUCKING LINEN HANDKERCHIEF? And "needed one"? What, were you stocking up for a time traveling expedition!?
Are you bringing your own weapons?