If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Yo! David Maynard! (Was: Rebates -- Best Buy rebate scam)
David Maynard wrote:
My point then, as now, was your criteria for 'deducing' is flawed, as the millions of rebates that go through with no problem at all attest. Put another way, human fallibility dictates that, given sufficient volume, there will always be "hundreds" of problems to make your kind of deduction from. Here's another article that bolsters your position, which is backed by several retail/marketing research firms and the Merchandising Chief of a large retailer known for having one of the most prolific rebate programs in the retail industry (which is now ending mail-in rebates): --Only about one-third of national retail consumers who buy merchandise with mail-in rebates actually send away for the refunds and take advantage of the sale price, according to America's Research Group. "That statistic means that 70 percent of shoppers who thought they were purchasing a bargain actually cheated themselves out of the 'sale' price," notes Vero.-- OfficeMax Ends Mail-In Retail Rebates http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060703/cgm010.html Notice a common theme? (hint: it doesn't say consumers are getting cheated by retailers or rebate processors...but themselves) There is virtually no evidence supporting deliberate fraud or conspiracy to deny rebates, except for personal anecdotes and baseless speculation. Years of data showing up to 70% of consumers reliably fail to submit rebates is more than enough to make rebates profitable for the manufacturer, retailer, and rebate processor without any need or impetus for deliberate deception or fraud. Why 'cheat' someone out of their money when you don't have to? Even the computer technician in the Newsweek article who redeems more than 100 rebates per year feels that rebates translate into significant savings for him and does not say he has ever been defrauded. He files complaints automatically when rebate checks don't arrive in the stated timeframe, which may or may not influence his success. I don't start rattling chains or threatening to file complaints until the rebate check is overdue by at least one month. I rarely have to do either, a fair percentage of checks arrive late but they arrive without any additional action on my part. Rebates may not benefit consumers as a whole, but when the blame for this falls onto those consumers, who cares? Credit does not benefit consumers as a whole, either, because of the growing number of consumers who load-up on revolving debt in pursuit of instant gratification through conspicuous consumption and material worship. Many of my friends don't blink at the thought of charging $2000 for a new widescreen television or spending $10,000 over and above what they need in safe reliable transportation when buying a car (luxury/performance options, trim packages, more expensive models, aftermarket accessories, prestige factor, et. al.), then complain they 'can't afford' to buy a home, go to the doctor, or build any savings (after $300 ~ $600 or more goes out every month for credit card debt, payments and insurance on their upscale vehicle, premium cable or satellite television service with every option/upsell, et. al.). Consumers who fail to submit rebates are making choices based on their own priorities (they have better things to do than rebate paperwork), just as those consumers who load-up on unsecured revolving debt at the expense of savings, retirement, and even their own health (e.g. I have $2000 to spend on that cool television but not to pay that stupid doctor bill). Should we eliminate credit because a disturbing [and rising] number of consumers fail to keep their materialistic desires in-line with their means, choices based on their own priorities? As far as consumers finding rebate submissions as 'complicated' - lol! I have never dealt with a rebate submission I would characterize as 'complicated'. Different rebate promotions have slightly different requirements and instructions. Some require the original UPC, some accept a copy. Some require the original invoice/receipt, some accept a copy. Some require a signature, some do not. Some require alternative proof of purchase such as the screen capture of a competing software program, some require the competing program's installation CD. Sorting through these slightly different requirements doesn't require an advanced degree. High school equivalent reading skills and an attention span longer than a flash bulb is all that is required. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Yo! David Maynard! (Was: Rebates -- Best Buy rebate scam) | Curmudgeon | Homebuilt PC's | 9 | July 4th 06 05:05 PM |
Rebates -- Best Buy rebate scam | Don Freeman | AMD x86-64 Processors | 2 | June 30th 06 01:55 AM |
Rebates -- Best Buy rebate scam | Don Freeman | Overclocking AMD Processors | 2 | June 30th 06 01:55 AM |
Rebates | [email protected] | General | 19 | April 18th 04 11:32 PM |
Another Fuji rebate deal - 90 CDRS for around $6 after rebates 3- 30 packs at compusa tomorrow | rtr | Cdr | 10 | November 3rd 03 12:03 AM |