Random topic thread

[Arkhan]

THIS IS AMERICA.

SUE OR BE SUED!

[RoyVegas]

THIS IS AMERICA.

SUE AND BE SUED!

Fixed.

[esteban]

Disclaimer: BlackandBlue, I don't have a beef with you. I just wanted to talk about consumer's rights.

I think most people have a distorted idea about the nature of lawsuits, especially when it is so easy to label everything as "frivolous".

People need to f*cking be realistic and stop suing for every little thing they can. 

A Class Action lawsuit was filed against Microsoft.

We should not passively accept shady/unfair/unjust business tactics. There is nothing wrong with trying to change things to make life better for us. Consumers do, and should, have basic rights and protections.

Realistically, successful class action lawsuits should have more TEETH to them... but corporations, even when found guilty, are able to offer silly crap (like coupons, or vouchers) to compensate consumers. Clearly, power has not shifted to us, the consumers. Power, and the ability to abuse that power, remains the prerogative of business.

While far from perfect, lawsuits are one of the few tactics consumers have to rectify things.

Sure, lawyers get rich, corporations get slapped on the wrist, and we, the consumers, have little, if any power at the end of the day. Should I just give up, then? Hell no.

/rant

I still love all you guys, of course

[termis]

Consumers in the U.S. have about the most power of any consumer in the world.  (if not the most)

[BlackandBlue]

I see what you are saying and it is not fair that consumers are getting screwed.  But, its not like MS is intentionally selling the points in values that will make sure someone has points left over.  All 3 stores are like this.  You buy Wii points the same way.  I have 100 left that I will never use.  PSN you buy $5 increments.  I do not think you can get a refund with either of those services either.  I hate to say it, but itunes is the only fair one I have used (buying an app for my phone only charges me the amount for the app).

The article seems to be more set on the fact that 100 != $1.  I dont see why that is an issue.

[jperryss]

The article seems to be more set on the fact that 100 != $1.  I dont see why that is an issue.

It's an issue because it masks what you're spending on your purchase.

Wouldn't you be pissed if you went to a store, and at the front door they made you convert your dollars to 'points' to spend in the store? And you gave them $20 and in return they gave you 1600 points? Even if the prices of everything in the store were scaled appropriately, it's still an unnecessary pain in the ass.

It's not that difficult to remember that 100 = $1.25 but that's not the point. They're making it unnecessarily more difficult to think about how much you're spending, and there is not a single logical reason for them to do that, other than to trick people.

[BlackandBlue]

The article seems to be more set on the fact that 100 != $1.  I dont see why that is an issue.

It's an issue because it masks what you're spending on your purchase.

Wouldn't you be pissed if you went to a store, and at the front door they made you convert your dollars to 'points' to spend in the store? And you gave them $20 and in return they gave you 1600 points? Even if the prices of everything in the store were scaled appropriately, it's still an unnecessary pain in the ass.

It's not that difficult to remember that 100 = $1.25 but that's not the point. They're making it unnecessarily more difficult to think about how much you're spending, and there is not a single logical reason for them to do that, other than to trick people.

I dont agree with the whole points thing.  I do think that it is a way to mask how much things cost, but I still dont think the 100 != 1 is an issue.  You have to remember that these companies distribute world wide.  So, somewhere it isnt going to make sense.  I believe in UK 2000 wii points is £25 (msrp on amazon.co.uk).  So, now the conversion is £1.25 per 100 whereas it is $1.00 per 100 here.  I am in no way sticking up for them, but just trying to show everything can't be catered towards Americans.

[RoyVegas]

but just trying to show everything can't be catered towards Americans.

YES it can!  

[BlackandBlue]

but just trying to show everything can't be catered towards Americans.

YES it can!  

 

[Emerald Rocker]

The logical reason for Microsoft to scale the cost of points is because points is a global unit.  The value of an item (in points) is the same globally, so to make the value match the local currency, they have to fiddle with the cost of points in that region.  By using points, they can raise or reduce the cost as necessary to achieve maximum profit.

Esteban:
I agree that in a perfect system, successful consumer-driven class action lawsuits should have more teeth to them -- giving cash refunds instead of coupons would be a great place to start.

However, I would not support doing that yet.  There are WAY too many frivolous lawsuits filed.  The whole system needs to be overhauled to reduce the mentality of "well, let's file a lawsuit and see if it catches on".  If TEETH are added to the penalties without adding TEETH to penalize frivolity, then corporations might end up paying way too much in penalties.

I am reminded of the class-action lawsuit filed against cinemas, because they showed commercials prior to films.  The lawsuit was filed because paying customers "already paid and therefore should not have to spend time watching  commercials (since the film's advertised start time is actually when the commercials begin)".  The consumers who joined in on that suit were either just joining for the hope of future reward, or because they didn't bother to investigate the economics... cinema income is precarious.  Without advertisements, they would have to either raise ticket prices or concession prices, but both are already about as high as the demand curve will allow.  Killing advertisements would kill the cinemas.

Lawsuits like that, which are about convenience (as opposed to a failure to deliver the advertised product), should not only be dismissed, but lawyers should be penalized for wasting the courts' time.  Get a certain number of strikes, and their license to practice could be revoked.

Besides, consumers already have a protection mechanism against most companies -- it's called not buying their product.  There are certain exceptions (utilities) but for the most part, if you don't like a company, don't buy their stuff.  There's a difference between deception and consumers not educating themselves, and companies should only be responsible for the former.

Most of the successfully-prosecuted illegal company practices in today's world involve unfair competition, which generally has a larger impact on other companies and less (visible) impact on the consumer.  In these situations, recompense should be made to other companies and not so much to the consumer.  When Nintendo was fixing prices of NES cartridges and forcing retailers to choose between selling NES or Sega, why was Nintendo's "penalty" to send out millions of discount coupon for future NES products (and of course to discontinue such practices)?  That's an insane solution.  It boosts Nintendo's future sales, which is the opposite of recompense for competitors.

[Arkhan]

America sucks!

Gatorade is better.

[Necromancer]

We should not passively accept shady/unfair/unjust business tactics.

But what about Xbox point cards is shady, unfair, or unjust?

It's an issue because it masks what you're spending on your purchase.

Wouldn't you be pissed if you went to a store, and at the front door they made you convert your dollars to 'points' to spend in the store? And you gave them $20 and in return they gave you 1600 points? Even if the prices of everything in the store were scaled appropriately, it's still an unnecessary pain in the ass.

Yeah, I might get pissed..... so pissed that I turn around, get back in my car, and spend my money elsewhere.  I sure as shit wouldn't spend my money and cry about it later.

It's not that difficult to remember that 100 = $1.25 but that's not the point. They're making it unnecessarily more difficult to think about how much you're spending, and there is not a single logical reason for them to do that, other than to trick people.

BlackandBlue gave you the logical reason: they're an international commodity being bought with various currencies.

[Arkhan]

MS Sued Over Live Points

What the f*ck's the point of this shit?  These retards knew the rules going in and if they had a problem with 'em, they should've saved their pennies.  It's not MS's fault if they're too f'n stupid to use simple division to determine what 100 points are going to cost, nor is it their fault if someone has unredeemed points.  Retail gift cards work exactly the same way, in that they won't refund whatever is left on the card for cash, so can I sue Walmart for big money and big prizes?

I was thinking.

Who just goes and buys a point card?

When I used them, I spent the points BEFORE I bought stuff.   I'd plan out what I was getting and get point cards accordingly so I'd spent exactly what was needed, leaving me with 0 points...

doesn't seem to hard.  Especially for a lawyer to figure out.

[esteban]

However, I would not support doing that yet.  There are WAY too many frivolous lawsuits filed.  The whole system needs to be overhauled to reduce the mentality of "well, let's file a lawsuit and see if it catches on".  If TEETH are added to the penalties without adding TEETH to penalize frivolity, then corporations might end up paying way too much in penalties.

Yes, I agree with the points you made in your post .

Lawsuits should be a last resort (i.e. when an offending party simply refuses to address an legitimate concern).

Ultimately, I want resolutions to be "fair" and "timely": consumers benefit when they are treated fairly and their inconvenience is minimized. I think this builds trust and credibility between companies and their consumers.

The problem, of course, is that few (if any!) companies actually have a fair mechanism for dealing with issues/disputes. I can write a letter, clearly explaining how they can improve Xbox Live's online commerce. Maybe I can send it to the powerful executives who actually make decisions! I can talk to customer service.

Herein lies the rub: even if my concerns are heard by the powerful decision-makers (doubtful), there is a conflict of interest between the consumer's rights and the company's interests. Even seemingly simple solutions (see my suggestions below) take time, money, resources and energy.

We should not passively accept shady/unfair/unjust business tactics.

But what about Xbox point cards is shady, unfair, or unjust?

As a matter of principle, I believe that the prices for products/services should be immediately obvious, including all taxes and other charges/fees I will incur.

So, when purchasing WiiPoints, it should clearly state "3000 WiiPoints for $30 + TAX", but it doesn't. You only find out about tax later, on the screen to finalize the transaction.

You might think this is a minor point, but a simple disclaimer "+ TAX" (and the actual tax amount should be calculated and displayed, considering this is 2010 C.E., goddammit) helps inform the consumer about the true cost of an item/service.


BUT, that was a tangent, let's discuss the process of "purchasing via points":

1. This is 2010. 2010. Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo could EASILY improve the usability and fairness of their online stores by displaying prices in POINTS as well as LOCAL CURRENCY.
2. Remind me again why I have to purchase points in blocks of _________ units? Why can't I simply purchase an item a la carte?
3. If I am forced to purchase points in blocks of _________ units, remind me again why I can't be refunded the balance of unused points?
4. Hey, #3 is a pet peeve of mine, so I have to repeat myself: why no refund?


It's 2010. We live in a world where retailers can identify the REGION of a consumer and TAILOR the shopping experience so that prices are plainly obvious (virtual price, actual cost in local currency, relevant taxes and fees, grand total, etc. etc. etc.)

Am I asking too much?

Honestly?

END OF RANT

[Necromancer]

Man shows IRS what's what by lighting his own house on fire and then ramming his plane into an IRS office building, killing himself and injuring two others in the process.  That'll teach those f*ckers.