Comment Re:Op-ed (Score -1) 246
And your dad is not a man, but you mom is.
And your dad is not a man, but you mom is.
"Keeping a Li-Ion battery fully charged all the time is bad for its longevity..."
And that is completely wrong. Try again.
Fraud is an intentional tort. If they never intend to give the rebate for all eligible people, then it is fraud if they then do not actually do it (even if you don't complain). If not enough money is allocated up front, and if they run out of money to pay all the eligible rebates they receive, then it seems to me to be fraud (although IANAL)...
Well, the question comes down to what happens if every single person actually does comply with the terms of the rebate and requests it. It seems like either some party (either the company that offered the rebate, or the company that the rebate handling was outsourced to) will be forced to cough up the extra money to cover every rebate, or they will fail to pay out the rebates.
You seem to be assuming that the latter is the guaranteed result, but I don't see that it is. I'm not privy to the details of these contracts, but I would be amazed if they don't, as a general rule, spell out who is responsible for costs that exceed the expected cost of the rebate program.
That has absolutely nothing to do with the portion of the grandparent poster's comment that I was responding to.
just like your mom.
Outsourcing and incentivizing itself isn't fraudulent (just shady), but the reason that it's often fraudulent is that the allocated pool of money to the external marketing firm is never enough to cover the worst case, so they are effectively going into the promotion with the deliberate intent to defraud customers of the rebate and the original company doesn't indemnify the external company for worst-case shortfall (because they don't trust these shady rebate companies enough to think they won't just claim/pocket the money).
If the people who apply for the rebate get the promised rebate, then how could you possibly claim that anyone is being defrauded?
Because as you say the companies are actively planning to make the advertised price/rebate not possible, or very complicated for the customer to get.
I didn't say that at all. Doing that would be fraud, and should be prosecuted under existing laws. But there are plenty of times when obtaining a rebate is straightforward, and you want to make those illegal as well.
For the customers to compare products, with such complicated pricing schemes is just not feasible; it would take days to evaluate.
Well, I'm assuming people who can look at an advertised price of $X ($Y before rebate) and make a comparison, which is how most rebate offers that I see are advertised. If it takes you days to do that comparison, you probably are not qualified to be handling money at all.
Oooh Howard Dean! Now that holds water.
thanks for sharing that tripe, you fuckwit.
can't just ban the blatant rip-off of rebate promotions?
If the company honors the rebate as promised, and provides the terms of the rebate up front, then it's not a rip-off. If they don't, well, then that's fraud -- there are already laws against it, although I wouldn't mind seeing more enforcement of those laws.
Why should the government prevent competent adults from entering into an agreement that includes a rebate? Sure, the companies are hoping that many will not claim it, but that's the customer's choice.
I don't like the hassle of rebates myself (when I compare prices, I don't take rebates into consideration), but I don't need the government making that decision for me.
These kids aren't cheating, they're doing it the current/modern way.
This is a data structures and algorithms course, not a "find code snippets using google" course. In a work environment, the purpose of writing a program is to solve some problem by any means necessary. In the environment of this course, the purpose is to learn how these things are implemented.
spoken like a true twat-waffle.
oh shut the fuck up already.
The cords would just keep getting tangled up. You're much better off getting the DC model with a big battery pack.
Freak.
you really do like to hear yourself talk.
Intel CPUs are not defective, they just act that way. -- Henry Spencer
