mail in rebate

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I recently purchase a digital camera, a card,travel case all fuji, at
best buy store in Miami fl.
this product came with a mail rebate of 60 dollars, I send it and 30
day later came back unqualified because it din't have the upc wich
apparently is a bar code locaded in the camera .after a careful look at
the camera I discover that there is not such thing.

I found that very dishonest, I have allway use fujifilm products, it
let me down this time.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

disoba@gmail.com wrote:

> I recently purchase a digital camera, a card,travel case all fuji, at
> best buy store in Miami fl.
> this product came with a mail rebate of 60 dollars, I send it and 30
> day later came back unqualified because it din't have the upc wich
> apparently is a bar code locaded in the camera .after a careful look at
> the camera I discover that there is not such thing.
>
> I found that very dishonest, I have allway use fujifilm products, it
> let me down this time.

Rebates are a scam..

Statistically, 1/2 the people buying an item at the fantastic
rebate price don't "get around" to mailing in the rebate forms.
(There have been surveys to determine this).

Of those that get mailed in, the companies disqualify many because
they didn't precisely follow the rebate instructions and include all
the necessary things. As a result, only 1/3 of all rebates are
eventually honored.

So despite offering an amazing $60.00 off the price of an item, in
the big picture, they're only discounting it by around $20.00

This is common practice across the electronics industry. This is
why mail in rebates are so popular. They all do this.. Fujifilm
is no less honest than any other company..

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <118hl30l7ih55dd@news.supernews.com>,
Jim Townsend <not@real.address> wrote:

> Rebates are a scam..
>
> Statistically, 1/2 the people buying an item at the fantastic
> rebate price don't "get around" to mailing in the rebate forms.
> (There have been surveys to determine this).
>
> Of those that get mailed in, the companies disqualify many because
> they didn't precisely follow the rebate instructions and include all
> the necessary things. As a result, only 1/3 of all rebates are
> eventually honored.

Perhaps they're less a scam than a tax on stupidity.

----j7y

--
jere7my tho?rpe | "The land knows whom it sent out;
(440) 775-1522 | In the place of human beings
jere7my2@oberlin.net | Their ashes in urns
http/www.livejournal.com/~jere7my | Come back to each man's house."
--- Aeschylus, The Agamemnon

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

disoba@gmail.com wrote:
> I recently purchase a digital camera, a card,travel case all fuji, at
> best buy store in Miami fl.
> this product came with a mail rebate of 60 dollars, I send it and 30
> day later came back unqualified because it din't have the upc wich
> apparently is a bar code locaded in the camera .after a careful look at
> the camera I discover that there is not such thing.
>
> I found that very dishonest, I have allway use fujifilm products, it
> let me down this time.
>

Why did you post this article 10 times?

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
Spammers please contact me at renegade@veldy.net.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

> disoba@gmail.com wrote:
>> I recently purchase a digital camera, a card,travel case all fuji, at
>> best buy store in Miami fl.
>> this product came with a mail rebate of 60 dollars, I send it and 30
>> day later came back unqualified because it din't have the upc wich
>> apparently is a bar code locaded in the camera .after a careful look at
>> the camera I discover that there is not such thing.
>>
>> I found that very dishonest, I have allway use fujifilm products, it
>> let me down this time.
>>
>
> Why did you post this article 10 times?
>


Just look in the message header:

Organization: http/groups.google.com

I don't usually respond to posts originating from Google...
I missed it this time.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 16 May 2005 17:16:57 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>disoba@gmail.com wrote:
>> I recently purchase a digital camera, a card,travel case all fuji, at
>> best buy store in Miami fl.
>> this product came with a mail rebate of 60 dollars, I send it and 30
>> day later came back unqualified because it din't have the upc wich
>> apparently is a bar code locaded in the camera .after a careful look at
>> the camera I discover that there is not such thing.
>>
>> I found that very dishonest, I have allway use fujifilm products, it
>> let me down this time.
>>
>
>Why did you post this article 10 times?

Because he's stupid?

...just a guess..

--
Owamanga!
http/www.pbase.com/owamanga

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

A scam? I have *never* had a rebate refused and have *always* received what
was promised. All one has to do is follow directions, plain and simple.

--
John Tucker

Jim Townsend wrote:
> Rebates are a scam..

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John Tucker wrote:

> A scam? I have *never* had a rebate refused and have *always* received what
> was promised. All one has to do is follow directions, plain and simple.
>

Yes, but the companies *bank* on people 'forgetting' to send them in
and making errors when they do. This does happen. This in turn
reduces the effective total discount from the companies standpoint.

I'd prefer that the companies simply reduce the price by $60.00 rather
than making me jump through hoops for a $60.00 rebate.

I hate filling out forms (supplying my name and address to be entered
in some database) then mailing letters then waiting for weeks.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Jim Townsend wrote:
> disoba@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>I recently purchase a digital camera, a card,travel case all fuji, at
>>best buy store in Miami fl.
>>this product came with a mail rebate of 60 dollars, I send it and 30
>>day later came back unqualified because it din't have the upc wich
>>apparently is a bar code locaded in the camera .after a careful look at
>>the camera I discover that there is not such thing.
>>
>>I found that very dishonest, I have allway use fujifilm products, it
>>let me down this time.
>
>
> Rebates are a scam..
>
> Statistically, 1/2 the people buying an item at the fantastic
> rebate price don't "get around" to mailing in the rebate forms.
> (There have been surveys to determine this).
>
> Of those that get mailed in, the companies disqualify many because
> they didn't precisely follow the rebate instructions and include all
> the necessary things. As a result, only 1/3 of all rebates are
> eventually honored.
>
> So despite offering an amazing $60.00 off the price of an item, in
> the big picture, they're only discounting it by around $20.00
>
> This is common practice across the electronics industry. This is
> why mail in rebates are so popular. They all do this.. Fujifilm
> is no less honest than any other company..

Hi...

My personal experience is that Fuji goes far beyond what's
expected of them...

Couple of Christmas's ago my neighbor bought his family an
A210 a few weeks before the holidays. All they had was the card
that came with it.

Just before Christmas I was shopping; thought that maybe they'd
like another card to use with it. Saw a Fuji rebate form on
the counter - offered that with the purchase of a 210 they'd
send you a free 32 meg card, so I picked one up for them.

Got home to find that it expired the end of November (3 weeks
ago).

He decided to gamble a stamp, and send it in, along with a
note explaining that he knew it was late, and wondered if they
might consider making an exception.

They sent him a card. Hats off to Fuji.

Ken

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"John Tucker" <johnREMOVE@REMOVEintegrity-web-design.com> wrote in message
news:uJ4ie.269$VB6.126@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
>A scam? I have *never* had a rebate refused and have *always* received what
>was promised. All one has to do is follow directions, plain and simple.
>
> --
> John Tucker
>
> Jim Townsend wrote:
>> Rebates are a scam..
>
>
I've always gotten the rebate as well. A few years back, there was a problem
with rebates not being honored until they cracked down on the scammers.
Always follow the instructions in order for the rebate to be honored.
John

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 16 May 2005 13:23:11 -0500, Jim Townsend <not@real.address>
wrote:

>John Tucker wrote:
>
>> A scam? I have *never* had a rebate refused and have *always* received what
>> was promised. All one has to do is follow directions, plain and simple.
>>
>
>Yes, but the companies *bank* on people 'forgetting' to send them in
>and making errors when they do. This does happen. This in turn
>reduces the effective total discount from the companies standpoint.

Why do I care what others fail to do -- I got my $300 in
rebates for an $1100 computer with no problem .
>
>I'd prefer that the companies simply reduce the price by $60.00 rather
>than making me jump through hoops for a $60.00 rebate.
>
>I hate filling out forms (supplying my name and address to be entered
>in some database) then mailing letters then waiting for weeks.
>
At fifteen minutes of my time, that's $1200/hour for writing a
few things and making copies.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 16 May 2005 18:30:06 GMT, Ken Weitzel <kweitzel@shaw.ca>
wrote:

>
>
>Jim Townsend wrote:
>> disoba@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I recently purchase a digital camera, a card,travel case all fuji, at
>>>best buy store in Miami fl.
>>>this product came with a mail rebate of 60 dollars, I send it and 30
>>>day later came back unqualified because it din't have the upc wich
>>>apparently is a bar code locaded in the camera .after a careful look at
>>>the camera I discover that there is not such thing.
>>>
>>>I found that very dishonest, I have allway use fujifilm products, it
>>>let me down this time.
>>
>>
>> Rebates are a scam..
>>
>> Statistically, 1/2 the people buying an item at the fantastic
>> rebate price don't "get around" to mailing in the rebate forms.
>> (There have been surveys to determine this).
>>
>> Of those that get mailed in, the companies disqualify many because
>> they didn't precisely follow the rebate instructions and include all
>> the necessary things. As a result, only 1/3 of all rebates are
>> eventually honored.
>>
>> So despite offering an amazing $60.00 off the price of an item, in
>> the big picture, they're only discounting it by around $20.00
>>
>> This is common practice across the electronics industry. This is
>> why mail in rebates are so popular. They all do this.. Fujifilm
>> is no less honest than any other company..
>
>Hi...
>
>My personal experience is that Fuji goes far beyond what's
>expected of them...
>
>Couple of Christmas's ago my neighbor bought his family an
>A210 a few weeks before the holidays. All they had was the card
>that came with it.
>
>Just before Christmas I was shopping; thought that maybe they'd
>like another card to use with it. Saw a Fuji rebate form on
>the counter - offered that with the purchase of a 210 they'd
>send you a free 32 meg card, so I picked one up for them.
>
>Got home to find that it expired the end of November (3 weeks
>ago).
>
>He decided to gamble a stamp

Interesting phrase -- the last time I saw it used was in 1950s
ads for Charles Atlas (or similar) bodybuilding systems. The skinny
guy in the cartoon strip gets sand kicked in his face by the beach
dude, who makes of with the beach babe. At home, he reads the ad,
says, "I'll gamble a stamp ...." Some time later, as I recall, he
revisits the beach, commits battery on the beach dude and reclaims
"his rightful property."

>, and send it in, along with a
>note explaining that he knew it was late, and wondered if they
>might consider making an exception.
>
>They sent him a card. Hats off to Fuji.
>
>Ken
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

kashe@sonic.net wrote:

> On Mon, 16 May 2005 13:23:11 -0500, Jim Townsend <not@real.address>
> wrote:
>
>>Yes, but the companies *bank* on people 'forgetting' to send them in
>>and making errors when they do. This does happen. This in turn
>>reduces the effective total discount from the companies standpoint.
>
> Why do I care what others fail to do --

Have you ever wondered WHY so many companies go through the time and
trouble to offer rebates ?

Because when they advertise a product for $50 off they know the
cumulative discount will really be $25. (Yes, you can blame it
on the consumer).

But.. If EVERYBODY who bought a product applied for the rebate
with all the correct info and enclosures, the popular and stupid
rebate programs would end.

If they have to pay the full discount, then the only reason I can see
left for companies offering the rebate would be to collect names and
addresses for their databases.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Jim Townsend <not@real.address> wrote:
>
> Statistically, 1/2 the people buying an item at the fantastic
> rebate price don't "get around" to mailing in the rebate forms.
> (There have been surveys to determine this).
>

72% of all quoted statistics are made up ;-)

> Of those that get mailed in, the companies disqualify many because
> they didn't precisely follow the rebate instructions and include all
> the necessary things. As a result, only 1/3 of all rebates are
> eventually honored.
>

26% of all statistics that have sub-statistics are also made up.


One thing I am sure of is that as the size of the rebate increases in
absolute terms (dollar amount), the more likely a rebate will be sent.

The fact is that people are getting so tired of rebates that Best Buy
has unilaterally chosen to discontinue the majority of offered rebates.
I believe the implementation date for 100% of their product under these
rules is just over 18 months.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
Spammers please contact me at renegade@veldy.net.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John Tucker <johnREMOVE@removeintegrity-web-design.com> wrote:
> A scam? I have *never* had a rebate refused and have *always* received what
> was promised. All one has to do is follow directions, plain and simple.
>

I have had several small rebates seemingly just "disappear". You send
them in and never get anything back. Not much you can do once you have
sent in the UPC. However, I have not had this happen on any large
rebates ($100+). I have had ATI and Samsung (for a video card and flat
LCD screen) take 4 and 5 months respectively to get my rebates mailed to
me. They claim 6 to 8 weeks, but they are not telling the truth. I
mailed both those rebates two days after Christmas (27th) and didn't get
the checks until mid-April and early May respectively.

I DO like working with rebates when it comes to Costco. They allow you
to go online and fill out information from the receipt about point of
sale. You get an email about the acceptance of the rebate and shortly
after that a check arrives in the mail. No issues mailing in UPC codes
and fighting about semantics.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
Spammers please contact me at renegade@veldy.net.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Jim Townsend <not@real.address> wrote:
>
> Yes, but the companies *bank* on people 'forgetting' to send them in
> and making errors when they do. This does happen. This in turn
> reduces the effective total discount from the companies standpoint.
>

One of the reasons manufacturer rebates are so popular is that they
allow manufacturers to offer a sale globally without having to work with
each and every retailer on this. Further, it shows increased revenue
during a reporting period if they care to time these events properly.
So, it can be an interesting way of smoothing the books.

> I'd prefer that the companies simply reduce the price by $60.00 rather
> than making me jump through hoops for a $60.00 rebate.
>

Yes, so would I! However, the problem often is that they are required
to work with each of the retailers to discount inventory they already
have and have paid full price for, so that a credit is issued back to
them upon sale. Thus, retailers often lose because they have money tied
up in inventory that they have actually sold, awaiting credit from the
manufacturer. Large retailers have channels to eliminate this, but
small retailers may not.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
Spammers please contact me at renegade@veldy.net.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

kashe@sonic.net wrote:
> At fifteen minutes of my time, that's $1200/hour for writing a
> few things and making copies.
>

This is a misrepresentation of what actually is occuring here. You can
only get $1200/hour is you have that many rebates lined up to send.
Otherwise, your time is worth only that amount of money you can
potentially be refunded. For most people, it is $30 of their own money
that is tied up for 6 weeks awaiting its recovery. Time to get the
rebate submitted, wait for its refund and time spent to deposit the
check all add up to a terrible inconvenience.

What does this mean? Well, you can pay $1200 with a $300 rebate, spend
20 minutes submitting the rebate, wait 6 weeks while somebody has your
money, and then get the check and cash it, leaving the cost to you as
$900 + the loss of work of $300 over 6 weeks (plus a stamp). Or, you
can pay $900 up front with no rebate, and let your $300 work for you as
it would normally over 6 weeks and not have any loss of time. The
latter is clearly a better option.

So, representing this as a $1200/hour venture is clearly a gross
misrepresentation.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
Spammers please contact me at renegade@veldy.net.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 17 May 2005 09:09:58 -0500, Jim Townsend <not@real.address>
wrote:

>kashe@sonic.net wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 16 May 2005 13:23:11 -0500, Jim Townsend <not@real.address>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Yes, but the companies *bank* on people 'forgetting' to send them in
>>>and making errors when they do. This does happen. This in turn
>>>reduces the effective total discount from the companies standpoint.
>>
>> Why do I care what others fail to do --
>
>Have you ever wondered WHY so many companies go through the time and
>trouble to offer rebates ?

No, I've never wondered -- it was obvious from the outet.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 17 May 2005 18:22:34 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>kashe@sonic.net wrote:
>> At fifteen minutes of my time, that's $1200/hour for writing a
>> few things and making copies.
>>
>
>This is a misrepresentation of what actually is occuring here.

It's the RATE, boy, the RATE. Duration not implied.

> You can
>only get $1200/hour is you have that many rebates lined up to send.
>Otherwise, your time is worth only that amount of money you can
>potentially be refunded. For most people, it is $30 of their own money
>that is tied up for 6 weeks awaiting its recovery. Time to get the
>rebate submitted, wait for its refund and time spent to deposit the
>check all add up to a terrible inconvenience.
>
>What does this mean? Well, you can pay $1200 with a $300 rebate, spend
>20 minutes submitting the rebate, wait 6 weeks while somebody has your
>money, and then get the check and cash it, leaving the cost to you as
>$900 + the loss of work of $300 over 6 weeks (plus a stamp). Or, you
>can pay $900 up front with no rebate, and let your $300 work for you as
>it would normally over 6 weeks and not have any loss of time. The
>latter is clearly a better option.
>
>So, representing this as a $1200/hour venture is clearly a gross
>misrepresentation.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

kashe@sonic.net wrote:
>>
>>This is a misrepresentation of what actually is occuring here.
>
> It's the RATE, boy, the RATE. Duration not implied.
>

The ONLY rate that it is measuring is the rate at which you can get your
money back if you are similarily spending $1200/hour ... which is
assinine!

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
Spammers please contact me at renegade@veldy.net.