Subject:
|
Re: Has any one else noticed this lately?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 8 Jan 2000 15:45:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
634 times
|
| |
|
|
> > >
> I today bought 2 4561s which had been opened, at a particular Target. I
> dealt with a supervisor, identified what parts were missing, and made a
> case that I should get an additional discount, based on the value of the
> missing parts. I got it. Therefore, I personally now would not feel
> justified in going to CA to ask for the replacement, as to me,
> personally, that smacks of double dipping. TARGET should take the hit,
> it's THEIR security that allowed the shrinkage. Doesn't seem fair to ask
> LEGO to eat it.
While it is true that Target's security is pretty bad, it is also true that
Lego's packaging is substandard in terms of preventing theft.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Has any one else noticed this lately?
|
| (...) Agreed, CA is swell. But my question to you is, you asked for a discount and got it. Was that just to cover the hassle of getting the replacement parts? Or did you argue that because there were parts missing, you should get a discount for the (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)
|
52 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
