To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.generalOpen lugnet.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 General / 13345
13344  |  13346
Subject: 
Re: Has any one else noticed this lately?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.general
Date: 
Sat, 8 Jan 2000 15:45:35 GMT
Viewed: 
862 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 (...) (25 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR