| |
Mike Stanley wrote in message ...
> Jasper Janssen <jasper@janssen.dynip.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Nov 1999 04:44:37 GMT, cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com (Mike Stanley)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I'll address this more fully in response to Larry's post, which,
> > > while wrong, was a bit more thought-out than this one. :)
> >
> > You know, he's saying exactly the same thing I thought, and then
> > figured you'd be smart enough to infer from the smart-arse reply.
> > Guess not.
>
> Wow, thanks.
>
> > I'll explain more fully: You don't have _any_ right to a _promotion_
> > cheap DVD, other than what the selling organisation grants you. The
>
> You're certainly right about that.
>
> > selling organisation assumes that if one person in a household
> > purchases something there, they're likely to tell the other persons of
> > the household about the place they found, and thus they will increase
> > their full-price sales. You are, in effect, cheating them. I don't
>
> Well, I think that's debatable in general, and ridiculous with
> respect to me and my household. I haven't paid full price for any
> of the 50 or so DVDs I own. Heck, I haven't paid half price for
> more than a couple of them.
>
> If I find a way to get a DVD for a few bucks (I get one or two each
> week for that price) I just ask my father-in-law to get another one
> for me, then I pay him for it. If the deal is truly awesome, I
> might ask someone else to do the same, but that's a little more
> difficult, because most of my friends have DVD players as well.
>
> > think there's anything legally wrong with it (though, in the US court
> > system, who can tell?), but it's certainly morally wrong.
>
> Perhaps.
>
> So if 4 college roommates share a house they shouldn't each be able
> to cash in on the deal? But if each of them rents out a room within
> the house, giving them each a separate address (Apt 1-4) it might be
> ok? I still say there's some gray there, but it's mostly
> irrelevant, because I don't have to even risk soiling my conscience
> because I just have Rachael's Dad order something that is limited to
> "one per household".
>
> My point would be that the end result is the same. I get both DVDs.
> Now you could say that we're actually conducting a separate
> transaction after he completes his with the retailer, at no extra
> expense to me (except for maybe all the free computer support he
> needs) but that's just a mostly irrelevant middle step. In the end,
> both DVDs end up on my rack, with the retailer making the exact same
> amount from shipping them to two locations as if they had just
> shipped them to one.
>
> --
This reminds me of when KBKids.com had the X-wings for half price because
of some pricing error. I ordered one, and nearly had a friend order another
one because it was such a "good deal". But when it arrived, I wondered why
I bought it... it had not interested me at the store and didn't interest me
any more in my hands at home. What a bargain. My point is, of coure, that
sometimes thesegreat deals get us to buy crap we wouldn't even buy
otherwise. I guess that doesn't have much to do with this thread, but I
feel bad now for not pointing out that possibly they had a pricing error,
and maybe saving them lots of those little pennies Larry talks about. And
I still have this dumb X-wing.
--
Have fun!
John
I have some Legos for sale here!
http://www114.pair.com/ig88/lego
my weird Lego site:
http://www114.pair.com/ig88/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
178 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
