B
Bob M
Dude, get a life.
Dude, get a life.
L
larry moe 'n curly
Barry said:
It can be risky to mail the rebate on the same day because if the
product is defective you may not be able to exchange it for another one
if the UPC label is removed. I almost always test the product for at
least a week before submitting the rebate, and I never forget because I
always write a reminder on my calendar.
B
Barry Watzman
Agreed, be sure you are going to keep the product first. As it happens,
most of the rebates are on software. But if it's defective you can
always send it back to the mfgr., even if you can't return it to the
store (in fact, what percentage of your purchases are from a store vs.
from online? For me, most purchases are online these days).
most of the rebates are on software. But if it's defective you can
always send it back to the mfgr., even if you can't return it to the
store (in fact, what percentage of your purchases are from a store vs.
from online? For me, most purchases are online these days).
A
Adam Corolla
Jack F. Twist said:
"These days"? What you describe was the same experience I had until about 4
or 5 years ago... Around then, things seemed to change for some reason, and
I haven't had a problem since.
When doing rebates, here are some tips how I learned to make it work:
REBATE TIPS FROM ADAM
1. BEFORE YOU BUY
A. Check the rebate expiration date. It may already be expired
B. Ask a sales rep what forms you need from the store. Make a note of
that rep's name and the time&date you spoke to them.
2. WHEN YOU BUY
A. Get at least two copies of the receipt
B. Ask the cashier what additional forms or paperwork you need for the
rebate in case the sales rep gave you wrong info. Make a note of the
cashier's name and the time&date you spoke to her.
3. WHEN YOU GET HOME
A. In the excitement of enjoying your new purchase, it's easy to forget
about the rebate. Fill those forms out ASAP, but (see nest tip)
B. DON'T CUT THE UPC symbol off the product package or otherwise damage it
until you are certain you won't be returning the product! Returns with
damaged packaging may not be accepted or they may charge you a restocking
fee.
4. AS SOON AS POSSIBLE (after you are sure you won't be returning the
product)
A. Carefully fill out all necessary forms in clear, legible writing. Pay
special attention to all directions--sometimes they throw a goofy one in
there that most people ignore or don't read, then the rebate company refuses
the rebate on that technicality.
B. Make at least two photocopies of all forms, UPC symbols, rebate coupons
and receipts and anything else you need for the rebate.
C. Send the rebate request in with delivery confirmation. I cannot stress
this enough. If you don't do this, a shady rebate company can throw away
your request, claim they never received it, and by the time you find out and
send another one, it'll be past the expiration date and you'll no longer be
eligible for a rebate.
D. Check the instructions to see how long to expect the rebate to arrive.
Use the longer date (if it says six to eight weeks, use eight weeks) and
mark your calendar (preferably both paper and your pop-up reminder in
Outlook or whatever you use) to remind you that you should have received the
rebate. NOTE in there where you put the photocopies and delivery
confirmation receipt.
5. IF YOU HAVE NOT RECEIVED IT in the specified time
BEFORE DOING ANY OF THE FOLLOWING, get some note paper and note EVERYTHING
you do with the company. Every detail of conversation, every person you
speak to and their extension, any fax or phone numbers you're given, and the
times & dates of everything.
A. Call the company, being sure to get the person's name and note the time
& date of the call. BE POLITE AND PATIENT even though this is frustrating.
You will find that service people are much better able to focus on the task
at hand (helping you) if they aren't being pressured, insulted or bullied by
an angry customer. Find out why you haven't gotten the rebate. If they say
they are running late, ask for a specific date when you can expect the
rebate by. Make detailed notes. Re-mark your calendars for that date. Put
your notes with the photocopies and delivery confirmation.
B. If they say they can't find it, mention the delivery confirmation
(which you should have received weeks ago.) Point out that you have proof
they received it and on what date, and ask to speak to a manager. Get the
manager's name and explain that you will be re-sending the rebate request
with PHOTOCOPIES of the information. Normally, they won't accept
photocopies of receipts, UPC symbols, etc, but since THEY lost the
originals, they had better accept the copies!
C. Tell the manager you expect expedited service due to the fact that it
was their mistake, not yours, which is causing the delay. Ask if you can
send the request to his or her attention. Get a specific date by which you
can expect your rebate after he receives it. WRITE EVERYTHING DOWN IN
DETAIL AS YOU ARE TALKING/LISTENING because it's easy to forget when you
hang up.
D. Send the second request to that manager's attention right away, with
delivery confirmation, and a note detailing your phone conversation. Don't
forget to mention that he specified when you would have the rebate by, and
when he said it would be. Go by when he receives it, so if he said two
weeks, give him two weeks from the date he receives it (better yet give him
three or four extra days just in case he is swamped and it takes him time to
get through his mail to your letter, let him know you are doing this as well
because he'll appreciate your thoughtfulness and that works out good for
you.)
E. If they request the photocopies by FAX, get a phone number to call
after you send the FAX to make sure they received it. Also along with the
rebate forms, receipts and UPC symbols, include a letter politely insisting
on a return fax with the company information, rep's name, confirmation of
rebate form receipt, amount of rebate and date when to expect it by. Note
that you expect that return FAX within 24 hours. If you don't get it by
then, call them and find out why.
Be polite and patient at ALL TIMES. If you get angry, insulting, pushy or
belligerent, you're shooting yourself in the foot because you're making it
hard for the person you're dealing with to concentrate on your problem (and
less likely for them to want to help you.)
If after all the above you still can't seem to get the rebate, talk to the
highest level person you can and mention in a casual, relaxed way that
you've been in contact with other people who have not received the rebate
and that they were talking about a class-action suit. You have to say it in
a relaxed and casual way because usually people are making empty threats
when they mention suits, and you can tell an empty threat because the person
making it has to stress it, make it sound important and forceful. Imagine
that you aren't trying to use the lawsuit threat to push them to give you
what you want, but that you're just talking to a close friend about an
article you read in the paper.
Again, remember that the people you're talking to are peons, they aren't the
ones trying to rip you off, they're just trying to get through another day
at work for whatever pittance they're being paid while the corporate heads
set the "screw-the-customer" policies and rake in the cash. But don't
bad-mouth the company either... for reasons I won't go into here.
Does it seem ridiculous to have to go through all the above for a silly $20
(or whatever amount) rebate? Sure, but the $20 isn't why you do it. You do
it for the principle, and for the joy of being a pain in the ass (with just
cause) to a shady company and forcing them to give you your money.
D
David Maynard
DP said:
It's not an 'assumption', it's an explanation of a few reasons why
companies use rebates.
A "guess" based on what?
Not much of a 'trick' when you *are* getting the lower price, if you don't
screw it up.
I don't know what percentage of the populace "won't send in the rebate
form" and I'll "guess" that you don't either, the "most" claim notwithstanding.
However, I am absolutely certain the companies have an estimate, just like
they have a estimate for incoming part rejects, assembly line rework, and
product failure rates. Doesn't mean they 'want' any of them.
Contrary to your apparent 'trick conspiracy' belief, most companies do not
want that to happen because it's counter productive to the purpose of the
rebate in that whatever they gained from the single sale is more than lost
in customer dissatisfaction.
Car salesmen, maybe, because they figure that one purchase is the only time
they'll ever see you. But companies depend on reputation and repeat business.
Yes, they control what they sell it for, and only that.
Except the 'if' isn't valid.
There is absolutely nothing to prevent a company from dropping it's
wholesale price and if they wanted to they would. They don't.
You've got two choices. You can ignore rebates, which might help the others
get a better one since the return rate drops so the company estimate of
what they can offer might increase, or you can take advantage of the rebate
and save some money.
A company trying to incentivize sales wants to incentivize sales, not
'hope' the dealers drop the price as well.
Why should *I* 'not forget' MSRP when virtually everyone else does?
I have no idea where you get that theory from. The most common case is
selling below MSRP but if there's sufficient demand things get sold over
MSRP as well.
Selling over MSRP isn't common, though, because the demand will immediately
spur more production, if the company can possibly manage it. Won't be any
rebates either.
D
David Maynard
DP said:
Give me a reason not to, other than your apparently automatic assumption
they're 'evil'.
Depends on what one considers 'ethical' but I get the impression you'd call
'for profit' an priori 'unethical'.
How do you put food on the table?
Amusing. You 'only' get $20-tax back so you've "lost some money."
Clue: You never had it to 'lose'.
And, no, the 'choice' isn't it being sold for $80 vs a $100-$20 rebate
because manufacturers aren't going to change wholesale just because you
don't like rebates.
<snip>
D
David Maynard
DP said:
No, you're not talking about why companies do rebates, you're talking about
your 'guess' based on a knee jerk assumption there's some devious
conspiracy involved.
I, and some others, have already given you a few of the reasons companies
do rebates, some of which are rather obvious when given proper
consideration, but you ignore them because they don't fit your conspiracy.
Where's your data to show it isn't already 98%? Or that an increase to 98%
would be a "skyrocket?"
As long as it served the purpose of increasing sales in the target market.
And your evidence for that claim is where?
Uh huh. So, even if your accusation were true, just how do you expect
rebate programs to 'end'? Let me guess, you're one of those who want
government to 'pass a law' to keep you from being a sucker.
None, because that isn't the purpose of a rebate. They'd offer something
else, like 'pay you X bucks' for your old whatever, and throw it away.
(Based on an actual program brilliantly conceived.)
Ain't going to happen because your theory ignores the real reasons
companies do rebates.
Your analogy holds no water because there is no a priori discrimination on
the part of the manufacturer offering rebates. It's entirely up to the
purchaser whether he wants it and properly applies for it.
That's the main problem, your assumption even in the face of being given
the real reasons.
Except you do, if you apply for it properly.
That logic is just plain bad. If I offer, today only, a 'free' car to
anyone who comes in, with the advertisement, and asks for it but only one
person does, and gets the car, I have not 'cheated' all you skeptics who
claim it was 'a trick'. That's your problem. And, just to be clear, I've
also not 'cheated' you if I correctly guessed that only one person would be
'foolish enough' to come in and ask.
Nor does it mean I intend to change my regular price.
Well, 'surprise', then, because I do get it.
Oh come on. You can't claim that rebates 'in general' are inherently a scam
and then claim a practitioner isn't scamming.
D
DP
David Maynard said:
And lets turn your question back on you: How do you know those are the REAL
reasons? You say they are, but I won't believe you unless you can document.
As for the basis for some of my comments about redemption rates, etc, well,
the stories are out there all over the place.
Here's one, from that commie rag, Business Week:
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/nov2005/nf20051123_4158_db016.htm
OK, I've given you partial documentation for some of my claims; now how
about some documentation for yours?
It's your move.
B
Barry Watzman
Rebate redemption rates are relatively low (e.g. under 50%), but that
does not mean that those offering rebates are engaging in a scam, nor
does it mean that there is any "trickery" involved.
Rebate offers are, for the most part, exactly as presented and can
generally be taken at face value. There is no scam and no "trickery".
The offer is up-front, straightforward and, with very few exceptions,
fulfilled as described.
The redemption rates are low simply because half or more of the
population is some combination of {disorganized, lazy and/or forgetful}.
Rebates provide a means for the manufacturer or retailer to increase
total sales by INDIRECTLY offering differential pricing, where the price
paid is at the discretion not of the seller (the offer of the rebate)
but of the buyer.
does not mean that those offering rebates are engaging in a scam, nor
does it mean that there is any "trickery" involved.
Rebate offers are, for the most part, exactly as presented and can
generally be taken at face value. There is no scam and no "trickery".
The offer is up-front, straightforward and, with very few exceptions,
fulfilled as described.
The redemption rates are low simply because half or more of the
population is some combination of {disorganized, lazy and/or forgetful}.
Rebates provide a means for the manufacturer or retailer to increase
total sales by INDIRECTLY offering differential pricing, where the price
paid is at the discretion not of the seller (the offer of the rebate)
but of the buyer.
D
DP
Well, your impression would be wrong.
D
DP
Barry Watzman said:
Scam, as in an illegal enterprise designed to steal money from people? No.
Trickery? Well, I guess it all depends on how you define that word. Here's a
sentence from the BW story: "What rebates do is get consumers to focus on
the discounted price of a product, then buy it at full price."
To me, that has hints of a little shell game going on.
It's like those lottery commercials that make you think you have a chance to
become a multimillionaire. Yes, people do win lotteries and do become
multimillionaires as a result. But your individual chance of winning a
lottery is probably less than the chances of you siring or giving birth to a
child with three eyes.
I guess it's all a matter of trust. I used the example the other day of
extended warranties. In recent years, people have become suspicious of them
and are shying away from them (which is not to say there aren't some good
extended warranties out there). I think the same thing is happening with
rebates. People are becoming more suspicious.
If Best Buy or Circuit City or CompUsa wants to keep hyping rebates, then
they start to lose credibility with me. Which means I might be less likely
to believe any claim the company may make. Which means I may be less likely
to trust in their promise to stand behind their products. Which means I'll
take my money elsewhere.
I think simply as a keeping-your-customers-satisfied move, you'll see more
and more sellers moving away from rebates.
P
Percival P. Cassidy
I read the rebate instructions on one Web site a while ago and saw a
warning that they do not accept certified/registered/delivery
confirmation mail. This information was not on the printed form.
Another thing to watch is that the rebate processing service may have a
different set of instructions/conditions from those printed on the form.
A few years ago Staples had a good rebate on APC uninterruptible power
supplies, and there was no mention of the form of any limit. I checked
with the manager, who assured me that if no limit was mentioned, then I
could get the rebate on as many as I liked, so I bought two. However,
when I called the rebate processing center to see if I could mail them
in the same envelope or whether I needed to mail them separately, the
person read from her instructions that the rebate was limited to one per
customer. Being thus forewarned, along with the required information
(all in one envelope) I sent an enlarged copy of the rebate form,
drawing attention to the absence of any stated limit, and I pointed out
that the store manager had assured me that there was no limit. I did get
the two rebates.
Perce
J
John Malone
90%+ of the rebates are discriminatory so I never conceder them as worth
anything.
Where I live I have no address (other than a 911 we got last year and that
is 1.5 miles from the house) and you don't get mail to a 911 addy.
I use a PO Box and 99% of rebates won't let you use a PO Box so for me they
just won't work!
They all want a physical address but when I give them Range 8 W. Township 40
N section 1&2 ect....... No one can deliver anything to it.
I just get the best price I can without rebates and leave it at that....
--
John Malone
==============
|
| | > Rebate redemption rates are relatively low (e.g. under 50%), but that
does
| > not mean that those offering rebates are engaging in a scam, nor does it
| > mean that there is any "trickery" involved.
|
| Scam, as in an illegal enterprise designed to steal money from people? No.
|
| Trickery? Well, I guess it all depends on how you define that word. Here's
a
| sentence from the BW story: "What rebates do is get consumers to focus on
| the discounted price of a product, then buy it at full price."
| To me, that has hints of a little shell game going on.
|
| It's like those lottery commercials that make you think you have a chance
to
| become a multimillionaire. Yes, people do win lotteries and do become
| multimillionaires as a result. But your individual chance of winning a
| lottery is probably less than the chances of you siring or giving birth to
a
| child with three eyes.
|
| I guess it's all a matter of trust. I used the example the other day of
| extended warranties. In recent years, people have become suspicious of
them
| and are shying away from them (which is not to say there aren't some good
| extended warranties out there). I think the same thing is happening with
| rebates. People are becoming more suspicious.
|
| If Best Buy or Circuit City or CompUsa wants to keep hyping rebates, then
| they start to lose credibility with me. Which means I might be less likely
| to believe any claim the company may make. Which means I may be less
likely
| to trust in their promise to stand behind their products. Which means I'll
| take my money elsewhere.
|
| I think simply as a keeping-your-customers-satisfied move, you'll see more
| and more sellers moving away from rebates.
|
|
|
|
|
anything.
Where I live I have no address (other than a 911 we got last year and that
is 1.5 miles from the house) and you don't get mail to a 911 addy.
I use a PO Box and 99% of rebates won't let you use a PO Box so for me they
just won't work!
They all want a physical address but when I give them Range 8 W. Township 40
N section 1&2 ect....... No one can deliver anything to it.
I just get the best price I can without rebates and leave it at that....
--
John Malone
==============
|
| | > Rebate redemption rates are relatively low (e.g. under 50%), but that
does
| > not mean that those offering rebates are engaging in a scam, nor does it
| > mean that there is any "trickery" involved.
|
| Scam, as in an illegal enterprise designed to steal money from people? No.
|
| Trickery? Well, I guess it all depends on how you define that word. Here's
a
| sentence from the BW story: "What rebates do is get consumers to focus on
| the discounted price of a product, then buy it at full price."
| To me, that has hints of a little shell game going on.
|
| It's like those lottery commercials that make you think you have a chance
to
| become a multimillionaire. Yes, people do win lotteries and do become
| multimillionaires as a result. But your individual chance of winning a
| lottery is probably less than the chances of you siring or giving birth to
a
| child with three eyes.
|
| I guess it's all a matter of trust. I used the example the other day of
| extended warranties. In recent years, people have become suspicious of
them
| and are shying away from them (which is not to say there aren't some good
| extended warranties out there). I think the same thing is happening with
| rebates. People are becoming more suspicious.
|
| If Best Buy or Circuit City or CompUsa wants to keep hyping rebates, then
| they start to lose credibility with me. Which means I might be less likely
| to believe any claim the company may make. Which means I may be less
likely
| to trust in their promise to stand behind their products. Which means I'll
| take my money elsewhere.
|
| I think simply as a keeping-your-customers-satisfied move, you'll see more
| and more sellers moving away from rebates.
|
|
|
|
|
D
David Maynard
DP said:
You mean besides it being prima facia obvious?
Because I've been there.
Of course you won't, because it isn't a good conspiracy.
The topic is your claim that the 'reason' companies do rebates is because
"the vast majority" won't send them in but your article doesn't say that.
D
David Maynard
Barry said:
Actually, his article suggests the redemption rate is 60%.
D
David Maynard
DP said:
Then I'm glad to hear I was wrong.
M
Mark A
DP said:
Upgrade rebates are a different category. Upgrade rebates allows the company
to sell one box of software at two different prices, instead of having to
sell one software package for new buyers and one for people who qualify for
the upgrade. There is also a problem of qualification since many companies
want you to send in receipts, etc from the previous version.
D
David Maynard
DP said:
It's a 'hint' that is the author's opinion, or your interpretation, not a
'fact' and it's partially contradicted by the published fact, in the same
article, that the redemption rate is 60% (derived by subtracting 40 from
100). The majority "focus on the discounted price of a product" and then
get the discounted price.
It's also misleading the way you interpret it, or the way the author
'hints', as it is a plain simple fact, clearly understood, that you "buy it
at full price," then send in the rebate and get your rebate check, so the
end result is the "full price" you paid minus the rebate you receive, which
is what is advertised: "buy at... get back..." It's what "rebate" means.
But I'll answer the definition matter. In this context 'trickery' would be
leading someone to believe one thing when it's something else, as in "ah
hah, fooled you." But a rebate is precisely as advertised.
Again your analogy fails because there is no 'random chance of winning' a
rebate, other than your own reliability (plus the occasional blips and
blurps that accompany life).
The question is whether the 'suspicion' is warranted or a conspiracy theory
induced automatic 'distrust' regardless of what is done.
Now there you have a reasonable theory, that irrational mistrust may kill
the golden goose.
J
John Doe
Many people have contrary real world experiences to that opinion.
Many of us have found that rebates do not get delivered. For
example, the $20 rebate I was supposed to have received for buying a
Zoom modem.
David Maynard uses the "conspiracy theory" argument so much, it's
beginning to sound like a conspiracy theory.
/A rebate is a golden goose?
Very funny.
D
DP
Just as I thought, David, you can't document it. I don't care about your
opinion. Your credibility is zip with me.
It's just as prima facie obvious to me that, based on comments in this
thread and the Corsair memory thread alone, a LOT of people have gripes
against rebate companies and accuse them of worse than trickery.
Oh well, nice try. I'll be interested in hearing what precious "facts" (as
you mentioned in a different post in this thread) you can bring in to
support your position. Until then, I'll ignore your opinions and
speculations.