Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 67891011
Results 201 to 209 of 209
  1. #201  
    ^^ Sorry brother you don't get it...

    The "heirees" are the ones condeming what you are saying and slamming anyone who disagrees...

    NOW THE COWARD HYPOCRITES HAVE CRAWLED UNDER A ROCK NEVER TO BE HEARD FROM AGAIN!
    Last edited by SoufSidah09; 02/26/2005 at 08:08 PM.
    "They say my ghetto instrumental detrimental to kids, as if they can't see the misery in which they live." Krazy -Tupac Shakur

    "Should we cry when the pope die? My request, we should cry if they cried when we buried Malcom X." Blasphemy - Tupac Shakur
  2. #202  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo
    The cost of these losses are already placed in the price of the product.
    Do you own your own business? Being one (business owner) myself I can't say I've seen many businesses that can afford to do that. Given the competitive nature of a capitalist market the price is probably already as low as can be priced while factoring in profit and development costs.

    To try and imply that PalmOne's advertising of the Treo 650 is a form of stealing is very much a LIE. If you don't like the product you don't have to purchase it. And if you purchase it and don't like it you can return it within a certain number of days for a full refund. Do these bogus claims of yours make you sleep better at night?

    The real deal is that the S/W developers are getting paid via Handango. They will get their money. And Handango will get the money to pay the developers from Sprint. Which will leave Sprint in the hole because the cost of this promotion will go over 100% of their estimated cost. Anyone that feels they are getting over on some "big company" does not understand the "big picture". To make up for these losses either all Sprint customers will have to pay more for service OR Sprint will cut their costs which will mean some "very little people" lose their jobs.

    Not to mention, it is PalmOne that made the Treo 650 and established the wholesale price which creates a default retail price. In all this PalmOne will not be affected. It is Sprint that is hurt by this abuse. They are only trying to cover the wholesale costs and make a profit. Cingular and others are not offering this kind of deal and charging the same price. So for Sprint offering a special they are getting burned big time by a bunch of abusers.
  3. #203  
    I find it sad you think everyone does as you do and the only difference is they say they don't. Believe it or not there are honest people out there. I hope you find that out some day.
  4. #204  
    Sprint got burned, no doubt. But you must remember, Sprint's pockets are far deeper than handango's and the individual developer. To the average consumer, the amount that Sprint took on this mishap of lax webdesign and loose consumer morals will seem like a large amount. In the scheme of things, there are not that many treo users who abused the web site to cause grave concern in lost revenue that would create a large price jump in sprint service. Additionally, many of us early adopters tend to have two year contracts with Sprint, which locks us in with them for two years, but also locks in our rates with them for that period of time. If there is a price jump due to this insanity, then I certainly won't be affected as I renewed for two years beginning in February. Many of us of got the treo 650 recently I am sure have signed up starting at the purchase date. All we can really do is speculate about what this is really costing Sprint and how it might, if at all, effect the consumer.

    Additionally, as far as the cost of a Treo 650 from Sprint costing 599 dollars before tax is by no means indicative of what they paid wholesale for it. It is a new product, that is usual starting amount for any new smartphone from Sprint. Are you saying that Sprint paid the same wholesale cost for the Treo 600, I330, I500 or the Hitachi G-1000? No way. 599 dollars is an arbitrary BS price for them to turn a profit from those of us that want the new technology as soon as it comes out. We deal with it because we want it so bad, not because we are happy with the price. You make it sound as if Sprint is bearly making a profit with it's retail price. PalmOne and Sprint are in this together when they are selling this phone. The Treo 650 CDMA is BRANDED with Sprint's name on it and has its own section on the PalmOne site for everything from purchasing a new line of servie with Sprint, accessories and customer service, all for the Sprint Treo 650.

    As far as being unhappy with a product and returning within 14 days, that does not work a well as you think. Quite often there is a restocking fee of 15 percent plus shipping costs if you did not buy the product in the store. 14 days with a phone like a treo...come on. There are many people who have not started adding applications to there phone until two weeks later to see a ton of bugs come out and not to mention soft resets. Even those of us that have had this unit for some time, we are seeing that there are no manufacturing defects, but true design defects that cannot be worked around. PalmOne is responsible for design defects as each phone carries with it an implied warranty for mercantability and a warranty of a good fit for a particular purpose. Unless the fixes come as promised from PalmOne, not in the farm of a 128 mb memory card, I am sure a class action suit will commence in no time.

    So far, I wonder how many people are left that are still permitted to take part in the promotion. I am a business user so I guess that still covers me.

    I am not saying that it is right for people to abuse Sprint, but stop heckling those that got away with it. Who cares? Most of us would not have even known about this promotion but for some of the incessant ramblings of those that got their gift certificates...me included. So many of the righteous in here used the handango shopping cart trick to go beyond 87 active titles, but claim others are abusing the promotion. There is no difference between those two groups. If you got a gift certificate, whether you derserved it or not, more power to you. If you didn't, my condolences. I had a third gift certificate from Sprint when I tested the system with my girlfriend's work number when this thread started. I still have yet to use it or even know if it is still valid. Everyone who took advantage should not be called theives. Was it the right thing, no, it was not. But Sprint overlooked their Tom Foolery when they could have prevented it. Should I call Sprint a theif when they charge me overages when it should have been in my nights and weekends and I paid my bill without checking it first? That is my bad right there. I actually went througha year of bills with them and found nearly 250 dollars in screwups by them, but they said they can only credit me for the last two months and cannot go back any further. Was a angry with Sprint? Yes. Did I think they stole something from me? No. I did not check my bill. Sprint asked for your Sprint phone number. They permitted any phone number to be entered and sent you a gift certificate automatically. They didn't check their bills, either. They have to eat it. Do I feel justified in stealing from Sprint? No, which is why I never used the third gift certificate and offered it to a gentlman who did not get his. (I have two business lines). A mistake was made by Sprint and the only thing they have attempted to rectify what has happened it limit the people who can legitmately obtain gift certificates now. Dell makes these mistakes all the time. They will usually catch it just before an item ships. It happened to me when I saw a server for only 200 bucks. Until the guy I offered my gift certificate to respondsd I guess the number will sit in limbo. The promotion is dead, as this thread should be.

    So, to make everybody feel better:

    ABUSERS: Shame on you.

    HOLY ROLLERS: Get off your high horse.

    FENCE SITTERS: Choose a damn side.

    Did I leave anyone out?

    Good, let's move on and moan and groan about how PalmOne is going to make this device work right. Even if you have 1500 bucks in gift certificates, nothing is gong to fix how buggy this thing is.

    Thread over.
  5. #205  
    I wish I could speak with some folks that handle fraud at Sprint. This combined with all the other various forms of fraud does add up.

    The bottom line here is that those doing the fraud are the ones at fault.
  6. #206  
    I am just wondering what personal loss you have suffered? If you wish to speak to Sprint, you can contact them at any time. What other various forms of fraud are you talking about and what is it adding up to? Is it adding up to a problem for you or for everyone as a Sprint user? Mind you, it would take a considerable deal of money for Sprint to investigate every one of the "fraudulent" gift certitificate validations. I have defended a couple of piracy cases involving the recording industry. They are failry open and shut cases (if you got multiple bogus copies of movies in theatres now with a price tag on them and s table on the corner of John and Broadway in New York, you better plea fast) until it comes to the RIAA. They do not prosecute the criminal aspect of the case but appear to push the restitution part of it. Here is where having Sprint launch a huge fraud investigation fails: All of the RIAA recommendations for restitution during sentencing states that none of the money recovered goes to the artists or production companies or record lables. The money goes to the RIAA to continue to prosecute (which they do not really do as the prosecution is done by local or federal government agencies). The recording industry pays these lawyers and then never sees a dime as all the money is filtered back to this lobbying effort. Sprint putting a cap of the fraud will cost less than going after individuals.

    Has every song that everyone on this board downloaded been from iTunes or MusicMatch? I believe that there are honest people as KRamsaur said. But no one is perfect. I am a defense attorney. Perfect people are bad for business. Hehe.
  7. #207  
    A defense attorney...I should have known....

    Now back to Sprint! The company is taking losses when abuse like this happens and YES it does have an impact although lawyers like yourself make a living off making the company look like the real bad guy.

    The RIAA issues are not comparable. In the cases you defend there is no proof the customer would have purchased that song otherwise, so there is no "actual" tangible loss. Because when a person downloads music illegally no money changes hands. There is only "estimated" loss in those cases.

    With Sprint and this software it is much different! Because Sprint is expected to pay Handango. So for each fraudulent download there is an immediate tangible loss to Sprint! Money does have to change hands for each fraudulent download.

    Sugar coat it all you want...oh wait, you're a defense attorney, that's your job to cover for crooks!
  8. #208  
    " A defense attorney...I should have known...." Why? Are you a criminal? Nice cheap shot to the legal profession, but I am afraid the line forms to the left with a need for fresher material. It is funny, a small business owner like yourself uses the legal professsion at every turn. Additionally, I am a court appointed attorney, I defend criminals, I defend children, I defend families, victims, and I even defend the innocent people mixed in with those groups. How exactly am I making money off making big business look bad? As a court appointed attorney, I make money off of your tax dollars. In new york, the rates are terrific. I guess no lawyer is good to you until he make YOU money, right? Once again, an ignorant assumption on your part. Let's get to your other ignorant assumption. How are the investigatory and prosecutorial costs not comparable? YOU compared the wrong part of the RIAA lawsuits than the one that I used. Re-read my post. I was not defending music downloading (and there is a tangible loss through the loss of sale at the distribution level, but your not an attorney so YOU SHOULD not have known what their research says in presentencing reports, which judges have agreed that they are actual losses that can be used to ascertain restitution) and I was not saying that obtaining a gift certificate from Sprint is akin to illegally downloading music. READ what I wrote. I was comparing the costs of investigation, not the ability to pull one over on someone else. You were speaking about the costs of various frauds (which you have failed to identify) and I made a specific reference to the RIAA's investigation of fraudulent sales of movies (not downloading music). Also, small business owner, the loss to sprint is at the issuing of the gift certificate, not at the individual download. Their loss begins immediately as they have paid you a line of credit to use. All you did to answer any of my questions in my previous post was "Yes." Good luck with your call to the fraud department with the mysterious "various other forms of fraud" you refer to.
  9. #209  
    This has strayed too far from the original post. I was going to lock it a while ago, but I don't like having the last word on a thread (unless to close it).
Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 67891011

Posting Permissions