Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Good and Bad Canon

Reply
Thread Tools

Good and Bad Canon

 
 
Morton Linder
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-08-2006
Bill wrote:
> Purchased a Canon 20D just before Xmas partly attracted by 100 cashback
> offer. Applied for cashback mid Jan by Recorded Delivery to the 'Irish Canon
> address' with proof of reciept from the Post Office confirmed as 16 January.
> I yesterday recieved a mail from Canon telling me my application was
> recieved 1st February (quite untrue ) with apologies as there will be
> considerable delay in refunding my 100. Wonder why they would want to delay
> my cashback eh! Not Happy.
>
> Conversely there was also an offer of a free 256mb sandisk. Applied on line
> some 5 days ago. Acknowledged the following day and I actually recieved it
> today!! Very good. However there was a letter enclosed with the disk
> apologising that they had run out of 256 and had to give me a 512 sandisk
> compact flash instead. Excellent and thankyou.
>
> Won't hold my breath over the 100 though.
>
> BTW very happy with the camera.
>
>

Hi,

In the USA, the Staples chain of stores has a neat solution to the
problem. They print out 2 receipts, one of which is entitled Rebate
Receipt. The papers are sent to a Staples address, andStaples takes care
of the rebates within a few weeks, quite reliably in my experience.

Morton Linder
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Tony Cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-08-2006
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 07:07:04 -0800, "Skip M" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>
>"Tony Cooper" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2006 17:16:45 -0800, "Skip M" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>>Right, so the mfr is using the money in the interim, waiting for
>>>>>requests
>>>>>for reimbursement.
>>>>
>>>> You feel this is wrong? The manufacturer is offering the buyer a
>>>> deal. They can structure the deal any way they want to.
>>>>
>>>I didn't say it was wrong, just slick, in a Slick Willie sort of way. If
>>>they actually marked the price down to the retailer, so it could be bought
>>>at a lower price, then they wouldn't have the use of that money for the
>>>2-6
>>>months it takes the consumer to apply for the rebate and for the
>>>redemption
>>>middle man to request reimbursement.

>>
>> You don't seem to understand business. The idea of a rebate is to
>> offer a special, attractive price to the end-user to get that person
>> to buy this product instead of another, similar, product.

>
>Tony, I understand business quite well. I realize that the rebates are
>meant to attract purchasers with better-than-standard pricing. That is also
>the purpose behind sale pricing. What I am commenting on, as are several
>others, is the cynical thinking that seems to be behind its utilization.
>
>>
>> If the manufacturer offers an additional discount to the retailer, the
>> manufacturer *cannot* insist that this discount be passed on to the
>> end-user. Some retailers will, and some will just pocket the extra
>> margin and leave the normal sales price unchanged.

>
>No, the mfr cannot, but it is in the best interest of the retailer to do so,
>and, in 30 years of retail and wholesale sales, I've never seen a retailer
>with whom I've dealt fail to do so.


Well, in my over-30 years of owning businesses I've never felt
obligated to pass along information about deals offered by the
manufacturers I represented to the sales staff. If you weren't aware
of something, it could be because you weren't told about it.

Since my salesmen were commissioned based on the gross profit amount,
they were not always in favor of offering a discount since it reduced
their income. The rebate system doesn't affect their income.

The discount should increase unit sales, but salesmen always feel
they'll sell as many units on their own.

A retailer, if allowed to decide whether or not to pass along the
discount, will do so only if he thinks the discount will increase
sales. If, for example, the retailer is selling hard drives, he will
only pass along the discount if he thinks his hard drive sales will
increase because of the more attractive price. Unless he has some
unit goals by manufacturer, he doesn't care which brands sell.

>
>> The only way the manufacturer can be sure that the discount will be
>> offered to the end-user is to rebate directly to the end-user. The
>> retailer doesn't care which brand of item is sold as long as some item
>> is sold. The rebate program is the manufacturers way of affecting
>> which brand is sold.
>>
>> Your idea that the manufacturer has "use of the money" is absurd.
>> It's not someone else's money that they are holding. It's a delayed
>> discount from the manufacturer. It comes out of their pocket. It
>> only becomes *your* money when you buy the product, comply with the
>> terms of the rebate program, and get the check.

>
>It certainly isn't "absurd." If that money were offered as a discount, the
>mfr or wholesaler would not collect the money, thus it would never be in
>their possesion and available for use in the interim. With a rebate, that
>money is collected from the retailer or wholesaler, and then offered back to
>the consumer, if that consumer gets around to sending in the rebate forms in
>time. Just what is the money doing in the meantime, sitting in someone's
>desk drawer? Of course not, it is in the mfr's bank, probably drawing
>interest. I never said it was "my" money, or the consumer's. It is the
>mfrs money, until it is refunded, and thus, they, the mfr. have access to
>it, which they would not if it were offered as a direct discount.


The above is the absurdity. I'll repeat that you know very little
about business if you think the money from invoices collected sits in
accounts collecting interest. It's even more absurd to think that the
company sets aside the potential rebatable amount in a special
account.

The rebate is a delayed conditional discount. It is not "refunded".
It's an expense paid out.





--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Tony Cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2006
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 21:47:58 +0000 (UTC), Paul J Gans <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>>I don't particularly like rebate programs, but I don't think they
>>should be criticized erroneously.

>
>The problem with what you post is that it applies to
>an ideal world. In practice folks often have a very
>hard time getting their rebates.


I hear this, but I really don't see why. I think the correct version
is that people don't collect rebates they expect because they don't
follow clearly stated requirements.

From what I've heard, rebates are not paid because people don't submit
the right information, the specified proof of purchase, or don't
submit the forms in time to the right place by the date specified.

If the form says send in the UPC code cut from the box, I don't think
you should claim that the manufacturer makes it difficult for the
person that sends in a copy of the UPC code on the box.

>And it is costly since often an outside firm has to
>be hired to handle the paperwork, though the resultant
>bad will accrues to the equipment maker, not the
>fulfillment house.
>
>Speaking for myself, offering a deal that you *know*
>will be difficult to fulfill, is akin to fraud.


What is difficult? You read the terms, you follow the instructions.

>Worse, several of the places where I purchase merchandise
>require a sales receipt in order to accept returns,
>make adjustments, etc. And at the same time I'm often
>required to send the original sales slip to the fulfillment
>address to hope for my rebate.
>
>This gives me an ugly choice.


The places I deal with always print a second register receipt for
rebate purposes. If they didn't, I'd make a Xerox. I've never seen a
rebate program that required the original receipt, although some do
require the original UPC code.

I just received a $30 rebate on Western Digital hard drive. No
problems. I would have *preferred* to have paid $30 less at the
register, but the rebate was a better deal than not getting $30 a
month later.





--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul J Gans
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2006
Tony Cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Mon, 6 Feb 2006 15:49:31 -0800, "Skip M" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>wrote:


>>"Bill Funk" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:(E-Mail Removed). ..
>>> On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 22:35:10 -0800, "Skip M" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>It's unlikely that the mfr has costs much higher than the rebate amount,
>>>>since the redemption company is probably paid a percentage, rather than a
>>>>flat fee. And just where does the mfr hold the money, in escrow?
>>>
>>> My understanding:
>>> The fulfillment center collects rebate requests for a certain time or
>>> number, applies for funds to fulfill the requests for rebate, and then
>>> sends that money out.
>>> The manufacturer doesn't keep the money in any special account, as
>>> it's a cost of doing business. Accounting keeps it straight.
>>> And there have been rebates left unfulfilled because the company
>>> offering them simply ran out of money. (RIP)
>>>

>>
>>Right, so the mfr is using the money in the interim, waiting for requests
>>for reimbursement.


>You feel this is wrong? The manufacturer is offering the buyer a
>deal. They can structure the deal any way they want to.


Are they? Or are they offering the buyer a chance at a
lottery.

Folks constantly complain that they either have long delays
before the get their rebate or they never get it at all.

---- Paul J. Gans
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony Cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2006
On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 04:20:28 +0000 (UTC), Paul J Gans <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Tony Cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>On Mon, 6 Feb 2006 15:49:31 -0800, "Skip M" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>wrote:

>
>>>"Bill Funk" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>news:(E-Mail Removed) ...
>>>> On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 22:35:10 -0800, "Skip M" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>It's unlikely that the mfr has costs much higher than the rebate amount,
>>>>>since the redemption company is probably paid a percentage, rather than a
>>>>>flat fee. And just where does the mfr hold the money, in escrow?
>>>>
>>>> My understanding:
>>>> The fulfillment center collects rebate requests for a certain time or
>>>> number, applies for funds to fulfill the requests for rebate, and then
>>>> sends that money out.
>>>> The manufacturer doesn't keep the money in any special account, as
>>>> it's a cost of doing business. Accounting keeps it straight.
>>>> And there have been rebates left unfulfilled because the company
>>>> offering them simply ran out of money. (RIP)
>>>>
>>>
>>>Right, so the mfr is using the money in the interim, waiting for requests
>>>for reimbursement.

>
>>You feel this is wrong? The manufacturer is offering the buyer a
>>deal. They can structure the deal any way they want to.

>
>Are they? Or are they offering the buyer a chance at a
>lottery.
>
>Folks constantly complain that they either have long delays
>before the get their rebate or they never get it at all.
>


I know they do. I think my recent rebate came in about 60 days. That
doesn't cause me to complain, though, since I needed a new second hard
drive and would have purchased one with or without the rebate. I did
choose a Western Digital unit because a rebate was part of the deal.
As long as I'm not promised something they don't do, I don't complain.

The one time I was refused a rebate I did get a form letter stating
that my request was not filed in time. That was my fault.

I've not heard of anyone that can absolutely guarantee that they
filled out the forms correctly and otherwise complied with the terms
that did not receive a rebate.

It's my opinion that most complainers just didn't comply with the
requirements.


--


Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul J Gans
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2006
Tony Cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 04:20:28 +0000 (UTC), Paul J Gans <(E-Mail Removed)>
>wrote:


>>Tony Cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>On Mon, 6 Feb 2006 15:49:31 -0800, "Skip M" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>>wrote:

>>
>>>>"Bill Funk" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>>news:(E-Mail Removed) m...
>>>>> On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 22:35:10 -0800, "Skip M" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>It's unlikely that the mfr has costs much higher than the rebate amount,
>>>>>>since the redemption company is probably paid a percentage, rather than a
>>>>>>flat fee. And just where does the mfr hold the money, in escrow?
>>>>>
>>>>> My understanding:
>>>>> The fulfillment center collects rebate requests for a certain time or
>>>>> number, applies for funds to fulfill the requests for rebate, and then
>>>>> sends that money out.
>>>>> The manufacturer doesn't keep the money in any special account, as
>>>>> it's a cost of doing business. Accounting keeps it straight.
>>>>> And there have been rebates left unfulfilled because the company
>>>>> offering them simply ran out of money. (RIP)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Right, so the mfr is using the money in the interim, waiting for requests
>>>>for reimbursement.

>>
>>>You feel this is wrong? The manufacturer is offering the buyer a
>>>deal. They can structure the deal any way they want to.

>>
>>Are they? Or are they offering the buyer a chance at a
>>lottery.
>>
>>Folks constantly complain that they either have long delays
>>before the get their rebate or they never get it at all.
>>


>I know they do. I think my recent rebate came in about 60 days. That
>doesn't cause me to complain, though, since I needed a new second hard
>drive and would have purchased one with or without the rebate. I did
>choose a Western Digital unit because a rebate was part of the deal.
>As long as I'm not promised something they don't do, I don't complain.


>The one time I was refused a rebate I did get a form letter stating
>that my request was not filed in time. That was my fault.


>I've not heard of anyone that can absolutely guarantee that they
>filled out the forms correctly and otherwise complied with the terms
>that did not receive a rebate.


>It's my opinion that most complainers just didn't comply with the
>requirements.


But we'll never know, will we?

It is certainly not made easy, and it could be.

One sometimes feels that one ought to ask "why not?"

----- Paul J. Gans
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
integer >= 1 == True and integer.0 == False is bad, bad, bad!!! rantingrick Python 44 07-13-2010 06:33 PM
Bad media, bad files or bad Nero? John Computer Information 23 01-08-2008 09:17 PM
ActiveX apologetic Larry Seltzer... "Sun paid for malicious ActiveX code, and Firefox is bad, bad bad baad. please use ActiveX, it's secure and nice!" (ok, the last part is irony on my part) fernando.cassia@gmail.com Java 0 04-16-2005 10:05 PM
24 Season 3 Bad Bad Bad (Spoiler) nospam@nospam.com DVD Video 12 02-23-2005 03:28 AM
24 Season 3 Bad Bad Bad (Spoiler) nospam@nospam.com DVD Video 0 02-19-2005 01:10 AM



Advertisments