We as consumers should spend more time questioning ludicrous charges. I'm taking the wise suggestion of pointing them out as they come up.........
The All-American High School Basketball Game is taking place tonight (3/28) in Chicago at the United Center. For Bulls and Blackhawks games, concerts, and special events held there such as Ice Capades and a circus, attendees are asked to pay in the $25 to $35 range just to park their car in the closest parking lots.
Yet, for this basketball game, the promotional materials point out that it will be "free parking". Of course, we don't want to say or do anything to discourage this. But it raises a very important question.
What is it that was done so that parking for THIS event could be free? Why can't the same thing be done for concerts, sports events, and special events all of the time? Especially when you consider the cost per ticket, plus fees, gas prices, and the cost of traveling to the venue.
Speaking of ticket fees, I see where Aerosmith will be in concert at Milwaukee Summerfest in July. They are promoting $25 tickets, even if it is for the lawn. I suppose that's reasonable. Yet, the TicketMaster site indicates that the "convenience fee" per ticket is $25.50. Well, we know what entity this fee is "convenient" for.
However, TM continues to escape the majority of the lawsuits filed over this. Even though it is not necessarily the fault of the musical act (or team in the case of sports), those ridiculous charges for the Aerosmith show (among others) bring one response. Dream On !!
6BQ53DPMK887
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
The Poor Banking Chase Continues
It is possible to take a break from reading about more of the antics of Bank of America. In doing so, there is this about how attorneys were also involved with the false inflation of debts owed to Chase Bank, and how they are being 'found out':
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-01-19/business/bal-consuming-interests-payments-source-chase-no-longer-suing-to-collect-bad-debts-in-maryland-20120119_1_whistle-blower-lawsuit-whistle-blower-chase
I continue to think that now these large banks should pitch in and bailout the government.
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-01-19/business/bal-consuming-interests-payments-source-chase-no-longer-suing-to-collect-bad-debts-in-maryland-20120119_1_whistle-blower-lawsuit-whistle-blower-chase
I continue to think that now these large banks should pitch in and bailout the government.
Friday, January 27, 2012
Waiting Out The Movies
Now it looks like Warner Bros. is indirectly making it possible for us to pay less to see movies simply by waiting a while longer.
At first, when I saw today's announcement about Warner Bros.' new "deal" with Netflix, I thought it was another way for a large movie company to aggravate consumers who choose to buy or pay-for-view for recent new releases.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2012/01/warner-bros-netflix-deal-includes-delay-in-queues.html
The story basically says that Netflix customers will now have to wait an additional 4 weeks to be able to watch selected movies beyond the on-sale date for the DVD. Clearly, Warner Bros. wants anxious consumers to purchase the DVD, at a higher profit margin for them, than to view the film through Netflix. Until now, consumers could make that choice immediately. Warner Bros. is banking on (literally) the possibility that more consumers will purchase the DVD than otherwise would if given the immediate choice.
After thinking on it for a few minutes, I realize that this actually helps us frugal consumers in the long run. This formula of the theater release, then DVD sale, and THEN via Netflix. Thus, the longer we wait, the less it will cost to see these movies.
I have no problem with waiting to see a movie, and hope others adopt this approach. The fact remains it is the SAME movie no matter when you see it for the first time. It is not like sports, where every game is different and there are specific plays and results every day.
Over the years, I go less and less to movie theaters. Years ago, theaters would have double features plus 'short' features in between. You could easily be in that movie theater for more than 4 hours. It was what you did for the evening for the entire afternoon. And it was affordable. Now, these theaters expect people to pay more than twice the price for less than half of the entertainment they used to offer. And that's without buying anything from the overpriced concession stand. (Of course, that's not necessary, since we are in and out of there so fast these days that there's not enough time to get hungry.)
All things considered, the new formula is taking shape. The same $10 that now gets you only 90 minutes in a theater will get you 2 or 3 movies at home a few weeks later. I, for one, can wait.
At first, when I saw today's announcement about Warner Bros.' new "deal" with Netflix, I thought it was another way for a large movie company to aggravate consumers who choose to buy or pay-for-view for recent new releases.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2012/01/warner-bros-netflix-deal-includes-delay-in-queues.html
The story basically says that Netflix customers will now have to wait an additional 4 weeks to be able to watch selected movies beyond the on-sale date for the DVD. Clearly, Warner Bros. wants anxious consumers to purchase the DVD, at a higher profit margin for them, than to view the film through Netflix. Until now, consumers could make that choice immediately. Warner Bros. is banking on (literally) the possibility that more consumers will purchase the DVD than otherwise would if given the immediate choice.
After thinking on it for a few minutes, I realize that this actually helps us frugal consumers in the long run. This formula of the theater release, then DVD sale, and THEN via Netflix. Thus, the longer we wait, the less it will cost to see these movies.
I have no problem with waiting to see a movie, and hope others adopt this approach. The fact remains it is the SAME movie no matter when you see it for the first time. It is not like sports, where every game is different and there are specific plays and results every day.
Over the years, I go less and less to movie theaters. Years ago, theaters would have double features plus 'short' features in between. You could easily be in that movie theater for more than 4 hours. It was what you did for the evening for the entire afternoon. And it was affordable. Now, these theaters expect people to pay more than twice the price for less than half of the entertainment they used to offer. And that's without buying anything from the overpriced concession stand. (Of course, that's not necessary, since we are in and out of there so fast these days that there's not enough time to get hungry.)
All things considered, the new formula is taking shape. The same $10 that now gets you only 90 minutes in a theater will get you 2 or 3 movies at home a few weeks later. I, for one, can wait.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
A Penney Earned
Great move by J.C. Penney to announce that they are changing to "everyday low prices" and additional savings on all of their merchandise.
Sure, as a consumer this is good news. The more retailers that lower prices, the better it is for us.
If you missed it, here is the story:
http://www.suntimes.com/business/10227577-420/jc-penney-to-revamp-pricing-reformat-stores.html
But this announcement is more than that. This could very well turn this large retailer around, and that's good for their employees and investors in the long term as well.
Few, if any, would have questioned if Penney's had started closing a ton of their stores and began the journey to oblivion that some other regional and national retailers have been faced with over the past couple of years. This move turns a negative into a positive.
Their stores, or at least the ones I have been in over the past few years, became a bit stale. Not quite polished enough to feel like an elite (another word for overpriced for us consumers!) department store. But certainly not discounting anywhere near enough to be considered a discount or "low price" retailer. If the "low price" people and the "elite store" shoppers have what they are looking for down the street, and quite often in the same malls, it is no wonder that Penney's has become less and less busy lately.
Their "captain" is not only staying with the ship, but it seems this is an attempt to steer it in a better direction.
They deserve our consideration as they make these changes. We'll be watching............
Sure, as a consumer this is good news. The more retailers that lower prices, the better it is for us.
If you missed it, here is the story:
http://www.suntimes.com/business/10227577-420/jc-penney-to-revamp-pricing-reformat-stores.html
But this announcement is more than that. This could very well turn this large retailer around, and that's good for their employees and investors in the long term as well.
Few, if any, would have questioned if Penney's had started closing a ton of their stores and began the journey to oblivion that some other regional and national retailers have been faced with over the past couple of years. This move turns a negative into a positive.
Their stores, or at least the ones I have been in over the past few years, became a bit stale. Not quite polished enough to feel like an elite (another word for overpriced for us consumers!) department store. But certainly not discounting anywhere near enough to be considered a discount or "low price" retailer. If the "low price" people and the "elite store" shoppers have what they are looking for down the street, and quite often in the same malls, it is no wonder that Penney's has become less and less busy lately.
Their "captain" is not only staying with the ship, but it seems this is an attempt to steer it in a better direction.
They deserve our consideration as they make these changes. We'll be watching............
Thursday, December 1, 2011
How I-Phones Are Monitored By Outsiders
It looks more and more like cell phone companies are out to destroy what personal privacy we all have left. This story links to several accounts of how I-Phone calls and texts can be monitored by outsiders:
http://thenextweb.com/apple/2011/12/01/references-to-data-logging-software-carrier-iq-have-been-found-on-apples-ios/
Yet, while this is going on we have several large banks encouraging people to "bank by phone" which means entering in private account and personal information, along with checks and debit card transactions. So if "big brother" and most likely advanced hackers are watching and listening to your every move on your advanced cell phone, how long will you have all of your money and your identity?
Personally, I'm still not planning to use my phone for any transactions.
http://thenextweb.com/apple/2011/12/01/references-to-data-logging-software-carrier-iq-have-been-found-on-apples-ios/
Yet, while this is going on we have several large banks encouraging people to "bank by phone" which means entering in private account and personal information, along with checks and debit card transactions. So if "big brother" and most likely advanced hackers are watching and listening to your every move on your advanced cell phone, how long will you have all of your money and your identity?
Personally, I'm still not planning to use my phone for any transactions.
Monday, November 28, 2011
Malls Want To Track Our Whereabouts?
It seems that certain malls are going as far as to track visitors based on the locations of their cell phones within the mall, even though the shoppers were not aware of this.
To make matters worse, this story about the practice quotes one mall official as saying they will make it "easier to opt out" of this feature. Say what?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/technology/chi-malls-retreat-on-plans-to-track-shoppers-cell-phones-20111128,0,6644526.story
One "excuse" for doing this, according to a quote in the story, is to "make the playing field level with online shoppers". Yikes.
What gets me is that these malls have the time and money to spend in an effort to track, without authorization, the location of its shoppers, instead of putting their resources to better use.
What happened to simply and easily tracking the number of parking spaces in use within the mall's parking lot(s) on an hourly basis throughout the year? To tracking the amount of revenue brought in by each store or business during that same period? We, as consumers, can't stop them from doing that.
Many of the big malls should be using their resources to improve the experience for shoppers who go there, whether during the busy holiday period or any other time.
In much of the country, this time of the year, when malls draw their biggest crowds of the year, is during cold and wet weather times. Yet, few offer indoor or covered parking, and those that do generally suffer from overcrowding, thus leaving the process of parking to be an unpleasant experience.
The majority of shopping malls, including newer ones, continue to make the mistake of not providing easy access for cars to exit. They force drivers to head toward the stores and entrances, creating additional hazzards for pedestrians carrying packages and for the children with them, when these drivers are looking to exit the mall area.
Sure, the argument for doing this is to draw attention to the stores. However, the malls do not understand that doing this is not like grocery stores putting the milk and most commonly bought products in the back or further reaches of a single store.
Many malls fail to have enough directories, especially near the various entrances. Instead of tracking the cell phone whereabouts of patrons, perhaps helping them find the store(s) they are most interested in would be a better priority.
Worse yet, this story claims that major retailers such as J.C. Penney and Home Depot "have considered" using this technology. Whether for the sake of this story angle or as a matter of fact, each company seemed as if they are not ready to use this yet. The fact that it is a possibility is alarming. Suppose information that you are, at this moment, in the Home Depot by the home security devices, got into the wrong hands.
The Frustrated Consumer has an idea for the short term. Let's all turn off our cell phones just before we walk into a mall. With no data to show for their time and efforts, just maybe the malls and major retailers would consider checking inventory reports to see what sold and when. Not who bought them.
To make matters worse, this story about the practice quotes one mall official as saying they will make it "easier to opt out" of this feature. Say what?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/technology/chi-malls-retreat-on-plans-to-track-shoppers-cell-phones-20111128,0,6644526.story
One "excuse" for doing this, according to a quote in the story, is to "make the playing field level with online shoppers". Yikes.
What gets me is that these malls have the time and money to spend in an effort to track, without authorization, the location of its shoppers, instead of putting their resources to better use.
What happened to simply and easily tracking the number of parking spaces in use within the mall's parking lot(s) on an hourly basis throughout the year? To tracking the amount of revenue brought in by each store or business during that same period? We, as consumers, can't stop them from doing that.
Many of the big malls should be using their resources to improve the experience for shoppers who go there, whether during the busy holiday period or any other time.
In much of the country, this time of the year, when malls draw their biggest crowds of the year, is during cold and wet weather times. Yet, few offer indoor or covered parking, and those that do generally suffer from overcrowding, thus leaving the process of parking to be an unpleasant experience.
The majority of shopping malls, including newer ones, continue to make the mistake of not providing easy access for cars to exit. They force drivers to head toward the stores and entrances, creating additional hazzards for pedestrians carrying packages and for the children with them, when these drivers are looking to exit the mall area.
Sure, the argument for doing this is to draw attention to the stores. However, the malls do not understand that doing this is not like grocery stores putting the milk and most commonly bought products in the back or further reaches of a single store.
Many malls fail to have enough directories, especially near the various entrances. Instead of tracking the cell phone whereabouts of patrons, perhaps helping them find the store(s) they are most interested in would be a better priority.
Worse yet, this story claims that major retailers such as J.C. Penney and Home Depot "have considered" using this technology. Whether for the sake of this story angle or as a matter of fact, each company seemed as if they are not ready to use this yet. The fact that it is a possibility is alarming. Suppose information that you are, at this moment, in the Home Depot by the home security devices, got into the wrong hands.
The Frustrated Consumer has an idea for the short term. Let's all turn off our cell phones just before we walk into a mall. With no data to show for their time and efforts, just maybe the malls and major retailers would consider checking inventory reports to see what sold and when. Not who bought them.
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Wrong Way Information
Shouldn't businesses spend more of their behind-the-scenes time and effort on improving relations with current and potential customers? And less on how they can benefit by sharing our personal information?
Two unrelated incidents this week bring this to mind. Recent researched from Stanford University shows how a lot of major companies are equipped to share our information without us knowing it (until now).
http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/6740
Granted, the report profiled in the link above is very technical. But even the basic parts of the article, such as showing how logging in to the Wall Street Journal web site (without using the true password) sent the user's e-mail address to 7 outside companies, tell us a lot of what is going on these days.
The other incident was having a question for a large company, only to go on to their web site, and not find any way to ask anyone or contact them easily.
This has me starting to check the web sites I use or would use to make a purchase or execute some sort of financial transaction. If I have a question before I purchase, I should be able to easily contact someone from that company, even if by a link to an e-mail, to get an answer.
Maybe I need to have better faith in businesses these days. After reading the above-linked research, I am instead worried that if it were as easy as it should be to contact them online, they would be selling my information to others before responding to my query.
The above-linked article goes on to show how Home Depot, NBC, and other companies are sending our user names and other information to other companies even though their privacy statements show otherwise.
There needs to be a better way for consumers to GET information from these companies instead of giving it.
Two unrelated incidents this week bring this to mind. Recent researched from Stanford University shows how a lot of major companies are equipped to share our information without us knowing it (until now).
http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/6740
Granted, the report profiled in the link above is very technical. But even the basic parts of the article, such as showing how logging in to the Wall Street Journal web site (without using the true password) sent the user's e-mail address to 7 outside companies, tell us a lot of what is going on these days.
The other incident was having a question for a large company, only to go on to their web site, and not find any way to ask anyone or contact them easily.
This has me starting to check the web sites I use or would use to make a purchase or execute some sort of financial transaction. If I have a question before I purchase, I should be able to easily contact someone from that company, even if by a link to an e-mail, to get an answer.
Maybe I need to have better faith in businesses these days. After reading the above-linked research, I am instead worried that if it were as easy as it should be to contact them online, they would be selling my information to others before responding to my query.
The above-linked article goes on to show how Home Depot, NBC, and other companies are sending our user names and other information to other companies even though their privacy statements show otherwise.
There needs to be a better way for consumers to GET information from these companies instead of giving it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)