yeap. Troy is protecting themselves by telling the truth. Also dicks is opening themselves up for a nasty lawsuit from troy for trying to blame them and not filling the contract.
No I am a customer of both. Dicks is the middle man here. Dicks was telling people that originally Monday from CS lines that the reason that they weren't fulfilling orders was that Troy was not going to do so anymore. Dicks was throwing Troy under the bus so to speak initially. Troy found out, through other people not me, that this was happening. Why would this matter? Because if the blame of order fulfillment is dropped on Troy, then people would not buy Troy products from any retailer. When the blame is placed where it rightfully belongs in consumer perception on Dicks, then consumers will still buy Troy products from other outlets.
yeap. Troy is protecting themselves by telling the truth. Also dicks is opening themselves up for a nasty lawsuit from troy for trying to blame them and not filling the contract.
Crap responses? Why not just ignore them if you feel they were crap responses? I think you responded most, if not all of the them. How about you stop responding to my posts and I'll do the same to yours? I need to go back to doing some real legal work anyway. I have billable hours to meet because that's the way law in the real world works.
For the record, there were no attacks until the one you posted. And nobody is getting bent out of shape here. You say I have a problem with the justice system whereas I encouraged you to file the suit long ago in this thread - you even have the legal links ready to go so you are ahead of the game! All things considered, I don't understand why you are so mad.
No I am a customer of both. Dicks is the middle man here. Dicks was telling people that originally Monday from CS lines that the reason that they weren't fulfilling orders was that Troy was not going to do so anymore. Dicks was throwing Troy under the bus so to speak initially. Troy found out, through other people not me, that this was happening. Why would this matter? Because if the blame of order fulfillment is dropped on Troy, then people would not buy Troy products from any retailer. When the blame is placed where it rightfully belongs in consumer perception on Dicks, then consumers will still buy Troy products from other outlets.
Until you receive an AR15 from Troy, I don't believe you are a Troy customer. You are only a customer of Dick's, who promised you a troy product in exchange for your payment. I can take your money in exchange for an Ipad, but that doesn't automatically make you an apple customer.
If it's necessary I don't blame Troy from defending themselves from any wrong information put forward thru Dick's representatives, but throwing out lawsuit verbage frivolously has much bigger ramifications when done between corporate business partners than it does with individual customers who have formal relationship with the companies.
Get over it lmao. You Pre-ordered something and it fell through. That is a risk with pre-orders. People just don't understand anymore these days.
Unless it is physically in your hands, it is nothing but a future promise, a promise that dicks can legally break.
Peoples expectations are through the roof, its -almost- funny if it weren't so mind blowing.
"Pre-ordering is the same as buying!"
No its not.
Get over it lmao. You Pre-ordered something and it fell through. That is a risk with pre-orders. People just don't understand anymore these days.
Unless it is physically in your hands, it is nothing but a future promise, a promise that dicks can legally break.
Peoples expectations are through the roof, its -almost- funny if it weren't so mind blowing.
"Pre-ordering is the same as buying!"
No its not.
Thread should be renamed to "ATOT is bunch of *****"
it's actually pretty sad when you think about it. it just goes with the entitlement attitude of people that has grown big time in the past decade or so. i mean he got his money back (so nothing lost) AND $100 extra, and he STILL feels entitled to more.
Nope, I'm entitled to what I paid for. I will pursue more if I am forced to do so, but all I want is what I paid for. You guys are warping it all way out of proportion by trying to assign attributes to the scenario that don't exist.
it's actually pretty sad when you think about it. it just goes with the entitlement attitude of people that has grown big time in the past decade or so. i mean he got his money back (so nothing lost) AND $100 extra, and he STILL feels entitled to more.
and you paid for the item ($800 i think you said), and received all of that back when they couldn't get the item to you, plus $100 extra.
since when has it been entitlement to expect something you paid for?
something happened where they couldn't get the item to him. so they refunded him his money, plus extra.
wtf else do you want them to do?
i remember when PS3 was coming out and i was trying to buy as many as possible to flip them. same with when the HP touchpad were going on sale for $99.
both of those times i had orders go through that ended up not being able to be fulfilled, simply because the demand could not be met.
what did they do? they refunded me my money and life went on. i didn't expect them to do more than that.
something happened where they couldn't get the item to him. so they refunded him his money, plus extra.
wtf else do you want them to do?
i remember when PS3 was coming out and i was trying to buy as many as possible to flip them. same with when the HP touchpad were going on sale for $99.
both of those times i had orders go through that ended up not being able to be fulfilled, simply because the demand could not be met.
what did they do? they refunded me my money and life went on. i didn't expect them to do more than that.
Nope, I'm entitled to what I paid for. I will pursue more if I am forced to do so, but all I want is what I paid for. You guys are warping it all way out of proportion by trying to assign attributes to the scenario that don't exist.
The "something that happened" was DSG changed their mind. They had stock and inventory of the item to fulfill paid for orders. Someone on ar15.com recently posted that the Dicks manager at his store had his gun for pickup, but is now being forced by corporate to return it before he can pick it up. DSG is breaking sale contract law by refusing to fulfill orders despite being physically able to do so.
And you got your money back, now you are entitled to nothing :/
This ain't the same. Demend can be met (and was). Dick just decided to NOT sale the gun anymore (and then threw troy under the bus). What can they do? fulfill the order they agreed to and not take anymore orders. I wouldn't deal with Dicks either after that (anyway Gander Mountain is far better) i can understand the ops being pissed.
to expect something at a cost that both parties agreed to is not entitlement.
well yea if you didn't realize it, the whole newtown shooting thing is kind of an exception to the rule and not something commonly dealt with, so this is new territory to everyone.
again, you got your money back + extra which is MORE than fair enough imo, and i hope that if you do sue that you lose. but more power to you.
i agree, but to expect MORE than what you were entitled to initially, when the transaction falls through, IS entitlement.
Who is expecting more? I want the goods promised me. If I HAVE to use legal recourse, then I will go for whatever the letter of the law allows me to go for.
i agree, but to expect MORE than what you were entitled to initially, when the transaction falls through, IS entitlement.
your goods were valued at $800 and you got $900 worth when the goods couldn't be delivered.
just go sue them and let us know how that goes.