Originally posted by: supernancy
Went to the Compusa in Anaheim, CA. Was told that it was an "online only deal". I asked them nicely to go check. They did, came back to the register and said the nice words I wanted to hear: "yeah just give it to him at 29.99". Sweet. The webpage didn't say anything about "online only". I bought two with that Price Protection Plan.
Hey, I figure in a year they won't even have anything close to a 802.11b AP so the closest I'll get will at least be a G series. What do you all think about TAP plans from compusa? I've been told if the router breaks [in whatever circumstance] they will replace it, no Q's asked. True?
Most of those "PRPs" (product replacement plans), simply refund you your original purchase price. So you could potentially get your $30 back in a year if it breaks.
PS. I tried to get a local OfficeMax store to honor a price listed for an item on their website, and mentioned that it didn't say "online only" on the web site, and the kid working there gave me the schpiel about how "officemax.com and OfficeMax are seperate companies", and then I tried to point out that you could check the weekly in-store advertisements on the web site, and could purchase items on their web site for in-store pickup, and therefore clearly they were not seperate entities, so then the kid goes, in a very snide way, "Ok, let's check the weekly flyer, shall we? If that item is on sale in the flyer, then I'll sell it to you for that price". Like I was some sort of total idiot for making the sin of confusing "officemax.com", with "OfficeMax".
Fraudulent and deceptive, is what I think these companies are.
Does anyone have any pointers on how to pursue an FTC complaint and perhaps an investigation into these deceptive marketing/pricing policies, carried out by most major retailers that also have an online arm? If the online site has the same store logos, trademarks, etc., as a physical retail store, and carries the same product line, and shares the same inventory-control numbers, and allows ordering products from one or the other, aren't they the same store? (And if they truely aren't, then why don't they pursure trademark-infringement suits against each other? Clearly, claiming they are seperate entities doesn't make sense.)
If an item is only available at the advertised price, at one of the locations (either online, or B&M), shouldn't that be clearly specified? I think that there actually should be a law regarding that, and the description should be shown in a positive manner ("Product X is avaiable online and in-store", "Product Y is available on-line", "Product Z is available in-store"), so that the alternative location for purchasing the product can't claim that simple lack of a negative disclaimer also doesn't imply a positive statement. (Example - Customer: "It doesn't say 'on-line-only', so it should be available for that price in-store too." / Salesperson: "Those prices are on-line only. That is a different company from this retail store.")