wrestlingfan0815
Main Eventer
Joined on: Mar 28, 2018 15:26:43 GMT -5
Posts: 3,733
|
Post by wrestlingfan0815 on Oct 10, 2019 21:57:16 GMT -5
I figured those prices were too good to be true.
|
|
|
Post by Cassa Nova Kid on Oct 10, 2019 23:15:29 GMT -5
Sears is still around lol wow Canada lost sears years ago.
|
|
Blackbird 13
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 6, 2005 3:32:41 GMT -5
Posts: 3,242
|
Post by Blackbird 13 on Oct 11, 2019 1:25:21 GMT -5
Not really sure how this is legal... or how a huge company can get away with something that would get them a bad trader tag on this board.
|
|
|
Post by hellojoeivers on Oct 11, 2019 3:25:42 GMT -5
Oh good, more ""deals"" on WWE figures that no one shares until it's too late to get in. "WHAT?! You're not gonna sell me 27 Adam Cole elites for 9 bucks shipped!? How do you expect to stay in business if you can't uphold your offers?!" The UK WWE Shop messed up a few years ago and put the WWE Title watch (rrp £70 or thereabouts) in the £5 Friday sale. Was both enjoyable and embarrassing to see how many grown men were throwing their toys out of the pram wondering why they wouldn’t honour their order of 32 of them
|
|
|
Post by CM Poor on Oct 11, 2019 8:05:10 GMT -5
Not really sure how this is legal... or how a huge company can get away with something that would get them a bad trader tag on this board. Because false and deceptive advertising hinge upon the deliberate intent to deceive. Advertising f*ck ups happen every single day. It's part of the imperfect nature of business. Is it usually in a company's best interests to honor erroneous pricing so long as it's not going to exponentially affect their bottom line? Sure. More than likely, Sears doesn't have that luxury here, as this is clearly a matter of fulfillment rather than company held inventory (Sears absolutely does not carry that much depth of stock in regard to WWE figures). They were probably advertising a sale they didn't have the liberty to advertise, and knowing Sears, it was probably initiated on the back of poor system automation or poor corporate oversight. In any event, it's not like they're going to take the money and run. All anyone is out here is the minor inconvenience of hope that they might have collected these purchases at slam dunk pricing.
|
|
Hasbromaniac
Main Eventer
Joined on: Nov 17, 2004 16:13:30 GMT -5
Posts: 3,598
|
Post by Hasbromaniac on Oct 11, 2019 9:17:18 GMT -5
Didn't Gamestop have a sale error earlier this with people getting upset ? 90% or more of the WWE Mattel product is 3rd party Ringside merchandise. Neither Sears or Ringside were going to take a loss on this error. As other members said, if it's too good to be true, then it's not.
|
|
|
Post by TheHitmanKid on Oct 11, 2019 11:22:10 GMT -5
ToysRus is closed, and Sears is still open.....😓😭
|
|
|
Post by Mr. #1derful 🇵🇸 on Oct 11, 2019 13:09:21 GMT -5
(longtime Sears customers) Filthy casuals didn't get their deals fulfilled?
|
|
Blackbird 13
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 6, 2005 3:32:41 GMT -5
Posts: 3,242
|
Post by Blackbird 13 on Oct 11, 2019 13:41:36 GMT -5
Not really sure how this is legal... or how a huge company can get away with something that would get them a bad trader tag on this board. Because false and deceptive advertising hinge upon the deliberate intent to deceive. Advertising f*ck ups happen every single day. It's part of the imperfect nature of business. Is it usually in a company's best interests to honor erroneous pricing so long as it's not going to exponentially affect their bottom line? Sure. More than likely, Sears doesn't have that luxury here, as this is clearly a matter of fulfillment rather than company held inventory (Sears absolutely does not carry that much depth of stock in regard to WWE figures). They were probably advertising a sale they didn't have the liberty to advertise, and knowing Sears, it was probably initiated on the back of poor system automation or poor corporate oversight. In any event, it's not like they're going to take the money and run. All anyone is out here is the minor inconvenience of hope that they might have collected these purchases at slam dunk pricing. I gotta disagree with this mindset. When you purchase something from an online vendor, it's an agreement for the exchange. Sears would have gotten banned from Mercari, eBay, Facebook, or any other marketplace platform for agreeing to sell items that it didn't actually sell in the end. I would argue that someone picking an item up from this sale has "checked the box" that they've purchased an item. If that item were to sell out at every other retailer, for instance, the company would have caused the consumer an unfixable issue. While this particular case may not be a big deal to most, the underlying point behind this is a HUGE deal. Ringside is totally clean in this, but for Sears, it's either false advertising, or general fraud, as they represented something for sale that they had no legal right to sell. "We made an error" isn't really a good legal defense in most cases.
|
|
|
Post by CM Poor on Oct 11, 2019 14:01:19 GMT -5
Because false and deceptive advertising hinge upon the deliberate intent to deceive. Advertising f*ck ups happen every single day. It's part of the imperfect nature of business. Is it usually in a company's best interests to honor erroneous pricing so long as it's not going to exponentially affect their bottom line? Sure. More than likely, Sears doesn't have that luxury here, as this is clearly a matter of fulfillment rather than company held inventory (Sears absolutely does not carry that much depth of stock in regard to WWE figures). They were probably advertising a sale they didn't have the liberty to advertise, and knowing Sears, it was probably initiated on the back of poor system automation or poor corporate oversight. In any event, it's not like they're going to take the money and run. All anyone is out here is the minor inconvenience of hope that they might have collected these purchases at slam dunk pricing. I gotta disagree with this mindset. When you purchase something from an online vendor, it's an agreement for the exchange. Sears would have gotten banned from Mercari, eBay, Facebook, or any other marketplace platform for agreeing to sell items that it didn't actually sell in the end. I would argue that someone picking an item up from this sale has "checked the box" that they've purchased an item. If that item were to sell out at every other retailer, for instance, the company would have caused the consumer an unfixable issue. While this particular case may not be a big deal to most, the underlying point behind this is a HUGE deal. Ringside is totally clean in this, but for Sears, it's either false advertising, or general fraud, as they represented something for sale that they had no legal right to sell. "We made an error" isn't really a good legal defense in most cases. You can disagree with it all you want, but Truth In Advertising cases, again, are largely going to hinge upon a willful intent to deceive. The purchase is absolutely an agreement of exchange, but if the retailer cancels your order and refunds your money (as was done here to the nth degree), you no longer have any sort of binding agreement with them. "We made an error" is completely going to cover their ass, so long as Sears can prove that, in rectifying their error, they've "made it right" with the consumer. Your mileage may vary in terms of what constitutes making it right, but in a legal sense, cancelling the order and refunding the total sum of monies exchanged is going to fit the bill just fine. There are about 8 billion little factors that are going to ultimately spell the finite end of Sears Holdings, but it won't, in any material sense, be the case of the wrestling figures that were temporarily mispriced.
|
|
FFK
Main Eventer
FEED ME MORE!
Joined on: Sept 6, 2010 19:27:38 GMT -5
Posts: 3,156
|
Post by FFK on Oct 12, 2019 14:58:16 GMT -5
I had 1 item out of all of my orders sent. A retro sting. I also chose the premium shipping for .71¢.
|
|
|
Post by Valbroski on Oct 12, 2019 15:33:02 GMT -5
LOL. After working for Sears for just shy of five years in various roles from management on down, the best advice I could give anyone when preparing to do business with Sears is don't. This is probably a first time thing for a lot of figure collectors because I'm sure Sears is nowhere near the top of anyone's hunting location list, but advertising a slamming deal on their website and then being 100% unable to fulfill the offer is so ingrained in the fabric of that company at this point that it's a wonder it's not part of their renewed mission statement. That's funny, I worked for Sears for just about 5 years too. I worked in the back warehouse area/online orders department. Our store would take hundreds of orders daily even if we didn't have the item in stock. I had one operations manager in my first year there that would try and make us send similar items if we didn't have the exact item in stock for an order, which I never agreed to go along with anytime it happened and got crap for it.
|
|
|
Post by TheLastDude on Oct 12, 2019 15:39:55 GMT -5
Because false and deceptive advertising hinge upon the deliberate intent to deceive. Advertising f*ck ups happen every single day. It's part of the imperfect nature of business. Is it usually in a company's best interests to honor erroneous pricing so long as it's not going to exponentially affect their bottom line? Sure. More than likely, Sears doesn't have that luxury here, as this is clearly a matter of fulfillment rather than company held inventory (Sears absolutely does not carry that much depth of stock in regard to WWE figures). They were probably advertising a sale they didn't have the liberty to advertise, and knowing Sears, it was probably initiated on the back of poor system automation or poor corporate oversight. In any event, it's not like they're going to take the money and run. All anyone is out here is the minor inconvenience of hope that they might have collected these purchases at slam dunk pricing. I gotta disagree with this mindset. When you purchase something from an online vendor, it's an agreement for the exchange. Sears would have gotten banned from Mercari, eBay, Facebook, or any other marketplace platform for agreeing to sell items that it didn't actually sell in the end. I would argue that someone picking an item up from this sale has "checked the box" that they've purchased an item. If that item were to sell out at every other retailer, for instance, the company would have caused the consumer an unfixable issue. While this particular case may not be a big deal to most, the underlying point behind this is a HUGE deal. Ringside is totally clean in this, but for Sears, it's either false advertising, or general fraud, as they represented something for sale that they had no legal right to sell. "We made an error" isn't really a good legal defense in most cases. I am flabbergasted by this post. Get your money back from whatever two bit shyster took your money and gave you a phony law degree. Sears would have been banned from precisely nowhere, even if you could compare an obvious online price error by a store with an individual attempt to scam money from unwitting users through a third party hosted buying/selling site, which you can't...because they are in no way similar. The fact that you think this is a "HUGE" deal concerns me for the time when you are presented with an ENORMOUS deal, and I won't even bring up a possible GIGANTIC deal.
|
|
Blackbird 13
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 6, 2005 3:32:41 GMT -5
Posts: 3,242
|
Post by Blackbird 13 on Oct 12, 2019 15:57:11 GMT -5
I gotta disagree with this mindset. When you purchase something from an online vendor, it's an agreement for the exchange. Sears would have gotten banned from Mercari, eBay, Facebook, or any other marketplace platform for agreeing to sell items that it didn't actually sell in the end. I would argue that someone picking an item up from this sale has "checked the box" that they've purchased an item. If that item were to sell out at every other retailer, for instance, the company would have caused the consumer an unfixable issue. While this particular case may not be a big deal to most, the underlying point behind this is a HUGE deal. Ringside is totally clean in this, but for Sears, it's either false advertising, or general fraud, as they represented something for sale that they had no legal right to sell. "We made an error" isn't really a good legal defense in most cases. I am flabbergasted by this post. Get your money back from whatever two bit shyster took your money and gave you a phony law degree. Sears would have been banned from precisely nowhere, even if you could compare an obvious online price error by a store with an individual attempt to scam money from unwitting users through a third party hosted buying/selling site, which you can't...because they are in no way similar. The fact that you think this is a "HUGE" deal concerns me for the time when you are presented with an ENORMOUS deal, and I won't even bring up a possible GIGANTIC deal. Oh? Tell you what. Go ahead and sell something on Mercari, Ebay, or even this forum.. then back out of that and let us know how that goes. Sears pricing things that way was irresponsible, plain and simple. You guys can talk about "errors" all you want, but at the end of the day, a company has to take responsibility for its errors. You can't show up to a court trial and tell the judge "oh, I made an error". Well, yes... that's the whole point. As for it being a huge deal.. I don't mean this particular instance of discounted action figures. I mean the willingness of the general public to absolve large corporations of responsibility when they claim an "error". An error on a company's part should come with some sort of make good for the inconvenience. If we're nitpicking, how many of you spent time on Sears' website to research and agree to purchase? That time is now wasted, again due to an "error" that you had nothing to do with. "We're sorry for the inconvenience". No you're not. If you were, you'd do something to fix the problem.
|
|
|
Post by CM Poor on Oct 12, 2019 18:15:10 GMT -5
L O L
They did fix the problem. The price was corrected, and nobody’s out anything of any material value.
Sears isn’t going to wind up in court over this because they made it right. Everyone got their money back. JFC. Imagine even implying someone should sue because they didn’t land a slamming deal on a Singh Brothers Battle Pack.
There’s always that one customer who thinks that inconvenience has a price tag.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 11, 2024 6:46:23 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2019 18:30:38 GMT -5
There are laws in most states that retailers are legally obligated to have a percentage of their prices correct on the items they are selling. In my state the law is 98%. I agree nothing will happen with Sears but if their state wanted to proceed with legal action (probably just a fine) they would be able to do so.
|
|
Blackbird 13
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 6, 2005 3:32:41 GMT -5
Posts: 3,242
|
Post by Blackbird 13 on Oct 12, 2019 18:30:59 GMT -5
L O L They did fix the problem. The price was corrected, and nobody’s out anything of any material value. Sears isn’t going to wind up in court over this because they made it right. Everyone got their money back. JFC. Imagine even implying someone should sue because they didn’t land a slamming deal on a Singh Brothers Battle Pack. There’s always that one customer who thinks that inconvenience has a price tag. Time. Time has a price tag. I get that this particular issue isn't a big deal in and of itself. Keeping it frivolous though... what if someone had ordered one of the limited edition WWE2K games because of a discount and then had the order cancelled after the item had sold out elsewhere? It's not entitled or selfish to believe that your time and your decisions are worth money. That corporation makes huge decisions based on time being worth money. Sears screwed this up.. and simply refunding people isn't adequate.
|
|
|
Post by CM Poor on Oct 12, 2019 18:47:39 GMT -5
L O L They did fix the problem. The price was corrected, and nobody’s out anything of any material value. Sears isn’t going to wind up in court over this because they made it right. Everyone got their money back. JFC. Imagine even implying someone should sue because they didn’t land a slamming deal on a Singh Brothers Battle Pack. There’s always that one customer who thinks that inconvenience has a price tag. Time. Time has a price tag. I get that this particular issue isn't a big deal in and of itself. Keeping it frivolous though... what if someone had ordered one of the limited edition WWE2K games because of a discount and then had the order cancelled after the item had sold out elsewhere? It's not entitled or selfish to believe that your time and your decisions are worth money. That corporation makes huge decisions based on time being worth money. Sears screwed this up.. and simply refunding people isn't adequate. Legally, it is. You keep attacking this as if Sears walked off with everyone’s money, or this is the first and most glaring example of an advertising f*ck up. It happens. There’s a local grocer near me who does it on a near bi-weekly basis. “Our circular advertised product x at cost y. This is an error. We apologize for the inconvenience.” It’s life, dude. Mistakes happen. Sears is going to eat sh*t in short, short order for the litany they’ve made over the past 14 years since allowing themselves to fall under the purview of a hedge fund manager who once managed to get kidnapped by small time crooks. You definitely strike me as the kind of guy who asks to speak to the manager a lot.
|
|
Blackbird 13
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 6, 2005 3:32:41 GMT -5
Posts: 3,242
|
Post by Blackbird 13 on Oct 12, 2019 18:52:54 GMT -5
Time. Time has a price tag. I get that this particular issue isn't a big deal in and of itself. Keeping it frivolous though... what if someone had ordered one of the limited edition WWE2K games because of a discount and then had the order cancelled after the item had sold out elsewhere? It's not entitled or selfish to believe that your time and your decisions are worth money. That corporation makes huge decisions based on time being worth money. Sears screwed this up.. and simply refunding people isn't adequate. Legally, it is. You keep attacking this as if Sears walked off with everyone’s money, or this is the first and most glaring example of an advertising f*ck up. It happens. There’s a local grocer near me who does it on a near bi-weekly basis. “Our circular advertised product x at cost y. This is an error. We apologize for the inconvenience.” It’s life, dude. Mistakes happen. Sears is going to eat sh*t in short, short order for the litany they’ve made over the past 14 years since allowing themselves to fall under the purview of a hedge fund manager who once managed to get kidnapped by small time crooks. You definitely strike me as the kind of guy who asks to speak to the manager a lot. Advertising things at a price is totally different. Once I've committed to purchase them.. we have an agreement. I'm paying you X, you're giving me Y. Not the same as an advertising error... and if your technology cant handle things like this.. maybe fix it, on an overall scale. This thread is full of people saying this isn't the first time this has happened. I believe in defending yourself when you're screwed over, plain and simple.
|
|
|
Post by CM Poor on Oct 12, 2019 19:00:42 GMT -5
Legally, it is. You keep attacking this as if Sears walked off with everyone’s money, or this is the first and most glaring example of an advertising f*ck up. It happens. There’s a local grocer near me who does it on a near bi-weekly basis. “Our circular advertised product x at cost y. This is an error. We apologize for the inconvenience.” It’s life, dude. Mistakes happen. Sears is going to eat sh*t in short, short order for the litany they’ve made over the past 14 years since allowing themselves to fall under the purview of a hedge fund manager who once managed to get kidnapped by small time crooks. You definitely strike me as the kind of guy who asks to speak to the manager a lot. Advertising things at a price is totally different. Once I've committed to purchase them.. we have an agreement. I'm paying you X, you're giving me Y. Not the same as an advertising error... and if your technology cant handle things like this.. maybe fix it, on an overall scale. This thread is full of people saying this isn't the first time this has happened. I believe in defending yourself when you're screwed over, plain and simple. Yep. And if I’m unable to provide you y, I give you back your x. This is how it’s happened since the advent of retail, at dozens upon dozens of retailers, far and beyond the walls of exclusively Sears. Sears 100%, unequivocally f*cked up. It’s not the first time, and it probably won’t be the last. Nevertheless, in a vacuum, they’ve done what was required of them. Sears has an innumerable amount of aspects of their business causing them to tank, so much so that their routine habit of erring in their advertising practices is so far down the list it’s not even funny. Still, it’s completely absurd to suggest that, now that the issue has been resolved, there remains an unpaid debt. That’s “I’ll speak to your manager” syndrome, and anyone who’s spent more than five minutes in retail can smell it a mile away.
|
|