D'Juhn Keep on 11/12/2008 at 18:56
2 for the price of 3 would indeed be quite a scam
3 for the price of 2 is hardly a scam though. If you want 1, buy 1. If you want, or could conceivably use, 2, then you've got another free! I don't really see the problem here. I also don't agree with your "Up to 50% off" gripe. What they say isn't a lie or a scam, it's accurate. If you actually believe that sign means everything in there is 50% off then you probabaly shouldn't be trusted with money in the first place.
Although saying that I did pass a Woolworth's that had a sign saying "All stock 50% off" today because they've just started Closing Down Sales in all branches. I've been looking for a specific brand of crockery in Woolworth's lately, my girlfriend and I have scoured about 8 different nearby Woolies and have most of the set but are missing a few cups :(
Hidden_7 on 11/12/2008 at 19:27
I think what he's saying is that it's purposefully deceptive advertising. Technically all stores always have an "up to 100% off." However they don't go around saying that because they want the "up to 50% off" to appear to mean something. Yes, it is dumb to be fooled by these sorts of things, and yes what they said was 100% accurate and true, but that doesn't excuse the person willfully trying to fool you.
On a similar note another thing that bothered me that we did at the video store I worked in (mostly because I had to keep explaining it to people and then they'd get annoyed like I'm personally trying to trick them) is the bin of movies or whatever that is "from $5.99" or whatever. That means the absolute lowest price you will find in that bin is $5.99, but lots of people read it as "everything in this bin is $5.99," and it's hard to blame them when on the sign the price is giant and the from is in little tiny print that sorta blends in with the background. Slightly more rarely people would see the from and read it as "this is the highest price you will find in there" which I have very little sympathy for, since you SAW the wording, you just interpreted it incorrectly.
Selkie on 11/12/2008 at 19:43
"Anti-Aging"
Foundation (pardon the pun) of an entire industry.
SD on 11/12/2008 at 23:21
Quote Posted by Muzman
You could do a book on tech wank of that sort all by itself
37 inch screen! Of course, they don't mention they're measuring it
diagonally.
rachel on 12/12/2008 at 00:53
Er, maybe they don't mention it because it's been the standard for decades...
SD on 12/12/2008 at 11:45
Quote Posted by raph
Er, maybe they don't mention it because it's been the standard
for decades...
I know it's been done for years, that's not really my point. My point is who the fuck measures things diagonally? Does the Great Pyramid of Giza measure 180m instead of 140m? Can I tell the ladies I have an 8-inch cock?
You're right - they've been getting away with this creative measurement for decades, but that doesn't make it right.
Volca on 12/12/2008 at 12:15
Not a scam itself, but I think it's very irritating - lowering the volume of normal TV broadcasts, with the exception to advertisements - so the advertisements are way louder than normal broadcasts.
Thirith on 12/12/2008 at 12:17
Quote Posted by SD
37 inch screen! Of course, they don't mention they're measuring it
diagonally.
How else should they measure it if you have different aspect ratios? In any case, it makes sense to measure the diagonal because otherwise people would never know whether its height or width. Your examples don't really make sense because you measure the most meaningful quantity. For a screen, that would be neither height nor width due to the aspect ratio thing.
David on 12/12/2008 at 12:30
It's purely because the first CRT TV tubes were round, rather than a rounded rectangle and when they moved to rounded rectangle the size was measured diagonally as a way to compare sizes with different tube-styles.
Measuring diagonally was never a marketing scam. Quoting the tube size was as the edges were hidden under a bevel or surround making the viewable area smaller than the marketing material stated. The industry moved onto 'viewable size' in the last days of the CRT TV to combat the minor amount of ill-feeling from consumers who felt they were being 'cheated'. This all changed with LCD and Plasma screens as the full screen size is available.
Also diagonally measurement is absolutely no help for differing aspect ratios other than knowing that 19" is fairly 'small' (that is 4:3/5:4 against 16:9/16:10)
Kolya on 12/12/2008 at 16:42
Storage media manufacturers measuring 1MB at 1000KB.
