Business

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

WSJ Goofs Reporting Walmart+ Discount for Seniors

On July 20th, The Wall Street Journal published a story claiming that Walmart was offering a 50%-off discount on its Walmart+ membership program to recipients of various government assistance programs including those on Social Security. Wow!

Walmart+, which is regularly $98/yr, is similar to Amazon Prime giving members free shipping even on small orders and other benefits such as a free Paramount+ membership.

WSJ - Walmart+ half price for Social Security recipients

At just $49, even MrConsumer, who refuses to pay $139 for Amazon Prime, might consider a Walmart+ Assist membership. But being a good and suspicious consumer, he wanted to review the fine print terms and conditions first.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Walmart+ Assist terms

In that alphabet soup of government programs, Social Security is not listed. And even in Walmart’s press release announcing the Walmart+ Assist program, there is no mention of Social Security recipients being eligible for it.

So why in the world did the Wall Street Journal, right in its headline, say that those on Social Security qualified? The reporter, a summer intern at the paper, probably thought that SSI meant “Social Security” when in fact it stands for “Supplemental Security Income” — a program that provides monthly payments for those with disabilities or blindness.

But, within two hours of our writing to her, the headline was corrected, and a note about the error was appended to the end of the story.

New Headline

*MOUSE PRINT:

WSJ correction

So the lesson here is… if a news story sounds too good to be true, sometimes it is.

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Subway’s “No Tuna” in Their Tuna Sandwiches Saga Nears an End

It has been going on for nearly two-and-half years already. Two California consumers claimed there was no tuna in Subway’s tuna sandwiches.

The case generated headlines worldwide.

Subway Tuna Headlines

We’ve written six stories about the case. First the consumer claimed there was no tuna in their subs, then her lawyers said it wasn’t 100-percent tuna, and on and on. The lawyers filed and withdrew complaint after complaint, changing their theory of the case.

The company got a huge black eye because of these cases, and probably suffered significant reputational damage and lost sales.

Now, on April 20, 2023, the consumer sought to voluntarily dismiss the case.

But guess what? Subway said not so fast. In essence, because the consumer and her lawyers put the company through the wringer even after having been provided with documentation pinpointing the place where the tuna is captured to how it’s packaged, Subway’s lawyers are seeking sanctions against the consumer’s lawyers.

They say the suit should have been dropped long ago, and way before the company had to spend over $600,000 in legal fees to defend itself. The six consumer lawyers filed various pleadings, they say, to extend the lawsuit “motivated by the prospect that Subway might simply pay a windfall settlement.”

For their part, the consumer’s lawyers countered that the consumer is withdrawing her complaint because of health issues. They went on to say:

Plaintiff filed her complaints with a good faith, non-frivolous basis based on testing and evidence that there was something amiss with respect to the meat product defendants were selling as ‘tuna.’

MrConsumer has always thought the case was a little fishy because of the questionable test results the consumer’s lawyers claimed to have. Now, finally, the case should come to a conclusion after an August hearing.

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Get a Free 55-inch HDTV*

Last week, a company called Free Telly came out with a once-in-a-lifetime offer: They are going to give away half a million 55-inch HDTVs for free in 2023!

Say what?

Free Telly

So what’s the catch? This novel TV has two screens: the main viewing screen, and then a second full-width but smaller screen below that will stream information like news and weather, but more importantly, interactive advertisements from which viewers can order merchandise or meals. And the content may be related to what is being viewed on the main screen. They also have the ability to collect a ton of user data via their privacy policy. And the TVs have a microphone and camera supposedly for voice commands and video calling.

Now a company like this is not going to willy-nilly send out 55-inch televisions with no strings attached. In fact, they have a detailed terms and conditions statement with a couple of interesting qualifications.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Free Telly terms

Many people have bigger or better TVs as their primary television and are not going to want to put this one in its place.

If you don’t play by the rules, you have to return the TV or you will be charged for it via the credit card you are required to provide.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Free Telly charge

Interestingly, the terms and conditions statement changed on its launch day last week. The previous version for beta testers spelled out the penalty for not returning the TV.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Free Telly penalty

Here are some more details about their plans.

Will this be a big financial success or go the way of MoviePass?