Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Sears Makes Good Despite the Fine Print (Part 2)

When last we left this saga, MrConsumer had ordered a Sears gas range based on a picture on their website. The stove that was delivered, however, was not like the picture in several respects, including coming with glossy instead of matte finish grates. Executives at Sears, once contacted, bent over backwards to right the situation by agreeing to replace the stove with the pictured model at no extra cost.

For a period of five days, however, MrConsumer had two new Sears ranges in his kitchen because of coordination problems between the delivery and installation departments at Sears. Worse, the replacement stove also came with glossy grates.

This discrepancy was predictable because of mouse print on the Sears Parts Direct website which indicated the part number for the grates on both the original range and the replacement one were the same.

Undaunted, and with a little research by MrConsumer, the correct part number for the matte grates was discovered, and the folks at Sears headquarters ordered a set of matte finish grates. What arrived? Two sets! Why? Another error on their parts site made it appear the grates were being sold individually rather than in sets.

From the start, the Sears executive who wanted to right the situation and the person at “executive resolutions” who did the heavy lifting to make it happen, were determined to see this through to a successful conclusion. The correction cost Sears, in retail dollars, over $700 (higher priced replacement stove, delivery, installation, removal, and grates cost). That is an amazing amount of money to spend to satisfy one customer… and this customer is very grateful to them for the effort. Old fashioned customer service, at least in this instance, is a live and well and living at Sears.

Share this story:

 

ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

(Not so) Free Chips Ahoy Cookies

Nabisco took out a full page in a recent Sunday coupon insert promoting a free package of Chips Ahoy cookies. What they were asking people to do was to visit their Facebook page, and there they could download a coupon for a free package of cookies.

That is not such an unusual offer. Last year, TGI Friday gave away free hamburgers if you became a fan of theirs on Facebook.

What’s different about this offer is buried in the fine print, and not even in that section of red words at the bottom of the ad.

*MOUSE PRINT:

So the offer is not really what the headline promises, nor even what the coupon at the bottom of the ad suggests in the larger print. The offer is really:

1. Buy a gallon of milk.
2. Buy a package of Nabisco cookies.
3. Become a fan of our cookies on Facebook.
4. Then and only then, get a free package of cookies.

The Federal Trade Commission’s guidelines on the use of the word “free” say:

“When making “Free” or similar offers all the terms, conditions and obligations upon which receipt and retention of the “Free” item are contingent should be set forth clearly and conspicuously at the outset of the offer so as to leave no reasonable probability that the terms of the offer might be misunderstood. Stated differently, all of the terms, conditions and obligations should appear in close conjunction with the offer of “Free” merchandise or service. For example, disclosure of the terms of the offer set forth in a footnote of an advertisement to which reference is made by an asterisk or other symbol placed next to the offer, is not regarded as making disclosure at the outset. ”

Will advertisers EVER learn to play it straight (and follow the rules) and not lead consumers to believe they are offering something for free with no additional purchase necessary, when in fact there are many strings?

Share this story:

 

ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Campbell’s (Not) 25% Less Sodium Tomato Soup

As we become more health conscious, we tend to be attracted to products that are better for us. Unfortunately, manufacturers usually charge a premium price when a product offers health benefits compared to similar products.

Here, for example, is Campbell’s Tomato soup — the regular type and the 25% less sodium version. Their regular tomato soup is $1 a can, while the can with less salt is $1.39. A huge percentage price difference. Funny, how we’re charged more for less. But it gets worse. When one checks the nutrition label, there is a big surprise:

*MOUSE PRINT:

The 25% reduced sodium version has just as much salt as the regular version!

Interestingly the mouse print on the back of the label of their regular tomato soup claims that it has 42% less sodium than Campbell’s regular soup — a greater reduction in salt than their so-called reduced sodium product.

How does Campbell’s explain these discrepancies? Consumer reporter Michael Finney (who tipped us off to this story) of the local ABC affiliate in San Francisco asked them [ignore initial 15 second ad]:

(Here is a direct link to the story if you cannot access the video above.)

Share this story:

 

ADV