var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
snowburnt
December 31, 2008 4:06 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

That email she got from Ritz looked like one of those Nigerian email scams. You'd think they'd use a form letter that was pre-approved and grammar checked.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
CumaeanSibyl
January 2, 2009 1:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@snowburnt: Ten bucks says that was the proofread version. American schools don't teach English very well any more.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Wit
December 31, 2008 4:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@snowburnt: Ha. You're spot on there. The grammar is 'quiet' appalling!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
SUNY_SteveDave
December 31, 2008 5:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Wit: I forgive spelling errors that are easily explained, I.E. it was a correctly spelled word, but not the right word, and spell check won't pick that up. Also, my dyslexia sometimes shows through in my spelling. It also shows me that they don't use a form letter, and address each concern, which is nice.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Adam Holcomb
December 31, 2008 8:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@SUNY_SteveDave:
I got 3 video credits in the iTMS by commenting on the txtspk that the customer service agent had used to email me.


I'm the kind of guy who calls Coke when he gets a bottle that tastes kinda off just so he can get free stuff, though. (aka I'm a jerk)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Wit
December 31, 2008 7:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@SUNY_SteveDave: I don't know - I'm dyslexic, too, but I also know that because of that, I need to proofread my letters before sending them out.

To me, the email reads like the author mashed it together out of pieces of several different forms and then didn't read it over for flow before sending it out. My guess (given the mix of stilted language and colloquialisms such as: \"We just need another chance...\") is that it was someone who's just starting to get the hang of the customer service \"voice.\" All these things are understandable, but the bottom line for me is that it sounds thoroughly unprofessional.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Rey
December 31, 2008 4:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Awesomely timely post. I was just perusing Ritz Camera for a birthday gift for my mom, the photographer.


I cruised over here for a second, saw this post, and immediately closed my Ritz browser window.


Inventory and Supply Chain issues are one thing, but this bribery email is beyond the pale. (Grammar and \"power of positive thinking\"/jedi mind tricks tone notwithstanding.)


Note to Ritz: Once you've screwed up to the extent that you've lost a customer, it's too late to try to wiggle out of it. You had your chance through the appropriate CSR channels.


In fact, in this case, you've alienated another customer who didn't yet have a chance to click the \"Process Order\" button.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
snowburnt
December 31, 2008 6:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Rey: as shady as this is, Ritz usually has good deals and they hire some knowledgeable and helpful people in their brick and mortar stores.

I've noticed supply issues like the OP pointed out at a number of their stores. One of their managers explained to me that most of the models of at least the cameras are at the end of their product cycle and new models are due out in January. Due to bad planning on Ritz's behalf they didn't stock up enough of the old models to meet the demand. Its unfortunate and understandable there.

What is bad though is Ritz's web half acting poorly, being misinformed or lying and then attempting to bribe off bad press.

Also in my experience the prices are the same in store as online. Plus if they have it at another store they will overnight to your store free of charge to you.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
larrymac808
December 31, 2008 7:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@snowburnt: I'm not buying that \"end of cycle\" excuse. The big photo trade show - Photokina - just took place in September, and that's when most new cameras are introduced. Certainly Nikon and Canon have each released new DSLRs in the very recent past. Also, my boo works for a locally-owned and operated photo shop and I've not heard any mention of this. Now the \"bad planning on Ritz's behalf\" I have no problem with.


This is, of course, the same camera chain who was still attempting to sell Polaroid Mio cameras less than a year ago, when the film was discontinued in 2005. And who charged me something like $11.99 to process a roll of 36 exposure color film, even though it was only $6.99 for a 24 exp, and extra prints were going for 25 cents.


I think they finally stopped bundling brand name (D)SLR bodies with their (reportedly poor quality) off-brand lenses, but I refuse to go near the place.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
FrugalFreak
December 31, 2008 5:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Rey: a good company would compensate you to hope to gain further business and trust. WITHOUT asking you to remove negative feedback.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
fantomesq
December 31, 2008 4:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is not bribery. Bribery requires that the person being influenced be \"an official or other person in discharge of a public or legal duty\". Leaving feedback is the equivalent of sending a letter to provide feedback on your experiences. I would hope that the Consumerist would recognize that a good company would try to make the situation right by offering something in return. The consumer's ability to remove or alter the negative feedback is a big bargaining chip in the consumer's corner.

Reply
7 replies
\"user-pic\"
vespolina
December 31, 2008 10:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: fantomesq is correct. this is not bribery - it's witness tampering. or possibly subornation of perjury.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
winstonthorne
December 31, 2008 6:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: ...except that Amazon and eBay both explicitly forbid this practice in their merchant agreements. It's not illegal, but it's against the TOS's of the sites.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
TCTH
December 31, 2008 6:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: Which makes it totally useless to anyone basing a purchase decision on what they think is an honest review? You're right, it is business as usual but that doesn't make it right or even OK.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Rey
December 31, 2008 5:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: A good company would have made this right prior to it resulting in negative feedback.


BTW, I have a dictionary too and it mentions nothing about \"bribery\" requiring a connection to \"public or legal duty\". We all know what a bribe is, and m-w.com's 2nd defintion, \"something that serves to induce or influence\" appears quite (quiet?) apt.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
fantomesq
December 31, 2008 5:19 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Rey:

Bribery's a legal term... my definition comes from Black's Law Dictionary. Any other usage is sloppy and inaccurate. Consumerist's headlines have been a little sensationalistic lately. Legal accuracy is important when making public accusations

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ugly
January 1, 2009 5:21 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: You're as bad as sea folks exclaiming that a boat isn't a boat, it's a ship.

Just because in the context of a courtroom \"bribery\" has a specific meaning doesn't make it so in the rest of the world. The same is true of ship/boat, seagull/

Save \"Black's Law Dictionary\" for when it's appropriate. Maybe for folks like you it needs to have a notice on the front. \"Not to be used outside of a court of law\".

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mythago
January 2, 2009 7:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ugly: In real life, lawyers don't use \"Black's Law Dictionary\" to show that something is or isn't a crime; Black's is something you refer to in law school, or if you're looking at legislative history. (That is, we're trying to interpret what legal term \"X\" means now by looking back at its origins.) fantomesq is either a law student or a BSer.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
January 1, 2009 7:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ugly: Leave it to a \"lawyer\" to complicate the matter.

To inject a little humour here, there really is a difference between a ship and a boat. A ship has a captain. A boat operates by mutual consent.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Skipweasel
December 31, 2008 10:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: Just because the law has a view on what a word means doesn't mean the rest of the English speaking world can't have one too.

I strongly suspect that to most people, bribe is the right word, and the company's actions stink.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Garbanzo
December 31, 2008 8:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: \"Bribery\" may be a legal term, but that doesn't mean that it does not also have other usages. \"Force\" has a specific meaning in physics which is quite different from its meaning in law. It would be obnoxious (and incorrect) for a physicist to go into a courtroom and tell the lawyers and judge that they're using the word wrong! Words commonly have more than one definition; get over it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)
December 31, 2008 7:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: Oh please. Even lawyers say \"assault\" when they mean \"battery.\"

(In fact, one of my very first marital arguments revolved around assault vs. battery. We're both lawyers, and I'm very clumsy. I went to stand up from the couch, lost my balance, and while windmilling my arms cartoon-style, whacked my new husband in the chest. In mock-offense he says, \"Assault me, why don't you!\" I burst into tears and sobbed, \"I didn't assault you -- I BATTERED you!\")

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mythago
January 1, 2009 5:09 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Eyebrows McGee: You must have been a very new lawyer then, or you would have coldly informed him that it would have been impossible for you to assault him as you ALREADY committed the battery - therefore there is no 'threat' - but you'd be happy to provide him with a brand-new assault if he wanted. ;)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)
January 2, 2009 3:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mythago: Still in law school at the time. :) But lemme tell ya, it's nothing compared to our arguments about which past chores are admissible as evidence in arguments over whose turn it is to do the litterboxes.

(And then I got pregnant and it's NEVER my turn!)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
snowburnt
December 31, 2008 6:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: Go back to law school! Legal definitions are long and confusing. They intend to offer indisputable clarity but instead obfuscate the matter further. If any law suit is brought up in this matter it would be laughed out of the court room.

I hope your professors don't read this blog

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Xanaxian
December 31, 2008 5:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: \"Bribery\" is a common English word that can be used quiet accurately and unsloppily outside of a legal context. The word \"damage\" can be found in a Dungeons and Dragons glossary, but no-one would suggest that it only be used in the context of bashing a half-elf over the head with a +2 bardiche.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
calquist
December 31, 2008 4:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: A good company would offer something in return, but acknowledge that they made a mistake in the first place, not try to cover it up.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
dorianh49
December 31, 2008 4:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It sounds like something that two guys named \"Vinnie\" might say.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
ScottRose
December 31, 2008 4:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Call me crazy, but I don't shop at electronics stores that are named for crackers that are marketed to poor people.

Annyways, that \"bribery\" has got to be against Amazon's ToS, no?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Sanspants
December 31, 2008 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Didn't the same thing happen over Spore's DRM?

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Oranges w/ Cheese hates what Christmas has become
December 31, 2008 4:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Sanspants: Well that wasn't really bribery as they're putting it - but its what I thought the article was initially about as well.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Sanspants
December 31, 2008 4:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Sanspants:
Or security thing or whatever it was?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
mustng67
December 31, 2008 4:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Remove the negative feedback,take the gift card, then post your experience somewhere else. Blog, forum, consumerist! Simple enough.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
SabreDC
December 31, 2008 9:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mustng67: Or, edit your feedback, get the gift card, and then edit it again to the original negative feedback. What's the company going to do? Say, \"But we bribed you with a gift card to remove the negative feedback, have you no morals and ethics?\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Jorn Knuttila
December 31, 2008 5:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mustng67:

Well, one of the points most of us are ranting about here is a matter of ethics. If she plays along, which she's certainly entitled to do, that changes the story a bit.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
rocknrollstalin
December 31, 2008 4:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mustng67:
Why not just repost the negative feedback after you've used the giftcard?

I'm sure that some of us here would really love to see Ritz attempt to enforce their 'terms and conditions of feedback bribery'

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Holy Juan
December 31, 2008 4:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If you give me 100 Consumerist Credits, this comment about your article will get \"a lot\" more positive.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
bluebuilder
December 31, 2008 4:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is hush-hush if you compare it to what Siemens has been doing.
[www1.economist.com]

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
MichaelLC
December 31, 2008 4:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Melissa should have added that Ritz offered the off-brand frame in her post. They didn't \"refuse\" to fix the issue, she just rejected their (crappy) offer.


Brenda's email is really bad. \"...will contact us at the earliest.\" Earlieset what? Week? Day?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
deadandy
December 31, 2008 5:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Feedback whoring is quite common and it's not exclusive to Amazon. Ever buy something from eBay and gotten a reminder from the seller to leave positive feedback if you had a good experience?

Feedback on Amazon is way more powerful than eBay though because it's about the product AND the seller. You browse to a product and see its feedback, but you can also click the seller link and see their feedback.

Another thing is that you can actually leave a review on a product even if you've never purchased it. And guess what? If only one seller offers it, your review reflects badly on them as well.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
WorthingtonBanks
December 31, 2008 6:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@deadandy: I'll go one further re: eBay. I had the seller e-mail me that he was going to leave me negative feedback if I didn't leave him positive feedback. Then, when I left him negative feedback because of that, and only that, he sent me another message that if I removed it, he would remove the one he left for me.

Doesn't this defeat the purpose of a feedback system?

T.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
humphrmi
January 2, 2009 5:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@WorthingtonBanks: I believe that this is why Ebay stopped allowing sellers to leave negative feedback against buyers.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)
December 31, 2008 7:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@WorthingtonBanks: I had that happen too. It was the last time I shopped with e-bay. The buyer had shipped slow, the product was not remotely what was in the pictures, it was damaged, and when they had not responded to my repeated attempts to contact them, I'd left negative feedback. At that point they left ME negative feedback stating that all their products are perfect and they ALWAYS get back to customers who contact them and that I was a liar. They e-mailed me saying they only left it because I neg'd them and they'd be happy to remove it (but not fix problems with the product) if I removed what I'd posted. I left a response comment about this threat, and forwarded it all to e-bay. E-bay didn't give a rat's ass.

Never shopped with e-bay since, even after they removed the ability of sellers to neg buyers.

That said, I don't think \"leave positive feedback if you had a good experience!\" is a problem. It's only when they offer threats if you leave negative feedback, or offer to only fix a problem if you change your feedback.

I like systems that won't let you edit your original complaint but WILL let you append to it, so you can post an addendum if the company later resolves the issue to your satisfaction. That seems fairer.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Jorn Knuttila
December 31, 2008 5:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

• Melissa's assertion that Ritz \"...refused to assist with the situation. \" is untrue. They did offer to rectify it. She just thought the offer sucked. Melissa is entitled to her opinion, but it does not logically conclude that Ritz refused to do *anything.*

• Errors happen, it's in how a company deals with them that sets the company apart. When Melissa called the first time, that's when Ritz needed to go \"above and beyond.\" They didn't. Shame on them for that.

• Brenda Jones is not offering to fix the situation. She is offering Melissa $20 to lie. How does that reinstate confidence? I'm dying to know.

I woulda taken the $100 frame for $50, all other things being equal. It's not like brand name really matters with LCDs. But, after all this, I think we'd all agree that Ritz gets no more of our money.

FAIL RITZ FAIL

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
fantomesq
December 31, 2008 5:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Jorn Knuttila:

The feedback submission was the beginning of a negotiation and submitting it gave the OP a substantial bargaining chip on her side. The retailer responded by offering $20 in exchange for removing the feedback which the OP could do if she was now satisfied by the result. She chose to reject the offer as she was free to do.

She was not asked to lie. Lying would be a request to change her feedback to something more positive. Removing the feedback after a situation is rectified was always an option on her plate and a growing consumer power in the online world.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mythago
January 2, 2009 7:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: This is not your Contracts exam.

And yes, she was asked to lie, by erasing her previous true statement. An honest response would be something like 'follow-up, they have now fixed the problem and done X and I am happy with the transaction.'

Reply
\"user-pic\"
92BuickLeSabre
December 31, 2008 7:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: It's intentionally worded in such a way as to allow for your reading. And I'd even go further. Ritz could argue that the two points are not even contingent. We request that as in would really like it if you do this. And on an entirely unrelated note here's $20 because we feel bad.

But the implication is very different.

Contract drafting lawyers think they cover their bases with this kind of thinking.

But litigators have won cases with far less.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Jorn Knuttila
December 31, 2008 5:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq:

Okay, I can see your point, too. It seems like an area for grey matter. DOes the right price, in theory, actually change the consumer's opinion, or is it the price to just change what they are willing to say? Hmmm....

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
johnfrombrooklyn
December 31, 2008 5:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Unfortunately companies have to do this stuff because one poor Amazon review can kill their sales. Amazon in particular has no vetting process so reviews are filled with shills posting fake positive reviews, competitors posting fake negative reviews, and zero quality control over the \"truthiness\" in these reviews. There are thousands of \"reviews\" on Amazon from people who freely admit they don't even own the product or have ever seen it. But somehow they still feel qualified to write a review. Unfortunately Amazon lumps everyone together into a 5-star system which can be completely gamed.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
floraposte
December 31, 2008 5:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@johnfrombrooklyn: Companies that do this \"stuff\" deserve bad ratings.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
FrugalFreak
December 31, 2008 5:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

add Thingfling.com to that list. after buying from them received emails urging me to leave review and rating at rate site.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Jorn Knuttila
December 31, 2008 5:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@FrugalFreak:

That's not uncommon, nor all that unethical. Lots of companies encourage you to leave feedback in various forms/locations. But, I'd agree that it gets a bit creepy at times.

What's different in the Ritz case detailed here (and others like it) is that the vendor is encouraging you to leave a potentially dishonest review and offering a cash reward to do so.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
SDreamer
December 31, 2008 5:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Wow... \"quiet upset.\" If they can't use the correct grammar to persuade me, I wouldn't even think about it, lol.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
LandruBek
December 31, 2008 6:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@SDreamer: It's like Quiet Riot, but even more subdued.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
floraposte
December 31, 2008 5:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@SDreamer: That's not a grammar problem, though, that's an orthography problem.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
TrueBlue63
December 31, 2008 5:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Online reviews are subject to the same vagaries as any other. Is this different than hotels that give Frommers and Fodor's reviewers free stays (some to get in the book), and restaurants giving away free meals.

Get real.

2 good sources for travel are the Insiders Guides and Unofficial guides for travel. They have no relationships with any vendors, and when I have asked businesses if they are proud of their recommendation, they usually don't even know about it.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
chrisjames
December 31, 2008 5:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

A little money sent my way might compel me to write a better review than I normally would. It's all part of the experience anyway, like a rebate offer. Though, would I still get the money if I said the reason I gave a 10/10 is because they paid me to? Perhaps not.

Too bad she declined a $100 frame over a $50 mistake. I'd like to be in her shoes if that's the worst customer service she has ever experienced.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
LandruBek
December 31, 2008 6:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@chrisjames: Maybe I'm missing something, but I assume they offered her the $100 frame in exchange for a hundred dollars, not for free. Which would explain why she declined the offer.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
SUNY_SteveDave
December 31, 2008 5:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Which company CSR did she speak with? Amazon or Ritz. I was confused on that point.

Reply
1 replies
","
\"user-pic\"
aguacarbonica
December 31, 2008 5:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq: Oh come off it. It's an internet blog, and \"feedback bribery\" is a coined internet term. Stop taking the internet so seriously.

Also this is hilarious. It reminds me of how obsessive eBayers are about feedback.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
LandruBek
December 31, 2008 6:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@MichaelLC: Arguably, a crappy counteroffer is tantamount to refusing to fix the issue. And we don't have a transcript of their conversation: maybe they did explicitly refuse to fix the issue.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
wee0x1B
December 31, 2008 5:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You guys are all assuming they were offering her that $100 frame for $50. It doesn't say that in the original post. It says they offered her a $100 off-brand frame. But we don't know if they were offering it at 50 bucks or 100. It reads like it was at 100 dollars.

But, yeah, shame on Ritz.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
December 31, 2008 6:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This will work out poorly for consumers. Right now, feedback serves as an honest (not necessarily fair, but reasonably unbiased) measure of a company. But once companies just start bribing everybody, it acts as a subsidy for people who complain and reduces public information about the company. Free markets only work when there is good information available.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
liz.lemonade
December 31, 2008 6:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Not to nitpick, but ... oh, hell. This is nitpicking. I admit it.

When did it become common to put the dollar sign after the number, i.e. \"50$\"? That's akin to nails on a chalkboard for me.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
January 1, 2009 6:41 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@liz.lemonade: More common is \"$50 dollars\". I even see that usage in main-stream newspapers - using software instead of human proofreaders.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Beerad
December 31, 2008 7:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@liz.lemonade: I think it snuck in with other sloppy e-mail/texting grammar issues as the technology became widespread. My own personal theory is that the trend is for people to text/e-mail parallel to how they speak. Thus, \"50 dollars\" is \"50$\".

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Adam Holcomb
December 31, 2008 8:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@liz.lemonade: \\
Because $50 is \"Dollar 50\" $50 Dollars is \"Dollar 50 dollars\" but 50$ is \"Fifty dollars\"

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Helicomatic
December 31, 2008 6:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Amazon still makes it hard to use their feedback, since it is not possible to sort by rating. Sure, a reseller may have negative ratings but you will have to page through all ratings to pick them out. I emailed Amazon about this, and they said: \"I am sorry to say that currently we do not have the option to view the negative ratings alone for the sellers.\"
Beyond lame.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
lotussix
December 31, 2008 6:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The second Ritz CS agent misread their imperfect inventory system.

The OP's girlfriend probably has never had this happen before. Sorry if they can't replace your DISCONTINUED item with one of better quality. I wish tech specs were included so that a good comparison of a comparable product could be made. I am willing to guess that $100 off a different frame would have gotten her just as good of a deal or even a bigger size.

It is sorta bogus that they are asking to remove the feedback.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
lotussix
December 31, 2008 6:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@lotussix: I misread the offer. I read it as \"$100 off another brand name frame\" instead of what it really said. Still bogus that they asked to remove, I think that the compensatory offer was probably not satisfactory.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
RandomHookup
December 31, 2008 7:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I offered to fill Consumerist's Wikipedia page with only platitudes in exchange for a star, but they didn't bite.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
December 31, 2008 7:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Some Ebay sellers have used feedback bribery for years. Ever wonder why an Ebay seller won't leave feedback for a buyer unless the buyer leaves feedback first? That's because if the buyer leaves \"neutral\" or \"negative\" feedback, then the seller will leave negative feedback to punish the buyer for leaving a bad review. I know, it has happened to me. I won't leave feedback anymore on Ebay unless I am a seller or if I am the buyer and the seller leaves it first. And if I do leave feedback it will never be anything lower than \"positive\" even if the other party sucked.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Pink Puppet
January 2, 2009 6:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ZadaNobble: Ebay sellers can give negatives again?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Adam Holcomb
December 31, 2008 8:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I had placed a $60 order through Amazon buying from some candy company in Arizona. The candy was shipped ground with no ice packs or anything, and when it got to me it was pretty much all melted. I left a review saying that you'd think with their location they'd throw an ice pack in the box, since all my candy was melted. I got an email within an hour saying \"we will fully refund your order and ship a replacement for all melted items if you remove the negative review.\" Since I needed the stuff, I accepted.


I'm pretty sure everyone does that. Hell, that's the reason resellerratings and the BBB exist,isn't it? So our negative comments get the problems fixed (and we get free stuff,w00t)?

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Underpants Gnome
December 31, 2008 8:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

My wife bought an iPhone screen protector through Amazon storefront for $1.99, but then $8 shipping and handling got tacked on by the actual seller. She left a neutral (not even bad) review, but mentioned the high shipping charges. The next day, the company offered to refund the entire $10 just to take down the rating. Woo-Hoo! Free iphone screen protector!

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
December 31, 2008 9:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

i had this happen when an electronics seller on Amazon F'd up the delivery of my order. when i posted negative feedback the guy immediately phoned & emailed offering me a $40 credit if i would remove the comment. i did, but then he NEVER came thru with the $40.

that is until i nagged him to DEATH for a month.

next time i'll just leave the comment where it is and see if the inducement increases.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
tbax929
December 31, 2008 10:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

My car dealership tried to pull this crap with me. They offered me a free oil change if I gave them a perfect rating when GM called me to evaluate them. Since they charged me $90 for a fuse without my prior consent, that wasn't going to happen. Not only did I slam them, but I continue to tell everyone I know not to do business with them.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
InThrees
December 31, 2008 10:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Every single customer review / story I have read about Ritz camera (and this is no small amount of stories) has involved a bait and switch angle.

In fact, as soon as I saw \"Ritz Camera\" and \"Photo frame\" I expected the story to progress to \"and the (brand name) frame was out of stock but they offered me a no name frame at a higher price.\" Color me unsurprised when that's exactly how it played out.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
ablestmage
December 31, 2008 11:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Isn't pretty much everything you get paid for bribery? Don't employers pay an employee to do work that they may not have normally done else they had been paid? How is that not therefore bribery also?

Off topic: It appears most of this reponse thread has squiptipadoogleboinkaflopped. A dictionary is not \"the only ways a word may be used\" but instead a newspaper of how words have been used. Just as a newspaper reports stories that have occurred rather than command how stories may occur, a dictionary is merely a record of common past usages -- not fodder for, \"I looked it up and it can't be used that way,\" rationale.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
DrRonster
January 1, 2009 2:14 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I order inkjet cartridges and laser toner to be used in the future. How the hell am I to post any review until after Ive attempted to use them. And they want immediate posting. UPS was fast. Post office was good. WTF

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
January 1, 2009 1:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Reader Dan and/or Melissa - please post the letter from Ritz with your review on Amazon. This will provide a number of consumer benefits including: additional details against Ritz, the value (in real $) of purchase feedback, and might also encourage more honest feedback in the hope of receiving money. It's got to be fairly easy to post additional comments after getting the gift card (which of course you'd auction off on ebay).

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
meadandale
January 1, 2009 5:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Every one of the companies that I left negative or lukewarm feedback for last year on Amazon contacted me and asked me to remove the feedback for some kind of quid pro quo. In most cases, it was refunding the excessive shipping fees (e.g. $7 for a $10 item that weighed a few ounces).

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
January 2, 2009 2:41 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

eBay sellers do the same thing, only with free shipping and everything. That site has emphasized \"voluntary\" feedback comments so much that you can't get seen in searches if your feedback blows. That in itself blows. The mandatory whoring for feedback thing has driven many smaller sellers (including myself) away from the site.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
January 2, 2009 2:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I do not see anything wrong with rewarding good comments with $5 bucks! If your negative opinion can be bought with $5.00, then your opinion isn't needed anyway! As a company that sells products, there are 2 sides to every story, that this website often fails to notice. There are mean spirited consumers that just like to leave negative feedback for no good reason at all! With small incentives, companies can get more people who like the products, but don't often leave feedback to do so. The consumer is not always right, just like a business is not always right. There are troublemakers and malcontents everywhere.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
January 2, 2009 5:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

When a glowing consumer review refers to the product as \"product,\" or when the review ends with \"buy this,\" I assume it was posted by a shill.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
cnsmrst123456
January 12, 2009 2:20 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Couldn't the customer could remove the negative feedback, and then leave new feedback, saying that they were now happy, because Ritz had payed them off?

Reply
");