![\"user-pic\"](\"/css/images/default.gif\")
\"Guests interested in returning the product must present a receipt per the Target return policy.\"
Wouldn't the receipt be invalid as it would be in, um, BLUE?
1 replies
\"Guests interested in returning the product must present a receipt per the Target return policy.\"
Wouldn't the receipt be invalid as it would be in, um, BLUE?
Another non-answer answer from a large, un-accountable organization. I think a company or the government telling the truth in plain English now and then would be sooo refreshing.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-150787-100x100.png\")
@halcyondays: It was a non-concern in the first place. It's like returning drums for being too loud, or returning strained peas because your munchkin didn't like them. The article stressed safety issues, and the response bullseyed (har) directly on issues of safety -- of which there is none. The original article guy, David, said, \"This can't be good for my baby's eyes.\" That's a bit like saying, \"Cheerios aren't good for my toddler when he crams them all up his nose.\"
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-86063-100x100.png\")
I bet a little small claims action (not just for the toy per se, but the damaged rug in the original post) would get their attention. The dye is most likely harmless to children or they would \"take the matter seriously\" but who wants a stained rug?
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-306460-100x100.png\")
I remember having these when I was a kid - which I probably inherited from my older cousins, making the toy 30+ years old. Mine didn't bleed blue. I guess they don't make 'em like they used to.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-545239-100x100.png\")
@friendlynerd: I had one too. I think everyone had one of these (and that little popcorn roller thing on wheels). It's sad that this kid's stack turns him blue.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-47390-100x100.png\")
@squinko - is pretending there's a star: I remember the joyful halcyon days of yore chasing my little brother with that bubble popper thing before trying to brain him with it.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-24730-100x100.png\")
@friendlynerd: Right. Back in my day they didn't use this flimsy plastic! They were made of cold-hard steel, and coated with the best lead-based paint.
Sure the Rock-a-Stack weighed 45 lbs, but we were grateful for it. Made us strong. No 95th percentile, overweight chubby baby butts for us. No sir.
Now you kids, get off my lawn!
(Just messin' with you. I agree the quality has depreciated in the 25+ years it's been since I played with them).
I agree with Target here because A)They're not making it, and aren't selling a product that has been recalled and B)Everyone wants their toddler to look like a smurf!
[I'm being sarcastic]
Still...don't be so quick to knock Target, they actually DO some good in the community (even though it's a small percent they donate and for their benefit).
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-808630-100x100.png\")
@catastrophegirl: There will be. I need to make a paper mache helmet/hat/mask/thing. Then I might cheat and have her wear the skeleton sweater I made her last year, and hope she doesn't notice the difference in bone structure. Don't know what to do about legs yet...possibly paper bones stuck on.
OTHER kids want to be dinosaurs. MY kid wants to be a skeleton that a paleontologist can dig up. Thank you, TMBG.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1159581-100x100.png\")
*sigh* See what happens when you take the lead out of the toys? The color bleeds out. Actually, I'm a little serious about that. My guess is that removing the lead is the reason for this. Lead additives greatly improve paints and dyes, which is why many paints and dyes suck these days.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-175610-100x100.png\")
Maybe Target needs to be targeted...
I dunno'...I have this for my kid and no blue dye.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-123697-100x100.png\")
@davebg5: We have one too (from Target), no bleeding blue dye here either. I even scrubbed it with a wet washcloth just to see. I'd definitely return it to Target if a toy I bought started to bleed ANY color on my baby!
Target has long had its head up its rear end with returns so this lack of a reasonable reply is just their standard boiler plate. I know from having tried to get past the customer non-service people to someone in the executive office that you are blocked from doing it. Calls to their Mn. HQ are NEVER put through to the executive offices they are routed ONLY to customer non-service which is a total waste of time if you are complaining about the customer non-service department. Take a look at my blog at: www.targetfiling.blogspot.com
this is the blog that Tarbutt couldn't shut down, it was in Federal Court for 23 months before the judge tossed it out. If you want to look at the legal case go to:
[www.citmedialaw.org]
@watsuk: I checked out the blog. The first post was a /disgusting/ criminal story about a guy who happened to commit his crime inside a Target. From what I can tell that is the only relation he had to Target. I didn't bother looking for a second story. If the focus was anything like the first it will simply be unrelated to Target and disturbing.
You know how sometimes you visit a webpage and read/see/hear something that you wish you never read/saw/hear before? Targetfiling.blogspot.com is not too far from one of those sites.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-6798-100x100.png\")
Off topic, but: could they please stop saying \"reach out to\" when \"contact\" would do just as well?
@magic8ball:
I was admonished years ago by an editor who said that \"contact\" is a noun but never a verb. So I've been afraid of \"verbing it\" ever since.
@ElizabethD: How many years ago? Was this editor educated pre-1927?
contact etymology at Online Etymology Dictionary:
...The verb is 1834, \"put in contact;\" meaning \"get in touch with\" is 1927, Amer.Eng.
\"Reach out to\" is annoying, I agree, but it's not the worst phrasing atrocity used in the media. That crown, in my opinion, goes to \"Speaking out,\" as in, The victim's family is speaking out tonight about their ordeal. Arrrgh. WTF? No, the family was pestered by reporters until they consented to give a statement to get them off the damn lawn. Or, the family was craving its fifteen minutes and called the news to offer an \"exclusive.\" I think speak out was originally intended to imply an overcoming of either some reluctance or repression of said speaker. In its common (over)usage today, it has no meaning. And it makes my jaw clench.
This toy hasn't changed since I had one 30 years ago! I don't remember it bleeding though.
I am not surprised by this at all. Last year I purchased a hair dryer with a diffuser attachment. The diffuser did not fit on the hair dryer so the next day I returned to Target to exchange it. I wanted to make sure the new hair dryer did not have the same issue, so at the Customer Service counter I took it out of the box and it had the same problem: the diffuser did not fit onto the hair dryer. Myself and the customer service rep took every box off the shelf and attempted at attaching the diffusers to the hair dryer and every single one of them would not fit. She offered me a refund and promised they would be contacting the manufacturer regarding the defect and in the meantime remove the products from their shelves.
To this day they are still selling this defective product. It's become a small obsession of mine to go into Target for the sole purpose of walking down the hair dryer aisle and removing the hair dryer and diffuser from the box and attempting to attach it. Fails every time.
Target is a huge corporation managed by individuals with little to no investment in their jobs. It would clearly take too much effort to file any sort of grievance with the manufacturer and ship back defective hair dryers.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1237948-100x100.png\")
They were made of solid lead when we were kids sucking on them. A little blue paint is nothing.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-15811-100x100.png\")
We still these at my store (Fred Meyer) and I've never seen one of these returned, let alone returned for bleeding blue. I wonder if there was a change in the dye formulation or something.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-66824-100x100.png\")
I hate the way companies now disingenuously call customers \"guests.\" I'm not your guest -- if I was your guest, you should just give me the things for free.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-752907-100x100.png\")
I just want to say that Target is the one retailer that I can think of off the top of my head that I have never had an issue with, online or in the store. I've never had any trouble returning damaged or defective items or even items I just didn't need, but then I always keep the receipt.
@Tom_Servo: That's not the point of the article. They shouldn't be selling these defective products in the first place, whether or not they have a great return policy is irrelevant.
It shows poor customer service for Target to be siding with the manufacturer and not looking out for the customer's best interest.
That photo looks oddly phallic.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-546082-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-131723-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1020806-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-389492-100x100.png\")
This is incredibly irresponsible. I'm blown away that Target had a chance to directly do something about this and completely failed.
There must be a strong business relationship between Target and Mattel that we don't know about - I can't understand why a vendor would allow a product that has such a... weird and potentially dangerous defect to stay on the shelves.
@bornonbord: I am not siding with Target on this one, but the key word there is POTENTIAL dangerous defect.
The key issue is that the blue bye comes off when exposed to moisture. if the blue dye were toxic, the dangerous issue would be there whether the dye came off the product or not. If the dye is non toxic, there is no safety concern, just more of an annoyance concern because the baby places the toy in its mouth and leaves blue hand and baby slobber stains on the carpet.
As a matter of product quality and brand reputation, the product should be recalled, but NOT necessarily as a matter of product safety.
@bornonbord: Just one way to cut healthcare costs.
@bornonbord: Oh... wait a minute...
Perhaps they are trying to help the government turn our babies into super humans?
[www.wired.com]
bornonbord: That is pretty lame of Target, coming from someone who works there. Even putting a hold on their item in the backroom due to potential issues could have been acceptable.