4 ms·
Seems very fair to me. I paid $5000 for a good TV for 5 years. If after 2.5 years it breaks and they refund me $2500, which I am then forced to use to buy a sh
by Adverblessly 9y ago
Seems very fair to me.
I paid $5000 for a good TV for 5 years. If after 2.5 years it breaks and they refund me $2500, which I am then forced to use to buy a shitty $2500 TV that will only last me 2.5 years, then effectively I paid $5000 for 2.5 years of good TV followed by 2.5 years of shitty TV, which is unfair to me.
If instead I take the $2500 and add my own $2500 to buy a new good TV for 5 years, then they instead switched the deal on me to 7.5K for 7.5 years, which is not what I originally signed up for, so it becomes an unfair bait and switch.
- chrischen 9y agoSo it becomes illegal to sell you a product as-is? Isn't that the point of a capitalist market? The best as-is product provider wins.
- _Tev 9y agoWell "capitalist market" can still be "unfair", due to information assymetry. Or can you perfectly decide which product is best "as-is"? Not saying regulation is best answer here, just that the issue is more complex and "free market" likely isn't 100% solution.