08-22-2017 07:29 AM
225 12345 ...
tools
  1. Adam Frix's Avatar
    That's one way. There are also other vendors you can actually trust, like Amazon. Or you can walk into a Best Buy, and talk face to face and get the news right away.

    This idea of blindly sending a device to someone who SAYS EXPLICITLY that "we may give you $200, we may give you $25, we'll let you know, either way your device will be gone" just blows my mind. Who on either side of the fence thought this was a good idea?

    Samsung did it because they knew they could get away with it. Only greedy people can be conned.
    07-03-2017 05:50 PM
  2. TylerLV76's Avatar
    So let me get this straight:

    Samsung (a company with which I will not do business, because they burned me on a Galaxy S3 bad software update and bricked the phone and took zero responsibility for it) said, "Send us a phone. WE COULD GIVE YOU $200 (or we could give you $25, we'll let you know our decision after you send it). Regardless, your phone now belongs to us no matter what happens."

    And people DID this???

    Did anyone ever see Vegas Vacation, the cheapo casino scene?



    This whole thing is the game, "Pick a number between 1 and 10". Honestly, why is anyone expressing outrage over this--besides the fact that you have (a) a keyboard, and (b) time on your hands.

    This is how the world works, people. You sent away a perfectly good phone and expected between $200 and $400 to come back to you IF Uncle Sammy decided to?

    If all you lost was a dollar, consider yourself lucky. Those of you who sent away a phone you could have sold on Swappa for more than $25, you need to re-think how the world works. Face it: Uncle Sammy told you that if you did something that benefited Uncle Sammy right now, guaranteed, you MIGHT see something in return for yourself. Or you might not.

    They laid it out. "YOU MIGHT NOT." What did you think was going to happen here??? Be honest with yourselves.

    Please, let this be a lesson learned as you move forward in your lives.
    Everything you said was incorrect, literally everything. In the terms they never stated you "may" only get $25. What they actually stated, had you read anything, was you would get a minimum of $200 for any working phone in good condition. Any working phone in good condition for $200.

    People are being denied for BRAND NEW phones.

    But hey you feel better telling people how it is right?
    AustinTech, raino and Jona005 like this.
    07-03-2017 06:37 PM
  3. Adam Frix's Avatar
    Everything you said was incorrect, literally everything. In the terms they never stated you "may" only get $25. What they actually stated, had you read anything, was you would get a minimum of $200 for any working phone in good condition. Any working phone, for $200.

    But hey you feel better telling people how it is right?
    And they said that "if the phone doesn't meet the requirements, we'll give you $25 for it".

    So yes, they did say "we'll give you either $200 or $25". They also said, "We'll let you know"--which is the equivalent of the "pick a number" game, or "the check is in the mail". They left it OPEN for them to give you only the $25. Not your device back, not $200, and no recourse for you to dispute the outcome.

    Why don't you go out and acquire a car under an open ended lease agreement. Look that up, and tell us your opinion on open ended agreements where one party can say or do what he wants.

    This is Samsung. Anyone who is surprised by this, simply hasn't had the Samsung treatment YET.

    If they had said, "we'll send you either $200 or your device back," that would have been a different matter. But to send your device to a black hole under Uncle Sammy's STATED conditions? That's the definition of insanity.
    07-03-2017 06:47 PM
  4. TylerLV76's Avatar
    And they said that "if the phone doesn't meet the requirements, we'll give you $25 for it".

    So yes, they did say "we'll give you either $200 or $25". They also said, "We'll let you know"--which is the equivalent of the "pick a number" game, or "the check is in the mail". They left it OPEN for them to give you only the $25. Not your device back, not $200, and no recourse for you to dispute the outcome.

    Why don't you go out and acquire a car under an open ended lease agreement. Look that up, and tell us your opinion on open ended agreements where one party can say or do what he wants.

    This is Samsung. Anyone who is surprised by this, simply hasn't had the Samsung treatment YET.

    If they had said, "we'll send you either $200 or your device back," that would have been a different matter. But to send your device to a black hole under Uncle Sammy's STATED conditions? That's the definition of insanity.
    Read it again...

    "Only phones in "good condition" are eligible for the discount, and anything else will only take $25 off your S8 purchase. Good condition means the phone has to turn on and hold a charge, have a functioning display, and not have any damage beyond "normal wear and tear" (like breaks or cracks). Your phone also cannot be on a blacklist of any kind, and can't have any anti-theft protection enabled."

    Show me where they say they decide if it's going to be $25. Good condition is laid out very clearly. People meeting that requirement got denied.

    Nowhere did they state that you stood a chance of getting $25 for a "good condition" phone, especially a brand new phone from walmart.
    AustinTech and Jona005 like this.
    07-03-2017 06:50 PM
  5. Adam Frix's Avatar
    "Only phones in what we decide are in "good condition" count". That's how it turned out, and frankly anyone who's been around more than a few years would have expected it to come out that way.

    So:

    * Samsung gets to decide "good condition" or not

    * once you send it off, Samsung's decision is final--you have no right to appeal

    * once you send it off, Samsung keeps your device--there's no going back and changing your mind after hearing their decision

    It sure looks like the reality is, they decide if you're going to get $25 or $200. No real surprise here.

    Look, accept the fact that the world is broken. Maybe you expected perfection out of this program; I'd say your expectations are out of whack. Send the device in with the very real risk that they could decide it DOESN'T conform to the program, and receive only $25 in the end? That's insane.

    The only way it's not insane is if the world worked perfectly. Well, it doesn't. Never has.

    Driving to Best Buy to take advantage of a trade-in program? A risk--but a low risk one. You can walk away, with your device, and at most you've risked an hour of your time. Putting your device into what you know to be a black hole with zero chance of getting it back, under the assumption that Big Corp on the other end somewhere--who knows where--actually works and will do the right thing and give you the $200 and not just the $25? HUGE risk.

    Life is about (a) understanding risk, and (b) mitigating risk. Doing things Uncle Sammy's way was one major risk, and it should be no surprise to anyone that things came out the way they did.
    07-03-2017 07:08 PM
  6. TylerLV76's Avatar
    "Only phones in what we decide are in "good condition" count".
    Again, not what they said. That's what you said, but that's not what they clearly laid out in the terms is it?

    "Only phones in "good condition" are eligible for the discount, and anything else will only take $25 off your S8 purchase. Good condition means the phone has to turn on and hold a charge, have a functioning display, and not have any damage beyond "normal wear and tear" (like breaks or cracks). Your phone also cannot be on a blacklist of any kind, and can't have any anti-theft protection enabled."
    AustinTech likes this.
    07-03-2017 07:10 PM
  7. Adam Frix's Avatar
    It starts with understanding risk.

    From the terms they provided, the risk that you never see your device again AND never see the $200 is plainly very real--because the world is NOT a perfect place, and because Samsung is Big Corp.

    So Samsung said some things. Big deal. Understand that the world is not a perfect place, and that Samsung is Big Corp, and you understand the risk of sending your device away without a chance of ever getting it back under any circumstances.

    And that's the kicker, isn't it--you have to accept, blindly, that the world will work perfectly. The ONLY way you get that $200 is a perfectly working world. If anything goes wrong, you can't back out. You don't get your device back. You throw everything into that black hole, and know that the only way you come out ahead is if Big Corp works perfectly.

    My, my.

    That it doesn't work perfectly, is no surprise to me. I wouldn't have taken up Samsung on this piece of garbage "offer" if you put a gun to my head. I understand the risk.
    07-03-2017 07:31 PM
  8. TylerLV76's Avatar
    It starts with understanding risk.

    From the terms they provided, the risk that you never see your device again AND never see the $200 is plainly very real--because the world is NOT a perfect place, and because Samsung is Big Corp.

    So Samsung said some things. Big deal. Understand that the world is not a perfect place, and that Samsung is Big Corp, and you understand the risk of sending your device away without a chance of ever getting it back under any circumstances.

    And that's the kicker, isn't it--you have to accept, blindly, that the world will work perfectly. The ONLY way you get that $200 is a perfectly working world. If anything goes wrong, you can't back out. You don't get your device back. You throw everything into that black hole, and know that the only way you come out ahead is if Big Corp works perfectly.

    My, my.

    That it doesn't work perfectly, is no surprise to me. I wouldn't have taken up Samsung on this piece of garbage "offer" if you put a gun to my head. I understand the risk.
    So like I said, your original post was completely incorrect.

    You came to a forum for a phone you don't have, from a company you won't buy from, to complain about people complaining. Seems pretty silly.

    You could have said "I'm not surprised Samsung changed the rules", but instead you told everyone how ridiculous they were for not reading the rules when in fact they did read them, and followed them.
    AustinTech and Jona005 like this.
    07-03-2017 07:37 PM
  9. Doug Moffat's Avatar
    Time to remind ourselves that Samsung is a predatory octopus w/some superior products. Apple is no better.
    07-03-2017 07:46 PM
  10. TylerLV76's Avatar
    Time to remind ourselves that Samsung is a predatory octopus w/some superior products. Apple is no better.
    Apple's customer service is pretty darn good though. Samsung would sooner tell you to drop dead than honor their agreements. Last year with the S7 Active they told all of us with faulty phones to **** off until the stories hit national media headlines. That's the only reason they helped anyone and even then it was like pulling teeth.
    07-03-2017 07:51 PM
  11. Adam Frix's Avatar
    The rules were clear: you will send us your device, and you will never see it again. Further, you will have no way to appeal our decision, or to reverse the process you've started.

    I focused on that, because it's a VERY real risk. It's a risk because the world isn't perfect. I would go so far as to say it's rarely perfect it the context of Big Corp like Samsung.

    You focused on things working perfectly, because you wanted to believe you would get $200.

    And look what happened.

    You want there to be rules of human decency. So do I, but I don't expect Big Corp like Samsung to operate by any rules of human decency. I operate based on that expectation.

    From the beginning, as Samsung outlined things, there was a VERY REAL risk of you losing your device and your opportunity to get $200 for it. Samsung did, in fact, make that clear.

    And look what happened.
    07-03-2017 08:05 PM
  12. TylerLV76's Avatar
    The rules were clear: you will send us your device, and you will never see it again. Further, you will have no way to appeal our decision, or to reverse the process you've started.

    I focused on that, because it's a VERY real risk. It's a risk because the world isn't perfect. I would go so far as to say it's rarely perfect it the context of Big Corp like Samsung.

    You focused on things working perfectly, because you wanted to believe you would get $200.

    And look what happened.

    You want there to be rules of human decency. So do I, but I don't expect Big Corp like Samsung to operate by any rules of human decency. I operate based on that expectation.

    From the beginning, as Samsung outlined things, there was a VERY REAL risk of you losing your device and your opportunity to get $200 for it. Samsung did, in fact, make that clear.

    And look what happened.
    I didn't focus on anything. I never took the deal because I don't trust Samsung as I stated earlier in the thread.

    The fact still remains, you chose to complain about people complaining before you had the facts straight and based your complaint on your own interpretation of the rules. Rules that were clearly laid out and the exact ones people followed.

    I get it, you don't want to apologize for jumping to conclusions. No need to keep trying to shift the subject to something that would have made sense from the beginning.

    The only way they should have denied the money is if someone sent in a phone that did not meet their "good conditions" guidelines. Unfortunately this is Samsung and they change those guidelines after the fact.

    Don't blame the users for following those guidelines, blame Samsung.
    07-03-2017 08:11 PM
  13. Almeuit's Avatar
    That's one way. There are also other vendors you can actually trust, like Amazon. Or you can walk into a Best Buy, and talk face to face and get the news right away.

    This idea of blindly sending a device to someone who SAYS EXPLICITLY that "we may give you $200, we may give you $25, we'll let you know, either way your device will be gone" just blows my mind. Who on either side of the fence thought this was a good idea?

    Samsung did it because they knew they could get away with it. Only greedy people can be conned.
    Bestbuy if your carrier sells there.. sure .
    07-03-2017 08:12 PM
  14. Adam Frix's Avatar
    I get it, you don't want to apologize for jumping to conclusions.

    Hardly. I simply read the agreement and determined risk, risk that any reasonable person should have found.

    The only way they should have denied the money is if someone sent in a phone that did not meet their "good conditions" guidelines. Unfortunately this is Samsung and they change those guidelines after the fact.
    Again, more risk. People expected the world to work, and apparently were surprised when it didn't.


    Don't blame the users for following those guidelines, blame Samsung.
    I do blame the users for expecting things to work perfectly in the world of Big Corp, especially Samsung.

    Lie with dogs, wake with fleas.

    BTW, it's not a flat $200. It's whatever Uncle Sammy told you it would be when you hit the web site.

    terms-and-conditions

    My favorite part about the T&C is this:

    "Samsung will determine, in its sole judgment, whether your Trade-In Device is in good condition."

    At this point they have your device, AND all the power.

    It's all about (a) understanding risk and (b) mitigating risk.

    Yes, I will to some degree hold responsible the people who failed to understand and mitigate their risk in this venture.

    You may continue to say that it's a perfectly good idea to send your device into a black hole, knowing you'll never get it back, and hope for the best. That's your business.

    Hope is not a strategy.
    07-03-2017 08:25 PM
  15. TylerLV76's Avatar
    Hardly. I simply read the agreement and determined risk, risk that any reasonable person should have found.



    Again, more risk. People expected the world to work, and apparently were surprised when it didn't.




    I do blame the users for expecting things to work perfectly in the world of Big Corp, especially Samsung.

    Lie with dogs, wake with fleas.

    BTW, it's not a flat $200. It's whatever Uncle Sammy told you it would be when you hit the web site.

    terms-and-conditions

    My favorite part about the T&C is this:

    "Samsung will determine, in its sole judgment, whether your Trade-In Device is in good condition."

    At this point they have your device, AND all the power.

    It's all about (a) understanding risk and (b) mitigating risk.

    Yes, I will to some degree hold responsible the people who failed to understand and mitigate their risk in this venture.

    You may continue to say that it's a perfectly good idea to send your device into a black hole, knowing you'll never get it back, and hope for the best. That's your business.

    Hope is not a strategy.
    Oh so you're ok with companies not following their own contracts but then like to complain about the people who get screwed? That makes tons of sense. Why should we hold companies accountable right? Theyre big so they should definitely get away with screwing people right.


    Again "good condition" was clearly laid out in the terms. Follow them and you get $200, don't and you get $25. Pretty clear.
    You can't seriously believe what your saying.
    07-03-2017 08:27 PM
  16. AustinTech's Avatar
    It takes a special kind of person to tell people who are getting ripped off, for no fault of their own, that they are basically idiots. Samsung isn't honoring their end of the deal they offered. Instead they are ripping people off.

    Frustration and anger are normal in this situation.
    Jona005 likes this.
    07-03-2017 08:28 PM
  17. raino's Avatar
    Er, what? That's 100% untrue. Why would you even say that?
    The Samsung part may (or may not) be true, but you may want to read this

    Has AC posted about this? What about the OP5 cheating in benchmarks; I'm sure a device review must have been posted, was this excellent finding by the XDA folks mentioned?
    07-03-2017 08:28 PM
  18. TylerLV76's Avatar
    It takes a special kind of person to tell people who are getting ripped off, for no fault of their own, that they are basically idiots. Samsung isn't honoring their end of the deal they offered. Instead they are ripping people off.

    Frustration and anger are normal in this situation.
    Apparently so is complaining about people complaining on a forum they dont have a single interest in. Some people just like to be heard even if they don't make any sense.
    AustinTech likes this.
    07-03-2017 08:29 PM
  19. ScottsoNJ's Avatar
    The rules were clear: you will send us your device, and you will never see it again. Further, you will have no way to appeal our decision, or to reverse the process you've started.

    I focused on that, because it's a VERY real risk. It's a risk because the world isn't perfect. I would go so far as to say it's rarely perfect it the context of Big Corp like Samsung.

    You focused on things working perfectly, because you wanted to believe you would get $200.

    And look what happened.

    You want there to be rules of human decency. So do I, but I don't expect Big Corp like Samsung to operate by any rules of human decency. I operate based on that expectation.

    From the beginning, as Samsung outlined things, there was a VERY REAL risk of you losing your device and your opportunity to get $200 for it. Samsung did, in fact, make that clear.

    And look what happened.
    So after the Note 7 fiasco you think Samsung knew they were going to screw people intentionally? For a gigantic company like Samsung that is trying to rebuild credibility they are really just cutting off their nose to spite their face. So they screwed 1000's of people out of the rebate. So now not only do they have to deal with all the backlash but also all the bad press. Plus all the people who had ordered and canceled (like me) because of this. Not a good way to improve public relations and rebuild trust.
    07-03-2017 08:37 PM
  20. Adam Frix's Avatar
    Oh so you're ok with companies not following their own contracts but then like to complain about the people who get screwed?
    Where did you get THAT idea?

    Acknowledging that the world isn't perfect and that Big Corp is likely to screw you, does NOT--does NOT--equal being OK with it.

    Again "good condition" was clearly laid out in the terms.
    Yes--and so was "we are the sole judge of any and all of this".

    And so was "you will never see your device again".

    You never had the opportunity to try this out and back out if you found out it wasn't working. THAT information was available to you from the beginning.

    Follow them and you get $200, don't and you get $25. Pretty clear.
    You can't seriously believe what your saying.
    That Samsung reserved the right to declare a device not to be worth the full amount (btw, not $200--each device was valued independently when the user entered it into the web form initially)? And that you the end user had NO WAY to challenge that OR to get your device back if you disagreed?

    Yes. I believe every bit of that--because it's factual. Don't you believe the facts laid out in front of you by Samsung's terms and conditions?
    07-03-2017 09:21 PM
  21. TylerLV76's Avatar
    Where did you get THAT idea?

    Acknowledging that the world isn't perfect and that Big Corp is likely to screw you, does NOT--does NOT--equal being OK with it.



    Yes--and so was "we are the sole judge of any and all of this".

    And so was "you will never see your device again".

    You never had the opportunity to try this out and back out if you found out it wasn't working. THAT information was available to you from the beginning.



    That Samsung reserved the right to declare a device not to be worth the full amount (btw, not $200--each device was valued independently when the user entered it into the web form initially)? And that you the end user had NO WAY to challenge that OR to get your device back if you disagreed?

    Yes. I believe every bit of that--because it's factual. Don't you believe the facts laid out in front of you by Samsung's terms and conditions?
    I quoted their terms and conditions, I didn't alter them to fit my narrative, hint hint. You keep quoting things that only you have said then trying to pass them off as Samsung's words. Doesn't work that way.

    You can't seem to realize where the blame lies and instead want to fault the victim as opposed to faulting the cause of the problem.

    There's zero reasoning with that logic. You feel good about your decision to come to a forum you have zero interest in to complain about people complaining. As I said earlier, seems pretty silly.
    07-03-2017 09:26 PM
  22. ThrottleJohnny's Avatar
    Ewww.. would never get caught up in something like this, although I'm sorry people have.

    I wouldn't trust this if it were Apple, let alone Samsung.
    Aquila likes this.
    07-03-2017 09:27 PM
  23. Adam Frix's Avatar
    It takes a special kind of person to tell people who are getting ripped off, for no fault of their own, that they are basically idiots. Samsung isn't honoring their end of the deal they offered. Instead they are ripping people off.
    The problem is, Uncle Sammy tried on the one hand to outline for the user what "good condition" meant--but then, with the other hand, took that away by saying "and we will be the sole judge of whether the device is in good condition, and you the user will have no recourse to dispute us, and once we have your device you can't get it back, therefore Samsung alone determines what you get".

    They all but used those words in their T&C.

    To hand your device to them given the mechanism they provided, is all but license for Samsung to steal from you. Can't dispute Samsung's judgment on "good condition"? Can't get the device back and undo the deal? Insanity. But people traded off their sanity for the hope of $200.
    07-03-2017 09:27 PM
  24. TylerLV76's Avatar
    The problem is, Uncle Sammy tried on the one hand to outline for the user what "good condition" meant--but then, with the other hand, took that away by saying "and we will be the sole judge of whether the device is in good condition, and you the user will have no recourse to dispute us, and once we have your device you can't get it back, therefore Samsung alone determines what you get".

    They all but used those words in their T&C.

    To hand your device to them given the mechanism they provided, is all but license for Samsung to steal from you. Can't dispute Samsung's judgment on "good condition"? Can't get the device back and undo the deal? Insanity. But people traded off their sanity for the hope of $200.
    Really don't understand how quotes work. You only quote what people actually say, not what your interpretation of those words is.

    When they said they will determine what good condition is, they stated they will put the phones through extensive testing. If you followed the guidelines and they found after those tests they were indeed followed you would get $200.

    How do you explain a brand new phone, never used, not following those guidelines? Please enlighten us.
    AustinTech likes this.
    07-03-2017 09:30 PM
  25. ScottsoNJ's Avatar
    The problem is, Uncle Sammy tried on the one hand to outline for the user what "good condition" meant--but then, with the other hand, took that away by saying "and we will be the sole judge of whether the device is in good condition, and you the user will have no recourse to dispute us, and once we have your device you can't get it back, therefore Samsung alone determines what you get".

    They all but used those words in their T&C.

    To hand your device to them given the mechanism they provided, is all but license for Samsung to steal from you. Can't dispute Samsung's judgment on "good condition"? Can't get the device back and undo the deal? Insanity. But people traded off their sanity for the hope of $200.
    You can word it anyway you would like. But the bottom line is a company as big as Samsung should not be doing this. Just 2 weeks ago they were having buy 1 get 1 free so for them to turn around and screw people out of rebates of $200 is pretty short sighted on their part.
    AustinTech and Jona005 like this.
    07-03-2017 09:34 PM
225 12345 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Why is my music stuttering on my Galaxy S8
    By awilisch in forum Samsung Galaxy S8 & S8+
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-18-2017, 10:03 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-02-2017, 05:52 PM
  3. How to change the watch band
    By AC Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-02-2017, 05:37 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-02-2017, 02:51 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD