Samsung isn't honoring its Galaxy S8 $200 trade-in discounts. Major PR blow to come.

Adam Frix

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2015
1,095
0
0
Visit site
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.
 

TylerLV76

Well-known member
Jun 30, 2016
2,062
0
0
Visit site
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.
 

Almeuit

Moderator Team Leader
Moderator
Apr 17, 2012
32,278
23
0
Visit site
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 :).
 

Adam Frix

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2015
1,095
0
0
Visit site
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.
 

TylerLV76

Well-known member
Jun 30, 2016
2,062
0
0
Visit site
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.
 

AustinTech

Well-known member
Feb 24, 2011
418
0
0
Visit site
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.
 

raino

Q&A Team
Nov 18, 2012
649
0
0
Visit site
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?
 

TylerLV76

Well-known member
Jun 30, 2016
2,062
0
0
Visit site
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.
 

ScottsoNJ

Well-known member
Jan 29, 2012
786
0
16
Visit site
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.
 

Adam Frix

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2015
1,095
0
0
Visit site
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?
 

TylerLV76

Well-known member
Jun 30, 2016
2,062
0
0
Visit site
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.
 

ThrottleJohnny

Trusted Member
Apr 1, 2014
2,761
0
0
Visit site
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.
 

Adam Frix

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2015
1,095
0
0
Visit site
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.
 

TylerLV76

Well-known member
Jun 30, 2016
2,062
0
0
Visit site
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.
 

ScottsoNJ

Well-known member
Jan 29, 2012
786
0
16
Visit site
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.
 

Adam Frix

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2015
1,095
0
0
Visit site
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.

No. I read Samsung's T&C. They put the end user in a bad position.

That's what Big Corp. does. They put themselves in a significantly better position than the end user. Yet for some reason, end users jump in bed with Big Corp and feed the monster.

They weren't my words; they were Samsung's words. "We are the sole judge of the device's condition. No mechanism exists for you to dispute our judgment. You cannot get your device back." Ergo, only one conclusion exists: you cannot back out after hearing what Uncle Sammy has to say.
 

TylerLV76

Well-known member
Jun 30, 2016
2,062
0
0
Visit site
No. I read Samsung's T&C. They put the end user in a bad position.

That's what Big Corp. does. They put themselves in a significantly better position than the end user. Yet for some reason, end users jump in bed with Big Corp and feed the monster.

They weren't my words; they were Samsung's words. "We are the sole judge of the device's condition. No mechanism exists for you to dispute our judgment. You cannot get your device back." Ergo, only one conclusion exists: you cannot back out after hearing what Uncle Sammy has to say.

Yes, they judge the condition, based on their guidelines and verification the phone meets those guidelines. Why is this not registering? A brand new phone, never used, would clearly meet those conditions correct?

So when they deny said phone people should just accept it? Is that what you're suggesting?
 

Adam Frix

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2015
1,095
0
0
Visit site
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.

At least with Apple, you'd only be out a trip to the Apple Store and you'd be able to walk away from the bad deal and remain whole.

With Samsung, there's no backing out. They literally say that their decision is final and that you have no recourse. It's literally like the "pick a number between 1 and 10" fake casino game.
 

Ian B

Well-known member
Sep 17, 2010
345
4
0
Visit site
For this fiasco from Samsung, I just picked up a brand new S8+ unlocked for $650 from swappa.com

Ian B
 

Adam Frix

Well-known member
Nov 29, 2015
1,095
0
0
Visit site
How do you explain a brand new phone, never used, not following those guidelines? Please enlighten us.

I get what you're saying. I really do. But you have to ask Samsung your question.

And in the world of Big Corp, you'll never get an answer. They just sit there and stare at you. Now what?

That's the risk. It's about understanding and managing the risk.

If you bought a new device for $10 and traded it in and got $25 for your troubles, are you harmed? You just got an extra $15 that you didn't have before. But you wanted whatever the web site initially told you, let's say $200.

Are you really going to fight for that?

Samsung got a new S8 sale RIGHT NOW, and that's all they wanted. Did they screw someone over? I would say yes--but that's not Samsung's concern right now. They'll worry about that later.

Welcome to Big Corp.
 

Trending Posts

Forum statistics

Threads
942,376
Messages
6,913,742
Members
3,158,380
Latest member
roshanchoudhary