Jump to content
iacas

Get $100 off a Wi-Fi system and a year of eero Plus with code _________.

9 posts / 6177 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

image.png

image.png

The normal "1 Base + 2 Beacons" eero system is $399. Purchased separately, everything would cost $497.

Screen Shot 2019-03-10 at 5.58.07 PM.png

And yet…

eero.jpg

Now, in no way does that seem like "Get $100 and a year of eero Plus".

Am I wrong here? I expected to pay $299 and get a free year of eero Plus. You can't get to $100 either by taking $497-$399 or by saying the $99 eero Plus is free… and the word is AND; it doesn't say "get $100 off with a free year of eero Plus" or "via" or "for" or anything like that.

It says "and."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Register for free today and you won't see this ad spot again!

I saw it as ‘ For $100 less ( $98 actually) you get 1 base and 2 beacons and a year of WiFi. Normally that would all cost $497 but you paid $399. It’s a poor advertisement I believe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

4 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I saw it as ‘ For $100 less ( $98 actually) you get 1 base and 2 beacons and a year of WiFi. Normally that would all cost $497 but you paid $399. It’s a poor advertisement I believe. 

No, purchased separately, they're $497.

But you can - without any coupon code whatsoever - get a base and two beacons for $399 right now, today. From Amazon. Directly from eero. Elsewhere. $399 is the standard package price of that 1+2 system.

So you're not saving even $1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

It depends on how exactly you read it, but I think that it would hold water from a legal standpoint. It feels kind of like the Oxford Comma thing that cost a Maine dairy company a huge amount of money because of ambiguous phrasing.

Do you read it as $100 off "a Wi-Fi system and a year of eero Plus" or do you read it as $100 off "a Wi-Fi system", and a year of eero Plus? Either reading is grammatically correct, but it would take a lot of arguing in a courtroom to prove that one or the other is legally correct since there doesn't seem to be much precedent that I can find for this type of thing.

Here's a good link discussing what constitutes deceptive advertising: https://www.classlawgroup.com/consumer-protection/false-advertising/deceptive-advertising/

Quote

The FTC, which is tasked with regulating advertising, has issued a Deception Policy Statement that says an ad is deceptive if it contains a claim – or fails to disclose important information – that:

  • Is likely to mislead a "reasonable consumer" – that is, a typical person looking at the ad; and
  • Is "material" – that is, important to a consumer's decision to buy or use the product. Examples of "material" claims include representations about a product's price, safety, performance, features, or effectiveness.

I don't think this would be considered to mislead a "reasonable consumer" since it is grammatically correct either way you interpret the phrase. However, I do think their implementation of the discount would run afoul of the law.

They claim you can receive $100 off, but you didn't. You only got $99 off with the advertised coupon code. If they simply reduced the price in the cart of any order that contained a Wi-Fi system and eero Plus in it by $100 they might be able to get away with the ambiguity in the wording. They do not do this, however, and only offer $99 off when they advertised $100 off the purchase.

This is how I see it, simply as a layperson who has done a fair amount of reading into the law but holds no certification or formal education in law. I'd be interested in hearing input from someone with qualified legal expertise (such as @DeadMan?), but I can understand if they would prefer to not weigh in lest it be considered legal advice or if their areas of expertise differ from the subject of advertising law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I think you can read it either way. I'm not an expert in advertising law at all, though, so I don't know if it would rise the level of deceptive advertising. It's probably less of a concern since you aren't locked into buying this before understanding exactly what the offer means. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

3 hours ago, DeadMan said:

I think you can read it either way. I'm not an expert in advertising law at all, though, so I don't know if it would rise the level of deceptive advertising. It's probably less of a concern since you aren't locked into buying this before understanding exactly what the offer means. 

I understand this. You can read it as (using parentheses to "group" things like you would in math):

  • Get ($100 off) (an eero WiFi system and a year of eero Plus) - or -
  • Get ($100 off an eero WiFi system) and (a year of eero Plus)

But still, there's no way to get to $100. At most it's $99 for the year of eero Plus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Yeah, they are missing a dollar. Maybe they'll give you three and a half days extra of eero plus for free?

Edited by DeadMan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

FWIW, my initial read was that you'd get $100 off the PACKAGE of the Wi-Fi system and year subscription...but definitely one of those things you can "see" either way.

They are clearly $1 short, though (long?)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Class action lawsuit over a missing $1???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2020 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
  • Posts

    • Only Aussies and Kiwis will understand this. I use to play with a guy who was notoriously slow on the greens and we called him ANZAC. He use to putt after a minutes silence.
    • Did anyone see the entire exchange between Ryan Palmer and a spectator just before putting yesterday? I had just tuned in and could tell Palmer was pretty upset. He subsequently missed the putt and appeared even more pissed. I'm curious as to what the spectator said or what was the catalyst for the heckling?
    • Then you missed the part where the Pacific Ocean magically makes all putts break towards it even if it’s downhill the other way. 
    • I have OA in both knees and have had surgery twice on the left. Funny thing is the right knee is the trouble one now. Without seeing your swing, we cannot speculate on the stress on the right knee. That being said, I do prefer a narrower stance myself.  Do you flare your feet at address? Flaring definitely helps reduce stress. I think the terrain you play in may make more of a difference on how your knee feels after. If I do a lot of downhill walking, I will need to ice after. The swing doesn’t seem to cause any issues on my right knee as there is not much weight on it at impact.
    • So my work has been progressing and now I’m happy with my grip and setup position. I also did the drill where you line up your ball with a line all around it and you make sure it’s rolling nice and tight.    But what got me thinking was this blog post by @iacas     Now I was experimenting with a metronome but I didn’t set it at 78BPM as iacas said he likes it at, but rather at 100BPM where the “magical” 600ms happens. But to actually get a 300ms downswing you need to set it to 200BPM (1beat = 300ms) and that’s just not a proper rhythm for golf.  But if you just leave it at 100 BPM (or whichever number between 60 and 100) you might soon revert to a 1:1 tempo as you will start to sync the backswing to a beat and the impact to the second beat. And you don’t want that apparently. So what I found is an online beat machine found here: Drum Machine online Free full-featured drum-machine for smartphone, tablet and desktop browsers. Create and share... You set it up like it’s in the attached picture.    You start the backswing on the first beat, start the downswing on the second beat, impact on the snare and end the follow through on the third beat.    At first you might want to concentrate on the snare, but later on I realized that it’s better to just notice the snare and concentrate on finishing the follow through on the third beat so that you don’t get into the habit of hitting at the ball but just focus on the tempo of the stroke. 
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. adamgoodman
      adamgoodman
      (26 years old)
    2. Cartagolf
      Cartagolf
      (24 years old)
    3. gnider
      gnider
      (33 years old)
    4. Hoganman1
      Hoganman1
      (70 years old)
    5. unigolf
      unigolf
      (27 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...