7-13 Nov 2004 Computer city rebate on Netgear routers

[Howard Kaikow]

This posting is for the benefit of those who purchased a Netgear router
at Computer City from 7-13 November 2004.

During that time, certain purchases were eligible for a rebate from
both Netgear and from Computer City.

The Computer City rebate was program number V9640.

I describe what I had to go through to get my rebate and you can see
whether it will apply to you.

Note that I have already reported all of this to the Federal Trade
Commission in the USA. If you wish to file a complaint, you can call 1
877 382 4357. If the FTC gets enough complaints, then the FTC will take
action towards Computer City.

OK, here's the particulars for my rebate.

I purchased the qualifying product on 11 November 2004 and submitted
the V9640 rebate form to Computer City at the address in the rebate
form.

On 10 December 2004, I telephoned the number in the form to ask whether
the form had been received, as I had not yet received any conformation
and I had received a confirmation of the Netgear rebate submittal.

I was told that they had no record of receiving the form and I should
call back in two weeks.

I called back on 3 Jan 2005. Again, I was told that they had not
received the form, but I was given an address for a resubmittal.

I resubmitted the rebate form on 4 January 2005.

On 7 Feb 2005, I received the check for the Netgear rebate, so that
prompted me to call to find out whether my resubmittal to Computer City
had been received.

Surprise! I was again told that they had not yet received my form, but
it gets worse!

I was told that V9640 was not a valid rebate program number. I
responded by informing them that was the number on the form I
downloaded from the Computer City web site and that "V9640" is actually
given as part of the address to which to send the form.

The number I had been calling was the 1 800 978 9035 number given in
the rebate form.

I was then given the number to Computer City rebates (1 888 213 9761),
but that number just goes to a different office at the Young America,
Minnesota rebate center. They gave me the same song and dance about
V9640 not being a valid program number and suggested that I go to the
local Computer City store to resolve the issue.

I went to the local Computer City store the evening of 9 Feb 2005. The
person behind the service desk did no more than call the same numbers I
called and got the same story. She said that I'd have to come back when
the store manager would be in. I was told that the manager would be in
on 11 Feb 2005.

So I went to the store on 11 Feb 2005. Guess what, no store manager!
Overcoming my natural shyness, I insisted on speaking to someone of
authority.

They found someone, I explained the situation and showed her the
paperwork. I stated that the evidence implies that my submittals were
being tossed because the program number was not known.

In any case, she gave me $20 in cash.

All of the above has been reported to the Federal Trade Commission.
As it has been only 13 weeks since the week of purchase, I expect that
more and more folkes will shortly be realizing that they have not
received the rebate.

I'd be interested in knowing whether anyone received a notification
that V9640 was not a valid code and how the case was resolved.

Perhaps my raising the situation at the local Computer City store will
fix the problem for others, however, I suspect that rebate forms for
V9640, at least for some of us, have been tossed and the only
alternative will be to go to the local store or resubmit or .

In any case, Computer City needs to be penalized. Best way is for
others to report such problems to the FTC to prod the FTC to action.
--
http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.

[Howard Kaikow]

Dag nab it!

That should have been "Circuit City", not "Computer City"!

[Howard Kaikow]

The title of the thread should also refer to Circuit City.

--
http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.
"Howard Kaikow" <kaikow@standards.com> wrote in message
news:cuj3tc$a4f$1@pyrite.mv.net... Dag nab it! That should have been "Circuit City", not "Computer City"!

[anon]

good for you! it's only when enough people are persistent and make it too
expensive to deal with rebates that this scam is going to stop.
Unfortunately, i'll doubt we'll ever reach that point.

hound them relentlessly, get every freaking dime you are owed.

[Howard Kaikow]

"anon" <adladsf234jlj@lsdfl.net> wrote in message
news:8%pPd.924$u16.853@bignews6.bellsouth.net... good for you! it's only when enough people are persistent and make it too expensive to deal with rebates that this scam is going to stop. Unfortunately, i'll doubt we'll ever reach that point. hound them relentlessly, get every freaking dime you are owed.

I got the rebate, but no compensation for the time involved, or cost of
driving to the store twice.

I followed up with a posting at the Circuit City web site yesterday.
Got a prompt (canned) email response this morning.
Tried to reply by email, but there appears to be a problem with the Circuit
City mailserver that is supposed to be worked on as we speak.

I also sent a letter to the editor at the Consumer Reports web site.

I have been keeping the FTC aware of what has been the response.

It would be useful if others filed similar complaints with the FTC.
A reprimand/fine from the FTC might wake up the powers that be at Circuit
City.

As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, after
rebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers that
week, but few of them will likely see my postings.

[Bob Ward]

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:10:03 -0500, "Howard Kaikow"
<kaikow@standards.com> wrote:
As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, afterrebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers thatweek, but few of them will likely see my postings.
Ahh-ooo-ga!

Do the words "One rebate per customer" ring a bell?

Now we have the REST..... of the story.

[Howard Kaikow]

there was only 1 rebate.

--
http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.
"Bob Ward" <bobward@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:e1os0194mfffece10r9litgotthqq0a11j@4ax.com... On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:10:03 -0500, "Howard Kaikow" <kaikow@standards.com> wrote:As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, afterrebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers thatweek, but few of them will likely see my postings. Ahh-ooo-ga! Do the words "One rebate per customer" ring a bell? Now we have the REST..... of the story.

[Bob Ward]

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:47:27 -0500, "Howard Kaikow"
<kaikow@standards.com> wrote:
there was only 1 rebate.--http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site."Bob Ward" <bobward@verizon.net> wrote in messagenews:e1os0194mfffece10r9litgotthqq0a11j@4ax.com... On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:10:03 -0500, "Howard Kaikow" <kaikow@standards.com> wrote:As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, afterrebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers thatweek, but few of them will likely see my postings. Ahh-ooo-ga! Do the words "One rebate per customer" ring a bell? Now we have the REST..... of the story.

That's not what you inferred above - "Several routers involved -
prices great after rebate" I've never seen any product involving
"several" items with "oly one rebate",

[doubter]

On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:25:02 GMT, Bob Ward <bobward@verizon.net> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:47:27 -0500, "Howard Kaikow"<kaikow@standards.com> wrote:there was only 1 rebate.--http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site."Bob Ward" <bobward@verizon.net> wrote in messagenews:e1os0194mfffece10r9litgotthqq0a11j@4ax.com... On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:10:03 -0500, "Howard Kaikow" <kaikow@standards.com> wrote: > >As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, after >rebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers that >week, but few of them will likely see my postings. > Ahh-ooo-ga! Do the words "One rebate per customer" ring a bell? Now we have the REST..... of the story.That's not what you inferred above - "Several routers involved -prices great after rebate" I've never seen any product involving"several" items with "oly one rebate",

No, that is what you INFERRED. What the OP IMPLIED is "there were several
routers with rebates, at great prices, so I expected there would be many
people that applied for rebates and would have had the same problem I
did.".

He never IMPLIED he submitted more than one. You incorrectly INFERRED that
he did.

[Bob Ward]

On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:46:00 GMT, doubter <devnul@san.spamblocker.com>
wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:25:02 GMT, Bob Ward <bobward@verizon.net> wrote:On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:47:27 -0500, "Howard Kaikow"<kaikow@standards.com> wrote:there was only 1 rebate.--http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site."Bob Ward" <bobward@verizon.net> wrote in messagenews:e1os0194mfffece10r9litgotthqq0a11j@4ax.com...> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:10:03 -0500, "Howard Kaikow"> <kaikow@standards.com> wrote:>> >> >As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, after> >rebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers that> >week, but few of them will likely see my postings.> >> Ahh-ooo-ga!>> Do the words "One rebate per customer" ring a bell?>> Now we have the REST..... of the story.>>That's not what you inferred above - "Several routers involved -prices great after rebate" I've never seen any product involving"several" items with "oly one rebate",No, that is what you INFERRED. What the OP IMPLIED is "there were severalrouters with rebates, at great prices, so I expected there would be manypeople that applied for rebates and would have had the same problem Idid.".He never IMPLIED he submitted more than one. You incorrectly INFERRED thathe did.


No, her did NOT say that there were several routers available - he
said there were several routers INVOLVED. There is always more than
one product available for rebates, to be purchased by different
individuals, but it is extremely rare for a single purchaser to be
eligible for more than one rebate underthe terms printed on the rebate
form.

[keith]

On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 04:17:13 +0000, Bob Ward wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:46:00 GMT, doubter <devnul@san.spamblocker.com> wrote:On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:25:02 GMT, Bob Ward <bobward@verizon.net> wrote:On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:47:27 -0500, "Howard Kaikow"<kaikow@standards.com> wrote:>there was only 1 rebate.>>-->http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.>"Bob Ward" <bobward@verizon.net> wrote in message>news:e1os0194mfffece10r9litgotthqq0a11j@4ax.com...>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:10:03 -0500, "Howard Kaikow">> <kaikow@standards.com> wrote:>>>> >>> >As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, after>> >rebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers that>> >week, but few of them will likely see my postings.>> >>> Ahh-ooo-ga!>>>> Do the words "One rebate per customer" ring a bell?>>>> Now we have the REST..... of the story.>>>>>That's not what you inferred above - "Several routers involved -prices great after rebate" I've never seen any product involving"several" items with "oly one rebate",No, that is what you INFERRED. What the OP IMPLIED is "there were severalrouters with rebates, at great prices, so I expected there would be manypeople that applied for rebates and would have had the same problem Idid.".He never IMPLIED he submitted more than one. You incorrectly INFERRED thathe did. No, her did NOT say that there were several routers available - he said there were several routers INVOLVED. There is always more than one product available for rebates, to be purchased by different individuals, but it is extremely rare for a single purchaser to be eligible for more than one rebate underthe terms printed on the rebate form.

That doesn't change the definition of "inferred" nor "implied", in any
case.

--
Keith

[Bob Ward]

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 23:30:51 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 04:17:13 +0000, Bob Ward wrote: On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:46:00 GMT, doubter <devnul@san.spamblocker.com> wrote:On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:25:02 GMT, Bob Ward <bobward@verizon.net> wrote:>On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:47:27 -0500, "Howard Kaikow"><kaikow@standards.com> wrote:>>>there was only 1 rebate.>>>>-->>http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.>>"Bob Ward" <bobward@verizon.net> wrote in message>>news:e1os0194mfffece10r9litgotthqq0a11j@4ax.com...>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:10:03 -0500, "Howard Kaikow">>> <kaikow@standards.com> wrote:>>>>>> >>>> >As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, after>>> >rebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers that>>> >week, but few of them will likely see my postings.>>> >>>> Ahh-ooo-ga!>>>>>> Do the words "One rebate per customer" ring a bell?>>>>>> Now we have the REST..... of the story.>>>>>>>>>>That's not what you inferred above - "Several routers involved ->prices great after rebate" I've never seen any product involving>"several" items with "oly one rebate",No, that is what you INFERRED. What the OP IMPLIED is "there were severalrouters with rebates, at great prices, so I expected there would be manypeople that applied for rebates and would have had the same problem Idid.".He never IMPLIED he submitted more than one. You incorrectly INFERRED thathe did. No, her did NOT say that there were several routers available - he said there were several routers INVOLVED. There is always more than one product available for rebates, to be purchased by different individuals, but it is extremely rare for a single purchaser to be eligible for more than one rebate underthe terms printed on the rebate form.That doesn't change the definition of "inferred" nor "implied", in anycase.


Admit it - you're just maiking all this up as you go along, aren't
you? It isn't about the definition of inferred or implied - it's
about trying to scam the rebate house and getting shot down.

[Bill Rubin]

Bob Ward wrote: On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:46:00 GMT, doubter <devnul@san.spamblocker.com> wrote:On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:25:02 GMT, Bob Ward <bobward@verizon.net> wrote:On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:47:27 -0500, "Howard Kaikow"<kaikow@standards.com> wrote:>there was only 1 rebate.>>-->http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.>"Bob Ward" <bobward@verizon.net> wrote in message>news:e1os0194mfffece10r9litgotthqq0a11j@4ax.com...>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:10:03 -0500, "Howard Kaikow">> <kaikow@standards.com> wrote:>>>> >>> >As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, after>> >rebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers that>> >week, but few of them will likely see my postings.>> >>> Ahh-ooo-ga!>>>> Do the words "One rebate per customer" ring a bell?>>>> Now we have the REST..... of the story.That's not what you inferred above - "Several routers involved -prices great after rebate" I've never seen any product involving"several" items with "oly one rebate",No, that is what you INFERRED. What the OP IMPLIED is "there were severalrouters with rebates, at great prices, so I expected there would be manypeople that applied for rebates and would have had the same problem Idid.".He never IMPLIED he submitted more than one. You incorrectly INFERRED thathe did. No, her did NOT say that there were several routers available - he said there were several routers INVOLVED. There is always more than one product available for rebates, to be purchased by different individuals, but it is extremely rare for a single purchaser to be eligible for more than one rebate underthe terms printed on the rebate form.

Bob, as someone who have blasted in the past for my posts, it
gives me great pleasure to be able to point out what a clueless
asshole you are in this case.

I did not do this particular rebate but I did a similar one in
October and there are *2* rebates that need to be filed for a
single product. One is from Circuit City, the other is from the
manufacturer. Yes, it sucks, and I refused to do dual rebates
when Circuit City first introduced them a few years ago but
given that it's become more and more frequent, you have no
choice if you want to get the good deals. In addition, the
rebates often cover more than a single item. So if they have
routers and adapters, the rebate forms will typically cover all
of the items, and you check off what you purchased (in the case
of Circuit City, if you buy in-store they can print a customized
rebate form which shows what you bought and the total rebate.
Not only that, but sometimes the form allows you to buy
multiples of the same item on a single form. So, even if there
were a single form, you would be allowed to buy 2 or 3 of the
item.

In other words, there is absolutely no indication that the OP
did anything wrong.

Bill

[Bill Rubin]

Howard Kaikow wrote: "anon" <adladsf234jlj@lsdfl.net> wrote in message news:8%pPd.924$u16.853@bignews6.bellsouth.net... good for you! it's only when enough people are persistent and make it too expensive to deal with rebates that this scam is going to stop. Unfortunately, i'll doubt we'll ever reach that point. hound them relentlessly, get every freaking dime you are owed. I got the rebate, but no compensation for the time involved, or cost of driving to the store twice. I followed up with a posting at the Circuit City web site yesterday. Got a prompt (canned) email response this morning. Tried to reply by email, but there appears to be a problem with the Circuit City mailserver that is supposed to be worked on as we speak. I also sent a letter to the editor at the Consumer Reports web site. I have been keeping the FTC aware of what has been the response. It would be useful if others filed similar complaints with the FTC. A reprimand/fine from the FTC might wake up the powers that be at Circuit City. As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, after rebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers that week, but few of them will likely see my postings.

First, it's good that you got the rebate. You should know that
the rebate you are talking about, which starts with a "V", is
NOT a Circuit City rebate (they start with YA), even though it
may have gone to the same Young America address that Circuit
City rebates go to. It's from the manufacturer. That's why the
CC rebate center was unable to find any information about it. I
am confused about your saying (in the initial post):
On 7 Feb 2005, I received the check for the Netgear rebate, so that prompted me to call to find out whether my resubmittal to Computer City had been received.

Do you mean you got the Circuit City rebate? You really should
explain what rebates were involved and where they got sent to.
In my case, when I bought this router there were 2 rebates and
neither were Circuit City's. Both were from the manufacturer,
with one going to Young America and the other to New Rochelle
(don't ask me why, I have no idea).

While I don't think you have a valid case against Circuit City
in this case (because it is not at all clear that it is their
rebate that you are having an issue with), they DEFINITELY need
to be investigated for one particularly nasty thing that they
have been doing: changing the dates on existing rebates. They
shortened the dates on a couple of promotions this holiday
season. In one case, they changed the date from 12/31 to 12/22
but did not bother to change the printable version of the form
on their website until 1/5 -- almost a full week after the
original date. They are rejecting rebates for items bought after
12/22, and when you call the rebate center or CC customer
service to complain they refuse to do ANYTHING about it. If you
complain enough they may call your local store and arrange for
them to issue you a refund in the amount of the rebate if you
go back to the store, but not on the corporate level. In a
second case, they had something advertised in their national ad
with the rebate and then decided to end it while the ad was
still valid. They're rejecting those as well.

Several of us have complained to several sources and have not
gotten anyone's attention. I should say that I did speak to
someone in the CC CEO's office and they are sending me a gift
card, but they still refuse to acknowledge that they have a
problem. I am not sure what it will take to get them to pay
attention. Maybe if a reporter in a major publication
investigated it and made Circuit City answer for the actions it
would work. But the answer may simply be "we can change the
terms whenever we want". This all really sucks, and more so
because Circuit City is typically one of the better companies
when it comes to paying rebates, often taking only a month from
mailing to receiving the check. But they are way off base on
this issue, and I don't think they realize the damage they are
doing to their reputation.

Bill

[Bob Ward]

On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 05:55:28 GMT, Bill <billrubin@prodigy.net> wrote:
Bob Ward wrote: On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:46:00 GMT, doubter <devnul@san.spamblocker.com> wrote:On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:25:02 GMT, Bob Ward <bobward@verizon.net> wrote:>On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:47:27 -0500, "Howard Kaikow"><kaikow@standards.com> wrote:>>>there was only 1 rebate.>>>>-->>http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.>>"Bob Ward" <bobward@verizon.net> wrote in message>>news:e1os0194mfffece10r9litgotthqq0a11j@4ax.com...>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:10:03 -0500, "Howard Kaikow">>> <kaikow@standards.com> wrote:>>>>>> >>>> >As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, after>>> >rebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers that>>> >week, but few of them will likely see my postings.>>> >>>> Ahh-ooo-ga!>>>>>> Do the words "One rebate per customer" ring a bell?>>>>>> Now we have the REST..... of the story.>>That's not what you inferred above - "Several routers involved ->prices great after rebate" I've never seen any product involving>"several" items with "oly one rebate",No, that is what you INFERRED. What the OP IMPLIED is "there were severalrouters with rebates, at great prices, so I expected there would be manypeople that applied for rebates and would have had the same problem Idid.".He never IMPLIED he submitted more than one. You incorrectly INFERRED thathe did. No, her did NOT say that there were several routers available - he said there were several routers INVOLVED. There is always more than one product available for rebates, to be purchased by different individuals, but it is extremely rare for a single purchaser to be eligible for more than one rebate underthe terms printed on the rebate form.Bob, as someone who have blasted in the past for my posts, itgives me great pleasure to be able to point out what a cluelessasshole you are in this case.I did not do this particular rebate but I did a similar one inOctober and there are *2* rebates that need to be filed for asingle product. One is from Circuit City, the other is from themanufacturer. Yes, it sucks, and I refused to do dual rebateswhen Circuit City first introduced them a few years ago butgiven that it's become more and more frequent, you have nochoice if you want to get the good deals. In addition, therebates often cover more than a single item. So if they haverouters and adapters, the rebate forms will typically cover allof the items, and you check off what you purchased (in the caseof Circuit City, if you buy in-store they can print a customizedrebate form which shows what you bought and the total rebate.Not only that, but sometimes the form allows you to buymultiples of the same item on a single form. So, even if therewere a single form, you would be allowed to buy 2 or 3 of theitem.In other words, there is absolutely no indication that the OPdid anything wrong.Bill


You seem to be more interested in proving me wrong than in addressing
the facts as posted. The original poster did not state that this was
a "system rebate"with a router and several adapter cards- he said
there were "several routers involved". A home network normally would
not consist of "several routers", so it is doubtful that the
manufacturer and/or retailer would offer a multiple rebate on
redundant equipment such as this. If he didn't submit multiple
rebates, how would "several routers" be a salient factor?

[Bill Rubin]

Bob Ward wrote: You seem to be more interested in proving me wrong than in addressing the facts as posted. The original poster did not state that this was a "system rebate"with a router and several adapter cards- he said there were "several routers involved". A home network normally would not consist of "several routers", so it is doubtful that the manufacturer and/or retailer would offer a multiple rebate on redundant equipment such as this. If he didn't submit multiple rebates, how would "several routers" be a salient factor?

Yes, it's true I showed great pleasure in proving how you were
wrong because it was just so easy in this case. I chose to put
my on-topic remarks regarding his rebate issue in another post.
But once again you insist on bringing up your error. You must be
referring to this quote of his:
As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, after rebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers that week, but few of them will likely see my postings.

In this case, were you even remotely aware of how the Netgear
rebates work at CC (instead of making assumptions, which you
have assured me are a stupid thing to do), you would know that
the single form covered rebates on multiple routers. I saw no
indication of him saying that he bought more than one, and even
if he did it would be perfectly acceptable per the terms of the
rebates.

And given that he left out several details and initially got the
name of the store wrong, it's not at all clear that the facts
are as presented, never mind how you are assuming them to be.

And my home network currently consists of 3 Belkin routers and
one adapter, because the routers are typically on sale for less
after rebate than adapters, and it's easy to bridge them (and
they seem to work rather well in that mode). So you're wrong
again.

Bill

[Howard Kaikow]

"Bob Ward" <bobward@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:h1it01h9fqf8m0t744skv3morb1pqmt049@4ax.com... On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:47:27 -0500, "Howard Kaikow" <kaikow@standards.com> wrote:there was only 1 rebate.--http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site."Bob Ward" <bobward@verizon.net> wrote in messagenews:e1os0194mfffece10r9litgotthqq0a11j@4ax.com... On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:10:03 -0500, "Howard Kaikow" <kaikow@standards.com> wrote: > >As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, after >rebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers
that >week, but few of them will likely see my postings. > Ahh-ooo-ga! Do the words "One rebate per customer" ring a bell? Now we have the REST..... of the story. That's not what you inferred above - "Several routers involved - prices great after rebate" I've never seen any product involving "several" items with "oly one rebate",

The rebate form applied to seven products.
There was 1 rebate allowed for each purchase, so if you purchased all 7
products, you got all 7 rebates.

[Howard Kaikow]

It was a Circuit City rebate.
There was a separate rebate form for the Netgear rebate and it was mailed to
a different rebate organization.

I have all the forms as I saved them as PDF, which includes the URL for the
form.
Of course the URL no longer exists, but the codes in the URL could be used
by Circuit City to backtrack and locate the original.

Circuit City definitely needs to be penalized.

Best way is for others affected to call the FTC and/or, as I state below,
have Consumer Reports pick up on the issue.

I brought the form, etc. to the local store and they saw the error.

While they may have intended that this code start with Y, they screwed up.
Both forms were downloaded from the Circuit City web site.
One was identified as a Netgear rebate.
The other was a Circuit City rebate.

I finally did get the rebate, after going to the store twice.

The evidence would imply that both of my submittals got tossed due to the
program code.
It's been a bit over 13 weeks since the rebate ended, so others soon will be
wondering where is the rebate.

The best bet for helping others is if Consumer Reports takes an interest in
the letter to the editor I submitted at their web site. Even if they only
mention the problem at their web site or publish a sidebar, the press/media
will pick up on that. Hopefully, this will help others in the same boat.

I would expect that Circuit City sold hundreds of those 7 routers that week

[Howard Kaikow]

FYI.

My only purposes in posting the lead article in this thread were:

1. To inform others who submitted the same rebate forms of what they may
expect.
2. To inform ALL that such a situation could arise.

There is nothing to discuss.

I'll post back here only if there are further developments with the FTC or
Consumer Reports or Circuit City itself.

[keith]

On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 05:53:24 +0000, Bob Ward wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 23:30:51 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 04:17:13 +0000, Bob Ward wrote: On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:46:00 GMT, doubter <devnul@san.spamblocker.com> wrote:>On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:25:02 GMT, Bob Ward <bobward@verizon.net> wrote:>>>On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:47:27 -0500, "Howard Kaikow">><kaikow@standards.com> wrote:>>>>>there was only 1 rebate.>>>>>>-->>>http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.>>>"Bob Ward" <bobward@verizon.net> wrote in message>>>news:e1os0194mfffece10r9litgotthqq0a11j@4ax.com...>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:10:03 -0500, "Howard Kaikow">>>> <kaikow@standards.com> wrote:>>>>>>>> >>>>> >As there were several routrs involved and the prices were great, after>>>> >rebate, I would expect that hundreds of folkes purchased the routers that>>>> >week, but few of them will likely see my postings.>>>> >>>>> Ahh-ooo-ga!>>>>>>>> Do the words "One rebate per customer" ring a bell?>>>>>>>> Now we have the REST..... of the story.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That's not what you inferred above - "Several routers involved ->>prices great after rebate" I've never seen any product involving>>"several" items with "oly one rebate",>>No, that is what you INFERRED. What the OP IMPLIED is "there were several>routers with rebates, at great prices, so I expected there would be many>people that applied for rebates and would have had the same problem I>did.".>>He never IMPLIED he submitted more than one. You incorrectly INFERRED that>he did. No, her did NOT say that there were several routers available - he said there were several routers INVOLVED. There is always more than one product available for rebates, to be purchased by different individuals, but it is extremely rare for a single purchaser to be eligible for more than one rebate underthe terms printed on the rebate form.That doesn't change the definition of "inferred" nor "implied", in anycase. Admit it - you're just maiking all this up as you go along, aren't you? It isn't about the definition of inferred or implied - it's about trying to scam the rebate house and getting shot down.

No, I'm not making up the definitions of "inferred" and "implied", though
you're trying to. Infer from that what you wish. I only implied that
you're ignorant.

--
Keith

[Bill Rubin]

Howard Kaikow wrote: It was a Circuit City rebate. There was a separate rebate form for the Netgear rebate and it was mailed to a different rebate organization. I have all the forms as I saved them as PDF, which includes the URL for the form. Of course the URL no longer exists, but the codes in the URL could be used by Circuit City to backtrack and locate the original. Circuit City definitely needs to be penalized. Best way is for others affected to call the FTC and/or, as I state below, have Consumer Reports pick up on the issue. I brought the form, etc. to the local store and they saw the error. While they may have intended that this code start with Y, they screwed up. Both forms were downloaded from the Circuit City web site. One was identified as a Netgear rebate. The other was a Circuit City rebate. I finally did get the rebate, after going to the store twice. The evidence would imply that both of my submittals got tossed due to the program code. It's been a bit over 13 weeks since the rebate ended, so others soon will be wondering where is the rebate. The best bet for helping others is if Consumer Reports takes an interest in the letter to the editor I submitted at their web site. Even if they only mention the problem at their web site or publish a sidebar, the press/media will pick up on that. Hopefully, this will help others in the same boat. I would expect that Circuit City sold hundreds of those 7 routers that week

Look, I'm trying to help you, unlike the other(s) who claim
you're posting BS. But you're making it very difficult with your
absolutely ridiculous claims about whose rebate this is. Admit
that you are a novice and allow someone like me who has done a
LOT of Circuit City rebates to tell you the facts, rather than
your clearly incorrect assumptions.

The fact is that the "V" rebate WAS from Netgear (and it's not a
typo, it would have been in the YAnnn form if it were CC's
rebate). Amazingly, Netgear uses multiple different rebate
centers. I don't know why, and I don't know why they insist on
having different ones for the same item during the same sale
promotion (it sucks), but I did this a month before you did and
they were BOTH Netgear rebates and one went to Young America and
the other to New Rochelle. I don't care where it was addressed
to. That makes little difference (and may have been a typo, but
the PO Box and zip code are all that matters). You have no
evidence that rebates are being tossed, and you have no evidence
that others are in the same situation as you. Young America is
generally a very good rebate processing company but even the
best company makes mistakes.

I will base my belief that this is not a widespread problem
based on the fact that there has not been a lot of screaming
about it on Fatwallet. here is the thread that discussed that
deal:

http://www.fatwallet.com/t/24/392390

And you will see that there are as many people who did not
receive the other rebate as did not receive the one you are
complaining about. And you will note that someone stated that
they had heard from the rebate center that the "V" rebate was
from the manufacturer, not Circuit City. And, most importantly,
there are people who report getting their Young America rebate,
thereby showing that you are wrong that no one got paid.

As I said, Circuit City does some rebate stuff clearly deserving
of investigation. But if you file a complaint against them for
this the only thing that will happen is that you will look
foolish. Submit it against Netgear if you want. Or acknowledge
that problems happen and that you got your money, and move on to
the next deal (or don't, since you clearly have problems dealing
with problems like this).

If you start telling me that I am wrong again, then you deserve
any abuse that Bob Ward sends your way.

Bill

[Guest]

I bought a Netgear router from CompUSA last year, and had a
hassle to get the rebate. E.g., they claimed that it wasn't
purchased during the valid dates, tho it was in fact purchased
in the middle of the valid dates.

Therefore, Netgear seems to be the problem. Anyone buying a
Netgear product: beware.

[Jerr]

<con@sum.er> wrote in message
news:DK9Qd.12118$H05.2481@twister.nyroc.rr.com...I bought a Netgear router from CompUSA last year, and had a hassle to get the rebate. E.g., they claimed that it wasn't purchased during the valid dates, tho it was in fact purchased in the middle of the valid dates. Therefore, Netgear seems to be the problem. Anyone buying a Netgear product: beware.

And I bought one through Amazon.com. They accepted the forms on 11/16/04
and approved it. Still waiting for the $30 check. I called them yesterday
and they said the check will be cut on 3/9/05. I argued with them that it's
supposed to be a 10 week turnaround and it'll be over 4 months before I get
the check. They couldn't care less. No more Netgear for me.

[Bill Rubin]

Jerr wrote: <con@sum.er> wrote in message news:DK9Qd.12118$H05.2481@twister.nyroc.rr.com...I bought a Netgear router from CompUSA last year, and had a hassle to get the rebate. E.g., they claimed that it wasn't purchased during the valid dates, tho it was in fact purchased in the middle of the valid dates. Therefore, Netgear seems to be the problem. Anyone buying a Netgear product: beware. And I bought one through Amazon.com. They accepted the forms on 11/16/04 and approved it. Still waiting for the $30 check. I called them yesterday and they said the check will be cut on 3/9/05. I argued with them that it's supposed to be a 10 week turnaround and it'll be over 4 months before I get the check. They couldn't care less. No more Netgear for me.

The rebate house can't pay you if they haven't been paid.

Bill