Yes, you could take three Netflix movies and keep them for 67 years. And it would cost you over 12 thousand dollars.
Funny how they only charge people the restocking fee to people who bring back a movie late.
Lincoln used to ask a riddle to people, “How many legs would a mule have if you called its tail a leg?” People would answer “Well, if you call the tail a leg, a mule would have five legs.” And then Lincoln would say, “No, you can call the tail anything you want but a mule’s still only going to have four legs.”
Many people have made the argument that common sense should have told customers that when Blockbuster said “no late fees ever” there had to be some kind of catch. But suppose Blockbuster had offered a lesser deal. Suppose they said that all movie rentals on Tuesdays were 25% off? Would you just assume it was a good bargain and an intelligent plan for Blockbuster to rent movies on a slow weeknight? Or would you have your attorney review the contract? Suppose you rented a couple of movies one Tuesday and then when you returned them the next day, you were informed that the 25% off price was only for “in-store rentals” - by taking the movies out of the store you incurred the “traveling rental” fee which was ten dollars more? Of course all of this was explained in a brochure that you could have asked to read if you had known it existed. It was right downstairs in the room with the “Beware of Leopard” sign.
Maybe the due date they tell you when you check out the movie might be a clue. Or the stuff printed on the movie box. Or on the receipt. Or on any one of the signs and brochures posted around the store. Or one of the actual Netflix like program advertised. Or you could ask the clerk, which is a prudent thing to do when you are renting someone else’s property and arn’t quite sure what the terms are.
O.K., that’s what I suspected - you’re paying a hefty fee per month for the privilege. Surely people didn’t actually think Blockbuster was offering the same thing for nothing?
Not really “it has to be a catch”, but more “obviously they don’t mean they’re giving away as many free movies as you want to keep forever for $3 each”.
Yeah, but that’s completely different. That’s a perfectly reasonable thing to do. If I thought they were giving 25% off, I wouldn’t think twice about it. But if I though they were giving away movies for $3 (or whatever the rental price is), and you never have to bring them back, I would instantly think, “I must not be understanding this right” and I would ask. YMMV.
Folks might assume it’s “like Netflix” because this change in Blockbuster policy was pretty clearly in response to Netflix’s success. Netflix has a ‘rent as long as you want’ policy (while paying your subscription fee, of course), which translates into “no late fees.” Wow, what a deal! So, Blockbuster comes up with its own no late fees plan. It seems understandable that a person would figure that, “gee, Netflix has no late fees if you’re a member, Blockbuster’s trying to compete with Netflix by doing the same thing.” Not a ridiculous assumption.
I don’t think you caught my drift. Not saying it’s ridiculous to think Blockbuster might be trying to compete with Netflix. I’m just not understanding why people would just assume something without taking the extremely simple step of just asking the clerk when they rent the movie, especially given the fact that Netflix charges a monthly fee and Blockbuster doesn’t*. I can see people thinking, “Hmmm…maybe it’s like Netflix.” But again, I don’t get the step where they say, “I will act on the assumption that it is just like Netflix, without bothering to find out if it’s true.”
*If you’re stupid enough to keep one movie from Netflix and never give it back, you’re just paying the monthly fee for nothing, so they’d make a buttload off you. In fact, the only reason Netflix can allow you to keep movies indefinitely is because you’re paying them money every month. As soon as you unsubcribe, you have to give the movies back. I mean, it’s common sense - you’re not gonna get a free lunch.
From Netflix terms of service:
See, Netflix isn’t offering a free lunch either. I just don’t get the part where people say, "I’m going to assume that Blockbuster is doing what Netflix does FOR A MONTHLY CHARGE, but is doing it for free, and just go ahead and act on that assumption. Again, YMMV.
I beg to differ. Netflix does have late fees, they just call it the “subscription fee”. As spooje pointed out, if racinchikki kept her three Netflix movies out for sixty-seven years she would pay many thousands of dollars for the privilege (hopefully this situation would not arise, and something tells me that racinchikki is fully aware of the math).
Any time that one is not turning round one’s Netflix movies there is an equivalent “late fee”. So, is Netflix as guilty of false advertising as some would claim Blockbuster to be?
It seems to me that anyone who would be misled by this so-called “Blockbuster deception” is the kind of person who would drive from San Francisco to Los Angeles just to fill up their gas tank, because everyone knows that gas is cheaper in LA than in SF. Way to stick it to Big Oil!
[Followup to previous post]
Sorry, blowero, for some reason I hadn’t seen your post on preview, and we’re largely covering the same ground but you’ve already put a lot of energy into this thread. I’m not trying to take your argument and claim it as my own, honest. 
No, actually I’m glad you posted, because you made a point I was thinking about too.
By the logic outlined in this thread, Netflix is just as guilty as Blockbuster (actually MORE so), yet nobody seems to be complaining about Netflix. Not only do you have a good point about the monthly charge being the same as a late fee, clearly, the language I bolded in their service agreement, especially this part:
or be subject to charge for unreturned DVDs.
constitutes a “late fee” as well, IF one were to apply the same logic that’s being applied to Blockbuster.
This works the opposite way as well, you realize. You can call a restocking fee a late fee all you want. Doesn’t necessarily mean it is.
There’s a strong distinction, to my mind, between ‘You kept this DVD out longer than the contractually agreed period, so we’re going to charge you extra to recoup lost revenue’ and ‘You kept this movie out so long we cleared it out of our system already. We’ll take it back, but we’re going to deduct a little for the inconvenience.’
It’s a fine distinction, perhaps, but one that makes sense to me. Of course, if all you’re concerned about is ‘They’re taking money from me’, then yeah, a restocking fee might as well be a late fee.
BayleDemon, I love you.
Edward The Head, * in the very segment you quoted*, I stated that us blueshirts were doing our damnedest to tell every single customer about the policy in person, so your statment that there were only commercials about the policy, is untrue.
We even had a seminar at 7 AM on a Saturday to explain the policy in full to us, and teach us how to discuss it with clients in a way that was clear and accurate.
This is an important point. At what point do you have to assume that a movie ain’t coming back? All of you who are angry about ‘late-fees’ or ‘restocking fees’ answer that for me.
There is a due date. This date is on my rental receipt. Every time I have rented, it was also told to me, verbally. When can Blockbuster assume I have absconded with their property and try to recoup? Every day I have it past the due date is a day they can’t rent it to someone else, right? Or a day they can’t sell it outright.
Whatever time frame is universally agreed upon is irrelevant. Because some people are still gonna think that the rules DO NOT APPLY TO THEM. They are gonna keep the movies longer than that and bitch up a storm when there are consequences.
These people should be sterilized.
Man, this really puts the idea of joining netflix into perspective for me. I don’t think I would ever spend 12k on movie rentals for the rest of my life.
But, think about how many other services we pay for and take those numbers over the next 40 years. You really get a perspective on these things. It seems like just a few buck a month, but think about it…
cell phone: 30-50; 14,400 to 24,000. Not counting any overages. For the average American, this is one year of your working life.
cable: 40-90; 19,200 to 43, 200. At the higher end, this is two years of your working life.
internet: 10-40; 4,800 to 19,200. Maybe a half year of work for each of us.
Think of all the other things you are just paying 5 (2400), 10 (4800) or 15 (7200) dollars a month for. The book nickled and dimed really makes a lot more sense now.
If you asked me now, to work for the next year, without pay, just to have cable for the rest of my life, I would say “piss off”, but I am doing it. If you were to ask me to work 6 months, full time, for nothing but the right to get fucking movies on my DVD player for the rest of my life, I would laugh at you. But, we are all doing this, everyday.
So basically, you’re going to ignore the 40 years of cable, internet and cell phone service you’ve received in exchange for your money and bitch about how you’re throwing your money away?
Are you stupid?
Money is exchanged for goods and services that are then used by the people who have purchased them.
It’s basic economics, if the Oppurtunity Cost of the service you are purchasing is not worth the quoted price, don’t buy it. Don’t bitch to us about how “we” waste our lives spending money on a service “we” but deem important.
OKay, just popping in to clear up something.
BB does have a Netflix-like program. They’ve had it for longer than I’ve worked there (since Oct 04). They have the online $14.99 for 3 movies plan. In store, they have 1 at a time ($9.99 first month, $14.99 every month after that), 2 at a time ($14.99 to $14.99), and 3 at a time ($19.99 to $29.99).
In my store, there are many, many signs explaining the no more late fees. On the entrance and exit doors, at the exit of the (what’s the word for the place you stand in line?), and two BIG posters on endcaps. Hard to miss.
Also, on every receipt, for every movie, it says “Buy this movie for just $x.xx more on xx/xx!”
On the other side of the folks who say that we’re defending BB because it’s a big business, well, maybe you’re just attacking it because it’s a big business. Some folks apparently have an instant distrust of any big business.
Even having said all that, I do think the ads should have been clearer. As soon as I saw the first commercial I just kind of said, “Uh oh. This can’t end well.”
Ahem. The two at a time goes from $14.99 to $24.99.
Wow. My head is spinning with the legalese. Why did you post the freakin’ Magna Carta here? And why is Netflix hiding this complex fine print in the basement behind a locked door that says “Beware of Tiger”? They said I could keep movies forever and now they want me to pay money for them or return them! The bastards!
That’s why I’m sticking with Blockbuster. When they say “No Late Fees” at least I know I don’t have to pay for the same movies month after month. 
Let me explain then. Let’s say you buy a new car off the lot for $20,000. Six months later, some punk kid keys your car. You take it back to the dealer and ask them to repaint it. They want to charge you for it. Are you going to argue that the repainting was not part of the sticker price, therefore you should not have to pay it?
As I implied with sarcasm in my previous post, it’s not the Magna Carta. One does not need to study law for 4 years to understand the BB agreement. It’s on a half sheet of paper, in large type, in a friendly sans-serif font, in language any 4th grader could understand. And it’s on every counter in the store, at least where I shop. As I’ve said, if it’s not on the counter in your store, that’s a problem. But I wonder how many customers simply don’t see the policy sheets because they don’t want to see the policy sheets.
There are at least three issues being conflated here.
1.) Blockbuster’s new policy. (I think it’s a very fair and very reasonable one.)
2.) The fact that Blockbuster advertised this policy as “NO MORE LATE FEES! THE END OF LATE FEES!” when, in fact, you get charged a fee if you take the movie back late. (I think this is a dishonest, but unfortunately common, form of advertising.)
3.) The people who believe they are owed money because they took movies back late and got charged for it. (I have no sympathy for these folks–they should have clarified the policy before they rented the movies. But I also have little sympathy for Blockbuster, who should think twice next time before they make a bold claim based on a technical distinction.)
A better analogy would be if the car dealership advertises “FREE REGULAR SERVICE! NO CHARGE FOR REGULAR SERVICE! SERVICE IS ABSOLUTELY FREE!” And they don’t charge you for service, but they do charge $10/quart for the oil. Or they’ll rotate the tires for free, but there’s a $20 charge to put the car up on the lift (which they require to rotate the tires).