Nobody said it was unheard of or unreasonable. However, it DOES contradict their very firm statements that if I return a movie late, I will not be charged more money for it. That is my understanding of a late fee.
The fact that BB has elected to call it something different doesn’t convince me that it isn’t a late fee.
Five days is fine with me. Blockbuster’s nine days is generous.
I don’t personally have a problem with that, and I don’t think anyone else in this thread does either. I only have a problem with them claiming to eliminate late fees while still charging a fee for movies that are returned late.
Let me address that “grace period”. If you pay for a two-day rental, and they give you an extra seven days after that to return it without paying fees, then you’ve actually paid for a nine-day rental. No matter what they call it, that’s what it boils down to, unless there’s some limit to how often you can take advantage of that “grace period”.
Yup, makes perfect sense. Netflix used to do the same thing, although you couldn’t return a DVD once they charged you for it. But they didn’t claim they were eliminating late fees; they advertised it as part of their late fee policy.
Your question has been answered. But remember, no matter how often you say “it’s not a late fee”, the fact is they charge a fee for returning a movie Tuesday night that they don’t charge if you return it Monday night. Even if they charge your credit card for the price of the movie on Tuesday morning, and it belongs to you for those few hours on Tuesday (until you give it back and they refund most of the charge), that doesn’t change the fact that when you return it on Tuesday, you pay a fee, just like at every other video store.
Marley and Mr2001 - we’ll just have to agree to disagree. To me a late fee and a restocking fee when returning a purchased product are two entirely different things. To you they are not, and it’s apparent that we will never convince each other differently and it’s a waste of my time to keep repeating the same argument. You go ahead and continue to think that Blockbuster is evil for their revised business plan and I’ll go ahead and think they are chumps for having even a 7-day grace period (as well as being evil for editting movies)
So, if blockbusters simply assumed the movie was sold after 9 days charging the purchase price with no option for the new owner to return it after that point, then everyone would be happy with their advertised late fees. But since they have also a buy-back scheme they are suddenly lieing scumbags.
BB will go bust if they don’t learn simple math, or their customers do. You can buy 3 second hand dvds for the price of 2. The cheapest 2nd hand price on the shelves is $4.99. There is a guaranteed minimum price that BB will buy a dvd from you of $5.00. So buy 3*4.99 dvds =9.98 (two for price of three offer) + TAX
Sell them back to BB = $15.00 store credit, repeat until you have as much store credit as you want.
Nope. I think everyone here would be happy if they just stopped promoting it as “the end of late fees”.
I got collections notices from the local Blockbuster twice – the first time on the tenth day after renting the movies (I had returned them a couple days late and the late fee was about $14) and the second time on the thirteenth day after renting the movies (the late fee was like $18 that time). It seemed rather hilarious at the time.
Alas, the local Blockbuster went out of business in October (or at least that’s when I noticed their space at the strip mall was empty and had a FOR LEASE sign up), so I can’t run the experiment a third time. Ah well.
There’s a difference between getting the postcards that Blockbuster sends out to remind you of late fees, and actually being sent to a collection agency. I’ve gotten a couple postcards from them in the past, asking me to please come in and pay my late fees - which I did - and not one of them came from a collection agency.
(Incidentally, I just got a thing from BB in the mail, waiving up to $25.00 in late fees from 2004.)
Indeed, there is. The two that I refer to above were from … let me see … ah, here’s the first one. “Credit Collection Services” in Newton, Massachusetts. It has a few paragraphs of United States Code quoted, and says “This is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained will be used for that purpose. This communication was sent by a debt collector.” on it. The second one was from the same people.
And again, this was not even two weeks after I had originally rented the movies. And it wasn’t like I had a history of delinquency or a huge account balance or something – we’re talking $14 and $18. Of course, the same store also had one of my brother’s friends arrested after his car was stolen with two of their movies inside, so none of it surprises me.
I might agree if we were talking about a voluntary purchase.
Can you even fucking read?
Wow. Just wow. I apologize for questioning you - that’s astounding. No wonder they’re no longer in business.
Quite well - can you even fucking understand the use of hyperbole to illustrate one’s point?
Hyperbole is when you exaggerate an accurate observation to make your point more obvious. It’s not hyperbole if there’s no grain of truth at the center. No one is complaining about Blockbuster’s new policy - only the way it’s being marketed.
In light of today’s news, it seems appropriate to bump this thread.