If they said you were “eligible for 0%” or you were “qualified for 0%”, they would have to give it to you if you asked.
Which means they would have to prescreen who they cold-call to ensure they’re fully on board with giving you, Bonum_Legatum specifically, their 0% deal.
Conversely, if they say you were “eligible to qualify for 0%” that means exactly nothing. It means you can make an application for the 0% deal, and they are free to approve or deny your application as their subsequent investigation reveals your creditworthiness.
Which enables them to simply program their robocaller to call 100% of their target market, and only spend the investigative effort on the small percentage who respond.
That’s vastly cheaper.
My wife is a retired banking attorney, and every word of every solicitation is carefully reviewed by Legal to ensure it’s not an offer of credit, only the appearance of an offer of credit. Meantime the Marketing folks are free to add as much glittering misleading BS to the pitch as they want. As long as they stop just short of saying the thing you misunderstood them to say.
IOW, whoever called you yesterday played their hand perfectly.
Once you start looking for it, you see some variation on this theme in substantially every bit of advertising or marketing. It’s a special sub-genre of corporate speak carefully designed from the git-go for just one purpose: to promise things they don’t actually have to deliver.
“Save up to 50%”. Or maybe save $0.00. Either way it’s true.
At my previous job, we had SMART goals (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timely). They were written down, then ignored.
(We also went through periodic cycles of “everyone must send in a written status report every week”. The reports were never read, but their existence was checked for for the first month or two of the cycle, at which point people would gradually stop sending them in. The cycle would restart again a year or so later when some senior executive decides that s/he needs to pretend that their incompetence is because “they aren’t getting enough information” so we need status reports from everyone to not read again.)
I recall BOHAGs but can’t recall what the “O” was.
Whenever I demanded Big Hairy Audacious Budgets to implement such goals on their notably Hairy Audacious Timelines they shut up pretty quickly. BizIdjits hate it when you call their bluff.
Any and all of the long line of chirpy, slogan-larded programs/processes that they trotted out through the past 3 decades. “Work Smart”(er), SDT ( self-directed teams ), and some other thing that was supposed to be an updated incarnation of TQM ( Deming’s Total Quality Management, minus the input of the front line employees ).
All turned out, despite flowery feel-good rhetoric from their presentations, to be pretty much this, with management saying:
“You guys need to do more with less. You need to police yourselves and reign in your faults and change the way you do things. Don’t concern yourselves with our actions/inactions, because heaven knows there is no need for us to change”.
Because they forgot “Exciting”! SMART is just job responsibilities, not goals. We already know our responsibilities, so why bother wasting time discussing it. Actual goals should include true goals, in the sense that you may or may not succeed, plus a stipulation that that there is no penalty for not completing them (but there will be a reward for completing them)
Oh they were definitely supposed to be “actual goals”, in that they were supposed to be things we are not currently doing. Don’t know about the penalty/reward bit because mostly we forgot them by the end of the cycle anyway.
When it came down to it, it was a software company managed by sales guys, none of which had any understanding of how the business works beyond “make cold calls and go on sales visits” and weren’t willing to take on/promote any real technical leadership. So the whole “set your own goals” exercise was really just a way to do product strategy without management having to know anything about the product.
There was a push in Canada to refer to it as “physical distancing”, because we don’t want to lose social connection while remaining physically distant, but the term didn’t seem to catch on.
The SMART acronym reminded me of an experience I had when we were discussing using the KISS principle with a new P.R. person to our project team. I mentioned that one of the underlying principles of the training was the KISS principle, you know, Keep It Simple Stupid and she reacted, horrified. “No, KISS stands for Keep It Simple Smartly,” she declared. Everybody grinned as the PM clarified that it never meant “Smartly” and if he ever saw it written that way, he’d have to request that the person not only cite the source, but deliver a white paper on it.
Another one in the training field. The term “Cheat Sheets” nas become “Job Aids” because Cheat Sheet means that we are cheating in some way. Heaven help us.
Before he retired, my father was an army officer and was posted to Gütersloh in Germany. His unit processed personnel who were travelling across the chanell.
I think that there were only around five people in his office and they all grumbled about the reams of ‘pointless’ reports they had to send in.
My father’s solution was to tell them to carry on completing the reports but to stop sending them. After a couple of months, any that had not triggered a request were scrapped.
“Disruption” seems to be the latest substitute for thinking.
Soon phalanxes of executives will swoop down and do what they call “disruption”, leaving those in the trenches to emerge from the wreckage and try to pick up the pieces.
One year I was ten minutes away from walking into my annual review. I’d totally spaced that it included a presentation on my “annual objectives/standards/to-do/guidelines/goals” (each of those were a different animal, with completely different language and time frames).
Each time I did those, they took good chunks of a couple of days. So I pulled up last year’s, did a search/replace, changing names of clients and projects (and dates). Walked in with a dozen pages of bullshit, boss was impressed, asked me about a couple of projects as he leafed through it.
Annnd, at the end of the meeting, I asked for it back… “As we were going over it, I caught a couple of typos, I’ll get you a corrected version tomorrow.”
I was afraid if he filed it right next to last year’s, he’d notice that I’d plagiarized myself.
No, I never did give him a corrected copy (hey, he never asked).
This is just a pleasantry, like saying “Have a nice day.”
The one that I hate is “Due to unexpectedly high call volumes, you may be on hold for…” I’ve heard that same message at the same company for literal YEARS. The call volumes are not unexpected at all. It’s just a baldfaced lie.
