Some people it seems are rather gullible when they are told by "authorities" on what to believe. Robert Mitchell talked to Stephen Baker at the NPD Group about how rebates are not actually designed to make companies money, and Mitchell believes it. If this is true, why is it that when companies could provide one rebate they almost always make you submit two. On each rebate form it states that no copies of the UPC or receipt are acceptable. The retailer knows someone has to be sent a copy, as does the rebate fulfillment center. The wording is designed to confuse and allow the rebate center to more easily reject a rebate request. Take upgrade rebates, rebate centers request the first page of a manual or the actual CD, or some similar proof of purchase. If you call in you will be told that a copy of the CD will be acceptable. Of course if you send in a copy of a CD then your rebate request will be denied until you call in. If all the CSR's know that a copy of the CD is ok why is the request denied?
The most damning evidence of this is the rebate fulfillment companies marketing information they hand out. They actually keep statistics on the percentage of rebates they reject, and places like TCA tout how they reject more rebates than other fulfillment centers in trying to get companies businesses. Its a basic fact that rebate companies can control how easy or hard it is to get a rebate fulfilled and they market this to companies. Want to make your customer wait 12 weeks to get a rebate? We can do that. Want to give the consumer 7 days to mail in the rebate? We can do that too.
I submitted McAfee and Symantec rebates on the same day to the same company (rebateshq.com), the Symantec rebates all came in 4-6 weeks. After 12 weeks and a few calls the McAfee rebates came in. The rebates were mailed at the same time to the SAME ADDRESS. Clearly the company had processed them at the same time, but because McAfee gave them different terms on fulfillment time they didn't mail the checks out on the McAfee rebates until later.
Of the items mentioned in the story that don't make sense:
-People perceive them as one-time oppurtunitys to get the product at a lower price.
How is this different from a sale? Considering todays all-rebate all-the-time environment, I don't think this is true anymore, even if it was 10 years ago.
-If rebates go away, all the savings won't go into a lower price.
Companies choose to provide rebates instead of lowering prices because it will cost more to lower the price $50 than provide two $25 rebates. So it does cost less to offer rebates, NPD group is basically admitting that their pro-rebates arguments are false.
-As long as consumers use rebates, companies will offer them.
Basically laws regarding rebates either don't exist or are minimal. Companies will continue to use rebates and take advantage of customers until laws making it harder to do so are put in place. Rebates used to take 4-6 weeks to get a check, now 8-10 weeks is the norm. If the rebate company messes up your rebate, you have to wait 8-10 weeks from when you resubmit your rebate even though its their fault. Some laws are being written to standardize the rebate process and provide consumers a better experience. Companies use rebates because its good for them, not because consumers want it.
business model verified by
WIRED
and other media.
Join using the following link and leave a comment to
this post. Once you are verified you will be added the the Free Ipod Nano Conga Line and others can sign up under you.
