Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

thehustle.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 471 posts

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#231

Post by macintux »

Mister_Snuggles wrote: post #223
macintux wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was younger in the US the situation was similar, but I thought it was up to the originator of the call to disconnect. Been too long to be certain of my recollection. I never determined the timeout, and I haven't had a land line in at least 15 years to experiment with.

You could be right, I can’t remember if the times that happened were when I originated the call or my friend did. I know it didn’t work all the time, and I think it stopped working at some point too. This was back in the days when you could tell roughly where someone lived by their phone number - 43x—xxxx was south Edmonton (but not Mill Woods or Riverbend), 2xx-xxxx was Calgary, area codes didn’t matter because the…

Actually, I’m coming around to your point of view. I think it was the recipient who controlled the “transaction”.

The world was so very different. Waiting for that 0 to finally work its way around the dial, good grief. Especially since as a kid I was perpetually afraid any phone number that included a 0 might lead me to somehow get connected to a phone operator, so I wanted to dial the following number as quickly as possible.

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#232

Post by Bartweiss »

gregpilling wrote: post #224
pwg wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Roping the unsuspecting into an incredibly expensive time-share using hard-sell boiler-room tactics without ever being up-front about the true costs. I sat through one of these once, curious about how it was going to go, and with the intent going in of not ever buying anything anyway. They present the timeshare as if it costs only pennies a day, and never admit to the true cost unless pressed very hard (and even then…

The real scam is the ongoing, monthly, maintenance fees on your 'timeshare'. Worldmark wanted $100 per month, per week of ownership, in a presentation I saw in Vegas. Which means that 52 weeks x $100 x 12 months = $62,400 per year in 'maintenance' on each unit. So even if you paid cash, they still get $62K per year in addition. This was Worldmark Vegas, buying a 'week' in a townhouse complex of $150,000 units. The mo…

I get the sense that the days of "take out a huge loan to be locked into vacationing at a crummy house in Boca" are over, probably because the reputation got too bad. Now it's reasonable prices, flexible travel dates, luxury properties around the world - all yours, for the low price of bank-breaking fees for life.

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#233

Post by Bartweiss »

pwg wrote: post #185
Angostura wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was watching the gullible filling out their "loan applications" and setting themselves up for $500/month for the next ten to twenty years before they could pay off the 'loan'. I presume that quite a few of these are actually timeshare employees playing the role of "conspicuously convinced punter"

That is quite possible. I presumed the 'open plan sales room' was exactly to play on 'follow the herd' mentality. These guys were slick enough that they very well may have filled half or more of the room with plants to further fuel 'herd' mentality.

Interesting - the presentation I saw was careful to pitch each family separately and not even walk them past one another. I assume it was partly for the feeling of exclusivity, and partly to avoid letting any awkward questions like "don't those fees turn this into a total ripoff?" pollute multiple buyers.

I wonder which approach works best? (Though I guess if there are enough plants, you could get both effects going at once.)

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#234

Post by astura »

toss1 wrote: post #219
astura wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like an easy problem to solve. Make the winner fill out the tax forms and send them directly to the IRS. The IRS informs the promotion they've received the tax forms, and verifies names, addresses, amount match. The promotion releases the prize to the winner.

Might not be so easy -- it is like paying payroll -- you, not only the recipient, need to report the tax ID of the person/entity that you paid.

Right, so you provide that information to the winner to put on their form. No big deal.

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#235

Post by [deleted] »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #42
dawnerd wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They just blame it on their phone company and the like. I know a few people that knowingly hand out info at conventions yet will blame everything but. Might have to do with the marketing companies waiting long enough and people quickly forgetting about them entering their info. So when the spam calls hit they just think of whatever company they know for sure has it. Side note: it’s almost impossible to book anything…

This is why the GDPR and similar things are good; you can sign up, but they have to delete your data if you ask them for it. It makes schemes like this a lot less er, 'final', so to speak.

[deleted]

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#237

Post by mikec3010 »

Animats wrote: post #9

Since this is a California on-site thing, California sweepstakes law applies.[1] - "The exact nature and approximate value of the prizes must be disclosed clearly and conspicuously when they are offered." - "The law prohibits the company from misrepresenting the odds of receiving any item offered." - Prohibited: "Failing to award and distribute all prizes of the value and type represented." Online complaint form here…

I bet a nice $1500 small claims case would be ideal to fight these people. Put them right on the threshold of not paying for a lawyer.

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#238

Post by Rjevski »

NLips wrote: post #218
jsjohnst wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> NB in some countries landlines can remain on a call for several minutes after the call receiver has hung up. Source for this? I find it highly suspect from a technical perspective (1-3 seconds, maybe, but not several minutes) and nothing I can find online even remotely seems legitimate / real.

Telecoms + networking software engineer here: 'tis true - the caller has call release control on the PSTN i.e. the call doesn't end until the caller puts down the phone. There's special handling for e.g. 911 calls so that call release control is given to the callee i.e. the PSAP. This doesn't work for e.g. SIP because the SIP client is not a dumb slave to the network. If I click end call, even if the network doesn't…

This used to be true but I really doubt it’s the case anymore.

Most of the “PSTN” nowadays has a bunch of SIP or other digital stuff in the middle, so this breaks down. Not to mention, this was never possible for mobiles to begin with.

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#239

Post by Bartweiss »

sanderjd wrote: post #193
pknopf wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm all for capitalism, but I feel like this should be illegal. Yes, I know, "the consumers shouldn't be so dumb". But there is always the group of a society that will bite. The seller may make a good buck, but these tactics have many downstream effects that just get compounded for the people buying this garbage. There should be some kind of protection for the consumers in this case. I know it would be hard to define…

The biggest problem here is information asymmetry. The market for these time share schemes is very inefficient because the sales people have more information on both the value and cost than the customers. This is why people commenting here who have out of band information about this were unpersuaded despite finding the pitch emotionally compelling / exhausting. Regulations to require earlier and less subtle cost disc…

> The biggest problem here is information asymmetry.

This gets to the heart of a question I've always had about unfettered markets, and never seen answered.

It's widely acknowledged that markets don't just satisfy demand, they also transfer information. If you know something other people don't, you can make money, but in doing so you'll gradually disperse your unique knowledge until it's no longer valuable. (Either directly, by selling it, or indirectly, as people see that you're consistently willing to make transactions other people wouldn't.) At best, this is a payout for the productive activity of spreading knowledge (the argument for arbitrage). At worst, it's a short-term scam that's self-negating.

This is all true. Timeshares spread information because people noticed "if this is such a great deal, why do you have to pay people to listen to the pitch?" And so timeshares got a horrible reputation with most people. When I talk to hard libertarians, anarcho-capitalists, and so on, this is their argument - it took some time, but the marked worked even with asymmetric information.

But... new information can be created, at least in economic terms. Timeshare pitches now have segments on why this timeshare isn't a scam like the old ones. There are new names for things that basically amount to timeshares. The focus of the scam has moved from high interest to high fees.

And so the scammers constantly 'make' new information that disadvantages everyone who lacks it, and get money spreading that information to the populace. Is the pure-markets system supposed to not have this problem, maybe by correcting too fast to reward the scam? Or is it just accepted that there will be some large and stable amount of scamming at all times?

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#240

Post by oconnor663 »

rayiner wrote: post #220
lysp wrote: post #215

About 30 years ago in Australia There was a competition at the local shopping centre. Spend $20 at any shop in the centre, show your receipt and you get a chance to win the displayed car. The chance involved folding a paper plane, and then trying to get it into the car through the sunroof. Which was only open a small crack. A friend of the family tried about 5 times over the day and never got close. They came back qu…

> They came back quite drunk > They walked away with the car. Hopefully they did walk.

I believe the contest rules require you to floor it straight out of the mall (the "Left4Dead 2 clause").
Post reply on HN