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

431–440 of 471 posts

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#431

Post by jsjohnst »

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…

I definitely knew this was the case back when analog COs were the norm, but didn't realize this was still true. Seems it is very dependent on PSTN provider (I know SWBell didn't do this for normal lines when I worked there) as some do, some don't.

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#432

Post by jsjohnst »

Rjevski wrote: post #308
NLips wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really is the case. VOIP in the middle isn't a problem. MGCs can translate between the callee's phone being on-hook to a SIP re-INVITE with inactive media. In fact, I've worked on projects in the last few years to do just this. Telcos move slowly. You're right about mobile networks though - that's a different kettle of fish.

Just wondering, why is that? It seems like a lot of effort instead of just sending a BYE when the phone is hanged up. I don’t see any legitimate reason for this “feature” to exist - if anything it makes scams & eavesdropping by a malicious remote caller easier.

Per one of the articles I found on it, British Telecom apparently set the delay to 3min. The rational (if article is to be trusted) is that customers wanted the ability to hang up one phone and pick up another phone in the same home without disconnecting the call.

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#433

Post by unclebucknasty »

kolpa wrote: post #413
unclebucknasty wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems that it would violate the "no purchase necessary" rule most (all?) states require to avoid it being an illegal lottery.

It appears that since there are no "winners and losers" -- either everyone wins or every one loses an equivalent amount, these giveaways are not in scope for sweepstakes/contest laws.

>everyone wins or every one loses an equivalent amount

That's not a factor WRT the law in question.

The law states that if you take money or some financial consideration for a chance (that is not based on your skill) of receiving something of value, then it is effectively an illegal lottery. It doesn't matter whether everyone wins or loses.

This is usually addressed by allowing people to enter without making a purchase (entry form, postcard, etc). But, here, that obviously would be an insane offer, so doesn't really apply.

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#434

Post by lysp »

sandworm101 wrote: post #317
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…

Technically, that is a different type of competition. That is an event at least partially based on skill rather than a pure-chance lottery. In places like Canada, and I suspect Australia too, such rules draw lines between competitions for prizes and a lottery subject to gambling rules. I'd bet that a suburban mall couldn't got a gambling license, but a paper airplane throwing competition is something else. It may see…

I suspect 2 things.

1) Being Australia, the laws required it to be actually a competition and not a "chance for a chance for a chance".

2) Being 30 years ago, there is a less of a chance that people were simply trying to rip you off.

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#435

Post by Sylos »

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 was about to say that I can't believe this isn't illegal, but I guess I shouldn't take things that companies do as an indicator of what's legal.

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#436

Post by aekotra »

jonhendry18 wrote: post #74
raverbashing wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well this is solved by asking the SSN to redeem the prize, but not before the draw.

The solution is probably a two-part form where the winner can fill in their SSN and seal it in an envelope, then the contest operator would take that envelope and enclose it with the operator's part of the form, and mail it. That way the contest operator need not ever see the winner's SSN. The amusing thing is the apparent widespread assumption that contest operators are shady as f.

What the...the problem is the contest winner not trusting the operator with their information. How does giving the operator an envelope containing their SIN solve this problem?!

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#437

Post by InvisibleCities »

Zetaphor wrote: post #256
braythwayt wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Way back in the day, I had a reinsurance company as a client. For those unfamiliar, reinsurance companies insure insurance companies. For example, they might insure a standard insurance company for automobile accidents, with a $1,000,000 deductible. So the retail insurance company handles payouts up to a million dollars, but when there's a really wild claim, the reinsurance company pays the insurance company for anyt…

Who insures the reinsurance company?

Reinsurance funds typically market themselves as a source of alpha for large institutional investors. The reinsurance company sells bonds that promise a relatively high rate of return, with the caveat that in the event that the fund needs to pay out a large claim, the value of the bond may be nullified.

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#438

Post by briandear »

pnathan wrote: post #358
briandear wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OT but worth mentioning.. He is one of the finest human beings to ever come out of Houston. A class act. He flew a bunch of vets on a private jet to the World Series just because. He also does a massive amount of charity that doesn’t make the headlines. During Harvey, as you know, he opened his furniture store as a shelter. A real gem of a person. He is also in his store, open to close, every day. (“I-45 North betwee…

Is there a decent write up? Sounds, from what you say, like a lucrative business with someone who has a decent set of ethics. It's always useful to read people's stories like that.

I’m actually calling him tomorrow to ask about that. I was wondering the same thing. He does a lot of local talks and such

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#439

Post by gcb0 »

blang wrote: post #319
btilly wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Berkshire Hathaway. Per https://www.reuters.com/article/us-berkshire-buffett-insuran... , they are planning for handling a potential $400 billion catastrophe.

Yup: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Play_for_a_Billion

> insure the payout for a US$10 million premium.

wouldn't actually giving out the $11mi to the consumer, or picking 10 consumers, create more brand awareness than promising $1bi that nobody can get?

Re: Why nobody ever wins the car at the mall

#440

Post by Dylan16807 »

_bpgl wrote: post #171
polynomial wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is absolutely no doubt that ideogram promises a chance to win the car in exchange for the registration. While a naive person may make that inference, a rational person may understand that 'ideogram' does not constitute an assertion that the picture depicts the prize to be won. I sure don't mean to defend such predatory scammers, but I'm pretty sure they are legally safe on that part. I had a friend last year…

I don't think it's particularly "naive" to believe that retailers or advertising companies could make enough off of a contest promotion to justify the cost of a car. Most of the cost models of contests are opaque and, in most of North America at least, there is probably a general perception that regulations would be in place for something that so prominently implies that it is a contest for a car. The "trick" here is…

In a world full of multi-million-dollar marketing budgets, where cars actually are given away to get attention, it's definitely not obvious at a glance that this isn't one of those sweepstakes.
Post reply on HN