Something on your mind? Want to give us feedback on something in particular or everything in general? Tell us how we are doing!
#18366 by dtalwar
Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:19 am
I agree, I think enough has been said and commented upon already. While it is makes for a very interesting reading, we aren't getting anywhere. Now, I am not faced with this situation since I bought my Ooma system before this deal came out, but I can see why people are miffed with it. I like Lola's question on the contact information of someone higher up in Ooma --- it needs to be escalated to either Sales or Marketing VP, so it gets proper attention and an official response.
#18391 by oomg
Mon Aug 31, 2009 9:53 am
mikepa wrote:Oomg, you seem to defend your statements by choosing overly restrictive definitions of terms I used in a general manner.


Overly restrictive??? Let's see... I quoted you Florida's definition of a "partner." No matter what your idealistic (or "overly expansive") definition is, it simply is not the law. Our legal obligations are defined by laws. Others have called ooma's practice "deceptive," but so far, no one has been able to support that argument with legal authority.

mikepa wrote:Companies working together is what makes the world go around. When one screws up, it is often a "partner" who steps in to take up the slack. An example would be a Delta Airlines flight to L.A. arrives three hours late, so you miss your connecting flight to Singapore. Even if you have a non-refundable fare on Singapore Airlines that would normally require a change fee, under these circumstances the change fee would be waved and a new reservation booked with no fuss. DL & SQ are not in business together, but they are serving the public and working together as "partners" to get you to Singapore happy.


I can't pedict whether your example would or would not lead to the same result on every occasion, or on any occasion for that matter. However, I can state with reasonable certainty that barring a contractual agreement otherwise, there is no legal obligation on the part of Singapore to waive a change fee. I rather suspect that part of any decision they might make would depend on a number of factors, including without limitation, the number of empty seats, if any, on the later flight.

mikepa wrote:P.S. If I bought the mower and it was supposed to come with a free grass catcher and then I had to give the grass catcher back after 90 days, I probably would return the mower and buy one elsewhere.


You haven't answered my questions. I'll repeat:
"By the way, assuming for the sake of discussion that you ran a smaller "mom & pop" business that sold a certain product (say lawn mowers). Customer returns his lawnmower to you because you sold it to him at MSRP... says manufacturer's ad was deceptive because it contained an inflated MSRP, and he has since found it cheaper at Costco or some other big box store.
[1ST QUESTION]
How would you feel?

[2ND QUESTION]
Are you a partner with the manfucturer because you sold the product at MSRP?

[3RD QUESTION]
Isn't that similar to what you are suggesting?

In an earlier post (on page 4) you wrote:
mikepa wrote:Returning the product to Costco is quick and easy and sends a message to Ooma that we don't like your tactics. It will cost them much more than the $50 credit they should have given me. You can then (or even before) buy another system from elsewhere (at lower cost) and easily switch your account to that hub if you think, as I do, that the Ooma service is worthwhile despite their misguided business practices. (Emphasis added in bold.)


So what it really boils down to is this: The advertising is not deceptive, and despite your idealistic view of the world, ooma and Costco are not partners. You have found what you perceive as a better deal elsewhere, and feel you need to justify your action. So, you have tried to convince the world that ooma is responsible, first for what you characterize as a deceptive practice, and altrnatively, on some overly expansive, yet unsupported, theory that ooma is in a partnership with every retailer that sells their product. I think we have just stumbled on the definition of disingenuous.
#18403 by mikepa
Mon Aug 31, 2009 10:40 am
OMG Oomg, are you an attorney? I have never mentioned anything about legal obligations and I do not use partner in any legal sense - just the in the sense that they are working together to shift product. I was simple stating good business practices. Yes SQ is under no obligation, but they do it every day because it's good for business. Clearly Ooma is under no legal obligation to extend the $50 period or else they would probably have done it.

Your lawn mower questions are silly and irrelevant to the discussion at hand. I am not returning the Ooma to Costco because I found it cheaper elsewhere. I am returning it to Costco because the deal I was offered was withdrawn. When I complained to Costo they offered to accept the unit back and they will in turn return it to OOma and this will cost Ooma. Is that fair to Ooma? Maybe not, since it was probably Costco's mistake, though Ooma could have mitigated it. However, if you want to deal with Costo you got to take the lumps along with the tremendous selling power they offer their "partners".

I think this is enough discussion for now, since clearly we agree to differ.
#18442 by oomg
Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:32 pm
mikepa wrote:OMG Oomg, are you an attorney? I have never mentioned anything about legal obligations and I do not use partner in any legal sense - just the in the sense that they are working together to shift product. I was simple stating good business practices. Yes SQ is under no obligation, but they do it every day because it's good for business. Clearly Ooma is under no legal obligation to extend the $50 period or else they would probably have done it.

Your lawn mower questions are silly and irrelevant to the discussion at hand. I am not returning the Ooma to Costco because I found it cheaper elsewhere. I am returning it to Costco because the deal I was offered was withdrawn. When I complained to Costo they offered to accept the unit back and they will in turn return it to OOma and this will cost Ooma. Is that fair to Ooma? Maybe not, since it was probably Costco's mistake, though Ooma could have mitigated it. However, if you want to deal with Costo you got to take the lumps along with the tremendous selling power they offer their "partners".

I think this is enough discussion for now, since clearly we agree to differ.


Actually, I think your reluctance (or refusal) to respond to simple questions coupled with your attempt to dismiss the analogy as irrelevant is all the answer we need.

Partners? It is irrelevant whether I or anyone else here is an attorney, the law (at least in Florida) is abundantly clear.

I can understand why you are no longer in business.
Last edited by oomg on Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#18443 by dr150
Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:33 pm
In the past days I've been in touch with Costco. Also, others are complaining to Ooma/Costco on deal sites that have huge traffic as a result of this thread.

Costco updated their online advertisement today.

It now states:
" *Credit applied to customer Ooma account and expires after 90 days. If the credit has not been depleted prior to expiration date, please contact Ooma for extension."

LINK:
http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.as ... opnav=&s=1


The jury is still out how long they will "extend" the credit.

It's nebulous terminology at best (why not just renew for 1 year or never - just like normal Ooma credits)? The cynic in me wonders if Ooma marketing is banking on people forgetting about renewing in some months down he road.

The jury is still out.

If one is thinking of playing a "wait and see" game before returning it, I urge everyone to make a copy (screen shot, PDF) of the Costco Ad with the updated terms for reference in case Ooma Customer Service gives you any lip in the coming months.....

I made a PDF file and screen shot of the ad with the new terms ATTACHED to this message.
Attachments
(228.95 KiB) Downloaded 196 times
Picture 3.png
Picture 3.png (191.39 KiB) Viewed 4183 times
Last edited by dr150 on Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:08 pm, edited 3 times in total.
#18446 by oomg
Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:42 pm
dr150 wrote:In the past days I've been in touch with Costco. Also, others are complaining to Ooma/Costco on deal sites that have huge traffic as a result of this thread.

Costco updated their online advertisement today.

It now states:
"*Credit applied to customer Ooma account and expires after 90 days. If the credit has not been depleted prior to expiration date, please contact Ooma for extension."

The jury is still out how long they will "extend" the credit.

It's nebulous terminology at best (why not just renew for 1 year or never, just like normal Ooma credits)? The cynic in me wonders if Ooma marketing is banking on people forgetting about renewing in some months down he road.

The jury is still out.

If one is thinking of playing a "wait and see" game, I urge everyone to make a copy (screen shot, PDF) of the Costco Ad with the updated terms for reference in case Ooma gives you any lip in the coming months.
[portions edited out]


Great... some good has come out of this. Disclosure. As Costco's ad now clearly states: the credit expires after 90 days.
#18451 by dr150
Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:01 pm
atici wrote:@dr150: Did you actually try to make international calls and are you content with the quality? That's a bigger source of disappointment for me. Even if they removed the expiry, I don't think that $50 credit is usable.


Every country will be a little different in terms of call quality from any VOIP provider.

You basically have to experiment with different services after your $50 Ooma credit expires (if your call is really bad, let Ooma know about it by calling tech support...your $50 credits should be at least usable.....they can make technical adjustments from their side....I've done this in the past with other providers to improve call quality).

As to my experience, I frequently call Europe and the quality is fine.

....However.......the rate Ooma has for some countries are not competitive. There are threads on this and other websites complaining about such uncompetitive rates (India, Chile, etc, etc).

Regardless, you can use a calling card VOIP long distance provider where you can program in your home phone to forego the PIN # when you dial in. Just dump $5-$10 and you're good to go. On some services, like Talkloop, you can even assign a number to a frequently dialed phone #. Thus, for instance, you dial the calling card access number, then press #1 to dial out to your mom.

Some of the popular VOIP long distance providers are: Talkloop.com, Localphone.com, Yupeephone.com, Pingo, Onesuite, Google Voice, etc. I've tried all of these services and they're all good to the countries I call to.

Just find one that works for you in terms of call quality to your chosen country, pricing and calling convenience.

Yupee has no calling card expiry and the rest don't either as long as you make a call periodically, say, every 6 months etc. (i.e. Talkloop).....not a problem for most of us.
Last edited by dr150 on Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests