MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: B8 on September 23, 2013, 01:07
-
I just saw this on the iStock site:
(http://s21.postimg.org/7gyvh9thz/Pricing.jpg)
The line through the 4 just makes it still look like a 4 and the line through the 7 makes it look like a confirmed 7. They should have uses "X" instead to avoid any confusion.
-
http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/new-pricing/ (http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/new-pricing/)
-
How long are they allowed to use the "now half the price" bit legally? It's been several months.
-
How long are they allowed to use the "now half the price" bit legally? It's been several months.
As long as they can use "only from iStock" where it isn't true.
-
How long are they allowed to use the "now half the price" bit legally? It's been several months.
You can only use "new" for 6 months, but "now" I'm not sure about.
-
.
-
Wouldn't you be able to use it forever? Half price of early 2013 prices would still be true unless they change the pricing again wouldn't it?
"Half our images are half the price, forever".
A: half the price of what?
B: images in the cheap collection can move up in price.
C: they aren't half the price if you pay cash.
D: after a period of time, using the slashed out credit price has to become misleading to the consumer.
E: "save with lower credit prices" - confusing - are credit prices lower, or is the amount of credits needed per image lower?
-
Wouldn't you be able to use it forever? Half price of early 2013 prices would still be true unless they change the pricing again wouldn't it?
In the UK its 6 months
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31900/10-1312-pricing-practices-guidance-for-traders.pdf (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31900/10-1312-pricing-practices-guidance-for-traders.pdf)
You cant keep offering half the price forever, at some point those half prices, are your prices and no longer half.
-
Wouldn't you be able to use it forever? Half price of early 2013 prices would still be true unless they change the pricing again wouldn't it?
In the UK its 6 months
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31900/10-1312-pricing-practices-guidance-for-traders.pdf (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31900/10-1312-pricing-practices-guidance-for-traders.pdf)
You cant keep offering half the price forever, at some point those half prices, are your prices and no longer half.
LOL, you clearly said what I couldn't get out.
-
.
-
.
-
Wouldn't you be able to use it forever? Half price of early 2013 prices would still be true unless they change the pricing again wouldn't it?
"Half our images are half the price, forever".
A: half the price of what?
B: images in the cheap collection can move up in price.
C: they aren't half the price if you pay cash.
D: after a period of time, using the slashed out credit price has to become misleading to the consumer.
E: "save with lower credit prices" - confusing - are credit prices lower, or is the amount of credits needed per image lower?
Standard iStock obfuscutory language: says something, could mean anything, much like the ASA.
-
.
-
Wouldn't you be able to use it forever? Half price of early 2013 prices would still be true unless they change the pricing again wouldn't it?
In the UK its 6 months
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31900/10-1312-pricing-practices-guidance-for-traders.pdf (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/31900/10-1312-pricing-practices-guidance-for-traders.pdf)
You cant keep offering half the price forever, at some point those half prices, are your prices and no longer half.
LOL, you clearly said what I couldn't get out.
The very first line of that says: "This Guide recommends to traders a set of good practices in giving the consumer information about prices in various situations. It has of itself no mandatory force"
lol, so you agree then that the dot is not really about good practice. Just deceive the customers, its ok, coz its not mandatory to have good practice. Now I get your love for the dot.
-
.
-
Thats what I said, 6 months. Did you actually read my comment. And dot is nowhere mentioning the date of the previous price.
Talking about selective reading:
The Guide however takes account of relevant legal obligations, in
particular those provisions of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading
Regulations 2008 (CPRs)
-
.
-
These are just recommendations and it seems to me (and your source) if iStock added the date which they are comparing to then they would be inline with the recommendations.
Yeah, and if they said, "only from iStock and probably other Getty family sites, and maybe some other websites if we've made a special deal" that would be in line with UK and Canadian (which I've checked and previously linked to on msg) Law.
-
.
-
These are just recommendations and it seems to me (and your source) if iStock added the date which they are comparing to then they would be inline with the recommendations.
Yeah, and if they said, "only from iStock and probably other Getty family sites, and maybe some other websites if we've made a special deal" that would be in line with UK and Canadian (which I've checked and previously linked to on msg) Law.
That's a different issue we were talking about pricing. There is no law that is sited here just a recommendation that after 6 months it would be good discontinue saying that the sales are half price but if they decide to continue to then they should say when the prices were higher...if they want to, it's just a suggestion.
True, but my point is that as they have already shown no inclination to follow UK or even Canadian (where they're based) consumer LAWs in the other issue, we can hardly imagine they'd be overly concerned to observe a recommendation in this one.
-
More than the strikethrough, the bit that's confusing me is the assertion that 4 is half of 10 and 6 is half of 15 etc :o
-
More than the strikethrough, the bit that's confusing me is the assertion that 4 is half of 10 and 6 is half of 15 etc :o
It's the New Maths.
What if their working out of our percentages is done under the same system ???
-
More than the strikethrough, the bit that's confusing me is the assertion that 4 is half of 10 and 6 is half of 15 etc :o
Thanks for putting a song in my head:
"Now, if 6 turned up to be 9,
I don't mind, I don't mind.
If all the hippies cut off their hair,
I don't care, I don't care...."
*exits stage left humming Jimi Hendrix*
-
More than the strikethrough, the bit that's confusing me is the assertion that 4 is half of 10 and 6 is half of 15 etc :o
Thanks for putting a song in my head:
"Now, if 6 turned up to be 9,
I don't mind, I don't mind.
If all the hippies cut off their hair,
I don't care, I don't care...."
*exits stage left humming Jimi Hendrix*
Beautiful People :)