Author: Joachim Rang
Date: 14:59:43 06/18/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 18, 2003 at 14:07:29, Mr j smith wrote: >On June 18, 2003 at 13:02:31, Joachim Rang wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>obviously you did not know the facts. On the websites chessbase.com and >>chessbase.de there were prior to the release and a few days after a wrong >>advertisement which claimed that J8 will also include the versions which were >>used in New York. There are several printed ads too, which claimed that. >> >>To take your example: This would be a similiar situation, if Mercedes Benz >>advertized its new S-Class in two versions, claiming that each version will have >>air conditioning system. Now you buy the cheaper one and notice that there is no >>air conditioning system. You ask Mercedes what is the reason and the say, sorry >>it was a mistka of our marketing department. We corrected the advertisments and >>sorry your version has no air conditioning system. >> >>Every court in every country will give you the right in such a case, to either >>give your product back or to get compensation for the lack of an assured >>characterisitc of the product. >> >>Do you agree? >> >>On June 18, 2003 at 12:50:24, Mr j smith wrote: >> >>>For those who continue to insist that Chessbase has wronged them by not >>>including 2 free engines with their purchase of Junior 8, in the face of the >>>plain meaning of the advertisments (which clearly state that only Deep Junior >>>purchasers receive the 2 free engines ), in contrast to the ambiguous cd covers, >>>and example from the real world may help show why your whining will fail to >>>bring you satisfaction. >>> >>>Suppose that a franchise holder of Mercedes Benz automobiles places an ad in >>>various newspapers and by accident the people in charge of the advertising copy >>>switch prices and certain details of a Mercedes Benz with a plain old Ford >>>sedan. In my example instead of selling for $50,000 the Benz was advertised for >>>$10,000. >>> >>>Do you think it would be both fair and legal for Mercedes Benz to honor such a >>>mistake? Of course not. There is no court in the United States that would >>>honor such an obvious mistake, and in the United States, there is the UCC >>>(Uniform Commercial Code) which deals with such issues. >>> >>>From the examples of advertised print that I have seen it would seem that there >>>was a mistake on the part of the advertisement department of Chessbase, which >>>Chessbase almost immediately rectified. The mistake however is only >>>superficial; the CD cover. A careful reading of all the ad copy clearly states >>>that only Deep Junior 8 was offering 2 free engines, not Junior8. > > >No, unfortunately for you, I am not wrong. The printed ads I have seen here do >not give rise to any claim on the part of purchasers of Junior8. Chessbase made >a mistake and almost immediately rectified the ads. Furthermore, if you >carefully read the ads, which for some reason you refuse to do, it is clear that >the 2 free engines come only with deep junior, not junior 8. Did you see the ads prior to the correction made by Chessbase? They were very clear, so clear as now the corrected ones. Older said in plain english: With Junior 8 you receive two engines. The actually J8 and the engine which played Kasparov in New York. Now the ads say as clear as above: With Junior 8 you receive the improved J8, but not the original engine which played Kasparov. That is pretty clear, isn't it? If you purchase now J8 than you should know, that there will be no engine which played Kasparov. If you purchased J8 when the old ads were running it was also clear that you should receive J8 with the engine which played Kasparov. I don't see here room for interpretations.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.