Ranting to /dev/null

I'm going to disagree mildly. You won't find me renting a video from Blockbuster, mostly because of their heinously bad selection, but I think that most people, when they see a policy like a "No Late Fees" policy will automatically think "What's the catch?". And a $1.25 after a week is still much milder than their old late fees; it isn't until a month later that they charge you the whole price of the movie. I think we could agree that, generally, someone who keeps a movie for a month probably doesn't intend to return it at all and so a company is probably justified at that point in charging the customer for its value. Now, I won't debate that the attorney might have a good case, because it still seems like false advertising in the strict sense (i.e. what is a restocking fee if not a late fee?). And I won't be sad if Blockbuster has to pay some megafee. It'll just make up for all the money I've wasted on their bloated rental charges in years past.

Sure, the ad does sound fishy, but it's generally considered the responsibility of the advertiser to spell out all terms and conditions, even if it's in a rapid voice-over accompanied by two pages of fine print that you can't read. As far as I can tell, Blockbuster has no such caveats.

I do agree that after a month, Blockbuster is perfectly justified in charging you for the movie, but trying to spin that as a break for customers instead of a way of dumping inventory is pretty disingenuous. The clear intention of the ad is to suggest that there's no penalty for not returning rentals in a timely fashion. There's a penalty.

i'm just thankful that my local library carries most of the titles i want. i can even reserve videos from my computer, and then just go pick them up when i get the email telling me they are there. they still have late fees, but i never feel too bad about paying those. as far as blockbuster--i hope they lose big. big companies have gotten comfortable with bilking individuals, knowing most of us are too busy to fight them. besides that, most chains are too big to care if they lose a customer. they need cases like these to keep them on their toes. yeah, it's the responsiblity of the consumer to know what they are getting themselves into. yeah, the first time i saw that commercial, i laughed, because it was obviously a marketing scheme to the benefit of blockbuster, being made out to be for the sake of the consumer. but i agree with ryan--you shouldn't have to read the fine print just to rent a video.

Although I agree with Ryan about the ad campaign being, I believe you put it so eloquently, "bollocks," in that it is indeed false advertising, Rob's right that they're a lot more flexible. Lauren neglected to return 2 dvds and 2 vhs tapes from Blockbuster. They didn't even charge her credit card, they just added the total to her next checkout, which when she saw the $50 she would have to spend to rent a movie, returned all the videos (mind you, this is probably 2 or more months after renting them) for a $1.25 fee apiece. Not bad. But at the bottom line, the ad campaign is incorrect.