On March 12, 1998 Samson, who was the sales manager for JunkCo, happened to see

Question

On March 12, 1998 Samson, who was the sales manager for JunkCo, happened to see an advertisement for “Get the Point" a new presentation software program which generated various slides, overheads. and other media to present data in a sales environment. The ad stated the price was $19.95. Samson went to Delila's Software Emporium, the store advertising the product, and took the box of software to the counter. The clerk indicated the advertisement was in error and the actual price was $199.95. Samson became enraged at what he perceived was a "bait and switch" tactic and he threatened to sue for fraud. The Clerk, flustered, and in an effort to save the sale, told Samson he would have the right to upgrade the software to the multi-user version without cost. Ordinarily, upgrading cost $250 more. Samson paid the correct price ($199.95) and left the store. Several weeks later, Samson tried to upgrade for free and was told by Delila's the price would be $250. When Delila's refused to upgrade, Samson sued the store for failing to sell the product for $19.95 and for damages for the extra cost to purchase the upgrade at $250.

What is the likely outcome? Discuss.

Explanation / Answer

Generally no law stipulates firms to stick to an advertised pricing if it is wrong. Typing errors/ miscommunication & other hitches can outcome in merchandise being offered at what seems to be deep discounts - ones that would be harmful for the firm if it were compelled to stick to them. Rules against false advertising need an intention to defraud on the part of the advertiser. If a firm can demonstrate that an advertised price was only an error, then it is not deceptive advertising. Yet, if the error isn't too massive, it may be in the firm's best interest to stick to the advertised rate instead of causing dissatisfaction to several of its potential consumers. Bait & switch is a kind of deceptive advertising utilized pull in unsuspecting consumers. To attract a legal action, consumer is required to prove that the firm’s acts were intentional & a component of their overall selling tactic. The FTC explains it as an appealing but deceitful offer to sell a commodity which the advertiser actually doesn’t intend / wish to sell. Its aim is to switch customers from purchasing the advertised goods, to sell something else, generally at a higher rate / on a basis more beneficial to the advertiser

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse O
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.