среда, 3 июня 2015 г.

uStupid Shipping Gang Sends Three Tiny SIMs In Three Separate Giant Boxesr


4 4 4 9
  • Even if you’ve never opened your mobile phone up, you probably know what a SIM card looks like: they’re the fingernail-sized chips that have your phone number and carrier details. When reader TJ’s employer bought some recently, they employed classic Stupid Shipping Gang tactics to make sure that these cards didn’t go missing.

    simbox

    sprintsims

    The Stupid Shipping Gang is our name for the mysterious people in e-commerce who over-package the items that people order. In this case, TJ reports receiving three separate substantial boxes, each of which contained only one SIM.

    As a packaging expert explained to us last year, there’s actually a good reason for both of these crimes against common sense, even if they seem wasteful out here in the real world. Tiny envelopes tend to get lost in the postal system, so putting a tiny item in a large box helps keep it from getting lost. It also makes the item less likely to get lost in the shipping fulfillment center itself, which uses rollers that are too widely spaced for a teeny padded envelope.

    That’s also the reason why three separate boxes arrive, even if it seems wasteful: “There are a lot of people out there who will try to say that you short shipped them and not pay,” our Stupid Shipping kingpin explained.



ribbi
  • by Laura Northrup
  • via Consumerist


uGuy Stuck Forever With Video Evidence Of His Doomed McDonald’s Drive-Thru Marriage Proposalr


4 4 4 9
  • When you close your eyes and think of the place where you might want something very, very romantic to happen, does that place have a distinct smell of fried food and perhaps a crackly voice coming over a PA asking if you want to make your meal a combo? Someone out there, sure, but it wasn’t the ideal scenario for one woman whose boyfriend posted the evidence of his drive-thru failure of a marriage proposal.

    As one might expect when someone’s proposing with a chicken sandwich, things didn’t go so well for our brave protagonist. In the video’s description he says his inspiration for the proposal came from a joke his girlfriend made in the past about how he’d eventually propose to her in a chicken nugget box because he was bad at planning in advance — their first date had been at that same McDonald’s due to his ineptitude at planning.

    “So I thought she would love when I surprised her this way,” he writes in the description. Spoiler alert: “She didn’t love it like the way I thought she would.”

    He can now cringe along with everyone else for the rest of his life while watching the doomed proposal. Things start to go awry pretty much immediately after he directs her to check her bag thoroughly to make sure they haven’t put mayonnaise on her chicken sandwich… FINALLY! THE WORDS SHE HAS BEEN WAITING TO HEAR!

    She complies and opens up the box. Then, she giggles, uncomfortably, while staring at the bedecked bun before her.

    “Will you marry me?” he says into the palpable silence.

    “This is a joke,” she says eventually a bit teary. “No… You’re not serious.”

    Oh yes, he’s serious.

    “You can’t ask me to marry you in a chicken sandwich,” she says, and he seems to finally accept this has all gone very wrong as she weeps into her hands.

    (Don’t worry — there’s a lot more awkwardness packed in the three minutes after he pops the question, we wouldn’t want to spoil it ALL for you.)

    He tells ninemsn that the proposal was filmed on May 19, but he just recently posted it to YouTube at his friends’ urging.

    “It was a doofus move by me that but it wasn’t a tragedy,” he admits. “I couldn’t care less if people call me or dumb or not.”

    All is not lost, however — he says they’ve agreed “to wait longer until it’s time to get engaged.”



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


uBuying Out Life Insurance Policies Is A Bad Investment When People Keep Livingr


4 4 4 9
  • Earlier this year, a company called Life Partners declared bankruptcy. They had a pretty simple business model: they brought together investors and dying people in need of cash. The investors put up some money and paid the life insurance premiums, collecting the insurance payout when the person eventually dies. This business model doesn’t work out for the investor, though, when the insured person lives longer than anticipated.

    While the invention of advanced anti-retroviral drug cocktails to control HIV has been a good thing for humanity overall, it was not a good thing for the life settlements business. That’s the business of buying out life insurance policies so a terminally ill person has some cash to live on: people also call them “death bonds.”

    The business isn’t inherently evil, but it becomes evil when a company deliberately under-estimates how long a person can be expected to live for the purpose of calculating their cash payout and when selling potential investors on the idea. Life partners brought together people to own shares of a dying person’s policy, telling them what the anticipated payout would be and how long the person was expected to live. The problem? The patients didn’t die.

    From a human point of view, that’s great news. From the point of view of an investor stuck paying the person’s life insurance premiums, that’s a disaster. Life Partners sold shares of life insurance policies to individual investors and to asset managers, but a federal jury found the company guilty by of deliberately under-estimating how long insured people would live.

    Life Partners filed for bankruptcy after it was ordered to pay a judgement of $46 million by the Securities and Exchange Commission, but what complicates liquidating the company is that investments are tied up in the life insurance policies of people who still haven’t died.

    Bloomberg uses the example of one woman who bought a share of a policy in 2001. She put up $25,000, and the man was expected to die within 18 months. When his life insurance paid out, she would receive $30,000. The man hasn’t yet died, and her share of his life insurance premiums in the interim has been $8,000. This turned out to be a poor investment.

    Death Bond Investors Risk Total Loss in Life Partners Bankruptcy [Bloomberg]



ribbi
  • by Laura Northrup
  • via Consumerist


uNew York Regulator Finalizes First-Of-Its-Kind Plan To Govern Virtual Currency With “BitLicense”r


4 4 4 9
  • Nearly a year after the New York Department of Financial Services took steps to regulate businesses that operate in virtual currency, the Department announced the finalization of the “BitLicense” plan, making it the first set of guidelines for the use of cybercurrency.

    Reuters reports that the Wall Street watchdog issued its final rules requiring financial companies dealing with Bitcoin to obtain a BitLicense to operate in New York, as well as keep detailed records of all transactions, ensure those records are strongly guarded and establish consumer protections.

    While the final plan [PDF] continues to provide consumer protections – such as a complaint system – Benjamin Lawsky, head of the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) says the licensing rules focus primarily on increasing the oversight of financial intermediaries.

    “There is a basic bargain that when a financial company is entrusted with safeguarding customer funds and receives a license from the state to do so – it accepts the need for heightened regulatory scrutiny to help ensure that a consumer’s money does not just disappear into a black hole,” Lawsky said.

    That means software developers, individual users, customer loyalty programs, gift cards, currency miners, or merchants accepting it as payment would not be required to obtain BitLicenses.

    (Still not sure what Bitcoin is? Take a look at our quick and helpful guide to virtual currency).

    Under the new rules, in order for a company to quality for a BitLicense it must maintain records for seven years and create an effective cybersecurity program to ensure that sensitive consumer information is closely guarded.

    Additionally, the companies must safeguard consumer assets, issue consumers virtual currency receipts after each transaction and establish and maintain a policy to “fairly and timely resolve complaints.”

    Much like the NYDFS’s previous BitLicense drafts, the finalized version was quickly opposed by the virtual currency industry.

    Coin Center, a group focused on policy issues facing the currently, expressed concern Wednesday that many of the provision contained in the rules will impede innovation in digital currency.

    “The final BitLicense still creates a lopsided regime as between digital currency businesses and traditional money transmitters and banks,” Peter Van Valkenburgh, director of research for Coin Center, said in a statement. “It has cybersecurity and state-level anti money laundering requirements that will not and have never applied to the legacy payments industry.”

    UPDATE 1-New York regulator issues final virtual currency rules [Reuters]



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uHomeowners Accept Buyer’s Offer After She Sweetens The Deal By Offering Free Pizza For Lifer


4 4 4 9
  • When it comes to buying a home, prospective buyers are always looking for bargaining tools that can help them get a leg up on the competition. And in Portland, OR’s competitive real estate market, one new homeowner found the leverage she needed to close the deal in the form of free pizza for the sellers — for life.

    After the homeowners put their house on the market a few days ago, they had four offers within just three days, reports Fox 12 News, but one prospective buyer stood out for a cheesy, delicious reason: As the owner of a local pizzeria, she was willing to throw in a free pizza for the family every month.

    Along with the pizza, she offered $26,000 over the asking price and included free rent for the two months it’d take the family to move out.

    “I’m willing to do anything because I know this market is crazy,” the pizzeria owner says of throwing in the pizza deal. “You kind of have to get creative at this point.”

    The homeowners felt like it was the right choice as well.

    “I really feel like they wanted this place, and they understood where the seller was coming from, and they built an offer around that,” the current owner explained to Fox 12.

    At $20 a pizza every month for 40 years, all those pies add up to about $10,000. It’s all worth it, says the new owner.

    “I’m going to be buying them a pizza for life, so I will know them very well. I’ll watch their kids grow up,” she said.

    Portland home sale includes offer of free pizza for life [Fox 12 News]



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


uIndiana Lottery Debuts Bacon-Scented Scratch-Off Tickets, Prizes Include 20-Year Supply Of Baconr


4 4 4 9
  • [Insert joke about literally bringing home the bacon here]

    [Insert joke about literally bringing home the bacon here]

    It appears Indiana likes New Hampshire’s style, as the state’s Hoosier Lottery has introduced a bacon-scented scratch-off ticket of its own. But unlike previous bacon-themed lotteries designed to tempt your olfactory system, this one actually includes the savory meat in the list of prizes, with a 20-year-supply of bacon at stake for players.

    Along with rewarding whiff of meat on the $2 cards that went on sale yesterday, there are the usual cash prizes to tempt players, with instant prizes of up to $10,000 and five chances to win 20 years of bacon.

    But what if you don’t have a ginormous deep freezer/meat locker prepared to accept all that bacon? Not to fear — the prize will be paid out in 20 installments of bacon (worth approximately $250 each) to allow for easy refrigeration, according to the official rules [PDF].

    If you happen to be say, a vegetarian or someone else who doesn’t want all that bacon delivered to your doorstep? You can instead choose a one-time lump sum payment of $5,000 cash.



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


uAT&T Exec Says Wireless Companies Soon Won’t Be Footing Bill For Customers’ Devicesr


4 4 4 9
  • During the first decade-plus of the 21st century cellphone boom, most of us paid only a fraction of the full retail price for our phones because the wireless companies were willing to pick up the rest in exchange for locking us into 2-year contracts. But with more service providers pushing subscribers into plans that have them paying full price for their devices, the days of getting a new $650 phone for only $200 are quickly fading into memory.

    “I think it is one of those options that is going to go away slowly,” explained Ralph de la Vega, CEO for AT&T’s wireless business, to Re/code.

    AT&T recently decided to stop selling traditional 2-year contracts through third party retailers like Walmart and Best Buy. Consumers who want to buy service at one of these stores will have to sign up for an AT&T Next plan, where you pay full price for your device in monthly installments. Those who want the less-expensive phones that come with a 2-year contract will have to seek out an actual AT&T store or use ATT.com.

    T-Mobile doesn’t even offer subsidized phones to customers anymore. When it switched to its “un-carrier” model in 2013, T-Mo changed its pricing to reflect that customers either own their phones outright or pay for them in installments.

    In spite of the fact that providers are giving consumers fewer options, de la Vega insisted to Re/code that the move away from subsidized is not a result of wireless companies insisting on ditching the traditional contract model, but “because customers will choose it less often.”

    As a trade-off for paying more for your device, wireless providers are generally cutting the cost of monthly plans because they are no longer footing the bill for these customers’ phones. That has helped convince a number of consumers to pay full price, with AT&T claiming that around two-thirds of its phone sales are now through Next plans.



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist