понедельник, 26 октября 2015 г.

uNew Subscription Service Offers Live-Streaming Broadway Showsr


4 4 4 9
  • (Gane)
    If you can’t make it in person to see the neon lights of Broadway, there’s now another option for fans of the theater: a new subscription service is offering up on-demand, live-streaming theatrical productions. I know what you’re thinking — how will I be able to aggressively shush the annoying people talking throughout?

    Two veteran Broadway producers teamed up to start BroadwayHD, Stewart F. Lane and Bonnie Comley, who have worked in the past on partnering with networks to broadcast stage performances, reports Mashable. Technology has come along way, making it easier to provide live content on-demand to audiences anywhere with an internet connection.

    “The streaming thing, the whole convenience of ‘what I want when I want it,’ is just how people are conditioned to consume their entertainment nowadays,” Comley told Mashable. “It’s how the business is evolving. It’s art meets theater meets the Internet.”

    Customers can choose from a monthly subscription ($14.99), a yearly membership ($169.99), or pay à la carte to watch whatever one specific show. There will also be some free content.

    But what about ticket sales? Won’t they suffer? Nah, say BroadwayHD’s founders — it’s totally different than being in the theater with other people and reacting to the live performers on stage. Actors will be sweating, spitting, crying and acting in real time, however, which provides some of that live experience without the trip to New York City.

    “This is part of an evolution,” Lane told the Associated Press. “We’re never going to replace the communal experience of seeing actors live. I understand that. New York has an amazing caliber of talent — of writers, directors and performers — that we’d like to share with the world. If they can’t get here in time, we can share that with the world in the best way we can.”



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


uState Attorney General Wants To Know If New Yorkers Are Actually Getting The Broadband They Pay Forr


4 4 4 9
  • (Jeremy Schultz)

    It’s a pretty basic tenet of American commerce: if someone advertises something to you at a certain price, they actually have to provide you that thing at that price. Like, for example, a broadband internet connection: if a company like Verizon, Cablevision, or Time Warner Cable says it will give you a connection of a certain speed, it’s supposed to make good. But in one sate, the top legal office thinks the ISPs may not be making good on their claims, and wants to know what’s up.

    Reuters reports that New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman sent letters to the broadband ISPs that operate in the state, asking about just that. The problem is that the state’s big three ISPs are promising consumers high-speed, blazing-fast broadband internet suitable for modern use, but that the speeds consumers can actually get may not come anywhere near those promises.

    The Attorney General’s office sent the letters to the executives at Verizon, Cablevision, and TWC on Friday, October 23. All three companies are being asked to provide the state with copies of every disclosure they make to customers, as well as copies of any internal testing they may have done of their own network speeds.

    Tim Wu (who invented the term “net neutrality” and unsuccessfully ran for office in New York last year), now serving in a senior role for Schneiderman’s office, wrote the letters. In them he specifically called attention to the harms consumers’ data suffers due to interconnection disputes, when businesses fight it out over who has to move what where. Wu pointed out that it doesn’t matter what premium offerings consumers are paying for if their connections still bottleneck hard at an interconnection point.

    “New Yorkers deserve the Internet speeds they pay for. But, it turns out, many of us may be paying for one thing, and getting another,” Schneiderman said in a statement.

    Representatives for Verizon, Cablevision, and TWC all told Reuters that they were confident in their broadband offerings and happy to work with the attorney general’s office to resolve the issue.

    New York launches probe into speeds at big Internet broadband providers [Reuters]



ribbi
  • by Kate Cox
  • via Consumerist


uWalmart Offering Fewer Products, Widening Aislesr


4 4 4 9
  • (Mike Mozart)

    Walk into any Walmart and you’ll see shelves upon shelves stocked with a wide variety of products in every shape and size. But that will soon change, as the retail giant begins a transformation of sorts by decluttering its aisles of excess items. 

    The Wall Street Journal reports that the big box store is taking steps to tame the stores’ sprawling inventory and organize its abundance of merchandise in a move to meet consumers’ tastes and turn a profit.

    First up, the company says it will decrease the number of products it offers. So instead of having six different sizes of the same kind of ranch dressing, the particular condiment brand might just have two size options.

    “It’s the same brand, exactly the same item, but it just comes in six different sizes,” Greg Foran, Walmart’s chief executive, tells the WSJ. “I look at that and I say to our team, ‘Do you really need six?’ The answer is we probably don’t.”

    So far, the company says it’s cut about 2,500 items from its average 120,000-product inventory in stores.

    The company also plans to display those fewer products in a different way, the WSJ reports.

    Foran says that while Walmart will be dropping some inventory, those that remain in the stores will be showcased in wider aisles: 10 feet wide compared to the current four-foot pathways.

    Additionally, the company is experimenting with several other inventory changes: restocking products during normal business hours, lowering shelf height near registers, and ditching some of the bin displays littered throughout the store.

    Under the new stocking system, the company says it can cut down on reorders of products that are simply lost in the backroom, the WSJ reports.

    The idea to lower shelves that hold gum, candy and other impulse products was made to give consumers a better view of the store from the front.

    The WSJ estimates that the change could cost the retailer hundreds of millions of dollars in sales. But the company says it will mitigate those losses by adding other, more popular products like fresh produce to its inventory lineup.

    “These are not willy-nilly decisions, these are decisions being driven by customer behavior,” Deisha Barnett, a spokeswoman for Walmart, says.

    While the changes might seem subtle to consumers, the WSJ reports that hasn’t been the case for suppliers of the company.

    The company reportedly sent out renegotiation letters to vendors and suppliers over the summer asking them to adapt to the retailer’s new processes.

    So far, that’s been met with apprehension, as some large suppliers say they can’t afford to pay fees for selling products at the store or accept longer payment windows.

    “All of the changes we are asking suppliers to make are to be true to our business model and everyday low prices,” Barnett tells the WSJ. “Change isn’t always easy. What we’re doing is what is happening across the industry.”

    Wal-Mart Shrinks the Big Box, Vexing Vendors [The Wall Street Journal]



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uScammers Who Defrauded Scam Victims Barred From Scamming Anyone Elser


4 4 4 9
  • (Tara Chavez)
    Imagine you’ve been a victim of that old “woke up in a bathtub with my kidney gone” urban legend. As you stumble out of the hotel in urgent need of medical care, you come across a helpful doctor who will tend to your wounds… only to wake up in another tub with another missing organ. Replace “unauthorized donation of precious, life-sustaining organs” with “telemarketing fraud” and you’ve got the basis for a scam that took in nearly $3 million from people who had already been the victims of fraud.

    The operators of a Florida-based telemarketing scam called Consumer Collection Advocates have been officially barred from making any further attempts to trick scam victims into paying more money for a service that doesn’t do anything.

    The scam run by CCA, according to a complaint [PDF] filed last year by the Federal Trade Commission, worked like this:

    Starting in 2011, CCA would cold-call consumers, claiming that the company ran a public service campaign that collects funds for victims of telemarketing fraud, like bogus timeshare or precious metal investments.

    For an up-front fee — 20% of the amount previously lost to scammers — CCA said it would recover victims’ money. If the victim, likely already out a lot of cash because of the earlier fraud, pleaded an inability to pay the 20% fee, CCA would consider knocking it down to 10%.

    CCA reps told these victims that the company could get back a substantial portion of the money they lost, and do so within 30 to 180 days.

    Even if the consumer said “no thanks” to the CCA sales pitch, the company would send them a prepared contract, a limited power of attorney form, and other materials — and keep calling to make additional pitches.

    Those who gave in an signed up for the CCA recovery service often found that their 10-20% fee — which ranged from a few hundred dollars to several thousand — might as well have been burned in the fireplace.

    CCA, which had been so active in pursuing the customer’s business, suddenly stopped calling after it received the fee. When customers called to inquire about the status of their case, they were told that CCA needed more time.

    “In numerous instances, consumers who pay the upfront fee… have not recovered the funds they lost in previous telemarketing transactions,” reads the FTC complaint. “Therefore, consumers have lost even more money on telemarketing fraud by also losing the money they spent to purchase Defendants’ recovery services.”

    CCA’s unfulfilled promises that was likely to recover victims’ money in a short window of time violated the FTC Act’s prohibition against deceptive marketing.

    More importantly, the Telemarketing Sales Rule bars any company from “Requesting or receiving payment of any fee or consideration from a person for goods or services represented to recover or otherwise assist in the return of money or any other item of value paid for by, or promised to, that person in a previous telemarketing transaction, until seven (7) business days after such money or other item is delivered to that person.”

    Basically, even if CCA was selling a legitimate money-recovery service, the company still violated the law by demanding the upfront payment.

    Today, the FTC announced that a federal court has approved a final judgment [PDF] against CCA, valued at $2.835 million.

    The company and its owner are not only banned from doing any more business in the recovery services field, but also from telemarketing in general — “directly or through an intermediary, including by lead generation, consulting, brokering, investing, advising, or training.”

    To pay back the $2.825 million, the court has seized and frozen seven bank accounts, and ordered CCA to turn over all customer info so that the FTC can contact victims and administer any repayments.



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist


uGood News: Loose Tarantula That Freaked Out Petco Shopper Was Just A Shed Exoskeletonr


4 4 4 9
  • Last week, we shared a reader’s story of encountering a cool spider just hanging out on a cart in the middle of the store while shopping at Petco. Yes, Petco does sell tarantulas, but they live in habitats. Are spiders really supposed to just hang out on the cleaning cart while their habitats are cleaned?

    Here’s what reader David saw in the store:

    spidercart

    As it turns out, no, they aren’t. “Our policy is that the animal should be contained in a specific carrier during cleaning, so we are following up with the store,” a Petco spokesperson explained to Consumerist when we sent over the photos. Today, they sent us a fascinating update to the story: the “spider” on the cart wasn’t a spider at all. It was a shed spider skin.

    This might be obvious to experienced tarantula-keepers, but the problem is that most people wandering through pet stores are not experienced tarantula-keepers. Reader David, the person in the Petco, knew enough to speculate that the skin might be a molt, but he still ran away.

    Here’s a shed skin from a baby tarantula. Here’s the underside of a molt, showing the fuzzy exoskeleton and how the animal is able to wriggle its legs out of the skin. Here’s a tarantula side by side with a molted skin: you may start to see where the confusion comes in.

    Petco checked with David’s local store, and found out that the “spider” starring in this story was indeed a molt. While it’s good to hear that no pets were ever sitting around loose, we’d recommend that pet store employees stash molts somewhere other than the edge of the cleaning cart where it can frighten or confuse shoppers.

    PREVIOUSLY:
    Shopper Spots Loose Tarantula On Cleaning Cart At Petco, Freaks Out



ribbi
  • by Laura Northrup
  • via Consumerist


uVerizon Wireless Asks FCC For Permission To Start Offering WiFi Callingr


4 4 4 9
  • (Jeepers Media)
    Not one to be left behind while the other major carriers are hanging out on the technology bandwagon, Verizon Wireless has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to enable WiFi calling on its network.

    In applying to the FCC for the waiver, Verizon likely didn’t want anyone calling them out for skipping a step: AT&T recently got the go-ahead it needed to offer WiFi calling to customers, by applying for a waiver from the FCC.

    See, in order to offer WiFi calling, carriers are required to offer an alternative to Touch Telephone (TTY) systems for deaf customers, called Real-Time Text, or RTT. That technology is similar, but it’s more reliable than TTY is on WiFi networks… and won’t be available until 2016, thus the need for a waiver from the FCC.

    Of the big four carriers, only AT&T and Verizon Wireless have bothered to apply for the waiver. Despite the fact that Sprint and T-Mobile both already provide WiFi calling as an option, they’re apparently doing so in violation of the FCC’s rules — a fact AT&T was quick to note to anyone who would listen.

    “We are left scratching our heads as to why the FCC still seems intent on excusing the behavior of T-Mobile and Sprint, who have been offering these services without a waiver for quite some time,” AT&T senior executive vice president Jim Cicconi wrote when announcing AT&T’s successful application.

    Once the waiver is approved by the FCC, it’s likely that Verizon will roll out WiFi calling in the near future. Slashgear notes that Verizon does offer WiFi calling through its app on iOS, but FCC permission will allow it to support the native feature in both iOS9 and Android.



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


uMan Says E-Cigarette Exploded In His Hand, Pieces Of Metal Pierced Wallr


4 4 4 9
  • Screen Shot 2015-10-26 at 12.48.39 PMWhile it’s been several years since we reported on an e-cigarette exploding while charging or being used by a consumer, that doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened. Case in point: A Wichita, KS, man says the device he used to try to beat his nicotine habit erupted, burning his hands and damaging nearby walls. 

    The man tells KAKE that he had recently purchased the e-cigarette and was following the manufacturer’s guidelines on how to use the device when it simply exploded.

    The man says he charged the battery and inserted it into the device.

    “I heard a sizzling like it was hitting and I hadn’t pushed the button yet,” the man recalls. “I was on my way to listen to it and when I went to listen to it, it just went bam, like a bullet.”

    The man says the device burst into two pieces that hit two walls in his home and scattered metal and plastic fragments across the room.

    Screen Shot 2015-10-26 at 12.50.11 PMWhile the man tells KAKE he suffered minor burns, he believes it could have been worse, noting that the pieces shot across the room with enough force they could have killed someone.

    After the incident, the man took the e-cigarette back to the store. Employees there told the man he needed to purchase a small computer chip to keep the battery from exploding, but he says he wasn’t given that information when he bought the device.

    The volatility of e-cigarettes has been a concern for consumer advocates after such explosions became an almost common occurrence for consumers.

    Starting back in 2012, Consumerist reported on several incidents in which the devices burst into flames or caused injury to consumers.

    Back in 2013, the Tobacco Vapor Electronic Cigarette Association said it was working with government agencies to implement rules requiring that companies manufacturing the devices carried liability insurance on all products.

    Last year, advocates shared concerns that the secondary risks of e-cigarettes, such as poisoning and a tendency for the devices to explode, could be more deadly than traditional cigarettes.

    E-cigarette explodes in man’s hand, blows through wall [KAKE]



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist