Olympus E-1 Digital SLR - £98.70 (Apple Education Store) [CLOSED]

gizmoleeds

Tojo_Ralph wrote:

Category 1:
Those who "purchased" a camera and do accept that Apple's Terms and Conditions cover them to the point that Apple had a right to act the way they did.

I fit firmly into category one, as Apple's T&Cs were very clear:

2.6 Whilst we will make every effort to supply you with the Products listed on the Order Confirmation, there may be occasions where we are unable to supply these Products because, for example, such Products are no longer being manufactured or we are unable to source relevant components.

...Repayment of such monies will be the extent of our liability to you if we are unable to deliver to you the Products you have ordered.

Many people here seem to be blatantly ignoring the words "for example", and assuming that if they can prove it is still possible to obtain the cameras then Apple must provide them. But Apple do not say "we can cancel your order only in the event of being unable to source stock", they merely provide it as an example. And the law is pedantic.

harryc_3

MSE_ForumTeam1 wrote:

To be honest I was very close to closing this thread having just read the last couple of pages. However, this is obviously a very popular thread and it would be a shame for people to be able to use it to discuss the latest developments.

What I will say however, is that aggressive or personal comments towards other MSE'ers must stop right now. I will check this thread again soon and if there is no improvement, I'll have to consider locking it permanently.

again i ask you not to close this thread. It is clear that certain individuals would love this to be the case .God alone knows what motives they may have.Surely to close a thread and prevent an avenue for those of us who are still pursuing this matter would be unfair.

a simplier solution and i ponder if it is an avenue open to you is to monitor the postings of those who have blatantly sought to cause annoyance and perhaps to prevent or limit thier ability to post at all.

Hence i would urge those who like myself have written to apple and await a reply not to engage in responses to posts of a nature desinged to provoke a response.

rowantoad

But apple have not said anything other than 'no longer available'. i.e. they have used the very thing after the 'for example'. No one is therefore ignoring the 'for example'. what is in dispute is if they have made every effort to supply and if they are really unable to supply because they are no longer available.

Had they said no longer able to supply because we don't want to, or we screwed up, that would be another arguement.

bad-head-day

harryc wrote:

Hence i would urge those who like myself have written to apple and await a reply not to engage in responses to posts of a nature desinged to provoke a response.

I will do as you ask, and leave it at that for now.

Amba_Gambla

rowantoad wrote:

Free yourself of the illusion of your own self importance.

It's not self importance mate. It's a fact of learning.

A parent does something, it goes wrong, they teach their child not to make that mistake

A teacher does something, it goes wrong, they teach a child not to make that mistake

A friend does something, it goes wrong, they teach a friend not to make that mistake.......

I've followed many of these misprices in my 2+ years on this iste I've tried to get in on misprices. I've tried to buy a laptop for £90, I've tried to buy a TV for 49p, and it hasn't worked. Nobody has got the product for this misprice, and no compnay has ended up in court. I'm not trying to be 'self important' I'm trying to pass on my personal experience of these misprices and how they pan out. It doesn't happen. They don't admit to mistakes, they don't end up in court, and in 99.9% of cases, nobody gets the product in question.

The_Negotiator

But this wasn't a misprice but Apple lacking availability, B&Q are ending up in court shortly for exactly the same reason; selling then not supplying. Hence why the there is an interest in following this up.

Tallyho_2

The_Negotiator wrote:

But this wasn't a misprice but Apple lacking availability, B&Q are ending up in court shortly for exactly the same reason; selling then not supplying. Hence why the there is an interest in following this up.

Out of interest what was the B&Q story about ?

The_Negotiator

There is a thread somewhere about it in this section of the forum, basic summary (as far as I know) is that a number of people ordered items during sale, waited for delivery and it never came. At least a few people are taking court action against B&Q. There may be differences but I am not aware of what they might be?

Tallyho_2

Thanks for that , I'll try to find the thread .

rowantoad

Amba_Gambla wrote:

I've tried to buy a laptop for £90, I've tried to buy a TV for 49p, and it hasn't worked. .

Thats funny.