Cashback

jarr

I've noticed when people have cashback on a contract they take it off the monthly cost. The thing is, the full amount is going from your bank account each month so how can you call that a saving? It's the lump sum you have that's the main advantage.

grumbler

jarr wrote: »

I've noticed when people have cashback on a contract they take it off the monthly cost. The thing is, the full amount is going from your bank account each month so how can you call that a saving?

If you pay, say, 24x£20 and have £450 refunded as a cashback during 2 years, how can you not call this a saving?

It's the lump sum you have that's the main advantage.

I don't understand what you mean.
For me the total amount I spend over the term of the contract, not some lump sum, is what really matters.

mobilejunkie

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/558661

jarr

Irrelevant. You don't save monthly. The same direct debit goes out.

grumbler

Also you don't save daily and weakly. However, you save quarterly and yearly.

What you call "saving" is in fact "solving short-term cash-flow problems".

jenniewb

jarr wrote: »

Irrelevant. You don't save monthly. The same direct debit goes out.

So given the option, on your next new contract, would you rather have to pay £20 a month for 18 months, OR £20 a month for 18 months AND THEN get £50 back.

Why is that not a saving? Your gonna pay anyway, why not at least get something back doing it via a website referal rather then a google link?

mobilejunkie

Only £50 back? Wow - I'd rather have £340 in your scenario plus a decent free phone!

jenniewb

mobilejunkie wrote: »

Only £50 back? Wow - I'd rather have £340 in your scenario plus a decent free phone!

Did I say only one came with a free phone?

Point is £50 is better then nothing back. Or is it hard to understand that?

mobilejunkie

£50 is nothing. Is that hard to understand? I don't understand the rest because it's awful English that makes no sense.

grumbler

It was easy to understad that £340 was more than £50.
It was hard to understand why this was posted in this thread because £50 figure was just an example to make the point.
£340 is a bigger saving than £50, but this doesn't make any real difference.

arielcohen

Yeah but if you adjust for inflation £50 could be more then £340. so you cant always say £340 is more then £50 , but dont forget TCB gives an extra 1% cashback so £50 becomes £50.50, now if you invested that in gold last night you could have turned that £50.50 into more then it is. Any way I don't know what's going on but cashback is cashback and direct debits are directive. Right?