Read the Small Print - afterhours

You are very wrong. A charge back usually DOES induce additional cost to the vendor/merchant. The credit card companies normally penalize the merchant, and for the merchant to explain a legit purchase charge, and that they believe the charge back should NOT be processed, is a laborious task for the merchant. The CC processors (visa, mastercard, etc.) do this on purpose -- they have a vested interest in keeping the CC user happy so they can extract their fees on a continuing basis. The CC processor feels no obligation to suck up to the merchant. Fraud works both ways, but the CC processor always favors the consumer -- illogically as the consumer is usually the one who perpetuates a fraud where chargebacks are concerned.

As a matter of fact, when some consumer downloads software, pays for it to get the license, then does a chargeback for a refund (but very likely keeps on using the software) -- that is actually theft. Might not leave a gaping whole on the store shelf, but it is theft. Or perhaps naysayers would feel that copying a DVD or CD, or wardriving for wifi service or any number of other non-obvious accumulation of services or intellectual property isn't theft (no hole on the shelf)? Come on -- perhaps it doesn't foster super warm-n-fuzzies to have to spell out what they won't accept, but they are well within their rights to post it. Would you like it that I've purchased several of your products and come back to you for refunds now that I've acquired the serials? I would think not. And it would not be fair to you and what you have crafted for me to pull such a stunt.

I am not affiliated with this company, nor have I even tried iDefrag (I already own Drive Genius and other ProSoft wares), but pointing out a company policy AS A COMPETITOR is bad form. I'm very surprised that a representative (Gordon?) from Prosoft would stoop to this.

I can see where features of this product could be fine additions to my copy of your Drive Genius package -- this software's GUI looks far more detailed than the graphics DG offers. Does it do a better job? I'm technical enough to know that is unlikely -- but it is far more informative in the process.

Why -- I wonder -- did Prosoft feel the need to post this as a general comment (and twice)? Why not as a reply to any erroneous info directly to those comments?

Reply to This

Tuesday, August 14 2007 @ 06:39 AM PDT

Read the Small Print - Prosoft

Hi There,

My post was indeed mistakenly posted twice and I immediately marked it for deletion but VT has yet to take the duplicate post down..

I appreciate your comments and we are always taking customer feedback into consideration. However, I guess I'm not sure I'd agree with you when you say Prosoft (namely me, Gordon) has "stooped" so low as to point out a competitor's policy. Um, that's what VersionTracker is all about, giving feedback about software, companies, policies, etc.. I think it's very important for customers to be aware of companies and their policies, especially when they are as abrasive as the one I mentioned..

Are there costs involved for companies when a person seeks a refund by getting a chargeback? Sure, but they are tiny...Would Prosoft ever proactively threaten our customers with legal action to recoup those costs? Heavens no.. We don't operate like that.....We like our customers and if they're so unhappy with something (or bought something thinking it did something it doesn't) that they seek a chargeback with their credit card company, well, we let them on their way.. There is no challenge from us, no legal fight...

I guess I find it just a little bit odd that you are offended by my post, where I "stoop" so low as to point out a competitor's policy whereby they threaten legal action. However, you have apparently no problem with that policy (and in fact seem to thoroughly defend it in a way that makes the average reader think you may indeed be connected somehow to that company).

I have been doing some more reading on this page:

http://www.coriolis-systems.com/refund-policy.php

Under the heading of "Please be polite" the company goes on about how if you're a customer, don't be rude to them, because in extreme cases, it may result in legal action against you..

So with that, honestly, I guess I better not say much more about the company, the products or their policies.. I do not want this to escalate into an extreme case :-)

Reply to This

Wednesday, August 15 2007 @ 05:07 PM PDT

Where's your "small print"? - Kendall Gelner

I read the "small print". What I found was a very well laid out page that described a reasonable set of proceedures for requesting a refund, and that chargebacks were not tolerated because they were the wrong way to go about a refund - true of any company! If they feel a refund is justified, they will give one to you.

Then I thought, if this normal policy on chargebacks has ProSoft so riled up, they must have a more elightened policy, one that welcomes chargebacks as a startdard refund mechanism. Well I can't even link to the "small print" for ProSoft, because there is no small print - along with no description AT ALL one just what a user would do to request a refund for a rather more expensive application.

Simply put, I think it the height of arrogance to mock someone for a policy when you will not even publish one!

If you think about it, for something that is potentially a single use application like a defragmentor you have to think that more people than average might stoop so low as to use the software once and then attempt a refund.

I was looking for a defrag utility, but now I would not use Prosoft software if it was raining from the sky along with licence codes. I'll buy iDefrag and be happy with a developer that takes the time to outline just what a buyer can expect from a transaction in clear non-legal text, instead of taking to the internet slandering competitors. And, I'll make sure to tell my friends the same thing if they are looking for utilities.

Reply to This

Sunday, September 02 2007 @ 11:10 PM PDT