In article >,
Sqwertz > wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 10:42:48 -0700, Dan Abel wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > (Steve Pope) wrote:
> >
> >> spamtrap1888 > wrote:
> >>
> >>>Did you notice the other case the guy is pursuing?
> >>>
> >>>"His firm, Callahan & Blaine of Santa Ana, also filed a class-action
> >>>complaint last month against 99 Cents Only Stores alleging unfair and
> >>>deceptive business practices and misleading advertising because the
> >>>discount chain raised some prices to 99.99 cents."
> >>
> >> I think it's way stupid of 99 Cents Only to charge 99.99 cents
> >> instead of 99 cents. It breeds badwill. It is not however actionable.
> >
> > So what do you think of Motel 6 and Super 8?
>
> I didn't know where they got their names until now. Maybe if
> their name name was Motel $6 or Super $8.88, then they could be
> sued.
I don't think they could be sued (but I'm no lawyer). I just think it's
stupid to put your price in your name. Inflation wasn't just invented,
you know.
> I do think a couple of the $.99 cent stores do claim "Everything
> .99 cents". So what the hell are they selling for $99.99?
From what was written above, it's US$.9999, or 99.99 cents. Since there
is no way that I know of to pay that amount, I imagine that means you
pay a dollar even.
> And
> does that explicitly rule out prices ending in $.99?
Good question. I think people would go along with that.
> I would say a store name of, "Everything 99 cents" with no other
> claims does not bar products that only end in $nnn.99.
Perhaps it depends on the signage. We've all certainly seen much worse
in the car world. There are all sorts of come-ons that really aren't
true.
--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA