Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > C-Store, ZEN, and Promotions

Thread Tools Display Modes
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5
# 11
06-11-2013, 03:01 AM
Wow, you're seemingly upset.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,051
# 12
06-11-2013, 04:18 AM
Originally Posted by neok182 View Post
It uses the exact same text description as the Caitain which is tradable. no where in the description for the borg boff does it say that it is in a box and once opened is not tradable. You can't return the box and if you've already bought another boff, you'd assume that since it's the same description it would be the same.
Do you do that often? Assume stuff and then complain that reality doesn't meet your assuption? Actually the reverse is true: the Caitian BOFF shares the description with the Liberated Borg BOFF, which predates the Caitian one by over a year.

They're not resposible for your assumptions.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 535
# 13
06-11-2013, 11:21 AM
They're responsible for correct advertising. Regardless of the date, it's the same description which makes it seem that both are the same, yet they are not.

You can't return a digital item therefor there is no possible way of knowing that the borg boff can't be traded until after you've bought it.

It's simple false advertising.

U.S.S. Gipsy Danger | U.S.S. Gunstar | U.S.S. Oswin
R.R.W. Coronatus | R.R.W. Valar Morghulis
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 165
# 14
06-11-2013, 12:14 PM
Originally Posted by neok182 View Post

It's simple false advertising.
No it's not.

Joined August 2009
Republic Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 357
# 15
06-11-2013, 02:08 PM
You're just flat-out mistaken. Otherwise, my Caitian boff would be tradable, as pointed out above. Same thing.

Trust me, I know what it feels like when a mistake costs you in this game. (Lost 90mil EC on an Exchange sale, because I had dropped to Silver.) That's it though. Cryptic was not deceptive at all.

Oh, and you could have clarified if it was tradable by asking here. It's not true that the only way to find out was to buy it.
Keep calm, and continue firing photon torpedoes.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,476
# 16
06-11-2013, 02:17 PM
User Error
Nothing Crytic did here is false advertising.

The User made a mistake.
Perhaps didn't read enough or take a couple minutes to research his purchase.
Whatever the reason, decrying the company that provided exactly what you purchased, for providing it.
That's not the way to handle things.

It was a $5 mistake.
Be thankful that it wasn't something more costly.

Read and Reread everything about what you are about to buy.
Take 5 minutes and look up info on it, as there are multiple places that S T O information is available online.

Use this as a cautionary tale.
But accusing the company for being responsible for your mistake ?
That's really not a very nice way to handle things.

Just my opinion.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 317
# 17
06-11-2013, 02:49 PM
Actually it might be false advertising.

Today's regulations define three main acts that constitute false advertising: failure to disclose, flawed and insignificant research, and product disparagement. The majority of these regulations are outlined in the Lanham Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C.A. ? 1051 et seq), which contains the statutes that govern trademark law in the United States.

Failure to Disclose: It is considered false advertising under the Lanham Act if a representation is "untrue as a result of the failure to disclose a material fact." Therefore, false advertising can come from both misstatements and partially correct statements that are misleading because they do not disclose something the consumer should know. The Trademark Law Revision Act of 1988, which added several amendments to the Lanham Act, left creation of the line between sufficient and insufficient disclosure to the discretion of the courts.

Directly from the C-Store: If you discard, sell, trade, or use a Borg Bridge Officer for training, you WILL NOT be able to claim a free replacement from the C-Store. You can only have a single Borg Bridge Officer active at once.
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 329
# 18
06-11-2013, 06:52 PM
They're not resposible for your assumptions.
Actually they are. When you are selling a product or a service it is your responsibility, as the seller, to make the details of the item/service explicitly clear. In this case, the cstore description is very poorly worded. To put it simply: the buyer assumed things worked a certain way because the wording in the description implied that it did. While i'm sure the intention is not false advertising, the fact is that it does technically fall under that definition - the description is not clear enough to give an accurate explanation as to how the whole trading thing works, in regards to the item. It also heavily implies that it works in a way that it does not - as in the other boff.

Again, not intentional i'm sure, but it is the responsibility of the company to make the details crystal clear prior to purchasing it. The solution is simple: add in a clearer description

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:00 AM.