I bought a Norton Anti-Virus in early July.
Affixed to the box was a sticker telling me I could get
back $20 USD and A CLAIM FORM.
I dutifully completed all necessary forms submitted, PER the instructions
and enclosed a copy of the receipt,and the original UPC code.
Today, about 6 weeks after I submitted it I get a card
telling me "all required products were not submitted".
What the hell does that mean? Oh, "products"?
So I read the "form" again and LOW and BEHOLD
Symantec is CORRECT!
The rebate isn't on Norton Anti-Virus THOUGH IT WAS AFFIXED TO
THE BOX, BUT FOR OTHER Norton PRODUCTS.
SO NORTON YOU FUCKED ME OUT OF $20.00 but YOU'LL NEVER GET
ANOTHER DIME FROM ME.
Xeno

All companies are very picky about rebates, READ CAREFULLY! I recently
bought the downloadable version of System Works, mailed in the rebate form
and had my $25 in hand within two months. I'm still waiting for my rebates
on some memory and a graphics card that I purchased about the same time, so
actually, Symantec probably does a better job at coming through compared to
other companies!

Leythos wrote:
Yeah - I was just thinking the same thing.

--
Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh. ~Doctor Who~

Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> said in
news:Tw8Fg.77071$Eh1.58216@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com:

Norton sucks any way. They make shit that is sometimes worse than the
things that it is suppose to resolve.

"Xeno Chauvin" <arfulbrank@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:su8Fg.12299$ph.3036@tornado.texas.rr.com...
Hello X, Perhaps you could use some reading lessons...!

Cheers.........!

Starz_Kid...

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:Tw8Fg.77071$Eh1.58216@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com. ..
My opinion: it's 30% Norton (I mean they DID put in on the box when it
shouldn't have been there in the first place being that it WAS for a
different product) and 70% the user (READ THE THING!) ^_^

On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 16:20:05 -0400, Sir Gis A Bun III
<gis_a_bun@hot_mail_no_spam.com> wrote:


We'd have to see the box to know one way or the other.

Since it was a sticker, the full terms of the rebate may not
have been available at the time of purchase. You're not
supposed to be pulling stickers off of products on retail
shelves, rather buying product before doing so- and once you
have bought product and *defaced* the packaging, it's quite
possible the store will not accept return- nor will many
once the packaging itself has been opened.

So, it is possible the sticker on the outside was not clear
about what this rebate applied to. It is possible that only
after undue burden would the purchaser receive money back by
returning product (if possible at all, some store managers
will simply deny you, leaving a long battle hardly worth the
time).

However, none of this accounts for the purchaser failing to
read the terms of the rebate AFTER it was taken from box and
being filled out for submission. At that point it was the
OP's fault but depending on what came before this point it
could be partially (or wholly) Symantec's fault for
misadvertising on the product.

My thinking as well, you just explained it much better ^_^, thats why I say
30% Symantec and 70% user

"Periwinkle" <mint@jelly.net> wrote in message
news:vNrFg.5541$Sn3.2535@newsread3.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
would not have purchased it otherwise and took it home and carefully read
the rebate information, he would not have sent in for the rebate. Would he,
or you, be any less angry with Symantec? I wouldn't.

On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 01:12:56 GMT, "Xeno Chauvin"
<arfulbrank@houston.rr.com> put finger to keyboard and composed:

To answer the question in the subject line, yes it *is* deceptive
advertising. But then the question remains, who put the rebate sticker
on the box, Symantec or your retailer?

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

"PWY" <pyork22@*mail.com> wrote in message
news:jbsFg.35524$so3.5152@southeast.rr.com...
then yes I would be angry with Symantec and or the retailer, but I would
have understood what the rebate is for BEFORE sending it in and then I would
NOT have sent it in. However, I would be angry with Symantec, or the
retailer, for the deceptive advertising. Having said that, if the original
poster is angry because Symantec will not give him his rebate, when the
rebate he has BLAH Blah Blah.......this is getting like programming in
assembly language spagettii *ROFLMOL*


I dunno...me...no like when big bad companies take money from Grom. Grom
smash companies and go BAM BAM with big club.

Whatever, its not ALL one persons fault and its not ALL Symantecs fault its
everyones fault...you, me and a dog named Boo. Like the Metallica Album says
"KILL THEM ALL!!!!!!"

Whew!! That felt good @_@

On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 02:27:09 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan>
wrote:


Seems a bit arbitrary to conclude that, since the OP's post
displays at least 3rd grade level.

It might really be plainly stated on that sticker, but how
about the first time it ISN'T plainly stated? Seems like
that will catch a few people off guard.

We haven't even scratched the surface of the larger issue
yet, which is: WTF was the OP thinking, paying MONEY for
Norton AV? I'd pay to NOT have that installed on a system
if it came down to it.

Grom Smash Symantec with big club go BAM BAM *falls over backwards*

Sorry, just in a weird mood

Norton Antivirus is a serious system hog so I agree completely.

Leythos wrote:
How's that go: Those who don't read are no better off than those who can't.

On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 02:20:54 -0400, Sir Gis A Bun III
<gis_a_bun@hot_mail_no_spam.com> put finger to keyboard and composed:

Not always. My local DSE store receives wads of stickers from Symantec
which the staff then affix to the product. It makes sense to do it
this way because old stock can be upgraded during the promotion
period.

My reading of the original post was that the rebate sticker had been
incorrectly affixed to a non-qualifying product. In retrospect,
although it would be unusual, it could be that the rebate was offered
only to those purchasers of NAV who had already bought other Symantec
products. Still, in this case, one would expect that this proviso
would be clearly visible without having to drill down through the fine
print.

I'd like to see the original rebate sticker.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

This is typical Symantec operations to screw a CUSTOMER out of the promised
rebate. They've been doing stuff like this ever since Norton sold the stuff
to them. He was the only winner.


"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:Tw8Fg.77071$Eh1.58216@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com. ..

You didn't read the email. The rebate was on the box bought but didn't apply
to that purchase but another different package.

Symatec has been doing this kind of stuff for a long time.

"Steve Bosell" <yar@NOTnehalemtel.net> wrote in message
news:7PSdnSjq89OhhXjZnZ2dnUVZ_r-dnZ2d@neonova.net...

I had Norton System Works and when the subscription ran out, it
stopped working completely. I don't mean no more updates, I mean I
couldn't run NDD NSD or the antivirus software. And forget removing
it. I tried to remove it and then install just a new version of
Norton's AV and it said that it couldn't do that because an older
version of Norton was on my system and I needed to remove it. Well,
my attempts to remove it finally led to a HD crash and HD Reformat.
I use to swear by Norton, now I swear at them. I am sure my account
is not typical, but I'll not buy another Norton product again.
T
D


On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 05:07:14 GMT, "Bullwinkle" <moose@verizon.net>
wrote:

On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 09:11:10 -0400, Tom Douglous
<Tom_Douglous@indaslammer.com> wrote:

<snip>

That account is typical. Norton wares = more trouble than
they're worth.

kony <spam@spam.com> jizzed:

Who was it once said that "Norton no longer has customers, only
victims..."?
___ _
/ __\ _ _ _ __ | |_
/ / | | | || '_ \ | __|
/ /___ | |_| || | | || |_
\____/ \__,_||_| |_| \__|


___ _ _ _
/ __\ _ _ | |__ | |__ | | ___
/__\//| | | || '_ \ | '_ \ | | / _ \
/ \/ \| |_| || |_) || |_) || || __/
\_____/ \__,_||_.__/ |_.__/ |_| \___|