I Am Seiously Considering....
- Thread starter Kumaki
- Start date
I'm not sure Craig has a choice in the matter. I'm not an attorney, but wouldn't handing the information over to a 3rd party presumably violate UK privacy rules? Or EU ones?That's not a horrible idea.. in theory... but makes a whole bunch of additional work for ED..
Craig would never agree because he needs to agree to handing over his pre-order information.
Neelix
Insecticidal Maniac
I haven't researched UK privacy laws but I very much doubt this would be an obstacle in this case. ED is Craig's Supplier, and the reason these details would be supplied to ED is to facilitate completion of the original transaction. This should (in theory) fall within the allowed use terms of the privacy laws.I'm not sure Craig has a choice in the matter. I'm not an attorney, but wouldn't handing the information over to a 3rd party presumably violate UK privacy rules? Or EU ones?That's not a horrible idea.. in theory... but makes a whole bunch of additional work for ED..
Craig would never agree because he needs to agree to handing over his pre-order information.
- Neelix
With a proper contract that also forbids me to use the information I get for anything but delivery, this should be possible, yes.
Kumaki
Well-Known Member
I do not know much, if anything, about UK or EU laws...concerning privacy or anything else.I haven't researched UK privacy laws but I very much doubt this would be an obstacle in this case. ED is Craig's Supplier, and the reason these details would be supplied to ED is to facilitate completion of the original transaction. This should (in theory) fall within the allowed use terms of the privacy laws.I'm not sure Craig has a choice in the matter. I'm not an attorney, but wouldn't handing the information over to a 3rd party presumably violate UK privacy rules? Or EU ones?That's not a horrible idea.. in theory... but makes a whole bunch of additional work for ED..
Craig would never agree because he needs to agree to handing over his pre-order information.
- Neelix
I WILL, however, draw a parallel in American law...in this case, concerning Protected Health Information. This can be shared with anyone who is facilitating that person's treatment.
As a medical biller, I routinely see other people's Protected Health Information...since I am part of the chain that is facilitating their treatment (my work is what sees to it the doctor gets paid!!)
I would ASSUME...that Protected Health Information...would be more guarded by any sane set of laws...than someone's customer list, or pre-order list....ESPECIALLY if the information being shared...was done with the intent and effect...of facilitating those customers being served.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sort of, but you can't bring in new companies to use the information without permission. The people using the information are pretty limited. This would be like contracting a new provider. You'd need to sign a release for the information. What you're doing at work is analogous to Craig sharing the order information with Jacquelin.I do not know much, if anything, about UK or EU laws...concerning privacy or anything else.I haven't researched UK privacy laws but I very much doubt this would be an obstacle in this case. ED is Craig's Supplier, and the reason these details would be supplied to ED is to facilitate completion of the original transaction. This should (in theory) fall within the allowed use terms of the privacy laws.I'm not sure Craig has a choice in the matter. I'm not an attorney, but wouldn't handing the information over to a 3rd party presumably violate UK privacy rules? Or EU ones?That's not a horrible idea.. in theory... but makes a whole bunch of additional work for ED..
Craig would never agree because he needs to agree to handing over his pre-order information.
- Neelix
I WILL, however, draw a parallel in American law...in this case, concerning Protected Health Information. This can be shared with anyone who is facilitating that person's treatment.
As a medical biller, I routinely see other people's Protected Health Information...since I am part of the chain that is facilitating their treatment (my work is what sees to it the doctor gets paid!!)
I would ASSUME...that Protected Health Information...would be more guarded by any sane set of laws...than someone's customer list, or pre-order list....ESPECIALLY if the information being shared...was done with the intent and effect...of facilitating those customers being served.
Kumaki
Well-Known Member
Well, no, the companies have to be in agreement to be sharing the information.
When my company gets a new doctor, we have a contract in force, and it is because of that contract that the doctor is allowed to share the Protected Health Information with me...so that I am able to then do my job - getting him paid - which is a part of facilitating the patient's treatment.
My point was...I'm sure ANY sane set of laws would more closely guard the information I get....than the information ED would get from Craig...his pre-order list. Yes, Craig would have to agree to it, BUT, my point was no actual LAW should be standing in the way of this happening...especially seeing as how it would be being done in the interest of facilitating the original order and serving the customer.
Unless I'm badly mistaken about the situation, Craig is basically broke, and unable to fulfill these orders. We know that the reasons for this are not entirely Craig's fault. However, he seems to be in a position of not being able to fulfill these orders.
So it comes down to either
A - Craig gets help fulfilling the orders - as I have suggested
or
B - Craig does not fulfill the orders, people get P.O.'ed and cancel, which now creates a refund queue, which Craig also cannot service...at which point this ruins Craig and he bankrupts on the whole deal - leaving behind a bunch of really pissed off people who didn't get a Pandy or a refund.
I would think Craig and all parties concerned would do whatever it took to avoid "Situation B."
When my company gets a new doctor, we have a contract in force, and it is because of that contract that the doctor is allowed to share the Protected Health Information with me...so that I am able to then do my job - getting him paid - which is a part of facilitating the patient's treatment.
My point was...I'm sure ANY sane set of laws would more closely guard the information I get....than the information ED would get from Craig...his pre-order list. Yes, Craig would have to agree to it, BUT, my point was no actual LAW should be standing in the way of this happening...especially seeing as how it would be being done in the interest of facilitating the original order and serving the customer.
Unless I'm badly mistaken about the situation, Craig is basically broke, and unable to fulfill these orders. We know that the reasons for this are not entirely Craig's fault. However, he seems to be in a position of not being able to fulfill these orders.
So it comes down to either
A - Craig gets help fulfilling the orders - as I have suggested
or
B - Craig does not fulfill the orders, people get P.O.'ed and cancel, which now creates a refund queue, which Craig also cannot service...at which point this ruins Craig and he bankrupts on the whole deal - leaving behind a bunch of really pissed off people who didn't get a Pandy or a refund.
I would think Craig and all parties concerned would do whatever it took to avoid "Situation B."
A handful of existing customers ordering a spare unit and taking the place of a preorderer won't help much.
About 1800 new units sold will clear things up.
Kumaki
Well-Known Member
Even if it helps a little bit...it's better than no help at all!
Like I said it was a suggestion.
Because, in my scenario...EVERY SINGLE WAIT ORDER PLACED....translates to a current user getting a Pandy. instead of needing to sell three or four Pandys before someone waiting gets one.
What you are essentially doing is recycling the queue list. People who have been on it a long time get off the list. People who go on it instead...go in knowing that they will be waiting....but get a lower price for doing so. Those people would not mind waiting since THEY already HAVE a unit. Plus they would not be waiting two and three years like some on the current list are.
My "solution" IS INTEDED TO BUY TIME!! Not to completely solve the problem, but to buy some time...and get people who have been waiting...get them a Pandy in their hands NOW. The queue is then made up of people who aren't as impatient...since they already HAVE one...and are also thus much less likely to cancel and order something else or somewhere else.
And in order to make it work...you have to give the people willing to go on queue SOMETHING...like a cheaper price, free TV-Out cables when they arrive, a free SD Card...something....because nobody in their right mind would place a WAIT order for the same price as they could place a NOW order.
The difference being...one who places a NOW order funds maybe 1/4 to 1/3 of a waiting user's Pandy...it takes 3 or 4 sales of new units to fund an existing pre-order. One who places a WAIT order...just with that one order...cleared out one-for-one...a waiting user. you see, it does not SOLVE the problem...it buys TIME. It also creates some goodwill from the currently-waiting people...instead of having them perhaps saying bad things.
My "solution" is really a stop-gap measure and damage control!
Like I said it was a suggestion.
Because, in my scenario...EVERY SINGLE WAIT ORDER PLACED....translates to a current user getting a Pandy. instead of needing to sell three or four Pandys before someone waiting gets one.
What you are essentially doing is recycling the queue list. People who have been on it a long time get off the list. People who go on it instead...go in knowing that they will be waiting....but get a lower price for doing so. Those people would not mind waiting since THEY already HAVE a unit. Plus they would not be waiting two and three years like some on the current list are.
My "solution" IS INTEDED TO BUY TIME!! Not to completely solve the problem, but to buy some time...and get people who have been waiting...get them a Pandy in their hands NOW. The queue is then made up of people who aren't as impatient...since they already HAVE one...and are also thus much less likely to cancel and order something else or somewhere else.
And in order to make it work...you have to give the people willing to go on queue SOMETHING...like a cheaper price, free TV-Out cables when they arrive, a free SD Card...something....because nobody in their right mind would place a WAIT order for the same price as they could place a NOW order.
The difference being...one who places a NOW order funds maybe 1/4 to 1/3 of a waiting user's Pandy...it takes 3 or 4 sales of new units to fund an existing pre-order. One who places a WAIT order...just with that one order...cleared out one-for-one...a waiting user. you see, it does not SOLVE the problem...it buys TIME. It also creates some goodwill from the currently-waiting people...instead of having them perhaps saying bad things.
My "solution" is really a stop-gap measure and damage control!
Kumaki
Well-Known Member
Well, as I said...it's an idea, and it buys time.
