Ojobenito
Well-Known Member
I got someone who was there to take a photo of the underside of the board... Haven't seen it yet. They are posting it soon.
Eagerly awaiting for it. Thanks, man!!!!
MattyCollector "Mattel Hoverboard" discussion
- Thread starter hound97
- Start date
Eagerly awaiting for it. Thanks, man!!!!
bowspearer
New Member
And this is what has annoyed me about Alan's utterly smug and condescendingly dismissive response.
The fact is, as you've rightly pointed out, that both in the US where Matty are based and in my case and here in Australia where I'm based (and I'm sure the same holds true for the EU), this is a bait and switch. That's not an exaggeration - that is a statement of legal fact. Furthermore it falls under the category of fraud.
Yet rather than trying to clarify, we're simply told to "get over it" and blamed for buyin an expensive item to begin with.
Also Alan claims that noone is forcing this on us. Yet if you look at the terms and conditions on the product page for it, it reads:
So there you have it. As Mattel has made no public offer to opt out; it stands to reason that they are trying to hide behind the terms and condition of the preorder until they find themselves in sufficient legal hot water for them to back away.
JakeBluesZombie
New Member
Response to BBB Hoverboard Claim on the Matty BBB page:
"The hoverboard sample on display at San Diego Comic-Con was not final and was clearly labeled as such. Matty Collector is aware there is some confusion over this on our forums and is working to address the concern with fans, but we wish to confirm that this was never intended to be presented as “final” at any time. MattyCollector has posted a video to explain this here: Video: Back to the Future Hoverboard Prop Accuracy - YouTube While we stand by our commitment to this product, and the hoverboard was offered for pre-sale with a “no cancellations” policy, if he still wants to cancel his pre-order, we will honor his request at this time."
Matty Collector/Digital River Business Review in Ontario , CA
I think if enough people were to cancel their orders by filing claims, they would open up a cancellation option. This isn't worth a lawyers time for class action because the damages aren't really there. Class action would be great if the hoverboard caused injuries or something like that, bait and switch isn't that sexy to attorneys.
"The hoverboard sample on display at San Diego Comic-Con was not final and was clearly labeled as such. Matty Collector is aware there is some confusion over this on our forums and is working to address the concern with fans, but we wish to confirm that this was never intended to be presented as “final” at any time. MattyCollector has posted a video to explain this here: Video: Back to the Future Hoverboard Prop Accuracy - YouTube While we stand by our commitment to this product, and the hoverboard was offered for pre-sale with a “no cancellations” policy, if he still wants to cancel his pre-order, we will honor his request at this time."
Matty Collector/Digital River Business Review in Ontario , CA
I think if enough people were to cancel their orders by filing claims, they would open up a cancellation option. This isn't worth a lawyers time for class action because the damages aren't really there. Class action would be great if the hoverboard caused injuries or something like that, bait and switch isn't that sexy to attorneys.
Sergemeister
New Member
This ^
For those of you content with the bare minimum, it is you the reason companies like this get away with it time after time. You are paying for a product; one that was promised to you as "screen accurate". Now I know we're talking about toys here BUT if someone were to tell you about a product, in detail mind you, and then they delivered an inferior product you would not part with your money. That's not the case here. Here they took your money and because of it, the company has already figured that they won't lose as much money producing what they promised. Instead they will give you an inferior item and still keep all of your hard-earned cash. It's bait-and-switch and a bad business practice. You shouldn't just accept what you are being given. Especially not for the amount of money you have just paid.
At Matty I am a subscription holder and I fully support the subs because I want some of these hard to find figures. The difference with the subs is that you have something to go on. They have made similar figures before therefore you know exactly what you will be getting. Not so in this case. Which is why they think they can get away with it. Not cool.
Sergemeister
New Member
I have to agree wholeheartedly with this breakdown. I have dealt with Matty for many years and it is damned near impossible to get anything cancelled. Most collectors, who are apparently here also, know that the only way to get out of a purchase is to cancel your credit card. That's hands down the only way to go about doing this. Matty creates these "fear" campaigns to get people on the hook to buy the product saying that it is limited and that they have to meet a certain number of purchases etc etc. But once they have you on that hook they are not gonna let go easily.
I know that there is a ton of butt-hurt going on in this thread and that I have joined it but damn it! People have to speak up!
California's law specifically:
"17500. It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation or
association, or any employee thereof with intent directly or
indirectly to dispose of real or personal property or to perform
services, professional or otherwise, or anything of any nature
whatsoever or to induce the public to enter into any obligation
relating thereto, to make or disseminate or cause to be made or
disseminated before the public in this state, or to make or
disseminate or cause to be made or disseminated from this state
before the public in any state, in any newspaper or other
publication, or any advertising device, or by public outcry or
proclamation, or in any other manner or means whatever, including
over the Internet, any statement, concerning that real or personal
property or those services, professional or otherwise, or concerning
any circumstance or matter of fact connected with the proposed
performance or disposition thereof, which is untrue or misleading,
and which is known, or which by the exercise of reasonable care
should be known, to be untrue or misleading, or for any person, firm,
or corporation to so make or disseminate or cause to be so made or
disseminated any such statement as part of a plan or scheme with the
intent not to sell that personal property or those services,
professional or otherwise, so advertised at the price stated therein,
or as so advertised. Any violation of the provisions of this
section is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county
jail not exceeding six months, or by a fine not exceeding two
thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by both that imprisonment
and fine."
Note specifically they do impose fines AND jail time. Given the statements publicly made and documented, I would be nervous as a spokesperson if several claims were filled and anyone decided to pursue it in court. There is a bit of serious repercussions and given the fan.collector mentality to doggedly pursue, this could turn into something more than just bad PR. Given more Matty has a bad history with the BBB, the courts might lean more to push a stiffer penalty for any such case brought before them.
"17500. It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation or
association, or any employee thereof with intent directly or
indirectly to dispose of real or personal property or to perform
services, professional or otherwise, or anything of any nature
whatsoever or to induce the public to enter into any obligation
relating thereto, to make or disseminate or cause to be made or
disseminated before the public in this state, or to make or
disseminate or cause to be made or disseminated from this state
before the public in any state, in any newspaper or other
publication, or any advertising device, or by public outcry or
proclamation, or in any other manner or means whatever, including
over the Internet, any statement, concerning that real or personal
property or those services, professional or otherwise, or concerning
any circumstance or matter of fact connected with the proposed
performance or disposition thereof, which is untrue or misleading,
and which is known, or which by the exercise of reasonable care
should be known, to be untrue or misleading, or for any person, firm,
or corporation to so make or disseminate or cause to be so made or
disseminated any such statement as part of a plan or scheme with the
intent not to sell that personal property or those services,
professional or otherwise, so advertised at the price stated therein,
or as so advertised. Any violation of the provisions of this
section is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county
jail not exceeding six months, or by a fine not exceeding two
thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by both that imprisonment
and fine."
Note specifically they do impose fines AND jail time. Given the statements publicly made and documented, I would be nervous as a spokesperson if several claims were filled and anyone decided to pursue it in court. There is a bit of serious repercussions and given the fan.collector mentality to doggedly pursue, this could turn into something more than just bad PR. Given more Matty has a bad history with the BBB, the courts might lean more to push a stiffer penalty for any such case brought before them.
Sergemeister
New Member
From the FTC @ Guides Against Bait Advertising
16 CFR PART 238
§ 238.0 Bait advertising defined.
§ 238.1 Bait advertisement.
§ 238.2 Initial offer.
§ 238.3 Discouragement of purchase of advertised merchandise.
§ 238.4 Switch after sale.
Sec. 238.0 Bait advertising defined.1
Bait advertising is an alluring but insincere offer to sell a product or service which the advertiser in truth does not intend or want to sell. Its purpose is to switch consumers from buying the advertised merchandise, in order to sell something else, usually at a higher price or on a basis more advantageous to the advertiser. The primary aim of a bait advertisement is to obtain leads as to persons interested in buying merchandise of the type so advertised.
Sec. 238.1 Bait advertisement.
No advertisement containing an offer to sell a product should be published when the offer is not a bona fide effort to sell the advertised product. [Guide 1]
Sec. 238.2 Initial offer.
(a) No statement or illustration should be used in any advertisement which creates a false impression of the grade, quality, make, value, currency of model, size, color, usability, or origin of the product offered, or which may otherwise misrepresent the product in such a manner that later, on disclosure of the true facts, the purchaser may be switched from the advertised product to another.
(b) Even though the true facts are subsequently made known to the buyer, the law is violated if the first contact or interview is secured by deception. [Guide 2]
Sec. 238.3 Discouragement of purchase of advertised merchandise.
No act or practice should be engaged in by an advertiser to discourage the purchase of the advertised merchandise as part of a bait scheme to sell other merchandise. Among acts or practices which will be considered in determining if an advertisement is a bona fide offer are:
(a) The refusal to show, demonstrate, or sell the product offered in accordance with the terms of the offer,
(b) The disparagement by acts or words of the advertised product or the disparagement of the guarantee, credit terms, availability of service, repairs or parts, or in any other respect, in connection with it,
(c) The failure to have available at all outlets listed in the advertisement a sufficient quantity of the advertised product to meet reasonably anticipated demands, unless the advertisement clearly and adequately discloses that supply is limited and/or the merchandise is available only at designated outlets,
(d) The refusal to take orders for the advertised merchandise to be delivered within a reasonable period of time,
(e) The showing or demonstrating of a product which is defective, unusable or impractical for the purpose represented or implied in the advertisement,
(f) Use of a sales plan or method of compensation for salesmen or penalizing salesmen, designed to prevent or discourage them from selling the advertised product. [Guide 3]
Sec. 238.4 Switch after sale.
No practice should be pursued by an advertiser, in the event of sale of the advertised product, of "unselling" with the intent and purpose of selling other merchandise in its stead. Among acts or practices which will be considered in determining if the initial sale was in good faith, and not a stratagem to sell other merchandise, are:
(a) Accepting a deposit for the advertised product, then switching the purchaser to a higher-priced product,
(b) Failure to make delivery of the advertised product within a reasonable time or to make a refund,
(c) Disparagement by acts or words of the advertised product, or the disparagement of the guarantee, credit terms, availability of service, repairs, or in any other respect, in connection with it,
(d) The delivery of the advertised product which is defective, unusable or impractical for the purpose represented or implied in the advertisement. [Guide 4]
Note: Sales of advertised merchandise. Sales of the advertised merchandise do not preclude the existence of a bait and switch scheme. It has been determined that, on occasions, this is a mere incidental byproduct of the fundamental plan and is intended to provide an aura of legitimacy to the overall operation.
Footnotes
1. For the purpose of this part "advertising" includes any form of public notice however disseminated or utilized.
16 CFR PART 238
§ 238.0 Bait advertising defined.
§ 238.1 Bait advertisement.
§ 238.2 Initial offer.
§ 238.3 Discouragement of purchase of advertised merchandise.
§ 238.4 Switch after sale.
Sec. 238.0 Bait advertising defined.1
Bait advertising is an alluring but insincere offer to sell a product or service which the advertiser in truth does not intend or want to sell. Its purpose is to switch consumers from buying the advertised merchandise, in order to sell something else, usually at a higher price or on a basis more advantageous to the advertiser. The primary aim of a bait advertisement is to obtain leads as to persons interested in buying merchandise of the type so advertised.
Sec. 238.1 Bait advertisement.
No advertisement containing an offer to sell a product should be published when the offer is not a bona fide effort to sell the advertised product. [Guide 1]
Sec. 238.2 Initial offer.
(a) No statement or illustration should be used in any advertisement which creates a false impression of the grade, quality, make, value, currency of model, size, color, usability, or origin of the product offered, or which may otherwise misrepresent the product in such a manner that later, on disclosure of the true facts, the purchaser may be switched from the advertised product to another.
(b) Even though the true facts are subsequently made known to the buyer, the law is violated if the first contact or interview is secured by deception. [Guide 2]
Sec. 238.3 Discouragement of purchase of advertised merchandise.
No act or practice should be engaged in by an advertiser to discourage the purchase of the advertised merchandise as part of a bait scheme to sell other merchandise. Among acts or practices which will be considered in determining if an advertisement is a bona fide offer are:
(a) The refusal to show, demonstrate, or sell the product offered in accordance with the terms of the offer,
(b) The disparagement by acts or words of the advertised product or the disparagement of the guarantee, credit terms, availability of service, repairs or parts, or in any other respect, in connection with it,
(c) The failure to have available at all outlets listed in the advertisement a sufficient quantity of the advertised product to meet reasonably anticipated demands, unless the advertisement clearly and adequately discloses that supply is limited and/or the merchandise is available only at designated outlets,
(d) The refusal to take orders for the advertised merchandise to be delivered within a reasonable period of time,
(e) The showing or demonstrating of a product which is defective, unusable or impractical for the purpose represented or implied in the advertisement,
(f) Use of a sales plan or method of compensation for salesmen or penalizing salesmen, designed to prevent or discourage them from selling the advertised product. [Guide 3]
Sec. 238.4 Switch after sale.
No practice should be pursued by an advertiser, in the event of sale of the advertised product, of "unselling" with the intent and purpose of selling other merchandise in its stead. Among acts or practices which will be considered in determining if the initial sale was in good faith, and not a stratagem to sell other merchandise, are:
(a) Accepting a deposit for the advertised product, then switching the purchaser to a higher-priced product,
(b) Failure to make delivery of the advertised product within a reasonable time or to make a refund,
(c) Disparagement by acts or words of the advertised product, or the disparagement of the guarantee, credit terms, availability of service, repairs, or in any other respect, in connection with it,
(d) The delivery of the advertised product which is defective, unusable or impractical for the purpose represented or implied in the advertisement. [Guide 4]
Note: Sales of advertised merchandise. Sales of the advertised merchandise do not preclude the existence of a bait and switch scheme. It has been determined that, on occasions, this is a mere incidental byproduct of the fundamental plan and is intended to provide an aura of legitimacy to the overall operation.
Footnotes
1. For the purpose of this part "advertising" includes any form of public notice however disseminated or utilized.
JakeBluesZombie
New Member
Man, trip, that's a lot of BS legalese, but the point is definitely in that paragraph--about halfway down. The groundwork for such legal avenues however, would be several claims, filed for FREE with the BBB or FTC.
Last edited:
Ouch! Can't argue the facts there - Matty may be sweating bullets right now.
Ojobenito
Well-Known Member
Ok, there you go. Bottom side of the hoverboard thanks to CoolToyReview:
At first sight, holders half-corrected (there are no bumps where screws go but the connections to the battery pack are not perfect), magnets look better, battery pack is awful and looks like full of writings. The screwholes are not right (they were on the look-a-like prototype. This was easy to do it right and they screwed it up for some reason)
Overall... maybe I'll keep the board and do some tweaks to make it right, including a new battery cover in fiberglass or something like that, because this is awful.
Let debate begin....
At first sight, holders half-corrected (there are no bumps where screws go but the connections to the battery pack are not perfect), magnets look better, battery pack is awful and looks like full of writings. The screwholes are not right (they were on the look-a-like prototype. This was easy to do it right and they screwed it up for some reason)
Overall... maybe I'll keep the board and do some tweaks to make it right, including a new battery cover in fiberglass or something like that, because this is awful.
Let debate begin....
Last edited:
Thank you for the legal definitions of Bait & Switch etc.
Now, please prove that Matty knew, on the day that they opened up the pre-orders, that the hoverboard they presented was going to end up being substantially different from what was advertised.
That is what defines fraud - foreknowledge, and deliberateness on the day the advert, or taking payments, whatever, is published / actioned.
Anything else thereafter will be chalked down to what is in their terms & conditions, and which whoever ordered, agreed to.
This includes the infamous "Final product may vary" etc.
They did offer a refund to this fellow. And that was the end of that. I doubt they got fined or any of their staff are going to jail though. Foreknowledge can not be proven.
They offered a refund to razorsharp, and they will issue to it to whoever asks for it.
I stand by what I said - there is no fraud, no scam, rip offs etc, especially by legal definition, where it matters.
The most anyone will get is their money back, and that is the unfortunate bare and undeniable truth.
Don't rest on my words though. Anyone who wishes to take this matter beyond that (a refund), consult a lawyer and see what they tell you.
Now, please prove that Matty knew, on the day that they opened up the pre-orders, that the hoverboard they presented was going to end up being substantially different from what was advertised.
That is what defines fraud - foreknowledge, and deliberateness on the day the advert, or taking payments, whatever, is published / actioned.
Anything else thereafter will be chalked down to what is in their terms & conditions, and which whoever ordered, agreed to.
This includes the infamous "Final product may vary" etc.
They did offer a refund to this fellow. And that was the end of that. I doubt they got fined or any of their staff are going to jail though. Foreknowledge can not be proven.
They offered a refund to razorsharp, and they will issue to it to whoever asks for it.
I stand by what I said - there is no fraud, no scam, rip offs etc, especially by legal definition, where it matters.
The most anyone will get is their money back, and that is the unfortunate bare and undeniable truth.
Don't rest on my words though. Anyone who wishes to take this matter beyond that (a refund), consult a lawyer and see what they tell you.
Alan, they noted late on in the production and it is archived that they would be using better materials such as the holograph/lenticular material, and also with the pre-sale had the video showing how meticulous they would be to get the detailing correct.
I have no doubt if pressed, there could be a good case for bait and switch, even with the disclaimer as illegal disclaimers do not hold, especially in a case with a pre-sale that is as strict as they have advertised and seem to to be holding. As well, this is district nine courts, which take a very anti-business approach to such matters. Add in the F rating with the Better Business Bureau and they most likely are by far not out of the legal woods as you suggest.
Given their history and the attitude they have had on this, it would be interesting to see someone take them on with this.
I have no doubt if pressed, there could be a good case for bait and switch, even with the disclaimer as illegal disclaimers do not hold, especially in a case with a pre-sale that is as strict as they have advertised and seem to to be holding. As well, this is district nine courts, which take a very anti-business approach to such matters. Add in the F rating with the Better Business Bureau and they most likely are by far not out of the legal woods as you suggest.
Given their history and the attitude they have had on this, it would be interesting to see someone take them on with this.
Just to be clear, I too would love to see someone taking them on ! I just don't think anyone will win, that's all
LeAngeSolitaire
Well-Known Member
I think misrepresentation would be a better legal basis for cancelling the Pre-order I would think.
http://www.expertlaw.com/library/business/fraud.html
Mattel evidently set the price point for this board at a level that didn't allow them to make a profit if they actually lived up to the promised accuracy. A printed graphic of the background pattern? $1. Real lenticular? About $20 per board. Once they realized the cost of following through with their promises, they cast them aside, ethics and truth-in-advertising be d@mned.
DARTH CHARLES
New Member
lol:lol...Matty is LAUGHING right now of all of you paranioc-lawyers-wannabe....As simple as: You don't like it...leave it. Get an "fan-made-accurate" and that's the end of all your problems.
Nobody has been charged for this item yet, and i sure you that the only cancellations you will see are from the same 5 or 6 unhappy funny-lawyers up here...
Good luck with your lawsuit pals¡¡
opcornlol:lol
EvilRocketeer
Master Member
if you want, you can make a list of all the laws they broken with facts and i will post it on their board for you.....
im pretty sure you havent posted it to avoid from being ban there.....i can careless about being on a mattyboard...
also, i live in california so i can add that to the post
JakeBluesZombie
New Member
As simple as: You don't like it...leave it. Get an "fan-made-accurate" and that's the end of all your problems.
Nobody has been charged for this item yet, and i sure you that the only cancellations you will see are from the same 5 or 6 unhappy funny-lawyers up here...
Good luck with your lawsuit pals¡¡
I like the all caps on 'laughing' --gives emphasis, and makes everyone involved in the current discussion feel small and ashamed. They aren't as big as those BIG CAPS. Couldn't have done that with lowercase. You are a very shrewd man, sir.
Except you completey ****ed up your second paragraph with your 'I sure you' comment which makes you sound like a brainless Appalachian mountain cityboy ****er from Deliverance. It's 'I assure' you, my poorly spoken friend.
I sure you, education is paramount. You could use a little more if you want to communicate with other human using written/typed language.
Good luck.
Ojobenito
Well-Known Member
Fenderf4i, I was the other one who ask them on twitter
Regarding legal issues, I think this is giong nuts, and you know I've been very critic to them (and tried to help with accuracy also). It can be as easy as a calling to your bank and say "take no money orders from Mattel". Let mattel contact you then, and explain the situation to them.
About Mattel themselves, it's just not about accuracy only, but to swears and swears that everything was going to be movie accurate, and they not only lied about it, but they didn't even care about explain it to the fans. If lenticular was more expensive, make two versions of it, a premium with lenticular and $20 more of cost (I'd have pay it) and the regular one version. I don't know, just giving an idea. But what was very cheap was to be silent for months once they got the money.
Also, is not as easy as "if you don't like it... leave" as Darth Charls says. They got the money, and right now it's not clear if refunds are accepted or not.
Well, let's keep legal conversation apart (it's boring and this is not a lawyers forum), and let's talk about the botton part of the board.
Regarding legal issues, I think this is giong nuts, and you know I've been very critic to them (and tried to help with accuracy also). It can be as easy as a calling to your bank and say "take no money orders from Mattel". Let mattel contact you then, and explain the situation to them.
About Mattel themselves, it's just not about accuracy only, but to swears and swears that everything was going to be movie accurate, and they not only lied about it, but they didn't even care about explain it to the fans. If lenticular was more expensive, make two versions of it, a premium with lenticular and $20 more of cost (I'd have pay it) and the regular one version. I don't know, just giving an idea. But what was very cheap was to be silent for months once they got the money.
Also, is not as easy as "if you don't like it... leave" as Darth Charls says. They got the money, and right now it's not clear if refunds are accepted or not.
Well, let's keep legal conversation apart (it's boring and this is not a lawyers forum), and let's talk about the botton part of the board.
Last edited:
Similar threads
