Welcome

Welcome to my Blog. I mostly re post articles that i find interesting on the web. After the article you will find a link that leads you to the original one.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Spirit Airlines Charges $10 For Buying Tickets Anywhere But Ticket Counter (...

via Consumerist by Alex Chasick on 3/24/09

Habitually awful carrier Spirit Airlines is bringing back its "passenger usage fee," which charges passengers $4.90 each way for booking tickets online or over the phone. The only way to avoid the fee is by purchasing directly from a ticket counter at the airport. Convenient!

Spirit tried to impose this charge last summer as a "web convenience fee," before getting hit with a $40,000 fine from the Department of Transportation for what it called an "unfair and deceptive trade practice and an unfair method of competition." They've been allowed by the DOT to resurrect the fee because they're now including it in the listing of fees.

Spirit says they're imposing the fee as a way to offset distribution costs. Which sounds dubious, considering the costs of staffing a ticket counter and printing actual boarding passes versus operating a computer (or even a call center) and letting customers print their own boarding passes.

Next Airline Fee: Buying Tickets? [WSJ]
PREVIOUSLY: Spirit Airlines Drops $10 Fee For Ordering Tickets Online
Spirit Airlines Charges $10 Fee For Ordering Tickets Online
Thanks, Jason!

Posted by at No comments:

'Unafraid' of Internet, China Appears to Block YouTube

via Wired Top Stories by Reuters on 3/24/09

BEIJING (Reuters) - China is not afraid of the Internet, its Foreign Ministry said on Tuesday, even as access to the popular video sharing site YouTube appeared to be blocked.

YouTube has been unavailable for users in China, which filters the Internet for content critical of Communist Party rule, since late on Monday.

"Many people have a false impression that the Chinese government fears the Internet. In fact it is just the opposite," Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang told reporters.

Qin said China's 300 million Internet users and 100 million blogs showed that "China's internet is open enough, but also needs to be regulated by law in order to prevent the spread of harmful information and for national security."

He said he did not know about YouTube being blocked.

Access to YouTube had been spotty earlier in March, the one-year anniversary of widespread protests by Tibetans against Chinese rule.

An Internet crackdown that began in January has closed hundreds of Chinese sites, including a popular blog hosting site and several sites popular with Tibetans.

It has been described by analysts as another step in the Party's battle to stifle dissent in a year of sensitive anniversaries, including the 20th anniversary of the government's bloody crackdown on the pro-democracy Tiananmen Square protests in 1989.

(Reporting by Lucy Hornby; Editing by Nick Macfie)

Posted by at No comments:

Teenager's 60-Foot Roof Wang Backfires, Rich Parents Dole Out "Punishment" [...

via Gizmodo by Sean Fallon on 3/24/09

Inspired by all of the classy art on Google Maps, 18-year old Rory McInnes decided to create a 60-foot phallic masterpiece on the roof of his parents' stately English manor.

The painting stood for almost a year until a helicopter noticed it and contacted the Sun newspaper. The Sun followed up by contacting the owner who thought the whole thing must be some sort of joke:

He said: "It's an April Fool's joke, right? There's no way there's a 60ft phallus on top of my house."

Oh yes, Mr. McInnes, there is definitely a 60-foot wang on top of your house. Now what are you going to do about it? Does it involve a belt? A lifetime grounding perhaps?

The boy's father appeared to take the prank in good humour.

But he said: "When Rory gets home he will be given a scrubbing brush and white spirit and he can go and scrub it off."

Oh yeah, that will teach him. Rory did get his comeuppance...in a way. Despite his prank, the house roof remains penis-free according to Google. [Telegraph]

Posted by at No comments:

Kodak's Overpriced Photo Site Will Delete Your Photos If You Don't Spend Mon...

via Consumerist by Chris Walters on 3/23/09

Kodak Gallery is a poor choice for online photo storage. As of this month, they've changed their storage policy so that now you must spend a minimum amount—$4.99 or $19.99, depending on whether you're under or over 2GB of storage—every 12 months or your pics will be deleted. By comparison, Shutterfly has no minimum spending requirement and unlimited storage.

Both sites charge 15 cents per print, so there's no savings from Kodak Gallery when it comes to printing.

Threatening to delete your photos is bad enough, but Kodak Gallery also overcharges for archive CDs. We're not big fans of the one-way storage solutions offered by most photo storage sites, and Shutterfly is as guilty as Kodak in this regard—you can upload all you want, but will have to pay to get those photos back should you lose your own copy some day. But compare these prices from the two companies (current as of March 23, 2009) for 2,000 photos on an archive CD:

Kodak Gallery: $55
Shutterfly: $25

We're just comparing Shutterfly to Kodak, but there are other services you may want to check out as well. Snapfish, another popular site, falls somewhere between the two: 4x6 prints are only 9 cents and there are no explicit spending requirements to keep your account active, but retrieving your images from them is ridiculously expensive.

If you're going to be downloading lots of your stored images frequently, consider a $25 annual Flickr membership (unlimited storage, free access to high-rez versions of your photos). Otherwise, Shutterfly is far and away a cheaper alternative to Kodak Gallery.

(Thanks to Edward!)

Posted by at 2 comments:

Walgreens Doesn't Want You To Print Your Own Passport Photos [Walgreens]

via Consumerist by Chris Walters on 3/23/09

Walgreens charges a hefty $7.99 for passport photos. Is it because they're super fancy, or technically challenging to create, or the paper is strawberry scented? The answer to all of these questions is no. It's because it's an easy way to make a quick buck. That's why they hate it when you find a cheaper online solution and try to print out your own 4x6 layout of passport photos via their stores.

Last year we wrote about epassportphoto.com, a free online service that lets you create your own 5-pic passport layout suitable for printing on a 4x6 photo, which you can then print anywhere you like and save yourself the expense and trouble of so-called "professional" passport photo fees. They started offering a service where, for $7, you can pick up the print at Walgreens—but Walgreens is not happy about this and is trying to put a stop to it. Here's an email they sent to epassportphoto.com:

We do not allow customers to create their own passport pictures and print them themselves. It would be appreciated if you would no longer endorse our photofinishing services on your website.

Tom, the guy behind epassportphoto.com, told us, "We've had numerous customers reporting to us that Walgreens people tried to charge them the Walgreens fee" in addition to the fee they'd already paid epassportphoto.com to print the photo on their behalf.

We contacted Walgreens customer service for clarification, and were told that a passport photo is different than a regular photo and that's why it costs more, even if you do the work ahead of time and just send them a single 4x6 to print out the same way they print everything. This is pure nonsense—it's like saying photos of zoo animals are different from other photos, and therefore you must pay an $8 "zoo pic" processing fee.

Tom's website is still offering the in-store pickup option on their site, but he says epassportphoto is currently looking into using a different retailer for the in-store pickup option.

If you're really looking to save money, however, you should download the free file and print it yourself. Or, follow Tom's suggestion and open an online photo processor account somewhere that comes with free prints. Just don't be surprised if Walgreens gives you trouble if you try to print it via one of their drugstores.

"What's Walgreens afraid of? (tiny ePassportPhoto.com!?)" [epassportphoto.com]

Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)