Skip to content

Panasonic Scams the Poor

January 5, 2013

The Panasonic ES 3831 men’s electric shaver costs $17.99 at J and R Music World. When the switch of my unit was damaged such that I had to open and close the battery case to turn it off, they told me that a repair would be $45-55. The foil screen is easily damaged so that one has to be careful to keep it from cutting the face. J and R sells a certain Panasonic foil for 97 cents, but it is incompatible with the ES 3831, and they do not sell a compatible part. The compatible part is item WES9941P, which costs $12 on Panasonic’s website. (http://www.pasc.panasonic.com/epartr/PartsListChoice.asp?validate=1)

It would almost be cheaper to buy a replacement razor than buy the foil, even though I just bought a replacement unit last week. I received the first one as a gift from a friend because the razor I had needed to be charged in the wall socket, making it impractical for shelter use, based on the abominable DHS policy against clients using electrical sockets.

This incident leads me to not want to buy Panasonic products, and to recommend that others not waste their money on Panasonic products, either.

Advertisements
9 Comments
  1. Employed permalink

    Whining again, I see. How exactly is this a scam directed at the poor? Even assuming that it is a scam, does it not scam everyone equally? You’ve failed to provided any evidence that it was in any way targeted at the poor. If one assumes that your argument is that the poor can least afford to pay, then isn’t everything with a price an attack on the poor?

    Cheap products that cost more to repair than replace are the norm worldwide. Why do you feel so personally victimized by that?

    • The problem is that if Panasonic can charge 97 cents for one model of foil, they shouldn’t be charging $12 for another model of foil. This is the sort of thing businesses that plan to make a quick buck and go out of business do, not major companies.

    • I’ve already posted the definition of “whine,” but you seem to feel that it means whatever you want it to mean, and not what the dictionary says that it means.

  2. Employed permalink

    Whine: to snivel or complain in a peevish, self-pitying way. Hmmmm. “Panasonic Scams the Poor”. “Abominable DHS policy”. Sounds like self-pity to me. Sounds like complaining to me. Perhaps you should read the definition again.

    Speaking of definitions: abominable: repugnantly hateful; detestable; loathsome. So they failed to give you free use of electrical outlets on top of a free place to sleep and free food. Wow. Sounds like a medieval dungeon. Was that before or after your hour on the rack? How many lashes did they give you?

    So, back to your original post… How exactly is what you described a scam (“a confidence game or other fraudulent scheme”) and how is it targeted at the poor as asserted in your title? Perhaps bad business. Perhaps not nice. But why a scam? And why of “the poor”? You still haven’t answered.

  3. Well, they’ve given me a diseased pillow, food-borne illness, and gout. If the goal of DHS is to get us employed and self-sufficient, preventing us from charging our phones overnight is an abominable and hypocritical policy. Their defense is that the buildings are old and not wired properly, which is an indefensible excuse given the amount of money they rake in is far higher than a landlord of a rent-stabilized apartment, such as my former landlord, would make.

    The scam is that something that appears to be a good value is a sucker’s game to charge them ridiculously more. That you don’t see that the Panasonic situation is a scam is indicative of your lack of intelligence. Does it particularly target the poor? Perhaps not, but a poor person is more likely to buy an $18 electric razor than a $70 electric razor, not that that would necessarily be anything better.

    I no longer buy Remington products. I bought a $70 electric razor from them. Essential to its operation were two extremely flimsy plastic tabs that would flake off during normal use, causing the screens to fly off. They did not sell replacements, and gave me two replacements by mail, but when I contacting them a third time and said that the part had broken yet again, they got fed up. I’m not the one who made a flimsy product, nor did I know that the product was flimsy before I spent my $70 on it.

  4. Employed permalink

    The DHS policy against using electrical outlets did not give you a diseased pillow, food-borne illness, or gout. Other DHS actions might have, but certainly not their policy on electrical outlets. The title of your post was about Panasonic scamming the poor. That has nothing to do with your phone.

    You have failed to support your argument with evidence. Nothing about cheap products being of low quality and costing nearly as much to repair as to replace meets the definition of a scam and even if it were, it wouldn’t specifically target the poor. Using your own logic from your other posts, should your readers conclude you to be an idiot and/or functionally illiterate as a result of your blatant failure to support your argument with evidence?

    • You are now misrepresenting what I wrote. I never claimed that the policy against electical outlets gave me a diseased pillow or anyhting else. It is clear that your job is a cherry picker, meaning that you are a migrant farm worker employed at an illegally low wage.

  5. Employed permalink

    Read from the top. I drew my conclusions from your own words. You introduced criticisms of DHS that were completely irrelevant to defending your false claims about Panasonic. Perhaps I should alert both of them so they can pursue legal action against you.

    So far, you’ve accused me of being two people, being functionally illiterate, and made multiple insulting references to my employment. So far you’ve provided absolutely no evidence to support your allegations. You’d better check yourself before you wreck yourself.

    • You’ve failed to provide any evidence to support your allegations against me, and burden of proof falls to the accuser.

      Where did I introduce irrelevancies or make false claims against Panasonic?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: