Google Re-Refunds Video Purchases 129
holymodal writes "In a new post to the Google blog Bindu Reddy, the Google Video product manager, admits that only offering refunds via Google Checkout was a bad idea: 'We should have anticipated that some users would see a Checkout credit as nothing more than an extra step of a different (and annoyingly self-serving) kind. Our bad.' Google now plans to issue customers a full credit card refund, while allowing them to keep the Checkout credit and extending the life of purchased videos another six months."
Good job Google (Score:5, Insightful)
(man...I wish I had bought around $4000 in Google Videos
Re:Good job Google (Score:5, Insightful)
It's good to see what Google is doing now (and espcially so given that there is effectively a double-refund), but really, they should had done this at the outset (it would have cost Google less also).
Not exactly .. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think he means "extending the life of rented videos another six months." I wish companies would just be clear on the fact that you aren't actually buying anything, if the seller can revoke your privilege to use it at any time. I'm really tired of government and corporations trying to undermine the idea of "property", of what is mine and what is not.
Re:Good job Google (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Company admits Mistake: film at 11 (Score:2, Insightful)
Hell, our President could learn from that, even.
Re:Good job Google (Score:5, Insightful)
They get kudos from me, though as another person joked I doubt the $10 extra they are now out is going to hit their bottom line that hard.
An Interesting Precedent (Score:4, Insightful)
The message this sends to other companies in a similar business seems clear: "Don't ever leave the business so that your customers can't access their media. If you do, and you plan to ever do business again, it will cost you more than you earned throughout the entire process. Customers are effectively loaning you their money for as long as they can play their content."
What does this mean? I'm going to guess that if they listen to this message that they will glance nervously at each other as they slowly change over to non DRM content. Since that seems to be the trend currently, I would suppose that this can only accelerate it.
Still Not Convinced (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Still Not Convinced (Score:3, Insightful)
Based on my time in the corporate world, I'd guess they were close to having something else marketable in the video world (as part of their "refocusing"), and that it would hit soon enough that they figured people wouldn't have completely forgotten about their last...faux pas.
My betting money says that if they weren't about to launch something in roughly the same space (or partner with someone in the same space), they wouldn't give two hoots about any lingering bad PR.
Re:Good job Google (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good job Google (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good job Google (Score:4, Insightful)
Why don't you spend a few dozen hours looking for a time Microsoft publically admitted a mistake then forked over cash and you can enlighten us?
Re:Good job Google (Score:3, Insightful)
I feel like if Microsoft was in a similar position, they would make users jump through a bunch of hoops just to get part of their money back, and they would some how spin it as empowering the consumer. I could NEVER imagine Microsoft coming out and saying "we screwed up" without 10 paragraphs of legalese attached refuting the previous statement.
Re:Good job Google (Score:4, Insightful)
Slashdot: Not just one person. Duh?
Re:The reason they used Checkout in the first plac (Score:2, Insightful)
Still, wish I'd bought some Google videos, now.
Not good enough! (Score:4, Insightful)
This still doesn't change how I feel... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Good job Google (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good job Google (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good job Google (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good job Google (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not good enough! (Score:2, Insightful)