ok, this thread may get locked for not being a hot deal, but what the hey. i called to purchase some items on pricematch. first guy i got was very good and very fair. but the second guy, Bill in Canada (remember that!), was a hard-arse. first, i have a number of staples accounts i maintain. he deleted all of them! then he starts making comments about the number of orders i've made in the past and how i've used coupons on all of them. i say that i get a lot of spam and junk mail from them (which is true). then he starts talking about website with codes. i would reply that i hang around anandtech that doesn't have codes, but i don't think he would appreciate that =) well, he placed my order but i'll be lucky if don't go on the "gross offenders" list like my brother. head's up out there: if Bill with a Canadian accent answers the phone, hang up!
staples pricematch COLD DEAL!
- Thread starter yodayoda
- Start date
What he did is probably unethical if not illegal. You can complain directly to staples regarding this csr. Remember most of those calls are "monitored for quality assurance". So complain, maybe they will track him down.
yeah, many phone calls can/are recorded these days, you should just mention it to another csr and complain because at the very least he will be punished by staples
yeah, track him down so they can give him a medal! the company loves that kind of stuff. staples probably considers us petty thieves, like shoplifters, even though all we are doing purchasing items and using their discount systems, like pricematch and coupons. "gross offender" status is pretty harsh: you can't place an order online or by phone with that account or that name at that address.
Associated People:
Roski Jr., Edward #313 on Forbes 400 U.S. Richest 2000
Stemberg, Thomas G # 84 on Forbes Top CEOs 2000 , # 8 on Forbes Top CEOs 1999
Whitman, Margaret #313 on Forbes 400 U.S. Richest 2000 , #270 on Forbes 400 U.S. Richest 1999
Taken from Forbes magazine..
Roski Jr., Edward #313 on Forbes 400 U.S. Richest 2000
Stemberg, Thomas G # 84 on Forbes Top CEOs 2000 , # 8 on Forbes Top CEOs 1999
Whitman, Margaret #313 on Forbes 400 U.S. Richest 2000 , #270 on Forbes 400 U.S. Richest 1999
Taken from Forbes magazine..
Taken right from here...yahoo staples profile
Pay Exer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Stemberg, 51
Chairman, CEO $3.3M $8.3M
Ronald Sargent, 44
Pres, COO, Director 2.4M 2.9M
Joseph Vassalluzzo, 52
Vice Chairman 1.7M --
Joseph Doody, 47
Pres, Staples Contract & Commercial -- --
Edward Harsant, 55
Pres - Bus. Depot -- --
Pay up.
Pay Exer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Stemberg, 51
Chairman, CEO $3.3M $8.3M
Ronald Sargent, 44
Pres, COO, Director 2.4M 2.9M
Joseph Vassalluzzo, 52
Vice Chairman 1.7M --
Joseph Doody, 47
Pres, Staples Contract & Commercial -- --
Edward Harsant, 55
Pres - Bus. Depot -- --
Pay up.
Here's the lineup, even ages:
Thomas Stemberg, 51 (CEO, Chairman)
Ronald Sargent, 44 (Pres, COO, Director)
Joseph Vassalluzzo, 52 (Vice Chairman)
Joseph Doody, 47 (Pres, Staples Contract & Commercial)
Edward Harsant, 55 (Pres - Bus. Depot)
Thomas Stemberg, 51 (CEO, Chairman)
Ronald Sargent, 44 (Pres, COO, Director)
Joseph Vassalluzzo, 52 (Vice Chairman)
Joseph Doody, 47 (Pres, Staples Contract & Commercial)
Edward Harsant, 55 (Pres - Bus. Depot)
"I will paypal $1 to anyone who tells me name of staples.com CEO"
Doesn't this mean anyone who tells you the staples.com ceo's name until you choose to change this "promotion" gets $1.00?
<grin>
Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis
Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis
</grin>
You owe me! Pay up!
I suggest you modify your post...hehe
-M.T.O
Doesn't this mean anyone who tells you the staples.com ceo's name until you choose to change this "promotion" gets $1.00?
<grin>
Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis
Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis Jeanne B. Lewis
</grin>
You owe me! Pay up!
I suggest you modify your post...hehe
-M.T.O
I've had three different run in's with e-tailers (nothing serious yet with Staples). If you are looking for SATISFACTION, file a complaint with the Better Business Bureau (www.bbb.org).
In the past 2 months I've filed a complaint with the BBB about, and received immediate satisfaction from the following companyies:
1. MVP.COM - I had too much of their "deals" that never shipped. 7 items ordered, 7 items out of stock. A letter brought me action with them shipping 5 pairs of shoes at NO COST within 2 weeks!
2. COMPUSA - They overcharged me for items ordered on the web (they didn't take off the "instant savings". Three months of hassling with them, a month with my credit card (a waste - AMEX!) and I sent a letter to BBB. Within 3 days I had the head of customer service call me and a credit to my account in a week!
3. Western Digital - Rebate past due 2 months (been almost 5). Was assured check would be processed back in December. A call in January was, we're sorry they are going out right away. 3 weeks later nothing! A call and I'm told that Western Digital isn't paying their bills on time and the checks are still waiting for payment from WD so they can be released. Yep, you guessed it and letter to BBB (via their website) last Monday, email from them on Wednesday apologizing and checks for $180 for rebates due in my hand on Saturday!
I don't know how responsive Staples would be, but so far I'm 3 for 3 after trying to deal with customer service through the standard e-tailer process. BBB.ORG, you file online. You just need to know what City/State the company is located (the headquarters) and BBB.ORG promptly follow-up. A BIG THUMBS UP to BBB for their customer service!
In the past 2 months I've filed a complaint with the BBB about, and received immediate satisfaction from the following companyies:
1. MVP.COM - I had too much of their "deals" that never shipped. 7 items ordered, 7 items out of stock. A letter brought me action with them shipping 5 pairs of shoes at NO COST within 2 weeks!
2. COMPUSA - They overcharged me for items ordered on the web (they didn't take off the "instant savings"
. Three months of hassling with them, a month with my credit card (a waste - AMEX!) and I sent a letter to BBB. Within 3 days I had the head of customer service call me and a credit to my account in a week!3. Western Digital - Rebate past due 2 months (been almost 5). Was assured check would be processed back in December. A call in January was, we're sorry they are going out right away. 3 weeks later nothing! A call and I'm told that Western Digital isn't paying their bills on time and the checks are still waiting for payment from WD so they can be released. Yep, you guessed it and letter to BBB (via their website) last Monday, email from them on Wednesday apologizing and checks for $180 for rebates due in my hand on Saturday!
I don't know how responsive Staples would be, but so far I'm 3 for 3 after trying to deal with customer service through the standard e-tailer process. BBB.ORG, you file online. You just need to know what City/State the company is located (the headquarters) and BBB.ORG promptly follow-up. A BIG THUMBS UP to BBB for their customer service!
Taken from SEC filings (this research was part of a complaint letter for a class):
(note that this is staples.com, not staples)
NAME AGE POSITION
---- -------- --------
Jeanne B. Lewis............... 36 President
Kevin Dempsey................. 42 Vice President--Merchandising
Anne-Marie Keane.............. 34 Vice President--Business-to-Business Electronic Commerce
Christine T. Komola........... 32 Chief Financial Officer
Jeffrey L. Levitan............ 45 Executive Vice President--Strategy and Development
J.B. Lyon..................... 36 Vice President--Business Services
Kelly Mahoney................. 42 Chief Marketing Officer
Michael J. Ragunas............ 36 Chief Technology Officer
Jackie Shoback................ 33 Vice President--Operations
Sarah Alter................... 34 Vice President--Quillcorp.com
):(note that this is staples.com, not staples)
NAME AGE POSITION
---- -------- --------
Jeanne B. Lewis............... 36 President
Kevin Dempsey................. 42 Vice President--Merchandising
Anne-Marie Keane.............. 34 Vice President--Business-to-Business Electronic Commerce
Christine T. Komola........... 32 Chief Financial Officer
Jeffrey L. Levitan............ 45 Executive Vice President--Strategy and Development
J.B. Lyon..................... 36 Vice President--Business Services
Kelly Mahoney................. 42 Chief Marketing Officer
Michael J. Ragunas............ 36 Chief Technology Officer
Jackie Shoback................ 33 Vice President--Operations
Sarah Alter................... 34 Vice President--Quillcorp.com
all my staples accounts have been restricted and cant place new account because my last name been restricted. spoke to staples.com corporate office but she was no help. i didnt do nothing illegal all i do is use pricematch and coupons on each order. i am sorry if they dont like customers who will not pay retail price ever.I feel like my consumers rights been violated and trust me I will get this whole resolved within few weeks will get many apologies and i will make sure to call that bitch at staples.com corporate to tell her my account been unrestricted and i am calling to place new order with pricematch and coupon, I bet she will be pissed
I hope she gets fired, she gave me such attitude because i used coupons and pricematch on each order.
In this letter, I would like to share with you some thoughts I originally organized to educate the public on a range of issues. The full truth of my conclusion I shall develop in the course of this letter, but the conclusion's general outline is that when one examines the ramifications of letting Mrs. Susan pour a few drops of wormwood into our general enthusiasm, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that you may make the comment, "What does this have to do with cynical mudslinging-types?" Well, once you begin to see the light, you'll realize that she pompously claims that a totalitarian dictatorship is the best form of government we could possibly have. That sort of nonsense impresses many people, unfortunately. The more I think about the worst kinds of resentful lummoxes there are, the more troubled I become by Susan's hastily mounted campaigns. Oddly enough, Susan will simply continue to cause distress to people she doesn't know, has never seen, and who have done her no harm whatsoever. Stranger still, Susan is out to call for ritualistic invocations of needlessly formal rules. And when we play her game, we become accomplices.
Her ventures symbolize lawlessness, violence, and misguided rebellion -- extreme liberty for a few, even if the rest of us lose more than a little freedom. Believe you me, in order to do what needs to be done, we must reveal the nature and activity of her factotums and expose their inner contexts as well as their ultimate final aims. And that's just the first step. Remember, Susan attempts to sound intelligent by cramming as many big words into a sentence as possible, whether they are used correctly or not. Let me try to explain what I mean by that in a single sentence: I myself can definitely suggest how Susan ought to behave. Ultimately, however, the burden of acting with moral rectitude lies with Susan herself.
While the concept of broad-based peace and social justice coalitions remains desirable, in these days of political correctness and the changing of how history is taught in schools to fulfill a particular agenda, Susan can fool some of the people all of the time. She can fool all of the people some of the time. But she can't fool all of the people all of the time. Susan, as usual, you prove yourself to be vile. Is it important that she broadens her appeal by seeking influence and adherents in the obstructionism movement? Of course it's important. But what's more important is that I recently heard Susan tell a bunch of people that she can ignore rules, laws, and protocol without repercussion. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text.
I'm not the first to mention that griping about Susan will not make her stop trying to create a mass psychology of fear about an imminent terrorist threat. But even if it did, she would just find some other way to annihilate a person's personality, individuality, will, and character. Do you really want her to shift blame from those who benefit from oppression to those who suffer from it? I think not.
Must it be explained to her that it must be pointed out that I must protest her use of what I call nasty blusterers to subvert time-tested societal norms? Because she obviously doesn't realize that emotionalism is not merely an attack on our moral fiber. It is also a politically motivated attack on knowledge. Susan is differentiated from your average sinful curmudgeons by virtue of the fact that she wants to restructure the social, political, and economic relationships throughout the entire society. In the past, I've said that the fight to give direction to a universal human development of culture, ethics, and morality demands a fight against prostitution, prejudices, old habits, and previous conceptions. Were I to make such a generalization today, it would contain a few "weasel words" -- an escape hatch or that indispensable cliche that her vicegerents are merely liars with charisma. But because she has never inscribed her name on the Parthenon of human excellence, either mental or moral, I am not ready to retract my conviction or to recant error.
We don't need to demonize her; Susan is already a demon, and furthermore, if we are powerless to overcome the obstacles that people like her establish, it is because we have allowed Susan to play fast and loose with the truth. An armed revolt against her is morally justified. However, I feel that it is not yet strategically justified.
Some people are responsible and others are not. Susan falls into the category of "not". It is morally unjustifiable for her to befuddle the public and make sin seem like merely a sophisticated fashion. More than that, it's astounding that she has somehow found a way to work the words "disdenominationalize" and "hydrometallurgically" into her prognoses. However, you may find it even more astounding that she argues that I am brainless for wanting to criticize her expedients publically for their formalistic categories, their spurious claims of neutrality, and their blindness to the abuse of private power. I should point out that this is almost the same argument that was made against Copernicus and Galileo almost half a millennium ago.
Susan leads me to believe that she is doctrinaire. Likewise, some of the facts I'm about to present may seem shocking. This they certainly are. However, Susan says that my bitterness at her is merely the latent projection of libidinal energy stemming from self-induced anguish. You know, I don't think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life. While I have no proof that she tries to humiliate her opponents rather than win their understanding, you should still believe me, as it really bothers Susan when people don't obey her. Of that I am certain, because there is still hope for our society, real hope -- not the false sense of hope that comes from the mouths of the most malicious bums you'll ever see, but the hope that makes you eager to strike at the heart of her efforts to dig a grave in which to bury liberty and freedom. I may not believe that society is screaming for her mottos, but I doubtlessly do think that the law of self preservation dictates that I strip the unjust power from those who seek power over others and over nature. I always catch hell whenever I say something like that, so let me assure you that I am making a pretty serious accusation here. I am accusing her of planning to make individuals indifferent to the survival of their families. And I don't want anyone to think that I am basing my accusation only on the fact that we are observing the change in our society's philosophy and values from freedom and justice to corruption, decay, cynicism, and injustice. All of these "values" are artistically incorporated in one person: Susan.
Though cuckoo blackguardism is not discussed in this letter, much of what I've written applies to that, as well. Whether or not you realize this, the facts as I see them simply do not support the false, but widely accepted, notion that if Susan kicks us in the teeth, we'll then lick her toes and beg for another kick. She has recently been going around claiming that those who disagree with her should be cast into the outer darkness, should be shunned, should starve. You really have to tie your brain in knots to be gullible enough to believe that junk. (Yes, Susan thrives on the victimization of others, but that's a different story.) Statements like, "She is living in a dream world" accurately express the feelings of most of us here. It is apparent to me that I experienced quite an epiphany when I first realized that her cat's-paws should reevaluate their cherished assumptions about paternalism. I'll say that again, because I want it to sink in: I am astonished by how little integrity and good judgment she possesses.
I can't stress this enough, but everything I've said so far is by way of introduction to the key point I want to make in this letter. My key point is that Susan's crusades are a house of mirrors. How are we to find the opening that leads to freedom? No, don't guess; this isn't audience participation day. I'll just tell you. But before I do, you should note that Susan's positions have caused widespread social alienation, and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung. Susan spews out her vituperative slander from a safe, no-risk forum. Here, too, the exception proves the rule: If I have a bias, it is only against obtuse goofy-types who cause stupid subversion to gather momentum on college campuses. It is high time for someone to recall the ideals of compassion, nonviolence, community, and cooperation. Will that someone be you?
Her ventures symbolize lawlessness, violence, and misguided rebellion -- extreme liberty for a few, even if the rest of us lose more than a little freedom. Believe you me, in order to do what needs to be done, we must reveal the nature and activity of her factotums and expose their inner contexts as well as their ultimate final aims. And that's just the first step. Remember, Susan attempts to sound intelligent by cramming as many big words into a sentence as possible, whether they are used correctly or not. Let me try to explain what I mean by that in a single sentence: I myself can definitely suggest how Susan ought to behave. Ultimately, however, the burden of acting with moral rectitude lies with Susan herself.
While the concept of broad-based peace and social justice coalitions remains desirable, in these days of political correctness and the changing of how history is taught in schools to fulfill a particular agenda, Susan can fool some of the people all of the time. She can fool all of the people some of the time. But she can't fool all of the people all of the time. Susan, as usual, you prove yourself to be vile. Is it important that she broadens her appeal by seeking influence and adherents in the obstructionism movement? Of course it's important. But what's more important is that I recently heard Susan tell a bunch of people that she can ignore rules, laws, and protocol without repercussion. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text.
I'm not the first to mention that griping about Susan will not make her stop trying to create a mass psychology of fear about an imminent terrorist threat. But even if it did, she would just find some other way to annihilate a person's personality, individuality, will, and character. Do you really want her to shift blame from those who benefit from oppression to those who suffer from it? I think not.
Must it be explained to her that it must be pointed out that I must protest her use of what I call nasty blusterers to subvert time-tested societal norms? Because she obviously doesn't realize that emotionalism is not merely an attack on our moral fiber. It is also a politically motivated attack on knowledge. Susan is differentiated from your average sinful curmudgeons by virtue of the fact that she wants to restructure the social, political, and economic relationships throughout the entire society. In the past, I've said that the fight to give direction to a universal human development of culture, ethics, and morality demands a fight against prostitution, prejudices, old habits, and previous conceptions. Were I to make such a generalization today, it would contain a few "weasel words" -- an escape hatch or that indispensable cliche that her vicegerents are merely liars with charisma. But because she has never inscribed her name on the Parthenon of human excellence, either mental or moral, I am not ready to retract my conviction or to recant error.
We don't need to demonize her; Susan is already a demon, and furthermore, if we are powerless to overcome the obstacles that people like her establish, it is because we have allowed Susan to play fast and loose with the truth. An armed revolt against her is morally justified. However, I feel that it is not yet strategically justified.
Some people are responsible and others are not. Susan falls into the category of "not". It is morally unjustifiable for her to befuddle the public and make sin seem like merely a sophisticated fashion. More than that, it's astounding that she has somehow found a way to work the words "disdenominationalize" and "hydrometallurgically" into her prognoses. However, you may find it even more astounding that she argues that I am brainless for wanting to criticize her expedients publically for their formalistic categories, their spurious claims of neutrality, and their blindness to the abuse of private power. I should point out that this is almost the same argument that was made against Copernicus and Galileo almost half a millennium ago.
Susan leads me to believe that she is doctrinaire. Likewise, some of the facts I'm about to present may seem shocking. This they certainly are. However, Susan says that my bitterness at her is merely the latent projection of libidinal energy stemming from self-induced anguish. You know, I don't think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life. While I have no proof that she tries to humiliate her opponents rather than win their understanding, you should still believe me, as it really bothers Susan when people don't obey her. Of that I am certain, because there is still hope for our society, real hope -- not the false sense of hope that comes from the mouths of the most malicious bums you'll ever see, but the hope that makes you eager to strike at the heart of her efforts to dig a grave in which to bury liberty and freedom. I may not believe that society is screaming for her mottos, but I doubtlessly do think that the law of self preservation dictates that I strip the unjust power from those who seek power over others and over nature. I always catch hell whenever I say something like that, so let me assure you that I am making a pretty serious accusation here. I am accusing her of planning to make individuals indifferent to the survival of their families. And I don't want anyone to think that I am basing my accusation only on the fact that we are observing the change in our society's philosophy and values from freedom and justice to corruption, decay, cynicism, and injustice. All of these "values" are artistically incorporated in one person: Susan.
Though cuckoo blackguardism is not discussed in this letter, much of what I've written applies to that, as well. Whether or not you realize this, the facts as I see them simply do not support the false, but widely accepted, notion that if Susan kicks us in the teeth, we'll then lick her toes and beg for another kick. She has recently been going around claiming that those who disagree with her should be cast into the outer darkness, should be shunned, should starve. You really have to tie your brain in knots to be gullible enough to believe that junk. (Yes, Susan thrives on the victimization of others, but that's a different story.) Statements like, "She is living in a dream world" accurately express the feelings of most of us here. It is apparent to me that I experienced quite an epiphany when I first realized that her cat's-paws should reevaluate their cherished assumptions about paternalism. I'll say that again, because I want it to sink in: I am astonished by how little integrity and good judgment she possesses.
I can't stress this enough, but everything I've said so far is by way of introduction to the key point I want to make in this letter. My key point is that Susan's crusades are a house of mirrors. How are we to find the opening that leads to freedom? No, don't guess; this isn't audience participation day. I'll just tell you. But before I do, you should note that Susan's positions have caused widespread social alienation, and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung. Susan spews out her vituperative slander from a safe, no-risk forum. Here, too, the exception proves the rule: If I have a bias, it is only against obtuse goofy-types who cause stupid subversion to gather momentum on college campuses. It is high time for someone to recall the ideals of compassion, nonviolence, community, and cooperation. Will that someone be you?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter