2 Free Snowshoe Lift Tickets
33 posts
12 users
23k+ views
WP_Employee
February 14, 2005
Member since 03/7/2004
83 posts
I have 2 free snowshoe lift tickets for sale that were the result of the purchase of Coke products at Kroger in Blacksburg, VA.

The receipts allow you to get a FREE ALL DAY SNOWSHOE LIFT TICKET Monday-Friday and Sunday **any day** until Feb 28th, 2005.

The terms are as follows:

"Present this receipt at any lift ticket window. Redeem any day from dec 1 - dec 25, 2004 and sunday-friday from january 3-february 28, 2005. Limit one per household."

-- My friends and I have been using these non-stop over the past few months -- sadly I will not be back to Snowshoe any time soon.

Buy them for yourself and a friend and SAVE!

I am looking for $40.00 for both -- this includes shipping.

E-mail my @ cmyslins@vt.edu or reply to this thread.
Scott - DCSki Editor
February 14, 2005
Member since 10/10/1999
1,095 posts
Hi folks,

This has come up before, and because individuals were reselling the "free" lift tickets, Snowshoe discontinued this program and is unlikely to offer similar programs in the future -- which means we all lose out. The tickets are not meant to be resold for profit. Snowshoe was understandably very upset when they found out folks were reselling these ticket vouchers.

- Scott
tromano
February 14, 2005
Member since 12/19/2002
998 posts
Scott,

I feel the same way about selling free promotional tickets. A few years ago at University of Maryland about 1/4 the students who camped out for tickets to a Duke / UMD home basketball game sold their tickets on EBAY for $100+ even though there were tons of students still in line when the tickts were gone. The tickets were clearly marked as having no cash vlaue and cannot be legally sold in Maryland. Basicly what happened is the students who were unlucky enough not to get ticktes for free had to buy them from their friends on the open market for extreme prices if they wanted to go even tough the student ticket are paid for through the activites fee and shoudl be avialabel to any student and legally only real students can use the tickets. It was total ass IMO. Ok rant's over.

IMO if its free and a promotion you shold give it away not try to make some quick money for no investment or time on your part by taking advantage of the resort's good will and desire to promote the sport. Bleh.
Scott - DCSki Editor
February 14, 2005
Member since 10/10/1999
1,095 posts
Right. And I don't mean to pick on WP_Employee -- I'm sure he means no harm -- but Snowshoe does read DCSki and when they saw this sort of thing going on, it made them question whether to offer similar promotions in the future. Skiing is expensive, so I'm sure none of us want to see these types of bargains and promotions going away.
DCSki Sponsor: DCSki
JR
February 15, 2005
Member since 01/1/2003
276 posts
Snowshoe reads this stuff? I'll beat everyone else to it.

FREE BEER!
tromano
February 15, 2005
Member since 12/19/2002
998 posts
Sorry to be so judgemental.

It jsut seems that people always are complainign and I agree that resorts don't do enough to promote the sport directly. And now SS is and something like this comes up...
WP_Employee
February 15, 2005
Member since 03/7/2004
83 posts
To be absolutely fair on both sides of the issue:

This is the 2nd (second) year that Snowshoe has done this promotion. I doubt that anytime soon this promotion will be ending.

Snowshoe, if they are reading this, could very easily require the Kroger Plus Card that made the purchase in order to obtain the ticket. This is not the method they use however, so any after effects they suffer are a cause of marketings not planning for such activity.

LAST year they did not even require a Plus card to get a free ticket -- so while they stepped in the correct direction if they wish to end re-selling they should create a "used" database so they can track the kroger plus ID # and how many tickets were "obtained" with that account.

Just my 2 cents.
Jim
February 15, 2005
Member since 11/22/1999
317 posts
WP_Employee: Your reasoning is flawed. Its akin to saying that its up to the police to stop people from running red lights and speeding - not the responsibility of the motorist. In the case of the SS vouchers, they clearly indicate lack of cash value and nontransferability. Yet your attitude is if its wrong, they should stop me. If you have another reason as to why you should be able to take advantage of the good will of one ski area trying to promote a sport who's sales have been flat over the past several years, then please post it. But don't use the excuse of laying blame for your transgression of SS policy on SS's lack of enforcement.

By the way, I would also add that your post heading is misleading. You are not providing two "free" SS lift tickets. You are SELLING what is otherwise free.
Scott - DCSki Editor
February 15, 2005
Member since 10/10/1999
1,095 posts
WP_Employee: Our sources indicate that Snowshoe suspended the program the second they saw the lift tickets being re-sold this year on E-Bay and DCSki. (They are honoring any tickets that were already in circulation, but they stopped distributing new ones.) I heard directly from the resort that they were not happy, in no uncertain terms.

You can see why, right? It's one thing if folks obtained the ticket vouchers, couldn't use them, and gave them to friends who could for the same price they paid for them (i.e., nothing). It's a little different when folks are trying to re-sell the (free) vouchers at a profit.

This type of behavior translates directly to lost revenue for Snowshoe. Although some might argue Snowshoe is a big resort with deep pockets, the reality is that every ski resort in the mid-Atlantic region struggles, especially with winters that can be hit-and-miss. Every lift ticket adds up.

And yes, Snowshoe could take steps to prevent this type of action from occurring. But setting up a database or taking similar measures would be very expensive and probably not make it worthwhile for them to offer the program in the first place.

I don't want to beat a dead horse; as long as there is a way to re-sell vouchers (for Snowshoe or other resorts that offer similar programs), I'm sure folks are going to do so. But I can step in and say not to do it on DCSki, because I believe it harms both the consumers trying to take advantage of these deals in good faith, as well as the resorts that make mid-Atlantic skiing possible.

- Scott (stepping off his soapbox..)
JR
February 15, 2005
Member since 01/1/2003
276 posts
Do you realistically expect the place to be able to set up a system that scans Kroger cards for tickets that are free in the first place? That would be like them setting up a system to scan every university's ID so that people couldn't use Student IDs for discounts years after they graduate. I still happened to have mine in my wallet last time I was skiing and they asked if I was a student cause I could save 5 dollars. It was dang tempting but is 5 bucks worth GOING TO HADES OVER!!!! You think we have a hard time getting good snow in the mid atlantic.
WP_Employee
February 15, 2005
Member since 03/7/2004
83 posts
Actually JR -- it isnt that hard.

As an IT person myself -- here are the steps:

Since Snowshoe required the purchase of Coke products with a kroger plus card, every single receipt has the Kroger plus ID @ the top.

The person issuing the lift ticket goes to an access database ... or any other database product you would like and attempts to enter that kroger plus ID into the system. If it has already been used -- denied. Quite simple, would require about 15 mins of work to do.

Snowshoe does not have to maintain ANY database of "all" Kroger customer IDs. They only have to manage those that turn in a voucher (which, would be quite a small size).

Since all of the data they need is on the Receipt -- this is not really hard for them to do. Snowshoe did not do it and now acts like the victim? Whether or not people sell the vouchers, it generates revenue for Snowshoe. People buy lodging, etc. (which I do believe was one of the goals of Snowshoe's promotion, since Blacksburg is quite a haul to Snowshoe). It does not harm their business for end users to re-sell a voucher that they have earned by some legal action. ADDITIONALLY, nowhere, nowhere on the receipt does Snowshoe or anyone else advocate that you NOT resell the voucher.

This is not the deep pocket analogy that Scott mentioned. The deep pocket analogy would attempt to justify the action by stating Snowshoe could afford the lost revenue. However, with a free ticket, there was no realized revenue. The revenue that Snowshoe hoped the obtain was by increasing skier visits on the mountain. This promotion appears to do that, no matter how people show up.

--

As a person who works in the business world, and knowing the history of Intrawest, it almost shocks me that anyone @ Snowshoe would be surprised that people re-sold an open ended free lift ticket. Part of being in management is not getting caught up in group think and pointing out the weakness that exists in any marketing or business idea (or promotion, here). Snowshoe, for whatever reason, now acts upset because of these actions? I once again mention the reason they offered a free lift ticket was solely for their own gain and not ours -- Snowshoe is a business as much as we seem to forget it here.
Scott - DCSki Editor
February 16, 2005
Member since 10/10/1999
1,095 posts
Quote:

Actually JR -- it isnt that hard.

As an IT person myself -- here are the steps:

Since Snowshoe required the purchase of Coke products with a kroger plus card, every single receipt has the Kroger plus ID @ the top.

The person issuing the lift ticket goes to an access database ... or any other database product you would like and attempts to enter that kroger plus ID into the system. If it has already been used -- denied. Quite simple, would require about 15 mins of work to do.

Snowshoe does not have to maintain ANY database of "all" Kroger customer IDs. They only have to manage those that turn in a voucher (which, would be quite a small size).

Since all of the data they need is on the Receipt -- this is not really hard for them to do. Snowshoe did not do it and now acts like the victim?




Ok, I have to step in one last time. Consider it a case of dueling IT people.

I think you are grossly underestimating how "easy" it would be to set up a system similar to what you describe. First off, Snowshoe's various ticket windows (in at least four separate locations?) probably do not have generic PC's sitting next to them that can run an Access, MySQL, etc. database. They have proprietary lift ticket-printing machines and credit card processing systems. So Snowshoe would have to pay for its IT department to install networked PC's throughout all of the ticket window facilities. (There probably isn't physical space for them, so that could be another problem.) Appropriate software and OS's would have to be licensed for each system. All of these systems would have to be tied to a central server, with real-time communications so all PC's have a synchronized view of the database. All of these computers would need to be maintained; the server would need to be backed up; employees would have to be trained in the use of the system; etc. The software would need to be developed, tested, deployed, and supported. And Snowhsoe would have to be prepared for contingencies (what if the server is down? What if employees make typos?)

I could set up a database on my Mac here in a few minutes that kept track of unique ID's and counts, but that's a far cry from rolling out a system across an entire mountain resort. Deploying a system in any large business -- no matter how small that system is -- is costly. The key detail you leave out is that Snowshoe would need to purchase many PC's, install them in the ticket window facilities, and network them together. I don't think they could do that in 15 minutes.

And why should they? The ticket vouchers have no cash value and are non-transferrable.

If you carried your argument all the way -- that Snowshoe is making money on lodging anyway, so no harm done -- then you would have to argue that Snowshoe shouldn't sell lift tickets at all, and should hand them out free to everyone. But Snowshoe derives a large percentage of its income from the sale of lift tickets. That's what keeps the slopes groomed, the ski patrol employed, etc. You also say that Snowshoe doesn't lose out because there's no realized revenue for the free vouchers whether or not they're resold, but that's not right either. I don't live near a Kroger, so I'm not able to take advantage of the promotion. If I buy the lift ticket voucher from you for $20, that means Snowshoe isn't getting $50+ from me that they would have otherwise got. That's clearly unrealized revenue. The majority of the folks purchasing these vouchers are undoubtedly folks who couldn't take advantage of the promotion on their own, because they don't live near the Kroger stores offering the special.

So, clearly, you're not going to convince all of us that there's nothing wrong with doing this.

You are right that Snowshoe could take steps to prevent this type of thing from happening. But there is a cost to any steps they could take, and unfortunately, that cost might simply convince them not to offer similar specials in the future.
WP_Employee
February 16, 2005
Member since 03/7/2004
83 posts
>> If you carried your argument all the way -- that Snowshoe is making money on lodging anyway, so no harm done -- then you would have to argue that Snowshoe shouldn't sell lift tickets at all,

Incorrect, because this was a voluntary action by Snowshoe. You are still trying to connect selling lift tickets with selling FREE lift tickets. The huge difference here is that anyone using a free Snowshoe lift ticket was not going to buy a ticket. Additionally, you mentioned before it was okay to give it to someone for free but not to sell it? As far as Snowshoe is concerned, there is no difference. Giving a ticket to someone that did not get it through the process is the same as selling it to Snowshoe -- in either case according to your analogy they are losing revenue.

>> If you carried your argument all the way -- that Snowshoe is making money on lodging anyway, so no harm done -- then you would have to argue that Snowshoe shouldn't sell lift tickets at all,

Snowshoe allowed Kroger to print an unlimited number of free lift tickets. With my Kroger Card alone I had over 6 -- why? Once again, this is the fault of Snowshoe and any complaint now from them is invalid. IF the limit is one per household -- then Snowshoe should find a more effective way to distribute FREE lift tickets.

----

As far as the IT aspect goes -- once again Snowshoe only had to do one thing. They could have printed on the receipt that the ticket would only be honored at Top of the World, or some other large ticket location. When you give someone a free lift ticket I don't see any problem with restricting where it may be turned in. This would take care of the argument that they have to setup an elaborate network, etc. The actual percentage of people using these receipts is small -- not hard to do.

When I was given a free lift ticket last year by Snowshoe (for participation in a survey) I Had to FIRST take it to customer relations to have them approve it, then I could get my ticket. They have used this method in the past.
Scott - DCSki Editor
February 16, 2005
Member since 10/10/1999
1,095 posts
Quote:

>> If you carried your argument all the way -- that Snowshoe is making money on lodging anyway, so no harm done -- then you would have to argue that Snowshoe shouldn't sell lift tickets at all,

Incorrect, because this was a voluntary action by Snowshoe. You are still trying to connect selling lift tickets with selling FREE lift tickets. The huge difference here is that anyone using a free Snowshoe lift ticket was not going to buy a ticket.




I completely disagree with that statement. If someone pays *you* for the free lift ticket voucher, that person was almost certainly going to buy a lift ticket from Snowshoe. But instead, they're buying it from you, because you're undercutting Snowshoe on the price. If they lived near a Kroger and had the Kroger card, then they would have (legitimately) gone to Kroger and gotten the free lift ticket voucher that way, because that would be even cheaper than paying you for the voucher. I really don't understand your argument.

Quote:

Additionally, you mentioned before it was okay to give it to someone for free but not to sell it? As far as Snowshoe is concerned, there is no difference. Giving a ticket to someone that did not get it through the process is the same as selling it to Snowshoe -- in either case according to your analogy they are losing revenue.




I never said that was OK. My exact statement was:

"It's one thing if folks obtained the ticket vouchers, couldn't use them, and gave them to friends who could for the same price they paid for them (i.e., nothing). It's a little different when folks are trying to re-sell the (free) vouchers at a profit."

I'm not saying either thing is OK -- in either case, the voucher isn't being used in the way intended. But if you gave the voucher to a buddy for free because you couldn't use it, I am less concerned than if you are trying to use the DCSki forums to profit off of something you shouldn't be profiting off of. I stepped in because I don't want people using DCSki as a tool for an action that I feel is wrong and potentially harmful to both skiers and resorts. And that's really the bottom line.
jimmy
February 16, 2005
Member since 03/5/2004
2,650 posts
The "Bottom Line" here is really that Snowshoe discontinued the promotion. What WP thinks is right was wrong because of Snowshoe's reaction to the situation.

WP, Why don't you try to GIVE these to friends, or take a newbie up, promote the sport. Just my opinion, I'm usually wrong.

jimmy
Murphy
February 16, 2005
Member since 09/13/2004
618 posts
Quote:

Whether or not people sell the vouchers, it generates revenue for Snowshoe. People buy lodging, etc. (which I do believe was one of the goals of Snowshoe's promotion, since Blacksburg is quite a haul to Snowshoe).




I seriously doubt Snowshoe made much money on any of these vouchers. I've know of several of people who have used dozens of these vouchers and the average person has spent less than $10 at Snowshoe. Blacksburg's a college town. Students are willing to make it a day trip and Snowshoe knows it. IMO this promotion was run in Blacksburg because it was targeting people who otherwise wouldn't go to Snowshoe who would be likely to become future customers (after graduation when they could afford it). Skiing at a destination resort is primarily a hobby of those who make a pretty decent income and this promotion was a way for Snowshoe to tap a future market.
tromano
February 16, 2005
Member since 12/19/2002
998 posts
Quote:

The "Bottom Line" here is really that Snowshoe discontinued the promotion. What WP thinks is right was wrong because of Snowshoe's reaction to the situation.

WP, Why don't you try to GIVE these to friends, or take a newbie up, promote the sport. Just my opinion, I'm usually wrong.

jimmy




I happen to agree jimmy, taking a newbie friend out be the best way to help promote the sport. It is an opportunity to help our friends and family involved in something active and fun during the winter instead of just the usualy sitting arroudn watching TV or whatever. given the ammount of obesity and other health problems I think it is actually a very beneficial an smart buisness move on SS's par tto try to bring new people into the sport and a great way olf doing that is comp tickets. The tickets aren't for you to sell as a bonus to make a quick buck. They are to promote the sport and to make it easier for new people come to the sport. If you and a few others abuse that opportunity then we will all surely lose it. And in fact we already have apparently.
WP_Employee
February 16, 2005
Member since 03/7/2004
83 posts
This was the second year they ran this promotion. We were able to get lift tickets for FREE for about 3 weeks. I don't know any resort that would allow free lift tickets to continue for >1 month. Infact -- last year this promotion lasted a similar amount of time.

Snowshoe will probably do this again -- just with more thought and control.

Everyone I know that had these tickets in Blacksburg either SOLD them to friends or family.

>> They are to promote the sport and to make it easier for new people come to the sport. If you and a few others abuse that opportunity then we will all surely lose it. And in fact we already have apparently.

You all have said you never had the opportunity so it is of no loss to you. Please spare me the cynicism. Snowshoe is promoting their end of the sport -- which would be Snowshoe.

And to Murphy:
Since Snowshoe has so properly identified their market -- they should also know that a college market has low income. A free lift ticket with high value = income. Therefore, students will probably take advantage of a way to increase their income. Seems to make sense?

It is not the students fault that Snowshoe allowed an unlimited number of tickets to be obtained. Snowshoe themselves did not even ENFORCE the "limit 1 per household." Of course how could they? They had no controls set in place to enforce their own ticket redemption policy. To give you more facts, when I first got the ticket I was under the assumption that you could only use it 1 time. Once. I had a group of friends go up to SS and they found out rather quickly that after 3 days of free skiing there was no limit on use. Word of this spread extremely quickly in this area. I know some students here that redeemed over 9 coupons so far this season. That is obviously in violation of the limit 1 per household, which Snowshoe does not enforce, so Snowshoe lost revenue on every ticket >1 that a person uses.

>> DCSki forums to profit off of something you shouldn't be profiting off of. I

Absolutely your opinion and I respect it. But Snowshoe nor Kroger have any terms that prohibit the sale of such an item. The terms, as listed above, are "limit 1 per household." That is the only term aside from a limitation on when it may be redeemed.

>> WP, Why don't you try to GIVE these to friends

Since most of my friends would buy a lift ticket @ Snowshoe anyway, according to the talk in this thread I am taking away from Snowshoe's profits.
kennedy
February 16, 2005
Member since 12/8/2001
792 posts
As you said yourself WP Snowshoe is a business, they are there to make money and don't owe us anything. As such if they see fit to allow free lift tickets it is their goodwill, regardless of arguements about whether they make money on lodging or not. Snowshoe does pretty healthy business without giving away any free tix so setting up any additional processes for managing promotions is competely at their discretion. Look at it this way Snowshoe giveth and Snowshoe taketh away and the only people hurting are you and I because there will be no promotions and no discounted or free tix just $63 per person per day please, have a good one.
warren
February 16, 2005
Member since 07/31/2003
485 posts
WP,
I've been sitting here watching this thread evolve. Basically, you're scalping tickets The argument that they're not stopping you so it's OK is bogus That's the same mentality of "Gee there was no sign on my McDonald's coffee cup telling me not to put burning hot coffee between my legs and drive " In case you've not heard of this inane court case, the person sued McDonalds for their own stupidity and won No one's responsible any more. Unless someone tells them not to, it must be OK. COME ON! where in the h*ll has every ones personal responsibility gone?

-Warren-
jimmy
February 16, 2005
Member since 03/5/2004
2,650 posts
Can we talk about global warming for a while?
warren
February 16, 2005
Member since 07/31/2003
485 posts
Jimmy,

I agree I think this thread has been beat to death

-Warren-
WP_Employee
February 16, 2005
Member since 03/7/2004
83 posts
>> The argument that they're not stopping you so it's OK is bogus

Since I don't think I have done anything wrong, I dismiss your comment. Thanks. There is nothing wrong with selling something that was given to you that you cannot use. I cannot use 2 of the remaining receipts that I have -- thats it. I used all the other ones I had. So here I am, attempting to rid myself of what I have left. You all say "give it away for free" -- each one of those receipts cost me $8.59. So at a minimum -- $17.00 is due aside from shipping costs. These receipts were not free for me, I paid $8.59 for them, or $8.59 per lift ticket.
warren
February 16, 2005
Member since 07/31/2003
485 posts
WP,
Actually, you've received another product for those receipts. You paid nothing for the tickets. It's supposed to be a local promotion that you've abused, plain and simple. The fact that you're unable to grasp that fact is beyond me and the other posters Like I said before, I think this has been beat on enough.

-Warren-
Jim
February 16, 2005
Member since 11/22/1999
317 posts
Quote:

Can we talk about global warming for a while?




The Kyoto Protocol went into effect today. But since the U.S. is not a signatory, its okay. Besides, its up to the rest of the world to catch us over-emitting greenhouse gases anyway . . .
JR
February 16, 2005
Member since 01/1/2003
276 posts
WP, Isn't RogerZ from Blacksburg too? Why don't you two just meet in a dark alley at midnight, you give him the tickets for free, and be done with it. He can go to Snowshoe, you don't have to burn in hades, and the rest of us aren't forced to talk about global warming and the blue knob glades.
twin58
February 16, 2005
Member since 04/1/2000
198 posts
>>
That's the same mentality of "Gee there was no sign on my McDonald's coffee cup telling me not to put burning hot coffee between my legs and drive " In case you've not heard of this inane court case, the person sued McDonalds for their own stupidity and won
<<

I urge listers, in the interest of accuracy, to Google for "mcdonald's coffee burn"

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...amp;btnG=Search

Because many of the hits at the top of the list will be for trial lawyers, you may wish to bypass them to insure objectivity. Still, that leaves quite a few hits that deserve your attention.
jimmy
February 16, 2005
Member since 03/5/2004
2,650 posts
AAAH SOOO, Kyoto, Shame Mt. St. Helens isn't signatory, biggest contributor to ozone depletion in US.
Jim
February 16, 2005
Member since 11/22/1999
317 posts
Quote:

I urge listers, in the interest of accuracy, to Google for "mcdonald's coffee burn"





For those that do not want to go outside the forum to research this, the woman did sue, but on the grounds that McDonald's served their coffee too hot. They had received a number of complaints and testing did show the coffee to be hotter than typical (although there is no enforceable industry "standard"). The plaintiff did win initially, but the case was appealed and eventually settled for an undisclosed sum.

Here is more on the case from a mythbusters website:

Quote:

The "McDonald's coffee" case. We have all heard it: a woman spills McDonald's coffee, sues and gets $3 million. Here are the facts of this widely misreported and misunderstood case:

Stella Liebeck, 79 years old, was sitting in the passenger seat of her grandson's car having purchased a cup of McDonald's coffee. After the car stopped, she tried to hold the cup securely between her knees while removing the lid. However, the cup tipped over, pouring scalding hot coffee onto her. She received third-degree burns over 16 percent of her body, necessitating hospitalization for eight days, whirlpool treatment for debridement of her wounds, skin grafting, scarring, and disability for more than two years. Morgan, The Recorder, September 30, 1994. Despite these extensive injuries, she offered to settle with McDonald's for $20,000. However, McDonald's refused to settle. The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages -- reduced to $160,000 because the jury found her 20 percent at fault -- and $2.7 million in punitive damages for McDonald's callous conduct. (To put this in perspective, McDonald's revenue from coffee sales alone is in excess of $1.3 million a day.) The trial judge reduced the punitive damages to $480,000. Subsequently, the parties entered a post-verdict settlement. According to Stella Liebeck's attorney, S. Reed Morgan, the jury heard the following evidence in the case:

By corporate specifications, McDonald's sells its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit;


Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns (the skin is burned away down to the muscle/fatty-tissue layer) in two to seven seconds;


Third-degree burns do not heal without skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability of the victim for many months, and in some cases, years;


The chairman of the department of mechanical engineering and bio-mechanical engineering at the University of Texas testified that this risk of harm is unacceptable, as did a widely recognized expert on burns, the editor in chief of the leading scholarly publication in the specialty, the Journal of Burn Care and Rehabilitation;


McDonald's admitted that it has known about the risk of serious burns from its scalding hot coffee for more than 10 years -- the risk was brought to its attention through numerous other claims and suits, to no avail;


From 1982 to 1992, McDonald's coffee burned more than 700 people, many receiving severe burns to the genital area, perineum, inner thighs, and buttocks;


Not only men and women, but also children and infants, have been burned by McDonald's scalding hot coffee, in some instances due to inadvertent spillage by McDonald's employees;


At least one woman had coffee dropped in her lap through the service window, causing third-degree burns to her inner thighs and other sensitive areas, which resulted in disability for years;


Witnesses for McDonald's admitted in court that consumers are unaware of the extent of the risk of serious burns from spilled coffee served at McDonald's required temperature;


McDonald's admitted that it did not warn customers of the nature and extent of this risk and could offer no explanation as to why it did not;


McDonald's witnesses testified that it did not intend to turn down the heat -- As one witness put it: "No, there is no current plan to change the procedure that we're using in that regard right now;"


McDonald's admitted that its coffee is "not fit for consumption" when sold because it causes severe scalds if spilled or drunk;


Liebeck's treating physician testified that her injury was one of the worst scald burns he had ever seen.
Morgan, The Recorder, September 30, 1994. Moreover, the Shriner's Burn Institute in Cincinnati had published warnings to the franchise food industry that its members were unnecessarily causing serious scald burns by serving beverages above 130 degrees Fahrenheit.

In refusing to grant a new trial in the case, Judge Robert Scott called McDonald's behavior "callous." Moreover, "the day after the verdict, the news media documented that coffee at the McDonald's in Albuquerque [where Liebeck was burned] is now sold at 158 degrees. This will cause third-degree burns in about 60 seconds, rather than in two to seven seconds [so that], the margin of safety has been increased as a direct consequence of this verdict." Id.




tromano
February 16, 2005
Member since 12/19/2002
998 posts
Quote:

Quote:

Can we talk about global warming for a while?




The Kyoto Protocol went into effect today. But since the U.S. is not a signatory, its okay. Besides, its up to the rest of the world to catch us over-emitting greenhouse gases anyway . . .




The US sticking it to the planet by not signing kyoto is almost as bad as WP screwing snowshoe with his profitering.
lbotta - DCSki Supporter
February 16, 2005
Member since 10/18/1999
1,526 posts
Talking about global warming and Kyoto isn't going to take away the fact that selling what you didn't pay for is ultimately unethical.

I am disheartened that someone would not have even the slightest clue that selling what one gets for free is not appropriate...

I served (and still serve in a civilian position) our country in the military for 22 years, many of them in third-world countries that included two US embassy postings.

If there's one thing that clearly differentiates the working societies from the ones that do not work, is the sense of ethics of the population in general. Ethics is stopping at a red light at 2 AM when you're the only car on the road. Ethics is receiving free tickets and realizing that they are not to be sold. Ethics is putting a quarter in a newspaper machine and taking only one newspaper. Some may think this is dumb. They are wrong.

This is the second unfortunate time that I see this type of posting. I would just wish that these otherwise nice persons would live for only a few days in social orders where ethical behavior isn't clearly understood by the general population. They would returned as changed people...
jimmy
February 17, 2005
Member since 03/5/2004
2,650 posts
Quote:

Ethics is stopping at a red light at 2 AM when you're the only car on the road. Ethics is receiving free tickets and realizing that they are not to be sold. Ethics is putting a quarter in a newspaper machine and taking only one newspaper. Some may think this is dumb. They are wrong.





Lou,
That's beautiful!
jimmy
David
September 2, 2010
Member since 06/28/2004
2,444 posts
Welcome to DCSki. Don't believe anything you read here!

I'm just joking, this is a great place. Seriously though. You can trust about everyone (beware the Fish). wink
DCSki Sponsor: DCSki

Ski and Tell

Speak truth to powder.

Join the conversation by logging in.

Don't have an account? Create one here.

0.13 seconds