Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    SMS
    Guest
    "Cingular said it complained to Sprint about the ads and Sprint
    responded by saying that its claim was ``puffery" and did not require
    substantiation. In a legal context, puffery is advertising content that
    no reasonable consumer would rely on as a fact."

    "http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2006/05/28/wireless_carriers_take_network_ad_claims_to_court/"
    ([email protected] and bugmenot)



    See More: Sprint claims that its "Most Powerful Network" claim is "Puffery"so no substantiation is required.




  2. #2
    dr.news
    Guest

    Re: Sprint claims that its "Most Powerful Network" claim is "Puffery" so no substantiation is required.

    I had never heard the word "puffery" in that manner. Net: it is a sad
    reflection on American business tactics. We've come to know that car
    dealers invoice price has no relevance, and now we know that "most powerful
    network" has no relevance either. Sad that we can't win customers over with
    truth, quality and good value for their money. Not saying that any carrier
    isn't good value, as that is personal choice. But if you spend your
    advertising dollar trying to build market share with "puffery" isn't that
    just bold-face "nothing" hoping the stupid consumer (someone that doesn't
    know what puffery is, like me) will in fact believe it? dr.
    --
    dr.news //stores.ebay.com/better-price-wireless (not better than you
    deserve, just more than you're used to) //free.better-price.biz (for new
    lines of wireless service; all carriers; the phones are almost always a
    better-price)

    "SMS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > "Cingular said it complained to Sprint about the ads and Sprint responded
    > by saying that its claim was ``puffery" and did not require
    > substantiation. In a legal context, puffery is advertising content that no
    > reasonable consumer would rely on as a fact."
    >
    > "http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2006/05/28/wireless_carriers_take_network_ad_claims_to_court/"
    > ([email protected] and bugmenot)






  3. #3
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: Sprint claims that its "Most Powerful Network" claim is "Puffery"so no substantiation is required.

    dr.news wrote:
    > I had never heard the word "puffery" in that manner. Net: it is a sad
    > reflection on American business tactics. We've come to know that car
    > dealers invoice price has no relevance, and now we know that "most powerful
    > network" has no relevance either. Sad that we can't win customers over with
    > truth, quality and good value for their money. Not saying that any carrier
    > isn't good value, as that is personal choice. But if you spend your
    > advertising dollar trying to build market share with "puffery" isn't that
    > just bold-face "nothing" hoping the stupid consumer (someone that doesn't
    > know what puffery is, like me) will in fact believe it? dr.


    "You're in Good Hands with Allstate"
    "Sprint has the most powerful network"
    "Milk, it does a body good"
    "Coke, it's the Real Thing"

    None of it means anything. Does anyone believe any of those ad slogans?

    Milk is actually not very good for your body, other sodas are equally as
    real as Coke, "powerful" could mean a lot of different things, and
    you're not really in Allstate's hands.



  4. #4
    Sven Golly
    Guest

    Re: Sprint claims that its "Most Powerful Network" claim is "Puffery" so no substantiation is required.

    SMS <[email protected]> wrote in
    news:[email protected]:

    > dr.news wrote:


    > "You're in Good Hands with Allstate"


    Bad example. No superlative. (best, strongest, longest lasting, etc.)

    > "Milk, it does a body good"


    Bad example. No superlative. This is NOT puffery and in fact, has
    actually been the subject of FDA scrutiny. It's largely been replaced by
    "Got Milk?".

    > "Coke, it's the Real Thing"


    Bad example. No superlative.

    > None of it means anything. Does anyone believe any of those ad
    > slogans?


    Puffery has nothing to do with meaning. It has to do with whether a
    reasonable person would believe the claim as truth and whether the claim
    is measurable.

    "We make the best pancakes in the world"

    No reasonable person would believe this and it's clearly not measurable.
    That's puffery.

    > Milk is actually not very good for your body, other sodas are equally
    > as real as Coke, "powerful" could mean a lot of different things, and
    > you're not really in Allstate's hands.


    For FTC purposes, "most powerful network" is puffery.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puffery


    --
    Sven Golly
    Yah sure by gosh by yumpin' yiminy
    Trolling as usual
    Change the "_" to "." to reply by email



  5. #5
    Der.MEROVINGIAN
    Guest

    Re: Sprint claims that its "Most Powerful Network" claim is "Puffery" so no substantiation is required.

    On 2006-06-03 11:26:51 -0400, "dr.news"
    <[email protected]> said:

    > puffery


    According to my dictionary, "puffery" is .....

    puffery |ˈpəfərē| |ˌpəfəri| |ˌpʌf(ə)ri|
    noun
    exaggerated or false praise.




  6. #6
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: Sprint claims that its "Most Powerful Network" claim is "Puffery"so no substantiation is required.

    Sven Golly wrote:

    <snip>

    > "We make the best pancakes in the world"
    >
    > No reasonable person would believe this and it's clearly not measurable.
    > That's puffery.


    Just as "most powerful" in terms of a wireless phone network is not
    measurable, because the statement has no meaning. They don't claim that
    they have the the fewest dropped calls, the most cell sites, the best
    customer service, the fastest data rates, the best voice quality, etc.
    They actually explained what they meant, "Sprint Nextel says its "most
    powerful" network includes the widest coverage area and the best
    handsets and features."

    Actually "widest coverage area" is probably true because with a tri-mode
    phone on Sprint PCS, you would roam onto more non-Sprint CDMA and AMPS
    networks than you would with a Verizon tri-mode phone on any of
    Verizon's current calling plans (Verizon no longer allows roaming off of
    their "extended network" on any currently available plans, though
    subscribers with the old America's Choice plan, or National Single Rate
    can still roam onto non-extended network networks). Cingular and
    T-Mobile, with a GSM-only phone, have far less coverage than Sprint.

    As to "best handsets and features," that's highly debatable, though
    historically Sprint has had a better selection of handsets than Verizon,
    but with GSM you have a much larger selection of handsets than you have
    from any CDMA carrier.

    I can't believe that this is all heading to court. As it turns out, the
    Cingular/Telephia study for "fewest dropped calls" is from 2004
    (according to one source), but in two years a lot has changed.



  7. #7
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: Sprint claims that its "Most Powerful Network" claim is "Puffery" so no substantiation is required.

    In alt.cellular.t-mobile dr.news <[email protected]> wrote:
    > I had never heard the word "puffery" in that manner. Net: it is a sad
    > reflection on American business tactics. We've come to know that car
    > dealers invoice price has no relevance, and now we know that "most powerful
    > network" has no relevance either. Sad that we can't win customers over with
    > truth, quality and good value for their money. Not saying that any carrier
    > isn't good value, as that is personal choice. But if you spend your
    > advertising dollar trying to build market share with "puffery" isn't that
    > just bold-face "nothing" hoping the stupid consumer (someone that doesn't
    > know what puffery is, like me) will in fact believe it? dr.


    It is not so different than "Digital Quality Picture" that the major Satellite
    and Cable Companies like to boast. My CGA 16 color monitor from 15 years ago
    was a "Digital Quality Picture".

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1




  8. #8
    dr.news
    Guest

    Re: Sprint claims that its "Most Powerful Network" claim is "Puffery" so no substantiation is required.

    Thomas, I have to disagree. It in some ways is about integrity, and the
    equal and opposite position that says "buyer-beware." We've just come to
    learn the difference between puffery in some industries. And the way we
    learned hasn't been intuitive, but because we tested it, and it failed. To
    your comment:

    - most powerful network in the world: would imply that it is more powerful
    than others. The word "most" implies of all of the networks, it beats them
    all.

    - digital quality picture says nothing. It is more a statement that since
    your picture is "digital", that you will get whatever quality is associated
    with the technology called "digital". Now if it was the "best digital
    picture in the world" then you would be entitled to some facts.

    Hey: let the buyer beware.... no one is forcing anyone to buy the product;
    and the consumer is under an equal burden to do his / her own homework.
    Your point is well taken; it wasn't the "best" example, but it wasn't
    puffery either. dr
    --
    dr.news //stores.ebay.com/better-price-wireless (not better than you
    deserve, just more than you're used to) //free.better-price.biz (for new
    lines of wireless service; all carriers; the phones are almost always a
    better-price)

    "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > In alt.cellular.t-mobile dr.news <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >><snip>
    >> Sad that we can't win customers over with
    >> truth, quality and good value for their money.

    <snip>

    > It is not so different than "Digital Quality Picture" that the major
    > Satellite
    > and Cable Companies like to boast. My CGA 16 color monitor from 15 years
    > ago
    > was a "Digital Quality Picture".
    >
    > --
    > Thomas T. Veldhouse
    > Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
    >






  9. #9
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: Sprint claims that its "Most Powerful Network" claim is "Puffery" so no substantiation is required.

    In alt.cellular.t-mobile dr.news <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Thomas, I have to disagree. It in some ways is about integrity, and the
    > equal and opposite position that says "buyer-beware." We've just come to
    > learn the difference between puffery in some industries. And the way we
    > learned hasn't been intuitive, but because we tested it, and it failed. To
    > your comment:
    >
    > - most powerful network in the world: would imply that it is more powerful
    > than others. The word "most" implies of all of the networks, it beats them
    > all.


    Yes, but describe "powerful". Describe "digital quality". The same goes for
    both ... there is no definition and that is what makes it puffery. Does
    powerful mean "transmission power"? Nope. Does it mean "coverage"? Nope.
    Does it mean available data bandwidth? Doesn't seem to. Does it mean
    technology? Nope. What does "powerful" mean?

    >
    > - digital quality picture says nothing. It is more a statement that since
    > your picture is "digital", that you will get whatever quality is associated
    > with the technology called "digital". Now if it was the "best digital
    > picture in the world" then you would be entitled to some facts.
    >


    - Powerful says nothing. Follow-through with your analogy.

    > Hey: let the buyer beware.... no one is forcing anyone to buy the product;
    > and the consumer is under an equal burden to do his / her own homework.
    > Your point is well taken; it wasn't the "best" example, but it wasn't
    > puffery either. dr


    Indeed, it is puffery.

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1




  10. #10
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Sprint claims that its "Most Powerful Network" claim is "Puffery" so no substantiation is required.

    On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 08:35:34 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
    wrote in <[email protected]>:

    >I can't believe that this is all heading to court. As it turns out, the
    >Cingular/Telephia study for "fewest dropped calls" is from 2004
    >(according to one source), ...


    A little birdie?

    --
    Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
    John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>



  • Similar Threads