Charge Back and Refunds

Erillion

rodarin said:

Who is 'enjoying' star citizen right now?  the 5 guys who stream it on twitch (wit no viewers)?

Example:

Youtube - Star Citizen - this week - rank by number of hits    :  64000 people

Or the top 5 ranked fan made SC videos with a total of 3.139.070 views in the last year ?

Too bad that people can check out numbers for themselves .....  ,-)


Have fun



PS:
About those "5 guys" ....

https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/133119/star-citizen-streamers-list

10 pages of streamer Channels ....

GrumpyHobbit

rodarin said:

GrumpyHobbit said:

Unfortunately not. 

You even have some very well known posters who regularly post threads and comment on topics where they admit they do it just for the forum PvP. Essentially self professed trolls and the site does little to stop it.

Then you have the guys that will non stop make post after post after post making stuff up and stating it as facts rather then letting people interested in a game to enjoy talking about it. Why should you be allowed to enjoy a game if they cannot is their philosophy it seems.

So yeah, between the guys who get off repeatedly making annoying troll posts through to the guys who won't allow others to enjoy games but have to hate all the time...not so much community spirit, more like 'look at me I am important because here people don't ignore me or hit me like in real life'.

you talk about it like its a released product instead of something many people feel is going ot be the biggest flop ever and one that obviously has more than a few people looking to get their money back .

Who is 'enjoying' star citizen right now?  the 5 guys who stream it on twitch (wit no viewers)? Even the people who have backed it and spend all day promoting it arent even playing it now. So they obviously dont find any 'enjoyment' in it whatsoever.

I just call them like I see them, while you continue to claim people make stuff up its easy to see what the reality is.

Please point out where I talk about it as a released product.

Please point out where I state people are enjoying Start Citizen right now and not talking about enjoying talking about it. 

You call them like you see them and you are so blinded by your tinted hate glasses you can't even accurately comment on a post you directly quote. 

CrazKanuk

rpmcmurphy said:

Armendius said:

What I find as experience from this discussion board is that it feels like we fight eachother instead of to help  understand eachother point.
I always thought that a discussion board was to help instead of who is right or wrong.

Unfortunately not, the M.O seems to be that if you're not wholely in praise for SC then you are batting for the other side, you are one of DS's minions, perhaps even an alt and you only exist to stir up trouble. Criticism and/or scepticism is not allowed.
Shut up and spend your money Commando!!

Classic example of all or none, "If you're not with us, you're against us." 

In actuality, I rarely get flamed on here and I've made a considerable number of negative comments regarding the game. HOWEVER!!! Those comments remain OBJECTIVE. See, the biggest problem is that most people who claim to be objective, aren't. Period. 

rpmcmurphy

Armendius said:

In the praise of SC?

If you can sense emotion in text there is plenty posts who wanted and would enjoy to see a battle between creditcard institution and CiG.
None of mine shared that goal.
I only like to learn more about the topic to express myself  from things how I experience them.
What is a discussion.
Even if in my experience things are not always right, does not mean I cannot say that.
Its how I experience it.
Such is life, you fall, stand up and learn from things.

Dark side? Because of what that my english is confusing at times?

Then the last sentice in your message is the one that create the dark side.

All I did is express my feeling and that is not a critism, what you do is.

I think this is a language barrier issue. My comment was purely in response to the last sentence of your post that said "I always thought that a discussion board was to help instead of who is right or wrong."

There is a lot of antagonism on these boards, especially surrounding Star Citizen, most of it however, is in good fun. The discussions do have quite a deep, involved history so there's a good chance that things may be said that you don't get the gist of, take care commando!!

Armendius

rpmcmurphy said:

Armendius said:

In the praise of SC?

If you can sense emotion in text there is plenty posts who wanted and would enjoy to see a battle between creditcard institution and CiG.
None of mine shared that goal.
I only like to learn more about the topic to express myself  from things how I experience them.
What is a discussion.
Even if in my experience things are not always right, does not mean I cannot say that.
Its how I experience it.
Such is life, you fall, stand up and learn from things.

Dark side? Because of what that my english is confusing at times?

Then the last sentice in your message is the one that create the dark side.

All I did is express my feeling and that is not a critism, what you do is.

I think this is a language barrier issue. My comment was purely in response to the last sentence of your post that said "I always thought that a discussion board was to help instead of who is right or wrong."

There is a lot of antagonism on these boards, especially surrounding Star Citizen, most of it however, is in good fun. The discussions do have quite a deep, involved history so there's a good chance that things may be said that you don't get the gist of, take care commando!!

Nothing wrong with my barrier, you did insult me, and judged my feelings, and said it was me who stir up trouble, that critism is not allowed what you do and at last tell me to say nothing anymore.

rpmcmurphy

Armendius said:
Nothing wrong with my barrier, you did insult me, and judged my feelings, and said it was me who stir up trouble, that critism is not allowed what you do and at last tell me to say nothing anymore.

You've got to be kidding me!? You have totally misread the point I was trying to get across in my original post hence why I said it may have been a language barrier issue, the above only proves that.
There was no insult aimed at you, nowhere was I judging your feelings nor was any comment about stiring up trouble directed at you.
You are reading far too much into a comment that has virtually no bearing on what you posted.

Armendius

rpmcmurphy said:

Armendius said:

What I find as experience from this discussion board is that it feels like we fight eachother instead of to help  understand eachother point.
I always thought that a discussion board was to help instead of who is right or wrong.

Unfortunately not, the M.O seems to be that if you're not wholely in praise for SC then you are batting for the other side, you are one of DS's minions, perhaps even an alt and you only exist to stir up trouble. Criticism and/or scepticism is not allowed.
Shut up and spend your money Commando!!

You are talking to my post with you are.

rodarin

Erillion said:

rodarin said:

Who is 'enjoying' star citizen right now?  the 5 guys who stream it on twitch (wit no viewers)?

Example:

Youtube - Star Citizen - this week - rank by number of hits    :  64000 people

Or the top 5 ranked fan made SC videos with a total of 3.139.070 views in the last year ?

Too bad that people can check out numbers for themselves .....  ,-)


Have fun



PS:
About those "5 guys" ....

https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/133119/star-citizen-streamers-list

10 pages of streamer Channels ....

Again using meaningless numbers, all those are aggregates of videos that probably have nothing to do with the gameplay itself but people looking at something (else) Chris Roberts said that turned out to be untrue. Wouldnt shock me if there were some videos in that search you did made by Derek Smart and his goons bashing this project, but you dont care as long as it builds a hit count for you to try and cite to 'prove' something.

And the streamer list Bwwaaahaahaaahahahaaa that list was started in May 2014, so it couldnt be more irrelevant. The fact that you cant see the IMMENSE downturn in the people that USED to stream it and those that stream it CURRENTLY and what that means you are definitely trying to spin this game as you have always done.

You want to see a RELEVANT sample here is the link"



As of this typing there are THREE, thats right THREE live streams with a total of 50 viewers. Now admittedly it isnt any sort of 'primetime' anywhere right now but its definitely a time that people can play in Asia or Europe. Or anyone without a job anywhere else that just streams and plays games all day.

By comparison ARK has 24 channels and about 1000 people watching them, Black Desert has 20 channels and about 700 people watching, DayZ has 20 streams and about 1800 people, Elite Dangerous has 10 channels and about 100 people.

See when I give numbers I try to put them in a RELEVANT context, not just throwing out links to stuff years old (but then again we all know you do that so its no surprise).

CrazKanuk

rpmcmurphy said:

CrazKanuk said:

Classic example of all or none, "If you're not with us, you're against us." 

In actuality, I rarely get flamed on here and I've made a considerable number of negative comments regarding the game. HOWEVER!!! Those comments remain OBJECTIVE. See, the biggest problem is that most people who claim to be objective, aren't. Period. 

[mod edit]

.......You're right, I do post from the pro side primarily. There are a couple reasons for that.

First it's the name calling, like commandos, or "pledged their firstborn to Roberts", or calling people white knights.

Secondly, the most logical argument is that the game will be made. You can argue until you're blue in the face, but the game, in whatever state it does, is more likely to ship than it is not. I have been wrong, though, because I said I couldn't see DBG buying SOE and then shit-canning EQN, but they did. Either way, it's more likely to succeed than to fail. Would it have if it had a lower budget? That's a toss-up. 

Third, there is a large contingent of people involved who have no investment in the product at all. In fact, if those without any sort of "skin in the game" were to be quiet, these threads would quickly fizzle out. Instead, they feel the need to play the role of freedom fighters trying to save people from some evil villain, but it's really just about freedom of choice and you folks infringing on that. If the government decided tomorrow to take away guns from Murcans tomorrow, it would be a right shit-show. So what's the difference?

Fourth, the arguments are ridiculous!!!! I've said this at least a half dozen times over the past few weeks. If you're going to argue about something, at least argue about something meaningful. There is plenty wrong with SC, but the arguments of the anti-SC crowd have degraded from logical (this game is impossible) arguments to silly (How much was that door?). It's like the relevant arguments have all been exhausted so they feel the need to resort to silly arguments about completely irrelevant issues that don't stand up when compared against contextually-relevant peers. 

SO!! Maybe with these observations you can understand why some of the pro-SC crowd has resorted to silly, non-objective, ridiculous responses. Shoot, even I told people earlier in this thread that they should definitely use chargebacks more regularly. However, I worked for an eCommerce SAAS for years and understand that a consumer using chargebacks excessively can result in, at minimum, their credit card being revoked and, at worst, being sued. However, we have other people on here who are saying things like "That's what it's there for" without making any mention of the consequences of doing so. Even someone who claims to work for a bank. It just becomes tiresome and pointless to argue sometimes. However, the more ridiculous the argument, the more funny it is to respond to, also. 

As far as my objectiveness, take a peek through my posts. I actually had a pretty good conversation with @rodarin the other day and it actually gave me hope that there are some people on "the other side" with half a brain. 

rpmcmurphy

Armendius said:

rpmcmurphy said:

Armendius said:
I always thought that a discussion board was to help instead of who is right or wrong.

Unfortunately not, the M.O seems to be that if you're not wholely in praise for SC then you are batting for the other side, you are one of DS's minions, perhaps even an alt and you only exist to stir up trouble. Criticism and/or scepticism is not allowed.
Shut up and spend your money Commando!!

You are talking to my post with you are.

I see the problem. Where I am using the word 'you' it is being used royally. I am not pointing my finger at you and making a statement about your person. I am using it in the wider context.
I hope that explains things in a satisfactory manner.

Erillion

rodarin said:

You want to see a RELEVANT sample here is the link"



As of this typing there are THREE, thats right THREE live streams with a total of 50 viewers. Now admittedly it isnt any sort of 'primetime' anywhere right now but its definitely a time that people can play in Asia or Europe. Or anyone without a job anywhere else that just streams and plays games all day.

As we speak about relevance , why not take a look at a comparable example ? Like Elite-Dangerous



A breathtaking 73 viewers. For a released game.


or SWTOR



67 viewers. Another released game.


Twitch is interesting if there is something NEW. A new patch. A new DLC. A new expansion. A war going on in real time (e.g. EVE World War Bee).


Twitch numbers during "downtime" - when nothing new happens - are IMHO not meaningful. During these times i personally think that channels such as Youtube are of more interest to the community, as carefully prepared, edited and selected videos hold their interest longer.


Have fun

CrazKanuk

rpmcmurphy said:

Armendius said:

rpmcmurphy said:

Armendius said:
I always thought that a discussion board was to help instead of who is right or wrong.

Unfortunately not, the M.O seems to be that if you're not wholely in praise for SC then you are batting for the other side, you are one of DS's minions, perhaps even an alt and you only exist to stir up trouble. Criticism and/or scepticism is not allowed.
Shut up and spend your money Commando!!

You are talking to my post with you are.

I see the problem. Where I am using the word 'you' it is being used royally. I am not pointing my finger at you and making a statement about your person. I am using it in the wider context.
I hope that explains things in a satisfactory manner.

Ahhhhh, so you're discriminating against a group, not just singling someone out. Phew! Color me relieved! 

rpmcmurphy

CrazKanuk said:

Ahhhhh, so you're discriminating against a group, not just singling someone out. Phew! Color me relieved! 

As I have already explained to you, my response was the opposite of a previous poster's to highlight that it is not only one side causing trouble but both sides.

Hell, I even started my post in exactly the same way he did and used similar outlandish statements to show the silliness of the situation.

Just in case you're struggling to understand this I have posted the relevant part below,

"Unfortunately not. 

You even have some very well known posters who regularly post threads and comment on topics where they admit they do it just for the forum PvP. Essentially self professed trolls and the site does little to stop it.

Then you have the guys that will non stop make post after post after post making stuff up and stating it as facts rather then letting people interested in a game to enjoy talking about it. Why should you be allowed to enjoy a game if they cannot is their philosophy it seems."

CrazKanuk

rpmcmurphy said:

CrazKanuk said:

Ahhhhh, so you're discriminating against a group, not just singling someone out. Phew! Color me relieved! 

As I have already explained to you, my response was the opposite of a previous poster's to highlight that it is not only one side causing trouble but both sides.

Hell, I even started my post in exactly the same way he did and used similar outlandish statements to show the silliness of the situation.

Just in case you're struggling to understand this I have posted the relevant part below,

"Unfortunately not. 

You even have some very well known posters who regularly post threads and comment on topics where they admit they do it just for the forum PvP. Essentially self professed trolls and the site does little to stop it.

Then you have the guys that will non stop make post after post after post making stuff up and stating it as facts rather then letting people interested in a game to enjoy talking about it. Why should you be allowed to enjoy a game if they cannot is their philosophy it seems."

I can't disagree that there are those on the pro side who will take it to the next level, or become involved in pointless arguments just for the sake of arguing. I do understand where the OP is coming from, though. There have been countless threads that turn into an Anti-SC circle jerk until some pro-SC person makes a comment and then it just turns into a flame war. Apart from the 2 or 3 update threads with regards to SC on here, the majority of threads started appear to be negative (and that's completely speculative) posts intended to provoke flame wars. It's been stated by mods on here that they're sick of it, and they have started to ban people because of it. I don't think they are sick of all of the intelligent arguments. No, I think they're sick of the fact that each and every thread devolves into the same bullshit and name calling. Whichever side is responsible is irrelevant, the point is that you're not helping your case when in the matter of 2 posts you proved the first point of my lengthy post in response to why I post on the pro side, although remaining objective. 

Honestly, if you can't see that you're contributing to the problem, then I'm sorry. Just continue what you're doing, I guess? If you'd like to have an intelligent discussion, then feel free to fire away. Maybe not off-topic in a chargeback thread though. 

Armendius

After all this reading, I am feeling relieved.
That judgeing is just part of what we as human do.

After saying that,
there is not something as intentional battles.
judgeing someone judge is never wrong unless it become a  judgement
And that is when we judge as a judgement personally to someone.

From that point a judgement become an evidence to an attitude.

( I just posted this here for to close my feelings about everything)

What did I learn.

My acount is around 9 years ago, I almost never did talk.
I am sitting alot at home and thought discussions would maybe fun to try.
Feeling like interacting with other people then to be lonely.

I learned that this gameing discussion platform is not the same as many other 
helpfull forums, where you have a feeling about looking into things together and learning things.
My aim was to learn things here, so I was like looking things on internet and feeling like to be doing something rather then to just be playing only games.
The feeling at times how things was feeling to become personal was the reason why I was telling my experience how I was feeling at the other end of the discussion.

If anyone was feeling bad about how I was talking then they could simply said that to me or not be talking to me so I not reply in the engageing feeling of learning new things.

I was kind of skeptical as from the first post it was already abit feeling that the topic was more about promoteing people to charge back actions against a company with personal responses they shared.
When I just wanted to learn about how such thing can be possible to happen for even so long time, for me it was like feeling unfair.

Abit the same how I feel about my life to be unfair with all my problems and all time of the world.
It was feeling like alot of fun in the beginning but the more the topic advanced the worse feeling it gave me.

I would just say that, if people feel like something bad, let them say it and not speak for the people, because then it feel like such messages to me is feeling really bad and unfair, because again the person could just say it to me if they feel the same instead of to bully me out.

Many thanks for everything 

hfztt

Armendius said:

After all this reading, I am feeling relieved.
That judgeing is just part of what we as human do.

After saying that,
there is not something as intentional battles.
judgeing someone judge is never wrong unless it become a  judgement
And that is when we judge as a judgement personally to someone.

From that point a judgement become an evidence to an attitude.

( I just posted this here for to close my feelings about everything)

What did I learn.

My acount is around 9 years ago, I almost never did talk.
I am sitting alot at home and thought discussions would maybe fun to try.
Feeling like interacting with other people then to be lonely.

I learned that this gameing discussion platform is not the same as many other 
helpfull forums, where you have a feeling about looking into things together and learning things.
My aim was to learn things here, so I was like looking things on internet and feeling like to be doing something rather then to just be playing only games.
The feeling at times how things was feeling to become personal was the reason why I was telling my experience how I was feeling at the other end of the discussion.

If anyone was feeling bad about how I was talking then they could simply said that to me or not be talking to me so I not reply in the engageing feeling of learning new things.

I was kind of skeptical as from the first post it was already abit feeling that the topic was more about promoteing people to charge back actions against a company with personal responses they shared.
When I just wanted to learn about how such thing can be possible to happen for even so long time, for me it was like feeling unfair.

Abit the same how I feel about my life to be unfair with all my problems and all time of the world.
It was feeling like alot of fun in the beginning but the more the topic advanced the worse feeling it gave me.

I would just say that, if people feel like something bad, let them say it and not speak for the people, because then it feel like such messages to me is feeling really bad and unfair, because again the person could just say it to me if they feel the same instead of to bully me out.

Many thanks for everything 

DUde, whatever you are smoking, I want some....

mr1602

An interesting conversation I had some time ago with a PR guy around the whole 'refund' area and how they deal with it if it becomes a 'problem'.

Our job is to make sure those who are on the fence but leaning towards the refund / charge back area, STAY on that fence. The easiest way to manipulate them is to say that 'I'm on the fence and waiting'. People see that and go 'well, (s)he's on the fence and waiting like me, so I guess I'll wait too'. 
People want to belong and we can exploit that.
The worst thing you can do is to say 'No,  you shouldn't do a refund'. PR 101, never say NO to anyone. Saying NO gives you no leverage nor will people follow what you write. It is totally the wrong move.

CrazKanuk

mr1602 said:

An interesting conversation I had some time ago with a PR guy around the whole 'refund' area and how they deal with it if it becomes a 'problem'.

Our job is to make sure those who are on the fence but leaning towards the refund / charge back area, STAY on that fence. The easiest way to manipulate them is to say that 'I'm on the fence and waiting'. People see that and go 'well, (s)he's on the fence and waiting like me, so I guess I'll wait too'. 
People want to belong and we can exploit that.
The worst thing you can do is to say 'No,  you shouldn't do a refund'. PR 101, never say NO to anyone. Saying NO gives you no leverage nor will people follow what you write. It is totally the wrong move.

First of all, I'll call bullshit. The first rule of PR is to get everyone on board. It only takes a few fence sitters before others who were on-board are now on the fence with them. Keeping people on the fence beyond their refund period is a dangerous game. You said before you work in banking. How do you not know this is bullshit? You know that if your chargeback rate escalates to a certain level that you merchant account can be suspended. You know this! Don't you? Also, that rate is fairly paltry, like around 1%.

So I'm really sorry, but if you had a PR guy tell you this, I would have used your domain knowledge and common sense to say, "That's bullshit!". This "guy" is essentially hanging his entire company. Keeping people on the fence beyond their reasonable refund date is suicide because when those fence sitters decide to get off the wagon, the company gets an influx of chargebacks and their merchant account is cancelled. Goodbye business! 

mr1602

CrazKanuk said:

mr1602 said:

An interesting conversation I had some time ago with a PR guy around the whole 'refund' area and how they deal with it if it becomes a 'problem'.

Our job is to make sure those who are on the fence but leaning towards the refund / charge back area, STAY on that fence. The easiest way to manipulate them is to say that 'I'm on the fence and waiting'. People see that and go 'well, (s)he's on the fence and waiting like me, so I guess I'll wait too'. 
People want to belong and we can exploit that.
The worst thing you can do is to say 'No,  you shouldn't do a refund'. PR 101, never say NO to anyone. Saying NO gives you no leverage nor will people follow what you write. It is totally the wrong move.

First of all, I'll call bullshit. The first rule of PR is to get everyone on board. It only takes a few fence sitters before others who were on-board are now on the fence with them. Keeping people on the fence beyond their refund period is a dangerous game. You said before you work in banking. How do you not know this is bullshit? You know that if your chargeback rate escalates to a certain level that you merchant account can be suspended. You know this! Don't you? Also, that rate is fairly paltry, like around 1%.

So I'm really sorry, but if you had a PR guy tell you this, I would have used your domain knowledge and common sense to say, "That's bullshit!". This "guy" is essentially hanging his entire company. Keeping people on the fence beyond their reasonable refund date is suicide because when those fence sitters decide to get off the wagon, the company gets an influx of chargebacks and their merchant account is cancelled. Goodbye business! 

There are just so many wrong with this post.

1. I never said it was about 'refunds for SC', I said it was about 'refunds'. If people do something for a time, the likelihood of them doing that thing increases. We are a creature of habit. So the longer people 'stay on the fence', the more likely they will keep on 'staying on the fence'. 
The underlying assumption when a PR firm does this, is that the company will get the product right / some date is passed (ie. no more refunds after X date; depends on which country/state) or is buying time to get funds for the refunds to occur. In extreme cases, the company cannot get the funds and disappears / declares insoluble etc.
No, I am not saying CIG specifically is going to disappear or whatever, I'm talking generally.

2. You really can't see how 'Hey, I am just like you. And I do X' is not 'get everyone on board'?

3. CIG has decided to pass on the $15 charge back fee to their existing supporters. I cannot think of a single case where this was done and I worked at a bank! So, is the influx that big that the charge back fee is too great for CIG to handle? Who knows?

CrazKanuk

mr1602 said:

CrazKanuk said:

mr1602 said:

An interesting conversation I had some time ago with a PR guy around the whole 'refund' area and how they deal with it if it becomes a 'problem'.

Our job is to make sure those who are on the fence but leaning towards the refund / charge back area, STAY on that fence. The easiest way to manipulate them is to say that 'I'm on the fence and waiting'. People see that and go 'well, (s)he's on the fence and waiting like me, so I guess I'll wait too'. 
People want to belong and we can exploit that.
The worst thing you can do is to say 'No,  you shouldn't do a refund'. PR 101, never say NO to anyone. Saying NO gives you no leverage nor will people follow what you write. It is totally the wrong move.

First of all, I'll call bullshit. The first rule of PR is to get everyone on board. It only takes a few fence sitters before others who were on-board are now on the fence with them. Keeping people on the fence beyond their refund period is a dangerous game. You said before you work in banking. How do you not know this is bullshit? You know that if your chargeback rate escalates to a certain level that you merchant account can be suspended. You know this! Don't you? Also, that rate is fairly paltry, like around 1%.

So I'm really sorry, but if you had a PR guy tell you this, I would have used your domain knowledge and common sense to say, "That's bullshit!". This "guy" is essentially hanging his entire company. Keeping people on the fence beyond their reasonable refund date is suicide because when those fence sitters decide to get off the wagon, the company gets an influx of chargebacks and their merchant account is cancelled. Goodbye business! 

There are just so many wrong with this post.

1. I never said it was about 'refunds for SC', I said it was about 'refunds'. If people do something for a time, the likelihood of them doing that thing increases. We are a creature of habit. So the longer people 'stay on the fence', the more likely they will keep on 'staying on the fence'. 
The underlying assumption when a PR firm does this, is that the company will get the product right / some date is passed (ie. no more refunds after X date; depends on which country/state) or is buying time to get funds for the refunds to occur. In extreme cases, the company cannot get the funds and disappears / declares insoluble etc.
No, I am not saying CIG specifically is going to disappear or whatever, I'm talking generally.

2. You really can't see how 'Hey, I am just like you. And I do X' is not 'get everyone on board'?

3. CIG has decided to pass on the $15 charge back fee to their existing supporters. I cannot think of a single case where this was done and I worked at a bank! So, is the influx that big that the charge back fee is too great for CIG to handle? Who knows?

So I can see a firm trying to prevent people from taking refunds. Even promising that they will process a refund beyond the posted refund deadline date. Sure, I can see trying to accommodate those people. 

There definitely is a sense of belonging that goes along with anything. That's why we have celebs talking about how great the game is. I still wouldn't promote "the fence" as the place to be, though. You're always trying to convince people that there is more value on "the cool side". 

It doesn't matter if CIG passes on any fees to their supporters. That's not the point. What I'm saying is that there is a hard, well-known limit to the number of chargebacks that you are allowed to have as a merchant. If this point, say 1%, is passed, then you risk losing your credit card processing privileges altogether. It has nothing to do with passing on a fee at all. It has to do with the outright perma-ban that a credit card company can lay on a company. Incidentally, the fees for a chargeback are higher than $15 anyway, so if they are passing on some sort of fee, it's a portion of, not the fee in its entirety. Their fee would be more in the $50-$100 area. 

mr1602

CrazKanuk said:

So I can see a firm trying to prevent people from taking refunds. Even promising that they will process a refund beyond the posted refund deadline date. Sure, I can see trying to accommodate those people. 

There definitely is a sense of belonging that goes along with anything. That's why we have celebs talking about how great the game is. I still wouldn't promote "the fence" as the place to be, though. You're always trying to convince people that there is more value on "the cool side". 

It doesn't matter if CIG passes on any fees to their supporters. That's not the point. What I'm saying is that there is a hard, well-known limit to the number of chargebacks that you are allowed to have as a merchant. If this point, say 1%, is passed, then you risk losing your credit card processing privileges altogether. It has nothing to do with passing on a fee at all. It has to do with the outright perma-ban that a credit card company can lay on a company. Incidentally, the fees for a chargeback are higher than $15 anyway, so if they are passing on some sort of fee, it's a portion of, not the fee in its entirety. Their fee would be more in the $50-$100 area. 

In a refund thread, trying to get people off of that fence isn't going to work.
Best case is for the firm to stem the tide for a while and one of the ways is to say 'I'm like you but I'm waiting till X.'

I don't think you understand how charge back works.
https://stripe.com/docs/disputes/faq - charge back fee is $15

CrazKanuk

mr1602 said:

CrazKanuk said:

So I can see a firm trying to prevent people from taking refunds. Even promising that they will process a refund beyond the posted refund deadline date. Sure, I can see trying to accommodate those people. 

There definitely is a sense of belonging that goes along with anything. That's why we have celebs talking about how great the game is. I still wouldn't promote "the fence" as the place to be, though. You're always trying to convince people that there is more value on "the cool side". 

It doesn't matter if CIG passes on any fees to their supporters. That's not the point. What I'm saying is that there is a hard, well-known limit to the number of chargebacks that you are allowed to have as a merchant. If this point, say 1%, is passed, then you risk losing your credit card processing privileges altogether. It has nothing to do with passing on a fee at all. It has to do with the outright perma-ban that a credit card company can lay on a company. Incidentally, the fees for a chargeback are higher than $15 anyway, so if they are passing on some sort of fee, it's a portion of, not the fee in its entirety. Their fee would be more in the $50-$100 area. 

In a refund thread, trying to get people off of that fence isn't going to work.
Best case is for the firm to stem the tide for a while and one of the ways is to say 'I'm like you but I'm waiting till X.'

I don't think you understand how charge back works.
https://stripe.com/docs/disputes/faq - charge back fee is $15

Ahhhhhhhhh, ok, I gotcha. My issue. I didn't get the context. So IN a refund thread, you are trying to get people to stay on the fence. My bad. I was contextually challenged there. 

As far as the chargeback is concerned, cool, that's actually a decent rate. That fee will vary from processor to processor, though. That still doesn't change the fact that there is a threshold at which your merchant account goes bye-bye. You can't just continuously receive chargebacks and continue to operate your business. 

Darkcrystal

JohnP0100 said:

CrazKanuk said:

JohnP0100 said:

This is a continuous topic in various threads where people think because the payment was X days/months/Years ago, they cannot get a refund from CIG or do a charge back.
That thinking is false, no matter what CIG tells you.

The '14 days' grace period applies after the goods is delivered as promised.
1. 'as promised' doesn't even qualify with what's in the PU. This is the reason why CIG does not contest a charge back from the credit card company. They have to prove it and CIG knows they cannot. Yes, fanboys will try and contest this through mental gymnastics but this is between CIG and VISA/MC.

2. If CIG go down the 'it was a donation' path, ask why they are charging for VAT for UK transactions. This involves TAX (which all companies dread) so CIG will 100% back down from that path, else the UK tax department will be more than happy to go 'can we see your books please?'.

3. The response from CIG might have some threatening words like 
"I would also need to advise you that if you request a chargeback incorrectly that this would in itself be considered a fraudulent action." 
OR
"I am very sorry you felt the need to perform this, however chargebacks should only ever be used for cases of genuine fraud, where you have had no recollection of making the payment yourself. Using a chargeback as a means to gain a refund is a misuse of the system, and damages both us, and your own ability to use the payment provider in the future."

Those words are meaningless as they don't apply here and it is a scare tactic. The statement is also illegal in countries like USA/UK.
A. How is it 'incorrect' when even CIG doesn't contest a chargeback cause they know they haven't delivered what was promised?
B. If goods aren't delivered 'as promised', what do you call that? FRAUD.
C. Using a charge back to get a refund is what a CHARGE BACK is suppose to do; if the merchant refuses to provide 'as promised' or refund themselves. What "misuse"?

I'd also like to point out that 'As Promised' includes 'time of delivery' which as we all know, Chris Roberts has decided to not give one because people kept on asking him about missed deadlines.


It is disappointing to see CIG use such tactics towards their supporters but there are protections for you and you absolutely have the right to use them.

This isn't a CIG tactic. I worked for a SAAS eCommerce provider for over 5 years and I can tell you that people who chronically purchase and return items can actually have their credit card revoked. Similarly, merchants running a higher than normal chargeback rate can have their abilities to accept those cards revoked. 

So to be accurate in your statements:
A) Companies CAN contest chargebacks, but it's a question of worth. Also, as a customer, you could be taken to small claims court if the company really wants to fight for their money, but I'd say that's not likely. 

You would have a very difficult time with your definition of "as promised" since all that's every been given are estimates. You cannot say whether the product has been delivered as promised. Also, you probably agreed to TOS when you purchased, so if the chargeback rate starts to exceed 1 or 2% and they wanted to look like real aholes they could probably fight it. 

C) Just to be clear, a refund is NOT what a chargeback was designed to do. Has it become a popular way to leverage a refund? Yes. However, the expressed purpose is for fraudulent or disputed charges. So, once again, yes, if you believe that a chargeback == a refund then your credit card will soon cease to function. 

CIG hasn't contested a single charge back yet but we have lots of people on-record of doing charge backs; myself included.

It can't be delivered as promised because CIG themselves have changed the scope / game / timelines since the beginning. Customer doesn't have to prove anything when the company themselves have publicly declared to make something else entirely.

A charge back is one of the customer protection process. That's the actual definition.

When doing the charge back, make sure to point to the original KickStarter page, the various promises and deadline missed and make sure to include the 'we will no longer give out deadlines' quote by Chris Roberts.

Welcome to MMO  Game Development, they all change, is this your first MMO??? Get real...People who DONATE TO KS they cry, make me laugh.   I never gave to this game, because I didnt like it, but gave to some others before, and I donated like everyone else, and got nothing... Game went under...Get over it and learn from it... But its a donation....

Renoaku

This is why its better if you didn't order from (Kick Starter) but you order (Directly) from their website  for example  you purchase a Ship for example this one...

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/pledge/ships/misc-starfarer/Starfarer

If the company fails to deliver the product or package as promised then you can likely charge-back within at least 90 days, and seek legal actions, in the most they would likely just refund the package, this includes (Key Features) and changes being made after you placed the order to that specific ship so basically what you have to do when you pre-order something is (Document all the evidence with Screen Shots, even Video) no matter what game it is, and if they change stuff you don't like or don't deliver then you have the right to a refund.

Basically short version last year I had a company take $300 from me and it was a RIP-OFF company that tried to scam me I saved the evidence that I had in documents, and what I agreed with, as well as the 30 day refund they had said I could do if I wasn't happy with it turns out I was lied to over the phone by voice in many ways I was able to go to the Bank, and Cancel my recurring fees, as well as get a re-fund easily because of what I had documented even though they refused to provide it as promised.

So charge-backs can happen in pre-orders of games for example if changes are made to the order and its not something you didn't order even in Real Life if you order something and it fails to be delivered as promised.

CrazKanuk

Renoaku said:

This is why its better if you didn't order from (Kick Starter) but you order (Directly) from their website  for example  you purchase a Ship for example this one...

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/pledge/ships/misc-starfarer/Starfarer

If the company fails to deliver the product or package as promised then you can likely charge-back within at least 90 days, and seek legal actions, in the most they would likely just refund the package, this includes (Key Features) and changes being made after you placed the order to that specific ship so basically what you have to do when you pre-order something is (Document all the evidence with Screen Shots, even Video) no matter what game it is, and if they change stuff you don't like or don't deliver then you have the right to a refund.

Basically short version last year I had a company take $300 from me and it was a RIP-OFF company that tried to scam me I saved the evidence that I had in documents, and what I agreed with, as well as the 30 day refund they had said I could do if I wasn't happy with it turns out I was lied to over the phone by voice in many ways I was able to go to the Bank, and Cancel my recurring fees, as well as get a re-fund easily because of what I had documented even though they refused to provide it as promised.

So charge-backs can happen in pre-orders of games for example if changes are made to the order and its not something you didn't order even in Real Life if you order something and it fails to be delivered as promised.

Or you could just wait for the game to actually ship. What would be the purpose of purchasing something with a preconceived plan to charge it back? Also, a charge back is not a guarantee, so if you care about your money, maybe you just don't buy it at all until it ships.