Apple Products Now Include 7-Day Complimentary AppleCare+ in Australia

[jace88]

There seems to be a lot of speculation on the Australian retail landscape by non Australian consumers here. For what it’s worth I don’t think it’s about the not being able to say no, but it just removes both a large nuisance from the sales process since as some others have pointed out it is painful to go through and listen to the spiel just to get out the door, but it’s also because over the years there have been plenty of people who bought the insurance without really understanding what they were buying or whether it was appropriate for them. With some aggressive high pressure sales techniques it led to a poor outcome for unsuspecting consumers and this helps reduce some of that pressure and give consumers time to think about it.

As someone who works in financial services, I understand the direction the laws and regulations are heading even if it sounds a bit like a “nanny state” to some. There’s plenty of examples which occur not just here but all around the world where consumers are clearly in need of some support to ensure they aren’t buying or pressured into buying worthless or useless insurance products.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

There seems to be a lot of speculation on the Australian retail landscape by non Australian consumers here. For what it’s worth I don’t think it’s about the not being able to say no, but it just removes both a large nuisance from the sales process since as some others have pointed out it is painful to go through and listen to the spiel just to get out the door,

See “large nuisance” is what I’d like a definition of… for Australians. For example…

US Salesperson: “Would you like the extended warranty?”
US Customer: “No.”

is what’s in my mind, because that’s what I have experience with. It’s basically an afterthought right before finalizing the transaction.

Is Australia more like

Salesperson: “Would you like the extended warranty?”
Customer: “No.”
Salesperson: “Mate”
Customer: “What?”
Salesperson: “Maaaaate!”
Customer: “WHAT is it? What’s… what’s this? That you’re doing?”
Salesperson: “You WANT the warranty, riiiiight?”
Customer: “NO, I DON’T!”
Salesperson: “Michael, Michael come here”
Customer: “Who’s Michael?”
Salesperson2: “Yah?”
Salesperson: “HE doesn’t want the warranty”
Salesperson2: “What, really?”
Customer: “Are you kidding me?”
Salesperson2: “You really don’t want the warranty, mate? It’s a good warranty…”
Salesperson: “A FINE warranty”
Salesperson2: “Yeah, a FINE warranty, and if you don’t want the warranty… should we call Joe over?”
Salesperson: “I think we need to bring Joe in on this.”
Customer: “ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!”
Joe: “What seems to be the problem?”
… Is that the way it goes in Australia? Which, ok, may be a little annoying, but I’d just continue to say No. I can’t even imagine what would be so far as to be painful. But, again, maybe this IS painful for Australians?

but it’s also because over the years there have been plenty of people who bought the insurance without really understanding what they were buying or whether it was appropriate for them. With some aggressive high pressure sales techniques it led to a poor outcome for unsuspecting consumers and this helps reduce some of that pressure and give consumers time to think about it.

People… who buy things… without understanding what they’re buying… need the governments help to not buy things when they don’t understand what they’re buying. NOT consumer education? Because these Australian Consumer Protections I’ve heard about really sound kinda good. If EVERYONE knew about them, the salespeople wouldn’t even have a chance. Even in this thread, there are Australians that don’t understand what’s available, and that’s what makes it possible for the multinational companies to take advantage of them. Why are these not common Australian knowledge?

People who buy things without understanding what they’re buying can just be contacted 4 days later to be asked to buy things without understanding what they’re buying, too. Is it easier for Australians to say “No” over the phone? Are they effectively able to just hang up? (Should Australian shopping be limited to phone sales?) Is it the “in person” anxiety of the majority of Australians that reduces their ability to say no? Because, while it may not SEEM to be related to people’s inability to say no, the law exists, literally, because Australians are unable to say no. If every seller’s spiel was met with a “No”, you can bet they’d just start trying something different and this sales pressure would be effectively ended… no law required.

 

[jace88]

See “large nuisance” is what I’d like a definition of… for Australians. For example…

US Salesperson: “Would you like the extended warranty?”
US Customer: “No.”

is what’s in my mind, because that’s what I have experience with. It’s basically an afterthought right before finalizing the transaction.

Is Australia more like

Salesperson: “Would you like the extended warranty?”
Customer: “No.”
Salesperson: “Mate”
Customer: “What?”
Salesperson: “Maaaaate!”
Customer: “WHAT is it? What’s… what’s this? That you’re doing?”
Salesperson: “You WANT the warranty, riiiiight?”
Customer: “NO, I DON’T!”
Salesperson: “Michael, Michael come here”
Customer: “Who’s Michael?”
Salesperson2: “Yah?”
Salesperson: “HE doesn’t want the warranty”
Salesperson2: “What, really?”
Customer: “Are you kidding me?”
Salesperson2: “You really don’t want the warranty, mate? It’s a good warranty…”
Salesperson: “A FINE warranty”
Salesperson2: “Yeah, a FINE warranty, and if you don’t want the warranty… should we call Joe over?”
Salesperson: “I think we need to bring Joe in on this.”
Customer: “ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!”
Joe: “What seems to be the problem?”
… Is that the way it goes in Australia? Which, ok, may be a little annoying, but I’d just continue to say No. I can’t even imagine what would be so far as to be painful. But, again, maybe this IS painful for Australians?


People… who buy things… without understanding what they’re buying… need the governments help to not buy things when they don’t understand what they’re buying. NOT consumer education? Because these Australian Consumer Protections I’ve heard about really sound kinda good. If EVERYONE knew about them, the salespeople wouldn’t even have a chance. Even in this thread, there are Australians that don’t understand what’s available, and that’s what makes it possible for the multinational companies to take advantage of them. Why are these not common Australian knowledge?

People who buy things without understanding what they’re buying can just be contacted 4 days later to be asked to buy things without understanding what they’re buying, too. Is it easier for Australians to say “No” over the phone? Are they effectively able to just hang up? (Should Australian shopping be limited to phone sales?) Is it the “in person” anxiety of the majority of Australians that reduces their ability to say no? Because, while it may not SEEM to be related to people’s inability to say no, the law exists, literally, because Australians are unable to say no. If every seller’s spiel was met with a “No”, you can bet they’d just start trying something different and this sales pressure would be effectively ended… no law required.

Maybe instead of thinking about it as an extended warranty, think of it more like an insurance policy, a type of financial services product, which is how it is treated by regulators here.

The reason why these are so regulated is these are products typically sold by agents or representatives who may not fully explain or even understand themselves all the nuances of a product. A really well known example recently was certain types of credit card insurance which turned out to be nearly worthless because the conditions for claiming meant those who were most likely to need or rely on it and hence pay for it, were also excluded from claiming on it. As for how they ended up with these insurance policies, that’s the question about what kind of sales techniques may have been employed. Similar insurance sales issues were brought up in the Hayne Royal Commission a couple of years ago were products were being sold using high pressure techniques to vulnerable customers who wouldn’t have had any value from these products and hence it was considered unconscionable to sell it to them.

 

[profdraper]

There seems to be a lot of speculation on the Australian retail landscape by non Australian consumers here. For what it’s worth I don’t think it’s about the not being able to say no, but it just removes both a large nuisance from the sales process since as some others have pointed out it is painful to go through and listen to the spiel just to get out the door, but it’s also because over the years there have been plenty of people who bought the insurance without really understanding what they were buying or whether it was appropriate for them. With some aggressive high pressure sales techniques it led to a poor outcome for unsuspecting consumers and this helps reduce some of that pressure and give consumers time to think about it.

As someone who works in financial services, I understand the direction the laws and regulations are heading even if it sounds a bit like a “nanny state” to some. There’s plenty of examples which occur not just here but all around the world where consumers are clearly in need of some support to ensure they aren’t buying or pressured into buying worthless or useless insurance products.

Well yes, it ’is’ a nanny state here in OZ, some states more so than others. In general though, similar to the EU /there is a useful pushback against US bs, like the use of personal data, tax avoidance, guns, the minimum wage …. enhanced consumer protection, sure, why not. Apple is proven predatory, greedy, shareholder centric already.

 

[profdraper]

See “large nuisance” is what I’d like a definition of… for Australians. For example…

US Salesperson: “Would you like the extended warranty?”
US Customer: “No.”

is what’s in my mind, because that’s what I have experience with. It’s basically an afterthought right before finalizing the transaction.

Is Australia more like

Salesperson: “Would you like the extended warranty?”
Customer: “No.”
Salesperson: “Mate”
Customer: “What?”
Salesperson: “Maaaaate!”
Customer: “WHAT is it? What’s… what’s this? That you’re doing?”
Salesperson: “You WANT the warranty, riiiiight?”
Customer: “NO, I DON’T!”
Salesperson: “Michael, Michael come here”
Customer: “Who’s Michael?”
Salesperson2: “Yah?”
Salesperson: “HE doesn’t want the warranty”
Salesperson2: “What, really?”
Customer: “Are you kidding me?”
Salesperson2: “You really don’t want the warranty, mate? It’s a good warranty…”
Salesperson: “A FINE warranty”
Salesperson2: “Yeah, a FINE warranty, and if you don’t want the warranty… should we call Joe over?”
Salesperson: “I think we need to bring Joe in on this.”
Customer: “ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!”
Joe: “What seems to be the problem?”
… Is that the way it goes in Australia? Which, ok, may be a little annoying, but I’d just continue to say No. I can’t even imagine what would be so far as to be painful. But, again, maybe this IS painful for Australians?

Ummm… no it’s not. Am surprised you know where Australia is … is not a US state you know? Just saying…

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Ummm… no it’s not. Am surprised you know where Australia is … is not a US state you know? Just saying…

My question is, though, is it really that difficult for Australians to just say no when offered? So difficult, that the government has step in? For example, what’s your experience as an Australian? Have you purchased extended warranties when you didn’t need to?

It has been described as a “nuisance” and “painful”, but if all they’re doing is saying “Would you like the warranty” and the answer is “No”… well, I guess that could be painful to Australians maybe?

 

[jace88]

My question is, though, is it really that difficult for Australians to just say no when offered? So difficult, that the government has step in? For example, what’s your experience as an Australian? Have you purchased extended warranties when you didn’t need to?

It has been described as a “nuisance” and “painful”, but if all they’re doing is saying “Would you like the warranty” and the answer is “No”… well, I guess that could be painful to Australians maybe?

Maybe because I work in financial services regulation and conduct risk has been a huge focus for us in the past few years that I'm more attuned to this... and your sentiment reminds me of how I used to feel about these types of issues/situations and how the customer should be more accountable for their choices. Thankfully we've moved on from there and better understand how these tactics can impact vulnerable individuals and whilst not absolving them of all responsibility for their actions, given them some support to help ensure there are protections in place.

 

[Frankenfurter]

I've ordered a MBP custom build over a month ago through the Apple store online and it's due to arrive in a few days time, however, they've already activated the 'complimentary' 7-day AppleCare+. By the time it arrives, AppleCare will expire the next day. I called up and they said it's activated from the day of purchase. I complained. They said there's nothing they can do. It's effectively useless.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I've ordered a MBP custom build over a month ago through the Apple store online and it's due to arrive in a few days time, however, they've already activated the 'complimentary' 7-day AppleCare+. By the time it arrives, AppleCare will expire the next day. I called up and they said it's activated from the day of purchase. I complained. They said there's nothing they can do. It's effectively useless.

Feels like something they’d HAVE to do related to either this law or some other Australian consumer protections. Apple doesn’t want folks walking out the door with a phone, have an accidental drop in those first 7 days, then Apple says, “Sorry, should have had AppleCare.” However, if they’ve made the decision that the way to not fun afoul of the Australian law is to activate it automatically “on purchase” for everyone, (and if “purchase” is defined as when money changes hands), then that’s just one of the weird things that happens as a result.

I would imagine it IS effectively useless for the vast majority of Australians, but for those few who take home their iMac and absentmindedly places it on that table Adelaide loves to scamper across causing it to meet an untimely demise, AppleCare+ will cover that accidental damage. (To be fair, there may be some other Australian protections that factor into that particular scenario as well OR you could take it up with your credit card OR use your home insurance if it’s covered. However, taking it back to the store under AppleCare+ to have it replaced with a new system if it’s in stock is likely the easiest/quickest way of getting it taken care of. Maybe.)

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Ah! I see how the double posts are happening now.

When you post, there’s a delay to when it removes it from the edit screen so you come back to see it hasn’t posted yet (it can’t have, because the content is still down there), and you click post again