June 28, 2006
The Long View:
Thanks to Slubby for the reminder.
Posted by: Mark at June 28, 2006 09:33 AM (GvZ+q)
Posted by: Evil Chihuahua at June 28, 2006 09:37 AM (mAhn3)
Posted by: johnMc at June 28, 2006 09:41 AM (Dxk/h)
Posted by: Clark at June 28, 2006 09:49 AM (N8PcP)
I wonder if the New York Times has a secret program of their own they're not telling subscribers about.
Here's the story:
They sent me a subscription offer.... some ridiculously low price offer.
I sent them back the prepaid envelope empty...
Amazingly, two weeks later, I started receiving the NYT in my driveway every morning. At first I thought it was another desperation tactic to get new subscribers by giving away the paper.
Then the invoice finally arrived, claiming that I'd agreed to subscribe. I called and asked them to fax me a copy of anything I'd signed agreeing to get their rag.
They politely and quickly canceled the subscription without charging me for the papers delivered.
Maybe I'm just being paranoid, but I KNOW that I sent the an empty envelope.
Since then I've been wondering - Do they use encrypted bar-coding on the subscription envelope which identifies the person to whom the subscription offer was sent? It's no harder than computer printing the name and address which they have to do anyhow.
It would save a lot of expense for them as they would drastically reduce the handling of the envelopes. Just machine read the bar code information, and trash the envelope and its contents without even opening them.
You're going to send an invoice anyhow... so it really makes a lot of business sense. Think of the personnel costs you save by not having to have people open and read the contents of the envelope.
Can anyone tell me if this is just paranoia? If it is, then I think I've stumbled on a very marketable idea. I've no idea how to research this...
However, if they ARE doing this the NYT is doing it secretly
Posted by: at June 28, 2006 09:55 AM (wSBsc)
Via a reader at Michelle's
"And many readers are asking for a list of NYTimes advertisers. I'm not sure how effective an advertising boycott will be, but if you want to do it, a reader sends this list:
Rob Henrickson, CEO
200 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10166
Margaret M. Foran, Senior Vice President,
235 East 42nd Street, New York, New York 10017.
Corporate Headquarters 2001 Edmund Halley Drive
Reston, VA 20191
Dong-Jin Oh President & CEO
105 Challenger Road
Ridgefield Park, NJ 07660
AMD (American Micro Devices)
VAN CLEEF & ARPELS
Posted by: Pupster at June 28, 2006 10:09 AM (NMGPj)
Posted by: Pupster at June 28, 2006 10:11 AM (NMGPj)
Yes, the envelopes and mailers can have the information on their barcodes as to who it was sent to. My work uses them to identify customers.
Posted by: Mark at June 28, 2006 10:14 AM (GvZ+q)
Posted by: p. thadz at June 28, 2006 10:29 AM (BBv3C)
link : http://www.eff.org/Privacy/printers/index.php
NYT probably bought a list from a clearing house. Your name was on it. Usually there is a barcode imprint on the front of the return envelope. That is a serial code that tracks to you. Everybody on the list got the same discount offer, so there is not need to open the envelope.
But I like the idea. Just send back empty envelopes. I get this all the time from Dallas Morning News. I will have to try it. Another rock in my bag of tricks.
Posted by: JohnMc at June 28, 2006 10:33 AM (Dxk/h)
Posted by: dj elliott at June 28, 2006 10:34 AM (wLsKz)
No, you're not paronoid. Sports Illustrated did the same thing to me. I always send back unsolicited prepaid envelopes and when I did this with their subscription offer, they signed me up.
I called and asked if they'd received a signature and they cancelled my subscription without any hassle.
Posted by: The Warden at June 28, 2006 10:43 AM (8WTw1)
I seem to have Pee & Poop on the brain now. Thanks a bunch, Ace.
Posted by: stace at June 28, 2006 10:43 AM (A56/D)
Posted by: The Warden at June 28, 2006 10:44 AM (8WTw1)
I guess the NYT is read mostly by limousine liberals. Republicans are not the party of the rich.
Posted by: adolfo velasquez at June 28, 2006 10:46 AM (OfelW)
Where's the attack on them for that?????
Posted by: LOKKI at June 28, 2006 12:07 PM (wSBsc)
Posted by: at June 28, 2006 02:28 PM (lxb4k)
Posted by: Moonbat_One at June 28, 2006 04:00 PM (qlF1y)
Posted by: spurwing plover at June 28, 2006 04:22 PM (n7v4a)
The Pulitzer committe may like traitors, but it sure looks like Wall Street does not (and good for them).
$1 drop in a stock over 4 days is not a lot of big newsWell, it is when $1 is 4% of your stock price (and down by 50% over the last two years). Still, it hasn't yet been a whole week, so the stock could rebound, especially if the GOP doesn't do anything more than hold press conferences and pass resolutions.
Posted by: Space of Aides at June 28, 2006 05:30 PM (ssxTO)
A drop of $5/share over the next week would be much more impressive as a sign of market disdain for their most recent politically motivated actions.
Posted by: Patton at June 28, 2006 08:07 PM (Kc90N)
Posted by: Ron at June 29, 2006 05:18 AM (Bhe/R)
Posted by: JOHN RYAN at June 29, 2006 08:57 AM (TcoRJ)
Posted by: Troy Polamalu Jersey at November 21, 2011 09:56 AM (q+Z9s)
62 queries taking 2.4158 seconds, 260 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.