Recent posts

#1

Great Lakes and Ohio Valley / Re: Indiana Notes

Last post by Great Lakes Roads - Today at 05:16:21 PM

Speaking of which, the east side of Interstate 465 from the southern junction of I-65 to the US 31 interchange (excluding the current ClearPath 465 project) will be undergoing a concrete pavement restoration (CPR) project that will involve a 21-day directional closure from I-70 to I-65.

Time-wise, the 21-day directional closures (weather permitting) will begin with I-465 SB/WB closed between May 29-June 30 and I-465 NB/EB closed between July 5-August 4. Completion date is Fall 2025 with the project being split up into phases.

#2

Mid-South / Re: April bid openings: $1.09 ...

Last post by Plutonic Panda - Today at 05:13:27 PM

Oh I'm very familiar with that law. CAHWYGUY told me all about it. It's one of the dumbest laws I've seen. So how orange county manage to continously widen its roads? How does caltrans figure this would increase VMTs on this section of I-15? I do believe induced demand exists to an extent and that there can be an argument made widening urban freeways would increase VMTs but is just on that particular road? Tens of thousands of parking spaces are being constructed in LA alone. Will that not increase VMTs? Will refusing to widen a road have unintended consequences because idling cars and stop and go traffic will emit just as much if not more pollution than free flowing traffic? I don't know nothing about that law makes a lick of sense to me. Someday I'll do more research on it to find out what it actually says. It's not a small document, at least what I came across one night.

But I am skeptical it will raise VMTs. It's mostly about truck traffic tying up automobile traffic. They're also supposedly actually working on Brightline West now so I'd imagine that will cut down on some car trips but they should still widen it to at least 3 lanes each way. If I had my way it'd be four lanes each way.

I also think the AG check point on I-15 at least should be removed for cars. That seems to be a huge source for backups. If they really cared they could do something but they give a shit. They had a project to open a shoulder to traffic during specific times. Big whoop. California just doesn't give a shit. They won't even do a study for crying out loud.

#3

Off-Topic / Re: Minor things that bother y...

Last post by J N Winkler - Today at 05:08:47 PM

But it is not required that returned merchandise be returned for cash. (It's almost always in-store credit - which is basically a gift card.) So I have no idea why gift cards should be. I mean these are gifts.

That has not been my experience.  On the few occasions I have returned things for a refund, I have typically received a chargeback on the card I used to pay.  I can't remember the last time I was asked to settle for in-store credit or a voucher that I could spend only at the business concerned.

Okay, but what does "never expire" really mean?  Businesses don't stay around forever.  They don't have any way of knowing how to get ahold of people who have gift cards they issued, and I wouldn't want to be on their mailing list if they did.

"Never expires" means that the value of the card (or other deferred-redemption instrument) would remain a liability against the business indefinitely.  Realistically, I think it would have to be dischargeable in bankruptcy, even if this meant that customers would have to settle for pennies on the dollar.

In cases where small businesses local to me have simply stopped trading, they have often put out the word through local newspaper coverage that people who hold gift certificates from them should get in touch.  I don't know if the liability persists if it is not cleared before liquidation finishes.

One key benefit of not allowing gift certificates to expire, and requiring them to be redeemable for cash at full face value, is preventing abuses such as a large blue-chip merchandiser like Amazon declaring them void after one year, as I have had happen to me.  There is no realistic prospect of Amazon declaring bankruptcy over such a short time horizon, and a customer should not be pressured to buy something just to redeem value that would otherwise be lost.

#4

Traffic Control / Re: Erroneous road signs

Last post by 74/171FAN - Today at 05:00:52 PM

SC 322 WB at SC 274 WB in Rock Hill (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10220256398520636&set=a.10220256482402733)

#5

Traffic Control / Re: Unique, Odd, or Interestin...

Last post by 74/171FAN - Today at 04:56:54 PM

Some different speed limit text on Route 1 in Colonial Heights, VA:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/bVhXxi9n3qPxZiAo6

That signage has been around for my entire life, probably much longer than that.

#6

Off-Topic / Re: Minor things that bother y...

Last post by kkt - Today at 04:37:59 PM

If I had my druthers, merchants would not be allowed to sell anything with a deferred-redemption component unless the full value of said component were kept available to the customer without expiration.  This would mean:

*  Store gift cards and gift certificates would never expire.

*  Stored-value debit cards would never expire.  (I believe federal regulations already require this.)

*  Loyalty points would remain permanently available to the customer until used up.

*  At any point, the customer could demand the full face value in cash.

If this forced supermarket chains to phase out loyalty programs, I would not shed a tear.

Okay, but what does "never expire" really mean?  Businesses don't stay around forever.  They don't have any way of knowing how to get ahold of people who have gift cards they issued, and I wouldn't want to be on their mailing list if they did.

#7

Off-Topic / Re: Minor things that bother y...

Last post by SEWIGuy - Today at 04:33:33 PM

What do you have against supermarket loyalty programs?

They undermine price transparency.  I prefer to shop by value as measured against net price, and loyalty programs--especially ones based on points that do not have an explicit and easily found dollars-and-cents value--introduce an added layer of calculation.

For similar reasons, I support legislation that prohibits perpetual sales and requires display of unit cost for every price level accessible to the customer.  (With digital coupons, it is not uncommon to see three price levels:  without loyalty card, with card but without digital coupon, and with card and digital coupon.)

Anyway, I am with you until the last point. Why should the store have to redeem the card for cash?

Vdeane mentions one of the reasons--the value of the card should not be tied to the issuing establishment in any way.  Another is that a redemption requirement serves as a check on loyalty programs in general.  If it makes such a program uneconomic for a store to pursue, that is a benefit to the consumer.

I have read that one of the rationales for giving a gift certificate instead of an equal amount in cash is to ensure that the money is spent on items the store actually sells.  While I understand the appeal of this in the case of, e.g., a black-sheep relative who might otherwise spend cash on street drugs, the reality in economic terms is that buying a gift certificate amounts to setting some of the money on fire since the loss of convertibility equates to a reduction in the face value.

So because someone bought a bad gift, a card to "a place they aren't interested in shopping at", the store is now responsible for making it right?  People get bad gifts for one another all of the time.

Yes, absolutely.  Having to refund unwanted merchandise is a normal commercial risk.

But it is not required that returned merchandise be returned for cash. (It's almost always in-store credit - which is basically a gift card.) So I have no idea why gift cards should be. I mean these are gifts.

And I think you are way overthinking why people get gift cards for others. I don't purchase them because I am afraid that the recipient would buy drugs with the cash. I think they merely give the impression that someone put SOME thought into the purchase.

And I think you also overthink the loyalty programs. They're just nice things to get people to shop somewhere more regularly.

#8

Off-Topic / Re: Minor things that bother y...

Last post by J N Winkler - Today at 04:22:45 PM

What do you have against supermarket loyalty programs?

They undermine price transparency.  I prefer to shop by value as measured against net price, and loyalty programs--especially ones based on points that do not have an explicit and easily found dollars-and-cents value--introduce an added layer of calculation.

For similar reasons, I support legislation that prohibits perpetual sales and requires display of unit cost for every price level accessible to the customer.  (With digital coupons, it is not uncommon to see three price levels:  without loyalty card, with card but without digital coupon, and with card and digital coupon.)

Anyway, I am with you until the last point. Why should the store have to redeem the card for cash?

Vdeane mentions one of the reasons--the value of the card should not be tied to the issuing establishment in any way.  Another is that a redemption requirement serves as a check on loyalty programs in general.  If it makes such a program uneconomic for a store to pursue, that is a benefit to the consumer.

I have read that one of the rationales for giving a gift certificate instead of an equal amount in cash is to ensure that the money is spent on items the store actually sells.  While I understand the appeal of this in the case of, e.g., a black-sheep relative who might otherwise spend cash on street drugs, the reality in economic terms is that buying a gift certificate amounts to setting some of the money on fire since the loss of convertibility equates to a reduction in the face value.

So because someone bought a bad gift, a card to "a place they aren't interested in shopping at", the store is now responsible for making it right?  People get bad gifts for one another all of the time.

Yes, absolutely.  Having to refund unwanted merchandise is a normal commercial risk.

#9

Traffic Control / Re: Unique, Odd, or Interestin...

Last post by mglass87 - Today at 04:17:55 PM

Some different speed limit text on Route 1 in Colonial Heights, VA:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/bVhXxi9n3qPxZiAo6

#10

Off-Topic / Re: Minor things that bother y...

Last post by SEWIGuy - Today at 04:09:05 PM

What if the person has a gift card for a place they aren't interested in shopping at?  Or wants to change grocery stores without leaving a rewards balance (essentially impossible where I shop, as you can't redeem and earn points in the same transaction).

So because someone bought a bad gift, a card to "a place they aren't interested in shopping at", the store is now responsible for making it right?  People get bad gifts for one another all of the time.

By the way, I have had friends use this service. You get about 80 cents on the dollar, but if you truly do not like the store, you can get some cash for it.

https://www.cardcash.com/