Outlook Remains Strong
Each weekday, Cash4Gold will troll through the web’s gold banter and post some of the bigger or more interesting stories. Following is a run-down of today’s features:
"Gold, dollar break with past as safety buying spurs both higher"
Author: Moming Zhou
Website: Marketwatch.com
Main Points: Moming Zhou analyzes the trend of gold pricing, noting that the dollar and gold, at least lately, have been trending in opposite directions. As the dollar becomes less valuable, an ounce of gold will hypothetically be worth more dollars. However, the dollar’s recent upward trend coincided with gold topping out at about $1,000 per ounce. In conclusion, Zhou says that the price of gold is independent of other assets, and "moves to its own beat." Over the long term, gold "hasn’t had a strong relation with stocks, crude oil, Treasury securities or inflation rates."
Analysis: While safe, the value of gold on a day to day basis is somewhat unpredictable compared to other assets. While some have predicted that gold will continue to rise, such a prediction isn’t based on the behavior of other market securities. Given its somewhat erratic market behavior, selling gold now while it is approaching historic highs should be considered.
"Gold prices lose more ground, but pull off lows"
Author: The Associated Press
Website: International Herald Tribune
Main Points: After reaching an 11-month high of $1,000 per ounce on Friday, gold had a somewhat expected pullback, falling 5.3%. Experts do expect gold to rebound, considering the precious metal is a "safe haven" while the rest of the economy suffers. The pullback was simply necessary after such a significant surge (13%) during the past two months.
Analysis: While the value of gold can’t be tracked with the value of other assets and securities accurately, it does benefit from difficult economic times. Investors simply lose trust in otherwise safe investments like real estate and favor the strong, though somewhat unpredictable, performance of gold.
"Gold falls for fifth session as stocks pare losses"
Author: Moming Zhou
Website: Marketwatch.com
Main Points: The gross domestic product fell at a 6.2% seasonally adjusted annualized rate to finish the final quarter of 2008. Experts were estimating a 3.8% drop, and economists surveyed by MarketWatch had envisioned a 5.5% decline. The biggest decline since 1982 could increase the appeal of gold.
Analysis: Once again, gold as seen as a safe haven during difficult times. While the market in general thrives, investors flock to gold.
"When Gold Trades at 25 Times Oil"
Author: Chuck Marvin
Website: TheStreet.com
Main Points: Marvin covers an interesting economic “myth” that claims a shift in gold and oil prices will occur once the price of gold hits 25 times that of oil. If history is any indication, there may be more to this myth than meets the eye. On February 23, gold was selling at more than 26 times the price of oil. By Thursday, prices readjusted and the discrepancy dropped to 21 times (the shift). In fact, the price of gold to oil ratio has exceeded 25:1 only seven times since 1970. Immediately following those seven occurrences, there was a quick correction. Marvin also reinforces that the recent bad economic news likely helped the price of gold while hurting oil.
Analysis: Certainly interesting. We’ve been told that the performance of other assets is typically a poor indicator of the performance of gold, but there is certainly history behind this myth (or theory). Of course, having a good gauge on the price of gold means that you are accurately tracking oil to begin with.
"Nothing Shines Like Gold"
Author: Donald Luskin
Website: SmartMoney.com
Main Points: Luskin has been touting gold during tough economic times for a while now. He does not believe the recent drop following the price of gold breaking the $1,000 per ounce barrier is a trend. In fact, he predicts a new all-time high within the next seven months.
Analysis: More support for the theory that gold’s most recent fall is only a temporary correction after such a rapid ascent.
"Gold's Luster Outshines Rising Prices"
Author: Yahoo! News
Website: Yahoo! News
Main Points: David Galland, managing director of Casey Research, says that "you'll probably see $1,500 this year" for the price of gold. "You can only mine so much gold in a given year. Dollars can be created in the blink of the eye and with the signing of the pen."
Analysis: A little supply and demand to support Galland’s prediction.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Cash4Gold's Response to LA Times Article
LA Times Unwilling to Correct False and Misleading Article About Cash4Gold
The Los Angeles Times on Feb. 6 published an article about Cash4Gold that contained false and misleading information and misquoted Cash4Gold's CEO in a material way, which significantly altered the meaning of what he said. Cash4Gold sent the newspaper a detailed letter outlining the many errors in the story and calling on The Times to immediately post a correction to the article in print and online.
Cash4Gold also requested that the newspaper follow-up with other media outlets to ensure that corrections are appended to subsequent stories that appeared which were based on the original, erroneous Times report.
Since February 12, the newspaper has refused to take the appropriate actions, despite repeated follow-up requests from Cash4Gold. Below is a copy of the letter received by the Los Angeles Times.
Green Bullion Financial Services LLC
February 12, 2009
Russ Stanton, Executive Editor
Los Angeles Times
101 W 1st St.
Los Angeles, CA 91101
Dear Mr. Stanton,
I am general counsel for Green Bullion Financial Services LLC, owner of the Cash4Gold.com. The article, "Cash4Gold offers don't always shine" by reporter David Sarno published by the Los Angeles Times on February 6, 2009, contained false and misleading information. The article also misquoted Chief Executive Jeff Aronson in a material way, which significantly altered the meaning of what he said.
In addition, Mr. Sarno made a very serious error in his report with regards to the Florida attorney general's office. He reported that the Florida AG's office was "examining nearly 60 complaints about Cash4Gold." In fact, we have a copy of Mr. Sarno's request, in which he asked for information on the wrong company: cashforgold.com. To make matters worse, the figures he received from the AG's office included complaints filed against other companies with similar names. Due to the highly competitive space we operate in and our company's success, many unscrupulous companies have sprung up that have grabbed similar-sounding names to confuse customers. Clearly, they have also confused journalists like Mr. Sarno as well.
Finally, and most egregiously, Mr. Sarno was explicitly told by the AG's office that it was "not investigating" Cash4Gold. That key fact was not included in the report, leaving the impression to readers that Cash4Gold was operating under a cloud of suspicion and triggering other sensational and inaccurate reports.
Mr. Sarno clearly holds a negative view of direct response companies, which he describes as "quick-money schemes." He is entitled to his personal views. But publishing false or misleading statements, or deliberately omitting critical information that would be favorable to Cash4Gold, is dishonest journalism.
Given this, I want the Times to correct these mistakes in print and online, and follow up with other news organizations, in print and online, that have republished its article to ensure that they append the correction to their coverage.
Specifically, Mr. Sarno's article included the following inaccuracies or misrepresentations in a clear effort to portray Cash4Gold and its executive team in a bad light:
1. Mr. Sarno reported the complaints of two Cash4Gold customers without doing any fact-checking to determine whether their claims were correct. Neither did the reporter talk with the customers to find out whether they still held those views. It obviously makes a huge difference whether a complaint is valid or current and seems fundamental to consumer reporting. In fact, Mr. Sarno ignored evidence provided by the company that those allegations were incorrect, outdated or lacked credibility.
• In the first case, Mr. Sarno quotes Frank Poindexter claiming that he mailed Cash4Gold "150-$200 worth of gold" but "all he got back was a check for 15 cents." In fact, the company frequently receives worthless material, such as dog chains, and in those cases will send a customer a check for the value of the goods, even if it is very small. (The company uses best industry practices for testing precious metals.) The customer has the right to refuse that check, which Mr. Poindexter did, and the company sent his goods back to him. Cash4Gold informed Mr. Sarno of those facts and provided him a detailed report of the transaction with dates and a tracking number showing that Mr. Poindexter's articles were mailed to him. Instead of reporting those facts, Mr. Sarno simply repeated Mr. Poindexter's accusation, which made it appear that the company was trying to cheat him.
• In the second case, Thomas Valle claims that he had asked the company to return his gold and diamonds because he wasn't satisfied with Cash4Gold's offer, and said "it has been a month" and the jewelry hadn't arrived. In fact, Cash4Gold provided Mr. Sarno with a full report on the transaction and the tracking number with a date indicating that the jewelry had been mailed back to Mr. Valle within 11 days, as promised by the company. So to be clear, Mr. Sarno had direct evidence suggesting that Mr. Valle's complaint wasn't credible, yet he chose not to use that information. Instead, he quoted Mr. Valle's claim as if it were true, making the company appear as if it had acted in bad faith.
The only thing Mr. Sarno did was to quote chief executive Jeff Aronson stating that the company had "resolved" the two complaints. That is insufficient and clearly suggests that the company was at fault.
2. Mr. Sarno states that "The Florida attorney general's office says it is examining nearly 60 complaints about Cash4Gold." That is false, as I explained earlier in this letter. We are currently working with the attorney general's office to find out exactly how many complaints have been filed against my company, Cash4Gold.com. The attorney general is obliged by law to look into any complaint that it receives. That is routine business and it is irresponsible to imply otherwise. The attorney general is not currently investigating my company, as Mr. Sarno was told.
3. Mr. Sarno quotes Mr. Aronson saying the following: "Tell me one company in the world that wouldn't die for that [complaint] ratio." This leaves out a material part of the quote that renders the report false. In fact, what Mr. Aronson said was "Tell me one company in the DIRECT RESPONSE BUSINESS [Uppercase words were dropped by LA Times reporter] that wouldn't die for that ratio." Mr. Sarno knew that his edited version of the quote would make no sense for any company in the direct response business. The accurate quote fairly positions Mr. Aronson's company against its competitors. As Mr. Sarno knows, an employee for Beck Media listened in on that interview.
4. Mr. Sarno deliberately misuses the Better Business Bureau statistics to depict Cash4Gold as a company suffering a high level of customer dissatisfaction. In fact, a fair reporting of the BBB stats would show the opposite. Mr. Sarno reports that the Better Business Bureau has processed 269 complaints nationwide about Cash4Gold in the last 36 months (out of 500,000 transactions) and then compares that negatively to the complaint record of Southwest Airlines Co. That is clearly unfair, comparing a direct response jewelry company to an airline that has one of the best customer service records not only in its industry but in the corporate world. A responsible journalist would have compared Cash4Gold to direct competitors in the jewelry sector, or the Internet sales, or direct response business. For example, during that same 36 months, one of the country's leading jewelers, Kay Jewelers, had 465 complaints and DirecTV had 25,193 complaints, according to the BBB's website.
Or perhaps the reporter should have compared Cash4Gold.com with the Los Angeles Times, which has an "F" rating and 277 complaints during the same period.
5. Mr. Sarno states that "Cash4Gold has tried on multiple occasions to pluck thorns from its side by pressuring bloggers who criticize its service." However, Mr. Sarno did not even ask Jeff Aronson, the chief executive, about this during his interview or include a response from the company in his article. That's shoddy and unfair journalism. Had he asked Mr. Aronson, he would have been told that the statement was wrong on several counts.
• Cash4Gold has never offered to pay any blogger to remove critical posts from a blog or website.
• Cash4Gold did not authorize Joe Laratro, or anyone else, to pay bloggers to remove critical content from their blogs or websites. Joe Laratro was an independent web consultant for Cash4Gold at the time he reached out to Cockeyed.com.
• Mr. Laratro has made the following statement: "Last year when I worked as a public relations vendor for Cash4Gold, a website posted an item that unfairly represented how the company does business. Without telling anyone at Cash4Gold, I sent an email to the website, www.cockeyed.com, offering to pay the site to remove or change the item. Cash4Gold was unaware that I made the offer and it was the only time I offered to pay any site to remove any comments about Cash4Gold. I am no longer a vendor for Cash4Gold."
• More to the substance of the matter, the cockeyed.com article was inaccurate in several fundamental ways. Shouldn't Cash4Gold fight to protect its reputation against unfair reporting, whether on blogs or in the Los Angeles Times?
I am deeply concerned that Mr. Sarno's report is the result of a deep-seated bias against Cash4Gold, and his work has spawned a number of negative and potentially defamatory reports. I ask The Times to immediately post a correction to the article and follow-up with other media to ensure that the correction is appended to any material based on the Times report.
Thank you for your prompt attention.
Sincerely,
Cathy Lerman
General Counsel
Green Bullion Financial Services, LLC
The Los Angeles Times on Feb. 6 published an article about Cash4Gold that contained false and misleading information and misquoted Cash4Gold's CEO in a material way, which significantly altered the meaning of what he said. Cash4Gold sent the newspaper a detailed letter outlining the many errors in the story and calling on The Times to immediately post a correction to the article in print and online.
Cash4Gold also requested that the newspaper follow-up with other media outlets to ensure that corrections are appended to subsequent stories that appeared which were based on the original, erroneous Times report.
Since February 12, the newspaper has refused to take the appropriate actions, despite repeated follow-up requests from Cash4Gold. Below is a copy of the letter received by the Los Angeles Times.
Green Bullion Financial Services LLC
February 12, 2009
Russ Stanton, Executive Editor
Los Angeles Times
101 W 1st St.
Los Angeles, CA 91101
Dear Mr. Stanton,
I am general counsel for Green Bullion Financial Services LLC, owner of the Cash4Gold.com. The article, "Cash4Gold offers don't always shine" by reporter David Sarno published by the Los Angeles Times on February 6, 2009, contained false and misleading information. The article also misquoted Chief Executive Jeff Aronson in a material way, which significantly altered the meaning of what he said.
In addition, Mr. Sarno made a very serious error in his report with regards to the Florida attorney general's office. He reported that the Florida AG's office was "examining nearly 60 complaints about Cash4Gold." In fact, we have a copy of Mr. Sarno's request, in which he asked for information on the wrong company: cashforgold.com. To make matters worse, the figures he received from the AG's office included complaints filed against other companies with similar names. Due to the highly competitive space we operate in and our company's success, many unscrupulous companies have sprung up that have grabbed similar-sounding names to confuse customers. Clearly, they have also confused journalists like Mr. Sarno as well.
Finally, and most egregiously, Mr. Sarno was explicitly told by the AG's office that it was "not investigating" Cash4Gold. That key fact was not included in the report, leaving the impression to readers that Cash4Gold was operating under a cloud of suspicion and triggering other sensational and inaccurate reports.
Mr. Sarno clearly holds a negative view of direct response companies, which he describes as "quick-money schemes." He is entitled to his personal views. But publishing false or misleading statements, or deliberately omitting critical information that would be favorable to Cash4Gold, is dishonest journalism.
Given this, I want the Times to correct these mistakes in print and online, and follow up with other news organizations, in print and online, that have republished its article to ensure that they append the correction to their coverage.
Specifically, Mr. Sarno's article included the following inaccuracies or misrepresentations in a clear effort to portray Cash4Gold and its executive team in a bad light:
1. Mr. Sarno reported the complaints of two Cash4Gold customers without doing any fact-checking to determine whether their claims were correct. Neither did the reporter talk with the customers to find out whether they still held those views. It obviously makes a huge difference whether a complaint is valid or current and seems fundamental to consumer reporting. In fact, Mr. Sarno ignored evidence provided by the company that those allegations were incorrect, outdated or lacked credibility.
• In the first case, Mr. Sarno quotes Frank Poindexter claiming that he mailed Cash4Gold "150-$200 worth of gold" but "all he got back was a check for 15 cents." In fact, the company frequently receives worthless material, such as dog chains, and in those cases will send a customer a check for the value of the goods, even if it is very small. (The company uses best industry practices for testing precious metals.) The customer has the right to refuse that check, which Mr. Poindexter did, and the company sent his goods back to him. Cash4Gold informed Mr. Sarno of those facts and provided him a detailed report of the transaction with dates and a tracking number showing that Mr. Poindexter's articles were mailed to him. Instead of reporting those facts, Mr. Sarno simply repeated Mr. Poindexter's accusation, which made it appear that the company was trying to cheat him.
• In the second case, Thomas Valle claims that he had asked the company to return his gold and diamonds because he wasn't satisfied with Cash4Gold's offer, and said "it has been a month" and the jewelry hadn't arrived. In fact, Cash4Gold provided Mr. Sarno with a full report on the transaction and the tracking number with a date indicating that the jewelry had been mailed back to Mr. Valle within 11 days, as promised by the company. So to be clear, Mr. Sarno had direct evidence suggesting that Mr. Valle's complaint wasn't credible, yet he chose not to use that information. Instead, he quoted Mr. Valle's claim as if it were true, making the company appear as if it had acted in bad faith.
The only thing Mr. Sarno did was to quote chief executive Jeff Aronson stating that the company had "resolved" the two complaints. That is insufficient and clearly suggests that the company was at fault.
2. Mr. Sarno states that "The Florida attorney general's office says it is examining nearly 60 complaints about Cash4Gold." That is false, as I explained earlier in this letter. We are currently working with the attorney general's office to find out exactly how many complaints have been filed against my company, Cash4Gold.com. The attorney general is obliged by law to look into any complaint that it receives. That is routine business and it is irresponsible to imply otherwise. The attorney general is not currently investigating my company, as Mr. Sarno was told.
3. Mr. Sarno quotes Mr. Aronson saying the following: "Tell me one company in the world that wouldn't die for that [complaint] ratio." This leaves out a material part of the quote that renders the report false. In fact, what Mr. Aronson said was "Tell me one company in the DIRECT RESPONSE BUSINESS [Uppercase words were dropped by LA Times reporter] that wouldn't die for that ratio." Mr. Sarno knew that his edited version of the quote would make no sense for any company in the direct response business. The accurate quote fairly positions Mr. Aronson's company against its competitors. As Mr. Sarno knows, an employee for Beck Media listened in on that interview.
4. Mr. Sarno deliberately misuses the Better Business Bureau statistics to depict Cash4Gold as a company suffering a high level of customer dissatisfaction. In fact, a fair reporting of the BBB stats would show the opposite. Mr. Sarno reports that the Better Business Bureau has processed 269 complaints nationwide about Cash4Gold in the last 36 months (out of 500,000 transactions) and then compares that negatively to the complaint record of Southwest Airlines Co. That is clearly unfair, comparing a direct response jewelry company to an airline that has one of the best customer service records not only in its industry but in the corporate world. A responsible journalist would have compared Cash4Gold to direct competitors in the jewelry sector, or the Internet sales, or direct response business. For example, during that same 36 months, one of the country's leading jewelers, Kay Jewelers, had 465 complaints and DirecTV had 25,193 complaints, according to the BBB's website.
Or perhaps the reporter should have compared Cash4Gold.com with the Los Angeles Times, which has an "F" rating and 277 complaints during the same period.
5. Mr. Sarno states that "Cash4Gold has tried on multiple occasions to pluck thorns from its side by pressuring bloggers who criticize its service." However, Mr. Sarno did not even ask Jeff Aronson, the chief executive, about this during his interview or include a response from the company in his article. That's shoddy and unfair journalism. Had he asked Mr. Aronson, he would have been told that the statement was wrong on several counts.
• Cash4Gold has never offered to pay any blogger to remove critical posts from a blog or website.
• Cash4Gold did not authorize Joe Laratro, or anyone else, to pay bloggers to remove critical content from their blogs or websites. Joe Laratro was an independent web consultant for Cash4Gold at the time he reached out to Cockeyed.com.
• Mr. Laratro has made the following statement: "Last year when I worked as a public relations vendor for Cash4Gold, a website posted an item that unfairly represented how the company does business. Without telling anyone at Cash4Gold, I sent an email to the website, www.cockeyed.com, offering to pay the site to remove or change the item. Cash4Gold was unaware that I made the offer and it was the only time I offered to pay any site to remove any comments about Cash4Gold. I am no longer a vendor for Cash4Gold."
• More to the substance of the matter, the cockeyed.com article was inaccurate in several fundamental ways. Shouldn't Cash4Gold fight to protect its reputation against unfair reporting, whether on blogs or in the Los Angeles Times?
I am deeply concerned that Mr. Sarno's report is the result of a deep-seated bias against Cash4Gold, and his work has spawned a number of negative and potentially defamatory reports. I ask The Times to immediately post a correction to the article and follow-up with other media to ensure that the correction is appended to any material based on the Times report.
Thank you for your prompt attention.
Sincerely,
Cathy Lerman
General Counsel
Green Bullion Financial Services, LLC
Monday, February 16, 2009
Selling Your Gold: What Consumers Should Know
As the nation’s largest buyer and appraiser of jewelry from the public, Cash4Gold has transformed the gold business in America and completed more than 700,000 transactions. The vast majority of Cash4Gold customers—a staggering 94 percent—accept the company’s offered payment for their goods rather than declining and requesting that their jewelry be returned. The company stands by its 100 percent customer service guarantee.
Cash4Gold has always been refreshingly upfront about the fact that it is just one of many options for people looking to sell their gold, and that customers may be able to get more for their gold than Cash4Gold is willing to offer. Today’s entry continues our efforts to help educate consumers and give them a sense of their options and what they should expect.
[Note: I suggest that you also read an earlier entry in which we debunked some misconceptions about Cash4Gold and provided facts concerning the offers made to customers.]
It is important to remember that Cash4Gold—as a buyer and processor of gold—values jewelry entirely on its precious metal content. Workmanship is not a consideration since the pieces are going to be refined. As we say on our website, customers should research their options before sending in their goods since pawn shops and jewelry stores may be able to offer a higher price. They base their pricing upon reselling the goods and, unlike Cash4Gold, are not responsible for the costs of melting the gold down, providing shipping to customers, executing the transactions, etc.
Here are some other important points to keep in mind:
1) Cash4Gold prices don’t reflect retail value. This may seem obvious, but some people simply don't understand that the price paid for a piece of jewelry in a store has very little to do with its melt value. Retailers mark up the price of their goods by three, 10 and even more than 20 times their actual worth. Even if someone buys a piece of jewelry on sale or at a significant "discount" from a retailer, the price paid often far exceeds the value of the metal itself.
2) Insurance appraisals are for "retail replacement value." An insurance appraisal of your jewelry should not set the expectation for the offer made by Cash4Gold. These appraisals are made to establish the cost to you to replace a lost or stolen piece at retail value. This price has nothing to do with the value of the metal. Also, if you will look at an insurance appraisal's fine print, you'll find it says, "Not an offer to buy."
3) Jewelers use appraisals as marketing tools. Jewelers may offer more for your items, but be careful to get clarity on the context. Their offer may be for trade-in only. Under this scenario you are getting “more" for your jewelry, but only in exchange for the commitment to purchase another item marked up x percent by the seller. Some jewelers may indeed offer more cash outright for your jewelry, but they would be taking a calculated business risk. After all, they have you in the store and are hoping to either keep you there and sell you another piece of jewelry with that money, or to provide you with motivation to come back to their store when you are ready to buy something else.
4) The Estate Buyer bases payment on condition and spot price. Even if you have a piece of fine jewelry (Tiffany or Rolex, for example) that has value beyond its gold content, it is important to remember that the value of items can erode. Would you pay the same for a new Rolex watch as you would for a used one? Of course not. Whereas condition is of no importance regarding melt value, it is of importance to The Estate Buyer. The Estate Buyer sells the watch to a buyer at a percentage of "spot price" who in turn sells it again. Not only will the condition of the watch be important to the person who ultimately purchases it, but both The Estate Buyer and its buyer will seek to make a profit on the transaction.
5) Do not trust the engraving. Cash4Gold uses state-of-the art machines to thoroughly test all gold it receives. Occasionally, customers who send in jewelry are surprised to receive payout offers reflecting a different karat value than they expected. For example, someone may get an offer based upon 10K gold even though their jewelry is engraved as being 14K gold. Unfortunately, engravings/stamps on jewelry cannot be counted upon to be accurate. Unscrupulous dealers who create and sell this jewelry (particularly on the street, on the black market and overseas) have every motivation to mislead. They sometimes misrepresent the quality of an item to make you believe you are getting a better deal. We have even had cases where people have sent in stamped jewelry that actually has no gold content at all and is therefore of no value.
In Conclusion
Hopefully, this information helped clear up some common misconceptions about Cash4Gold and provided some helpful information, too.
Cash4Gold is not for everyone—but its combination of ease of use, speed, security and confidentiality make it the right choice for many.
Cash4Gold has always been refreshingly upfront about the fact that it is just one of many options for people looking to sell their gold, and that customers may be able to get more for their gold than Cash4Gold is willing to offer. Today’s entry continues our efforts to help educate consumers and give them a sense of their options and what they should expect.
[Note: I suggest that you also read an earlier entry in which we debunked some misconceptions about Cash4Gold and provided facts concerning the offers made to customers.]
It is important to remember that Cash4Gold—as a buyer and processor of gold—values jewelry entirely on its precious metal content. Workmanship is not a consideration since the pieces are going to be refined. As we say on our website, customers should research their options before sending in their goods since pawn shops and jewelry stores may be able to offer a higher price. They base their pricing upon reselling the goods and, unlike Cash4Gold, are not responsible for the costs of melting the gold down, providing shipping to customers, executing the transactions, etc.
Here are some other important points to keep in mind:
1) Cash4Gold prices don’t reflect retail value. This may seem obvious, but some people simply don't understand that the price paid for a piece of jewelry in a store has very little to do with its melt value. Retailers mark up the price of their goods by three, 10 and even more than 20 times their actual worth. Even if someone buys a piece of jewelry on sale or at a significant "discount" from a retailer, the price paid often far exceeds the value of the metal itself.
2) Insurance appraisals are for "retail replacement value." An insurance appraisal of your jewelry should not set the expectation for the offer made by Cash4Gold. These appraisals are made to establish the cost to you to replace a lost or stolen piece at retail value. This price has nothing to do with the value of the metal. Also, if you will look at an insurance appraisal's fine print, you'll find it says, "Not an offer to buy."
3) Jewelers use appraisals as marketing tools. Jewelers may offer more for your items, but be careful to get clarity on the context. Their offer may be for trade-in only. Under this scenario you are getting “more" for your jewelry, but only in exchange for the commitment to purchase another item marked up x percent by the seller. Some jewelers may indeed offer more cash outright for your jewelry, but they would be taking a calculated business risk. After all, they have you in the store and are hoping to either keep you there and sell you another piece of jewelry with that money, or to provide you with motivation to come back to their store when you are ready to buy something else.
4) The Estate Buyer bases payment on condition and spot price. Even if you have a piece of fine jewelry (Tiffany or Rolex, for example) that has value beyond its gold content, it is important to remember that the value of items can erode. Would you pay the same for a new Rolex watch as you would for a used one? Of course not. Whereas condition is of no importance regarding melt value, it is of importance to The Estate Buyer. The Estate Buyer sells the watch to a buyer at a percentage of "spot price" who in turn sells it again. Not only will the condition of the watch be important to the person who ultimately purchases it, but both The Estate Buyer and its buyer will seek to make a profit on the transaction.
5) Do not trust the engraving. Cash4Gold uses state-of-the art machines to thoroughly test all gold it receives. Occasionally, customers who send in jewelry are surprised to receive payout offers reflecting a different karat value than they expected. For example, someone may get an offer based upon 10K gold even though their jewelry is engraved as being 14K gold. Unfortunately, engravings/stamps on jewelry cannot be counted upon to be accurate. Unscrupulous dealers who create and sell this jewelry (particularly on the street, on the black market and overseas) have every motivation to mislead. They sometimes misrepresent the quality of an item to make you believe you are getting a better deal. We have even had cases where people have sent in stamped jewelry that actually has no gold content at all and is therefore of no value.
In Conclusion
Hopefully, this information helped clear up some common misconceptions about Cash4Gold and provided some helpful information, too.
Cash4Gold is not for everyone—but its combination of ease of use, speed, security and confidentiality make it the right choice for many.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Cash4Gold Verified Safe
From Ripoff Report:
Cash4Gold is continuing to meet the needs of hundreds of thousands of consumers with astonishingly high rates of customer satisfaction.
Ripoff Report has recently added Cash4Gold Company to its exclusive list of businesses who have qualified for "Verified" status. As a member, cash4gold has been shown to have a successful track record of customer satisfaction regarding its products and services.
Ripoff Report Verified Status benefits consumers by assuring complete satisfaction and confidence with member businesses. As part of Verified Status, this company has committed to "doing whatever it takes to make things right with our customers."
This program also includes a commitment to Ripoff Report Corporate Advocacy Business Remediation and Customer Satisfaction Program. A program that benefits the consumer, assures them of complete satisfaction and confidence when doing business with a member business.
Cash4Gold is continuing to meet the needs of hundreds of thousands of consumers with astonishingly high rates of customer satisfaction.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Cash4Gold's Response to Yahoo! Article
Yahoo! Tech today posted an article called "Beware the Cash4Gold Scam". The content is essentially a regurgitation of a couple of other stories that have been written and responded to, but considering the visibility of Yahoo! it's necessary to respond to this one as well.
Yahoo! Tech: "The folks at Cockeyed.com put Cash4Gold to the test, rounding up a bunch of old rings, necklaces, and earrings, and taking them to a regular pawn shop to be appraised. The offer: $198 for the lot. They then sent the items to Cash4Gold and waited for a check in the mail. It arrived within a few days as promised... in the amount of 60 bucks. (You don't have to accept the check; the deal isn't done until you cash it.)"
The Truth: They reference the Cockeyed article we have already confronted, but let's cover it again.
This scenario is not in dispute. While it cannot be confirmed that this is indeed what happened, I will trust that it did. However, it is very important to remember that Cash4Gold is not a pawn shop; it is a refinery. Whereas a pawn shop will take your jewelry and sell it in its current form (value dependent not only on gold content but craftsmanship), Cash4Gold melts down your gold and sells the gold itself. It doesn't matter what your gold looks like. Moreover, it is entirely possible that the pawn shop overvalued the gold in question.
CEO Jeff Aronson also discussed this in a more recent LA Times article. He made it clear that melting your jewelry is "not always the right way for somebody to monetize," and that "there are ways for them to make more money sometimes by reselling to pawnshops and jewelers." Moreover, the company's website takes the unprecedented step of telling its prospective customers that they may be able to get more elsewhere.
According to a recent study, 92% of Cash4Gold's customers would never use a pawn shop. The demand for their services are there because the process is quick, easy and confidential. In particular, customers can sell broken jewelry that pawn shops may otherwise have little interest in. The company's management openly acknowledges that gold owners may be able to get more if they put in the work to go to a pawn shop or jeweler. Many people simply don't want that hassle.
This may explain the discrepancy. Cash4Gold evaluates jewelry entirely on the content of the gold. Workmanship is not a consideration. Moreover, it is not a surprise that a pawn shop may sometimes pay more. They are not responsible for the cost of melting the gold down, providing shipping, executing the transactions, etc.
Even so, the point made by the Cockeyed article and reiterated by Yahoo! here is well taken. Cash4Gold does need to continue being clear about the process with prospective customers, educating them and setting reasonable expectations (a step in that direction was taken when another blog was posted called Selling Your Gold: What Consumers Should Know).
Yahoo! Tech: "As bad as that is, it's far worse if you opted for the company's 'Fast Cash' option. Here, that original offer ($60) is wired into your bank account within 24 hours of them receiving the booty. It sure is fast, but it's not much cash -- and you don't have the option of declining the offer at all. You're stuck with a pittance for your valuable gold items."
The Truth: Again, Yahoo! is taking this straight out of the Cockeyed article. Therefore, let's respond by looking back at our response to the Cockeyed article.
There is nothing secret or devious about the FastCash option. On the website where this option is promoted, it indicates that "By using the Cash4Gold FastCash program, you agree that you waive the 10-day return policy for all material." This isn't fine print at the bottom of the page or legal mumbo jumbo that's included in some terms and conditions that you will not read. It is right there in the middle of the page in regular sized print.
Also, to accept the FastCash option, you must send a canceled check along with a form that clearly indicates you are waiving the 10-day return policy. If a customer chooses this method, they indicate that they want the cash immediately -- time is of the essence.
This is not a scheme, but the company is reviewing this procedure to ensure that a customer selecting this option understands that they are waiving the 10-day return policy.
Yahoo! Tech: "(It's also worth noting that Cash4Gold has offered Cockeyed cash 4 removing its expose from the web...)"
The Truth: We also responded to this today, and Joe Laratro has been clear that his activities were completely independent of and without knowledge or approval from Cash4Gold. Even so, Cash4Gold takes responsibility for hiring him as a consultant (he no longer serves the company) and suffers the unfortunate consequences.
Yahoo! Tech: "As a side note, another website offers an in-depth expose on how the system works, this time analyzed from the inside by a former employee. Here it's outlined how the company offers bonuses to phone operators who can convince you to accept a lower offer and how the company attempts to delay payments as long as possible."
The Truth: The anonymous posting referred to by Yahoo! which claimed to be by a former short-term Cash4Gold employee was false and defamatory. At Cash4Gold’s urging, Yahoo! took appropriate action by removing reference to this posting in its article and eliminating the link to it. The false accusations posted anonymously on Complaints Board were debunked in an earlier entry on this site.
In Conclusion: The Yahoo! article is further evidence that Cash4Gold needs to continue to educate the masses on their service. Moreover, a robust online customer service will go a long ways toward setting reasonable expectations and avoiding such customer complaints. These are things that are being reviewed.
Yahoo! Tech: "The folks at Cockeyed.com put Cash4Gold to the test, rounding up a bunch of old rings, necklaces, and earrings, and taking them to a regular pawn shop to be appraised. The offer: $198 for the lot. They then sent the items to Cash4Gold and waited for a check in the mail. It arrived within a few days as promised... in the amount of 60 bucks. (You don't have to accept the check; the deal isn't done until you cash it.)"
The Truth: They reference the Cockeyed article we have already confronted, but let's cover it again.
This scenario is not in dispute. While it cannot be confirmed that this is indeed what happened, I will trust that it did. However, it is very important to remember that Cash4Gold is not a pawn shop; it is a refinery. Whereas a pawn shop will take your jewelry and sell it in its current form (value dependent not only on gold content but craftsmanship), Cash4Gold melts down your gold and sells the gold itself. It doesn't matter what your gold looks like. Moreover, it is entirely possible that the pawn shop overvalued the gold in question.
CEO Jeff Aronson also discussed this in a more recent LA Times article. He made it clear that melting your jewelry is "not always the right way for somebody to monetize," and that "there are ways for them to make more money sometimes by reselling to pawnshops and jewelers." Moreover, the company's website takes the unprecedented step of telling its prospective customers that they may be able to get more elsewhere.
According to a recent study, 92% of Cash4Gold's customers would never use a pawn shop. The demand for their services are there because the process is quick, easy and confidential. In particular, customers can sell broken jewelry that pawn shops may otherwise have little interest in. The company's management openly acknowledges that gold owners may be able to get more if they put in the work to go to a pawn shop or jeweler. Many people simply don't want that hassle.
This may explain the discrepancy. Cash4Gold evaluates jewelry entirely on the content of the gold. Workmanship is not a consideration. Moreover, it is not a surprise that a pawn shop may sometimes pay more. They are not responsible for the cost of melting the gold down, providing shipping, executing the transactions, etc.
Even so, the point made by the Cockeyed article and reiterated by Yahoo! here is well taken. Cash4Gold does need to continue being clear about the process with prospective customers, educating them and setting reasonable expectations (a step in that direction was taken when another blog was posted called Selling Your Gold: What Consumers Should Know).
Yahoo! Tech: "As bad as that is, it's far worse if you opted for the company's 'Fast Cash' option. Here, that original offer ($60) is wired into your bank account within 24 hours of them receiving the booty. It sure is fast, but it's not much cash -- and you don't have the option of declining the offer at all. You're stuck with a pittance for your valuable gold items."
The Truth: Again, Yahoo! is taking this straight out of the Cockeyed article. Therefore, let's respond by looking back at our response to the Cockeyed article.
There is nothing secret or devious about the FastCash option. On the website where this option is promoted, it indicates that "By using the Cash4Gold FastCash program, you agree that you waive the 10-day return policy for all material." This isn't fine print at the bottom of the page or legal mumbo jumbo that's included in some terms and conditions that you will not read. It is right there in the middle of the page in regular sized print.
Also, to accept the FastCash option, you must send a canceled check along with a form that clearly indicates you are waiving the 10-day return policy. If a customer chooses this method, they indicate that they want the cash immediately -- time is of the essence.
This is not a scheme, but the company is reviewing this procedure to ensure that a customer selecting this option understands that they are waiving the 10-day return policy.
Yahoo! Tech: "(It's also worth noting that Cash4Gold has offered Cockeyed cash 4 removing its expose from the web...)"
The Truth: We also responded to this today, and Joe Laratro has been clear that his activities were completely independent of and without knowledge or approval from Cash4Gold. Even so, Cash4Gold takes responsibility for hiring him as a consultant (he no longer serves the company) and suffers the unfortunate consequences.
Yahoo! Tech: "As a side note, another website offers an in-depth expose on how the system works, this time analyzed from the inside by a former employee. Here it's outlined how the company offers bonuses to phone operators who can convince you to accept a lower offer and how the company attempts to delay payments as long as possible."
The Truth: The anonymous posting referred to by Yahoo! which claimed to be by a former short-term Cash4Gold employee was false and defamatory. At Cash4Gold’s urging, Yahoo! took appropriate action by removing reference to this posting in its article and eliminating the link to it. The false accusations posted anonymously on Complaints Board were debunked in an earlier entry on this site.
In Conclusion: The Yahoo! article is further evidence that Cash4Gold needs to continue to educate the masses on their service. Moreover, a robust online customer service will go a long ways toward setting reasonable expectations and avoiding such customer complaints. These are things that are being reviewed.
Cash4Gold's Response to Laratro Quote in MSNBC Article
The purpose of this blog is to lay out critical arguments of Cash4Gold and provide informative responses. Due to the immense attention the company has received since the airing of its Super Bowl ad, there is need to more clearly articulate the purpose and processes of the company, and to clarify any misconceptions.
An MSNBC article was posted today, covering mainly old news. There was one surprising quote, however, from Joe Laratro. You may recall that Laratro, once employed by Cash4Gold as a consultant, independently contacted a website with a monetary offer to have them remove a blog critical of Cash4Gold. Not only does he no longer work for the company, but his actions were done independently without the knowledge or approval of anyone at Cash4Gold.
This fact was contradicted by a comment Laratro gave to MSNBC:
"The man who sent the e-mail, Joe Laratro of marketing firm Tandem Interactive, challenged Aranson’s account.
"'Everyone (at Cash4Gold) was well aware of what was going on,' he told msnbc.com."
Cash4Gold vehemently denies that it had any knowledge of Laratro's activities. In fact, Laratro issued the following clarification/statement today:
"Cash4Gold was not aware of all of the tactics being using in my reputation management services. I have been interviewed several times about Cash4Gold’s knowledge of my emails to the cockeyed blog. I have said it was just part of the client strategy, and specifically Cash4Gold was not aware of any emails to the Cockeyed Blog. I have also said it was my idea and my tactic. Another question that has kept coming up was if any other Web sites were paid to remove negative comments. I did not pay nor did I suggest paying any other sites to remove negative comments."
It can be assumed that this was a misquote since Laratro reconfirmed that his actions were made independent of the company.
Even so, Cash4Gold takes responsibility for hiring him as a consultant (he no longer serves the company) and has had to suffer the unfortunate consequences of his actions.
An MSNBC article was posted today, covering mainly old news. There was one surprising quote, however, from Joe Laratro. You may recall that Laratro, once employed by Cash4Gold as a consultant, independently contacted a website with a monetary offer to have them remove a blog critical of Cash4Gold. Not only does he no longer work for the company, but his actions were done independently without the knowledge or approval of anyone at Cash4Gold.
This fact was contradicted by a comment Laratro gave to MSNBC:
"The man who sent the e-mail, Joe Laratro of marketing firm Tandem Interactive, challenged Aranson’s account.
"'Everyone (at Cash4Gold) was well aware of what was going on,' he told msnbc.com."
Cash4Gold vehemently denies that it had any knowledge of Laratro's activities. In fact, Laratro issued the following clarification/statement today:
"Cash4Gold was not aware of all of the tactics being using in my reputation management services. I have been interviewed several times about Cash4Gold’s knowledge of my emails to the cockeyed blog. I have said it was just part of the client strategy, and specifically Cash4Gold was not aware of any emails to the Cockeyed Blog. I have also said it was my idea and my tactic. Another question that has kept coming up was if any other Web sites were paid to remove negative comments. I did not pay nor did I suggest paying any other sites to remove negative comments."
It can be assumed that this was a misquote since Laratro reconfirmed that his actions were made independent of the company.
Even so, Cash4Gold takes responsibility for hiring him as a consultant (he no longer serves the company) and has had to suffer the unfortunate consequences of his actions.
Response to ComplaintsBoard Article
The purpose of this blog is to lay out critical arguments of Cash4Gold and provide informative responses. Due to the immense attention the company has received since the airing of its Super Bowl ad, there is need to more clearly articulate the purpose and processes of the company, and to clarify any misconceptions.
Recently, a person claiming to be a former employee of Cash4Gold submitted an anonymous posting to ComplaintsBoard.com.
The posting was false and defamatory.
With that in mind, it is also important to take all accusations seriously, address them accurately, and ensure that the public is aware of the facts.
Let's take these one by one.
ComplaintsBoard: "1. The 'refiner's pack' that is used for you to put your jewelry is 'insured for UP TO 100 dollars,' according to how much they determine from a description from you, the worth of your items to be, NOT an actual fully researched appraisal."
The Truth: This is correct. Cash4Gold is not able to make an accurate appraisal until the material has been shipped and examined. The customers are encouraged to purchase more insurance at the post office if they feel their gold is worth more than $100.
ComplaintsBoard: "2. We receive your 'Refiner's Pack' within 3-4 days, BUT we are instructed to tell you that it takes '7-10 business days', for us to receive your pack, ALTHOUGH many times, your package has already arrived."
The Truth: At no time would a Cash4Gold customer service representative tell a customer that their pack had not yet arrived if it was in stock. It is common for any business to allow for 7-10 business days for shipping to set expectations. Of course, any package may and should arrive prior to that, and if a customer called about such a received package prior to the expiration of that 7-10 days, the rep would have record of that package that they would share with the customer.
ComplaintsBoard: "3. Your jewelry gets appraised by hand, a magnifying glass, a plastic container, a small weight pad, and a bottle of ORANGISH fluid, which your items are then determined a value for. Not million dollar equipment or specially trained jewelry experts. The company was temporarily closed recently due to health and code violations. I have witness testers being transported to Medical Centers, due to the testing department environment. There is literally a cloud of smoke in the air from acid and other testing material..."
The Truth: This is entirely false. The refinery and testing facility are A rated by OSHA for being a safe environment. All employees in these facilities are dressed in scrubs, the environment is clean and sterile, and the equipment is indeed state of the art. In the interests of full disclosure, an article will follow taking prospective customers on a virtual tour of these facilities.
ComplaintsBoard: "4. Although the payment (check) for your item is dated within 24 hrs of testing your jewelry, we SOMETIMES DO NOT actually send out the check until up to 3-4 days later..."
The Truth: All checks are dated the day they are sent out. An audit was done and all 10 day periods began on the date the checks were sent. All of them. 100%.
ComplaintsBoard: "5. We do offer a 100% Satisfaction Guarantee or your jewelry returned, BUT THE CATCH IS, that the guarantee is to contact us within 10 DAYS from when your check is DATED. (This begins with the time it took for the accounts payables dept. to ISSUE the check and also including the TRANSIT TIME for you to receive your check in the mail... If you request (sign) for FAST CASH (direct deposit) you automatically WAIVE your rights to have your items returned, EVEN if you are not satisfied with amount of your deposit."
The Truth: Two items to address here. The 10 days does begin the day that the check is sent out. However, by law Cash4Gold must provide up to 15 days. The 10 days is indicated to encourage customers to have it taken care of quickly, but the 15 days is recognized.
It is true that a customer waives the return policy if they select the FastCash method. However, this is clear on the FastCash promotional page. There is no fine print, it isn't at the bottom of the page, and it isn't hidden in a legal document. It clearly indicates in the middle of the promo: "**By using the Cash4Gold FastCash program, you agree that you waive the 10-day return policy for all material." Additionally, customers must submit a blank check and sign a form that clearly states that they are waiving this return policy. The customer signs up for this option because time is of the essence to them.
ComplaintsBoard: "6. You generally receive your check around the '7th-10th' business day, AND majority of the time Customers are outraged when they lay eyes on the amount of their check. Some Customer's even receive a check for 0.01 cents."
The Truth: As stated in the response to #5, the 10 day (which is actually 15) period begins on the day the check is sent. Mail can take up to 7-10 days for delivery, but in most cases it is much less.
Regarding the amount of payment received, it all depends on what is sent. Cash4Gold receives many items that are of little or no value -- whether known or unknown to the customer. Additionally, the only value to Cash4Gold is in the material's gold content. Since the company is a full service refinery, the material is melted down -- craftsmanship does not add value.
If a customer is unhappy with their check, they have every right to ask for their material back. They can request by phone or e-mail. More than 93% of customers accept the check.
ComplaintsBoard: "7. There have been times when we have received your package and MISPLACED or LOST it at the facility. We CLAIM to not have received the items and even try to convince you that it was lost in the hands of USPS..."
The Truth: Cash4Gold has established a high tech tracking program to follow all received packages. While packages do get lost in the mail, it would be extremely rare. At no point would a Cash4Gold employee claim that a package was lost in the mail if it was known to be in the facility.
ComplaintsBoard: "8. ...We issue low checks just to have you call us back if you are smart enough to realize that you just got scammed. For the smart one's we are paid to offer u a bonus up to 3x the original amount of your check and you accept. For ex: Sally Smith receives a check for $27.86... Now Sally Smith calls the cust srvc dept... and offer you a total amount of $53.20 which is a little under double the amount of your original check; in which case if you accept, the cust srvc rep makes a 15.00 bonus off of your transaction. If the customer service rep offers you under triple the amount of your orig check, he/she makes 10.oo in bonuses.
The Truth: Cash4Gold customer service representatives have received bonuses, but they are based on the number of calls, abandon rate and customer satisfaction.
ComplaintsBoard: "9. If you accept the offer, the deal is done, and you are told that the call is recorded (which most of the time, the record button does not work, or the box if full.)..."
The Truth: This is not true. All phone calls are recorded.
ComplaintsBoard: "10. If you only want the items that we do not find of any value back, you have to pay 10.00 shipping and handling fee to have your own items returned, which varies. Although it is listed under the terms and conditions, this charge varies from a 10.00-15.00 charge to NO charge, reason being, UNSURE."
The Truth: While Cash4Gold did charge for returns at one point, most returns are now done at no cost to the customer. Of course, given the range of material that may be returned, the company does reserve the right to charge if necessary.
In Conclusion: While the company is open to suggestions on improving its service, the accusations lobbed in the anonymous posting are false and defamatory and should be removed immediately from Complaints Board.
Recently, a person claiming to be a former employee of Cash4Gold submitted an anonymous posting to ComplaintsBoard.com.
The posting was false and defamatory.
With that in mind, it is also important to take all accusations seriously, address them accurately, and ensure that the public is aware of the facts.
Let's take these one by one.
ComplaintsBoard: "1. The 'refiner's pack' that is used for you to put your jewelry is 'insured for UP TO 100 dollars,' according to how much they determine from a description from you, the worth of your items to be, NOT an actual fully researched appraisal."
The Truth: This is correct. Cash4Gold is not able to make an accurate appraisal until the material has been shipped and examined. The customers are encouraged to purchase more insurance at the post office if they feel their gold is worth more than $100.
ComplaintsBoard: "2. We receive your 'Refiner's Pack' within 3-4 days, BUT we are instructed to tell you that it takes '7-10 business days', for us to receive your pack, ALTHOUGH many times, your package has already arrived."
The Truth: At no time would a Cash4Gold customer service representative tell a customer that their pack had not yet arrived if it was in stock. It is common for any business to allow for 7-10 business days for shipping to set expectations. Of course, any package may and should arrive prior to that, and if a customer called about such a received package prior to the expiration of that 7-10 days, the rep would have record of that package that they would share with the customer.
ComplaintsBoard: "3. Your jewelry gets appraised by hand, a magnifying glass, a plastic container, a small weight pad, and a bottle of ORANGISH fluid, which your items are then determined a value for. Not million dollar equipment or specially trained jewelry experts. The company was temporarily closed recently due to health and code violations. I have witness testers being transported to Medical Centers, due to the testing department environment. There is literally a cloud of smoke in the air from acid and other testing material..."
The Truth: This is entirely false. The refinery and testing facility are A rated by OSHA for being a safe environment. All employees in these facilities are dressed in scrubs, the environment is clean and sterile, and the equipment is indeed state of the art. In the interests of full disclosure, an article will follow taking prospective customers on a virtual tour of these facilities.
ComplaintsBoard: "4. Although the payment (check) for your item is dated within 24 hrs of testing your jewelry, we SOMETIMES DO NOT actually send out the check until up to 3-4 days later..."
The Truth: All checks are dated the day they are sent out. An audit was done and all 10 day periods began on the date the checks were sent. All of them. 100%.
ComplaintsBoard: "5. We do offer a 100% Satisfaction Guarantee or your jewelry returned, BUT THE CATCH IS, that the guarantee is to contact us within 10 DAYS from when your check is DATED. (This begins with the time it took for the accounts payables dept. to ISSUE the check and also including the TRANSIT TIME for you to receive your check in the mail... If you request (sign) for FAST CASH (direct deposit) you automatically WAIVE your rights to have your items returned, EVEN if you are not satisfied with amount of your deposit."
The Truth: Two items to address here. The 10 days does begin the day that the check is sent out. However, by law Cash4Gold must provide up to 15 days. The 10 days is indicated to encourage customers to have it taken care of quickly, but the 15 days is recognized.
It is true that a customer waives the return policy if they select the FastCash method. However, this is clear on the FastCash promotional page. There is no fine print, it isn't at the bottom of the page, and it isn't hidden in a legal document. It clearly indicates in the middle of the promo: "**By using the Cash4Gold FastCash program, you agree that you waive the 10-day return policy for all material." Additionally, customers must submit a blank check and sign a form that clearly states that they are waiving this return policy. The customer signs up for this option because time is of the essence to them.
ComplaintsBoard: "6. You generally receive your check around the '7th-10th' business day, AND majority of the time Customers are outraged when they lay eyes on the amount of their check. Some Customer's even receive a check for 0.01 cents."
The Truth: As stated in the response to #5, the 10 day (which is actually 15) period begins on the day the check is sent. Mail can take up to 7-10 days for delivery, but in most cases it is much less.
Regarding the amount of payment received, it all depends on what is sent. Cash4Gold receives many items that are of little or no value -- whether known or unknown to the customer. Additionally, the only value to Cash4Gold is in the material's gold content. Since the company is a full service refinery, the material is melted down -- craftsmanship does not add value.
If a customer is unhappy with their check, they have every right to ask for their material back. They can request by phone or e-mail. More than 93% of customers accept the check.
ComplaintsBoard: "7. There have been times when we have received your package and MISPLACED or LOST it at the facility. We CLAIM to not have received the items and even try to convince you that it was lost in the hands of USPS..."
The Truth: Cash4Gold has established a high tech tracking program to follow all received packages. While packages do get lost in the mail, it would be extremely rare. At no point would a Cash4Gold employee claim that a package was lost in the mail if it was known to be in the facility.
ComplaintsBoard: "8. ...We issue low checks just to have you call us back if you are smart enough to realize that you just got scammed. For the smart one's we are paid to offer u a bonus up to 3x the original amount of your check and you accept. For ex: Sally Smith receives a check for $27.86... Now Sally Smith calls the cust srvc dept... and offer you a total amount of $53.20 which is a little under double the amount of your original check; in which case if you accept, the cust srvc rep makes a 15.00 bonus off of your transaction. If the customer service rep offers you under triple the amount of your orig check, he/she makes 10.oo in bonuses.
The Truth: Cash4Gold customer service representatives have received bonuses, but they are based on the number of calls, abandon rate and customer satisfaction.
ComplaintsBoard: "9. If you accept the offer, the deal is done, and you are told that the call is recorded (which most of the time, the record button does not work, or the box if full.)..."
The Truth: This is not true. All phone calls are recorded.
ComplaintsBoard: "10. If you only want the items that we do not find of any value back, you have to pay 10.00 shipping and handling fee to have your own items returned, which varies. Although it is listed under the terms and conditions, this charge varies from a 10.00-15.00 charge to NO charge, reason being, UNSURE."
The Truth: While Cash4Gold did charge for returns at one point, most returns are now done at no cost to the customer. Of course, given the range of material that may be returned, the company does reserve the right to charge if necessary.
In Conclusion: While the company is open to suggestions on improving its service, the accusations lobbed in the anonymous posting are false and defamatory and should be removed immediately from Complaints Board.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Response to Cockeyed Article
The purpose of this blog is to lay out critical arguments of Cash4Gold and provide informative responses. Due to the immense attention the company has received since the airing of its Super Bowl ad, there is need to more clearly articulate the purpose and processes of the company, and to clarify any misconceptions.
Cockeyed.com recently posted an article with the title "Cash4Gold Will Offer One-Third of the Actual Value for your Gold" that was highly critical of the company's operations. We invite all prospective customers to investigate before they send in their jewelry, so in the interests of full disclosure following are a few of their findings and claims, along with a response.
Cockeyed.com: "Brent K. was also interested in doing a little Gold kit price evaluation, so he gathered up his family fortune of gold scraps and prepared to do some comparison shopping. He had some 14K gold and some 10 karat gold... First, he took the pile of gold to a local pawn shop... Brent's booty was worth $198... The offer check from Cash4Gold arrived, for $60!"
The Truth: This scenario is not in dispute. While it cannot be confirmed that this is indeed what happened, I will trust that it did. However, it is very important to remember that Cash4Gold is not a pawn shop; it is a refinery. Whereas a pawn shop will take your jewelry and sell it in its current form (value dependent not only on gold content but craftsmanship), Cash4Gold melts down your gold and sells the gold itself. It doesn't matter what your gold looks like. Moreover, it is entirely possible that the pawn shop overvalued the gold in question.
CEO Jeff Aronson also discussed this in a more recent LA Times article. He made it clear that melting your jewelry is "not always the right way for somebody to monetize," and that "there are ways for them to make more money sometimes by reselling to pawnshops and jewelers." Moreover, the company's website takes the unprecedented step of telling its prospective customers that they may be able to get more elsewhere.
According to a recent study, 92% of Cash4Gold's customers would never use a pawn shop. The demand for their services are there because the process is quick, easy and confidential. In particular, customers can sell broken jewelry that pawn shops may otherwise have little interest in. The company's management openly acknowledges that gold owners may be able to get more if they put in the work to go to a pawn shop or jeweler. Many people simply don't want that hassle.
This explains the discrepancy. Cash4Gold was valuing the jewelry entirely on the content of the gold. Workmanship was not a consideration. Moreover, it is not a surprise that a pawn shop would pay more. They are not responsible for the cost of melting the gold down, providing shipping, executing the transactions, etc.
Even so, the point made by the Cockeyed article here is well taken. Cash4Gold does need to be clear about the process with prospective customers, educate them and set reasonable expectations.
Cockeyed.com: "He also noticed that Cash4Gold offers a 'fast cash' scheme to forego the paper check and deposit their payment directly into your checking account within 24 hours. This setup would be faster, but gold sellers would give up their chance to examine and renegotiate their offer."
The Truth: Dictionary.com has several meanings of the word "scheme," but it's pretty clear that their intended usage here is "A secret or devious plan; a plot." There is nothing secret or devious about the FastCash option. On the website where this option is promoted, it indicates that "By using the Cash4Gold FastCash program, you agree that you waive the 10-day return policy for all material." This isn't fine print at the bottom of the page or legal mumbo jumbo that's included in some terms and conditions that you will not read. It is right there in the middle of the page in regular sized print.
Also, to accept the FastCash option, you must send a canceled check along with a form that clearly indicates you are waiving the 10-day return policy. If a customer chooses this method, they indicate that they want the cash immediately -- time is of the essence.
This is not a scheme. That said, it cannot be denied that there is enough uncertainty that Cockeyed would claim it to be a scheme. This is another item that the company is reviewing to ensure that there is no misunderstanding when a customer selects this option that they are waiving the 10-day return policy.
In Conclusion: The article is based on the assumption that Cash4Gold -- a full service refinery -- should offer customers the same amount of money for their jewelry as would a pawn shop -- which resells the whole piece without the additional overhead. This article is evidence that further education of prospective customers is necessary to prevent any confusion and set proper expectations. Cash4Gold is most often used by people either selling broken gold jewelry or those preferring a quick,easy and confidential transaction to the hassle of dealing with a pawn shop.
Cockeyed.com recently posted an article with the title "Cash4Gold Will Offer One-Third of the Actual Value for your Gold" that was highly critical of the company's operations. We invite all prospective customers to investigate before they send in their jewelry, so in the interests of full disclosure following are a few of their findings and claims, along with a response.
Cockeyed.com: "Brent K. was also interested in doing a little Gold kit price evaluation, so he gathered up his family fortune of gold scraps and prepared to do some comparison shopping. He had some 14K gold and some 10 karat gold... First, he took the pile of gold to a local pawn shop... Brent's booty was worth $198... The offer check from Cash4Gold arrived, for $60!"
The Truth: This scenario is not in dispute. While it cannot be confirmed that this is indeed what happened, I will trust that it did. However, it is very important to remember that Cash4Gold is not a pawn shop; it is a refinery. Whereas a pawn shop will take your jewelry and sell it in its current form (value dependent not only on gold content but craftsmanship), Cash4Gold melts down your gold and sells the gold itself. It doesn't matter what your gold looks like. Moreover, it is entirely possible that the pawn shop overvalued the gold in question.
CEO Jeff Aronson also discussed this in a more recent LA Times article. He made it clear that melting your jewelry is "not always the right way for somebody to monetize," and that "there are ways for them to make more money sometimes by reselling to pawnshops and jewelers." Moreover, the company's website takes the unprecedented step of telling its prospective customers that they may be able to get more elsewhere.
According to a recent study, 92% of Cash4Gold's customers would never use a pawn shop. The demand for their services are there because the process is quick, easy and confidential. In particular, customers can sell broken jewelry that pawn shops may otherwise have little interest in. The company's management openly acknowledges that gold owners may be able to get more if they put in the work to go to a pawn shop or jeweler. Many people simply don't want that hassle.
This explains the discrepancy. Cash4Gold was valuing the jewelry entirely on the content of the gold. Workmanship was not a consideration. Moreover, it is not a surprise that a pawn shop would pay more. They are not responsible for the cost of melting the gold down, providing shipping, executing the transactions, etc.
Even so, the point made by the Cockeyed article here is well taken. Cash4Gold does need to be clear about the process with prospective customers, educate them and set reasonable expectations.
Cockeyed.com: "He also noticed that Cash4Gold offers a 'fast cash' scheme to forego the paper check and deposit their payment directly into your checking account within 24 hours. This setup would be faster, but gold sellers would give up their chance to examine and renegotiate their offer."
The Truth: Dictionary.com has several meanings of the word "scheme," but it's pretty clear that their intended usage here is "A secret or devious plan; a plot." There is nothing secret or devious about the FastCash option. On the website where this option is promoted, it indicates that "By using the Cash4Gold FastCash program, you agree that you waive the 10-day return policy for all material." This isn't fine print at the bottom of the page or legal mumbo jumbo that's included in some terms and conditions that you will not read. It is right there in the middle of the page in regular sized print.
Also, to accept the FastCash option, you must send a canceled check along with a form that clearly indicates you are waiving the 10-day return policy. If a customer chooses this method, they indicate that they want the cash immediately -- time is of the essence.
This is not a scheme. That said, it cannot be denied that there is enough uncertainty that Cockeyed would claim it to be a scheme. This is another item that the company is reviewing to ensure that there is no misunderstanding when a customer selects this option that they are waiving the 10-day return policy.
In Conclusion: The article is based on the assumption that Cash4Gold -- a full service refinery -- should offer customers the same amount of money for their jewelry as would a pawn shop -- which resells the whole piece without the additional overhead. This article is evidence that further education of prospective customers is necessary to prevent any confusion and set proper expectations. Cash4Gold is most often used by people either selling broken gold jewelry or those preferring a quick,easy and confidential transaction to the hassle of dealing with a pawn shop.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
