@PaulR said:

None of you will get any sympathy from me - I happen to disagree with most people and if that rocks your boats - then tough sh!t.

Noone asked for your sympathy - but noone asked for your opinion either. You seem to be a very irritable, immature little whiner, who just can't help picking fights for the sake of it, doesn't think things through, and can't see different angles to a problem. Most of us are here to ask VSL some questions - since you're not them nobody actually has any interest in your views.

Bottom line is their actions are quite simply wrong, and we'd like to know why. No amount of jumping up and down and saying that other people do it is going to make their actions right.

@Pingu said:

Bottom line is their actions are quite simply wrong, and we'd like to know why. No amount of jumping up and down and saying that other people do it is going to make their actions right.

@PaulR said:

I'm sorry, but call me old-fashioned - I don't understand how some of the people on this thread know how to walk and breath at the same time - I mean - HOW do some of you ACTUALLY live? Huh? How do you manage to pay your bills. Beats me. . . . .

Have you complained to the health insurance company about their rising prices? Have you gone onto their forum website and told them it's left a bad taste in your mouth? If not - why not?

None of you will get any sympathy from me - I happen to disagree with most people and if that rocks your boats - then tough sh!t.

Paul:

It appears that, from your point of view, making promises and then breaking them without explanation is a good business model. I'd guess that most in the bvusiness world would strongly disagree.  There was no fine print in VSL's advertising of the VIP program stating that it could be withdrawn at any time, rather what was emphasized that you were making a "lifetime investment" because purchase included the VIP program.

In every form of relationship, whether business or personal, making and then breaking promises without an adequate explanation

elicits distrust and anger - - and lawsuits. Moreover, one might construe VSL's original advertising to have the force of an implied contract. I might also say that your implication that those who hold views contrary to yours on this subject are out of touch with the way things are done in the real world is, among other things, inapt. Indeed, in the real world, were a similar situation to occur between two large corporations - - where one perceived the other as breaching an implied contract - - there might already be armies of attorneys beginning litigation over the issue.

Your comparison of the current situation with VSL and rising health insurance costs is an apples to oranges comparison. The general question of the cost of health insurance can only be addressed - - and it will be - - politically since it affects every member of society in countless ways. However, even in this instance, there is a question of contractual obligation between the insurer and insured. In a recent case, for example, an insurance company, Healthnet, cut off payments for the chemotherapy of a woman being treated for cancer. Contrary to the insurance company's expectations, the woman survived - - because her doctors refused to stop the treatments. She won a nine million dollar settlement from the insurance company. 

I have the greatest respect for the folks at VSL, their products and their commitment to excellence - - but that does not mean that I (or anyone else) should stay silent when I (or they) think VSL is doing something likely to be self-defeating in the long run.  Again, VSL's policy change does not affect me personally, so I really have no need of your sympathy. 

@DG said:

Pingu, when you post on a public forum, you make the discussion public. You have no right only to solicit opinions that agree with your own.

Absolutely, which is why I'm entitled to respond to you in the same abbrasive manner that you employ in all of your posts. Dismissing your opinion seems to have rattled you rather quickly.

Now things are getting out of hand. Why let this PaulR guy drag this thread anymore of topic? He is not contributing at all, neither way, to what we are trying to say. I, for one (naively enough)  is trying to reach the VSL company, although the attempt problably won't do much good.

There have been quite a few responses to this thread, but I can't see to many asking for PaulR opinion in any of the relevant questions, but he has nevertheless been quite eager to state his mind. Which ofcourse is fine as this is an open forum. But when you, PaulR, start handing out insults it has gotten to a level which does not belong here at all.
 
Disappointingly enough (or should I say, "as expectet") it seems like VSL will block out the opinions of their customers, and just let this whole thing blow over.

@DG said:

Pingu, when you post on a public forum, you make the discussion public. You have no right only to solicit opinions that agree with your own.

Absolutely, which is why I'm entitled to respond to you in the same abbrasive manner that you employ in all of your posts. Dismissing your opinion seems to have rattled you rather quickly.

Have you read all my posts? I highly doubt it. [:O]

You think you "rattled me"? I highly doubt it. [:D]

DG

@tommalm said:

But when you, PaulR, start handing out insults it has gotten to a level which does not belong here at all.
 

@PaulR said:

[quote=Pingu]Bottom line is their actions are quite simply wrong, and we'd like to know why. No amount of jumping up and down and saying that other people do it is going to make their actions right.

Don't be so stupid. Right and wrong is not a matter of opinion. You are confusing them with legal and illegal; I have no doubt at all that there is no legal recourse against VSL's actions, particularly in the international market they operate in. But their actions are still wrong. Unless you believe dishonesty was declared to be ok at some point.

@PaulR said:

[quote=Pingu]Bottom line is their actions are quite simply wrong, and we'd like to know why. No amount of jumping up and down and saying that other people do it is going to make their actions right.

Don't be so stupid. Right and wrong is not a matter of opinion. You are confusing them with legal and illegal; I have no doubt at all that there is no legal recourse against VSL's actions, particularly in the international market they operate in. But their actions are still wrong. Unless you believe dishonesty was declared to be ok at some point.

@Pingu said:

Sorry DG, completely used the wrong quote - I meant to grab a part of PaulR's post, and got distracted, then wrote a response to what was in my window, without spotting your name at the top.

@PaulR said:

Stephen - this business about promises pales into insignificance when you look at things as a whole. OK - I could concede it's a bit naughty - oh dear - can you ever forgive my type of thing. OK Steve - you win. Let's move on from that. It's business. It's Chinatown.

The company would probably like to stay in business and grow over time - yes?
We like VSL and their products - yes?
We have enjoyed over time high levels of service from them - yes?
We want them to have a future - yes?

While I couldn't agree more with what you say about VSL, its products, services and its customers' hopes for its future, I have to disagree with the idea that, in any contractual agreement - - written or implied, either party is free to change the terms of the contract whenever it suits them. (Try that with your credit card company!)

A company can be great, make great products, offer great service, have idealistic intentions at its core and still make flawed, self-defeating decisions. It isn't helpful to the survival of a company if those who perceive that it has made a poor decision, stay silent. If you were to perceive a friend engaged in what you thought to be predictably self-defeating behavior, would you not risk his or her anger, by pointing out what you perceive? 

@stevesong said:

A company can be great, make great products, offer great service, have idealistic intentions at its core and still make flawed, self-defeating decisions. I

@stevesong said:

A company can be great, make great products, offer great service, have idealistic intentions at its core and still make flawed, self-defeating decisions. It isn't helpful to the survival of a company if those who perceive that it has made a poor decision, stay silent. If you were to perceive a friend engaged in what you thought to be predictably self-defeating behavior, would you not risk his or her anger, by pointing out what you perceive? 

@DG said:

Anything else is more akin to the mob mentality, and is not something that I would want to be associated with.

 

DG

@PaulR said:

This thread - Fred - is not really about insurance or assurance. This thread is about people wanting a thing right now and not having enough money concurrent with imminent purchase. It's about 'wants' and not 'needs' - we talked on this years ago if I remember correctly.

So here's an idea.  I am certain I don't know what I'm talking about, but whatever....

Maybe there's a price cut coming after July 15 (or whatever the cutoff date is) that exceeds the discount you'd get under the current pricing.  

@PaulR said:

Dishonesty? I assume you have a bank account do you? Do you go to your bank and tell them they are a bunch of assholes and totally dishonest?

Frequently!! I've taken them up on numerous counts and won on many.

I'm giving up on this argument, because you completely refuse to see my point. I don't doubt that other firms behave absolutely dreadfully. When they do so in breach of contract then yes I call them on it. When they've had the forsight (and banks fall into this category) to mention in their contract that they can alter clauses with sufficient notice, then there's not a lot you can do. Unfortunately VSL didn't mention ever changing their 'lifetime' promise - they fall into the category of firms I would usually be calling and ranting at.

And it's all very well pointing out that most firms behave with even less concern for their customers, but VSL aren't most firms, and I wouldn't want them to be. I would hate to have to think of them in the way I do British Gas or the Labour party. Which is why I'd like them to explain.

And yes I did try to open a private dialogue with them, but they ignored that too.