明買明賣?
![]() |
![]() |
兩名黑衫女子,兩種道歉,兩個只能活一個,怎麼選? 我撐阿珍,理由簡單,明買明賣,觀乎旅遊車內鴉雀無聲,便知團友自知理虧,不可能國內同胞一來香港便學會罵不還口,當中必有內情。鏡頭裏的阿珍思路清晰,語調誠懇,無論是真的為討回公道,還是要保住飯碗,她的道歉,OK收貨!順帶稱讚謝偉俊,帶來balancing voice,讓事件兩邊看得真。 反觀八達通的陳總裁,PR大災難,除了專業造型(Nel Nel 上身:那把捲髮極富層次感,讚!),第一罪交易非明買明賣(持卡人沒say no不代表say yes),第二罪前言不對後語,最worst第三罪乃道歉欠heart。那邊阿珍應該保得住導遊牌,這邊陳CEO恐怕最後要丟官。 |


持卡人沒say no不代表say yes <--- Are you sure?
The fact that you have used the card implies that you have agreed to their terms. If you do not agree to their terms, you should not use the card and use cash instead. This is also a case of 明買明賣, no? (.... provided you have access to and have bothered to read the terms. HAHA)
Reply to this
打個譬如,乾洗店張單後面啲免責條款,商鋪唔可以話啲terms印嗮喺度,你肯攞衫嚟洗,就assume個客同意。呢點消委會都有教過公衆要保障自己。
「八達通日日賞」係要用戶自願登記參加,所以算。但係普通八達通嘅性質就好唔同,又廣泛又幾乎接近民生必需品層面,大股東又係政府,好難講得通係明買明賣。
做得最理想,應該主動問客攞consent。退而求其次,至少有個check box俾人indicate如果唔想資料轉移可以opt out。
Reply to this