Sprint's Samsung Exclaim and HTC Snap in Radio Shacks this week?

[Thanks, anonymous tipster]
RadioShack posts

"Due to inventory constraints on the June 6 launch date, not all stores will be able to carry the Palm Pre at launch. To make sure we get the maximum advertising and brand benefit while still having enough inventory to meet the expected demand, we have selected key markets to receive the device at launch."Here's the best part, though: Radio Shack locations not receiving the phone on the 6th are being encouraged to offer the Instinct S30 as an alternative. Look, the S30's a fine phone for what it is (we suppose), but something tells us that no one -- and we mean no one -- is cross-shopping it with the Pre.
Nothing quite like a four- or five-figure phone bill to break your spirit, and in many circumstances, we can understand why your first reaction after opening such a bill might be "I'll sue the pants off of these people." Of course, contracts are pretty well ironclad thanks to the generations of overpaid lawyers that have perfected them over the years, and generally speaking, you've got to lie in the bed you've made -- but occasionally, a situation develops that's genuinely bogus. This one has been brewing for a while, actually, ever since AT&T and others decided to drop their unlimited data plans down to a 5GB cap: unexpected overage. A buyer of one of those $99 Aspire Ones bundled with an AT&T contract at Radio Shack got a shock of a bill after blowing past her 5GB cap, and while the individual should've certainly done a better job of understanding that the cap existed, shouldn't the carriers be shutting off data by default when you hit 5GB, or after just a very small amount of overage has developed? At any rate, she's suing AT&T and Radio Shack for her troubles -- and it looks like she's seeking class-action status -- so we'd love to see this spur companies into more proactively preventing nasty bills from developing in the first place.
Cellphone retailer Inphonic, which runs RadioShack's and Wirefly's online phone e-shops and has recently penned an agreement with Amazon to do the same, has been sued by Washington D.C.'s Attorney General for offering rebates requiring "onerous procedures" to fulfill. As we all know, rebates are often a boon for retailers and manufacturers because many buyers forget or don't care to fill out and mail the required forms, but it seems Inphonic has taken their rebate scam game to the next level, racking up over 2,000 complaints in the past three years. Besides unhelpful customer service representatives or automated messages (we usually have a rough time telling the difference), Inphonic is accused of making the terms of some of their rebates impossible to meet, like requiring 120 days of continuous phone activation on a rebate that expires in less than 120 days. "Any time you're dealing with millions of customers, as we are, there are going to be occasional concerns," says Inphonic's senior VP; we're assuming that by "occasional" he means "virtually anyone who attempts to claim a rebate from us."





