vet said:
Does the term say "not to be used in conjunction with any other offer" or 'thou shalt be in one promo at a time'??
I actally agree with
vet (I never thought I'd say that...). If they have brought out a new promo that overlaps with an existing promo, then they would need to include wording in the T&C's to specifically include or exclude piggybacking with the other promo's. As this hasn't happened, they won't have a leg to stand on with the authorities if they subsequently deny the additional point earning (and would be a retrograde step for them given the better T&C's they produced for the subsequent BP and Colorado promo's).
I think this new offer has been born, in part, from the negative publicity and loss of goodwill from (I would suspect) a growing number of complaints involving the BFSO.
Looking at
oz_mark's
post listing the names of all the current promo's, I find it surprising that they would use the same words for the first three promo's - unless they are "piggybacking" these promo's for those that:
1. Got the original card but didn't register initially (trying to re-engage them to using their Amex card this Xmas)
2. Didn't get a card (in the first mailing), and given the furore Amex created with lots of unhappy people being told about the promo, ringing up and not being allowed to register after whatever date it was canned (trying to re-engage them)
3. People who registered/rang up expecting uncapped offer, but given capped promo - trying to placate those cardholders from instituting further action
Although I haven't received the new promo postcard (yet...
), I probably don't expect to :shock:.
However, the cynic in me thinks this new promo has the opportunity for a right royal stuff up, which is quite possible with Amex's recent history
...