How many millions of friends, relatives and other acquaintances, scattered across the country, in all the over-17 demographics, do you actually have to be able to even surmise that nobody over 17 goes to the movies anymore?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Dunkin' Donuts sued over "butter substitute"
- Thread starter MarcB
- Start date
How many millions of friends, relatives and other acquaintances, scattered across the country, in all the over-17 demographics, do you actually have to be able to even surmise that nobody over 17 goes to the movies anymore?
S
Sammy Reed
Guest
This has gone on almost one whole page outside the topic of the thread.
Anyway - I heard a stand-up comic in the early-90's talk about a guy going to a restaurant and the person behind the counter asked "What else do you want?" and the guy said "Coke."
"What kind of Coke?"
"Orange."
Anyway - I heard a stand-up comic in the early-90's talk about a guy going to a restaurant and the person behind the counter asked "What else do you want?" and the guy said "Coke."
"What kind of Coke?"
"Orange."
The DD suit "Butter VS Substitute" (or, more accurately "Disclosure") was settled today in MA. Plaintiff received $500, his lawyer $90,000 and DD has to actually put real butter on its products for at least one year. They then must disclose either butter or "vegetable spread".
DD did charge extra for real butter and that was the basis for the plaintiff's case. He didn't get what he paid for.
The reasons DD gave for substituting "vegetable spread" was that butter, if left out, can become rancid - which is true but only if left out more than several days and if unsalted (salted butter can last longer).
Personally, I dislike DD. Their coffee isn't anything to write home about and their glazed donuts have no glaze a few minutes after purchase. Much better products, and less expensive, at my local grocery store bakery.
DD did charge extra for real butter and that was the basis for the plaintiff's case. He didn't get what he paid for.
The reasons DD gave for substituting "vegetable spread" was that butter, if left out, can become rancid - which is true but only if left out more than several days and if unsalted (salted butter can last longer).
Personally, I dislike DD. Their coffee isn't anything to write home about and their glazed donuts have no glaze a few minutes after purchase. Much better products, and less expensive, at my local grocery store bakery.
So why is the plaintiff only getting $500 and the lawyer is getting $90,000??? Even if the case was legit, this sounds like the lawyer was setting this up to make money for himself. It's a perfect example of what's wrong with the legal system in the US. 
So why is the plaintiff only getting $500 and the lawyer is getting $90,000??? Even if the case was legit, this sounds like the lawyer was setting this up to make money for himself. It's a perfect example of what's wrong with the legal system in the US.
The answer given in the article was that the plaintiff wasn't interested in money but wanted only to change the business to be honest.
But still the lawyer shouldn't be allowed to make $90,000 off of it.
How does this "Of all my friends, relatives and other acquaintances I know of exactly one couple who are regular movie goers." turn into this "How many millions of friends, relatives and other acquaintances, scattered across the country, in all the over-17 demographics, do you actually have to be able to even surmise that nobody over 17 goes to the movies anymore?"
Do you actually read the written word or was it that impossible to understand?
I mentioned friends, relatives and acquaintances - virtually all adults and mostly older adults. I don't hang out with 17-year olds. The crowds I see at the theaters these days are overwhelmingly young (probably under 30ish) with the single exception of the $3 theater on Tuesdays which is the senior special day. It is never near full though.
I don't recall whether it was a jury trial or judge-only but apparently whoever oversees the award thought it was worth the money. The plaintiff got what he wanted - a change of behavior - and the lawyer representing him won his case. There was no mention of what expenses the lawyer entailed but at several hundred dollars per hour it adds up quickly. Add some more money for bringing in witnesses and it doesn't take too long to rack up a substantial bill.
Last time I looked lawyers were independent businesses and could charge market rate or more if warranted.
- Status