Just head on Sunrise this morning that GU is trying to stop people
bringing in food not purchased at their cinema.

Wasn't this already tried by a BCC or GU in the last few years, and it
was sound to be not legal to do so?

Has anyone had any recent experiences with being stopped bringing in
their own stuff?

--
Trev

"I can't believe you pissed on my taco"

VizPoets Filmmakers - http://www.vizpoets.com
Newsgroup stats - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/newsgroupstats/

From:	Chris
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sat, 8 Jan 2005 23:13:44 +1100

The only thing Greater Union cinemas will achieved is to turn more and more
movie goers away.

From:	ML
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 16 Jan 2005 07:50:28 GMT

> The only thing Greater Union cinemas will achieved is to turn more and
> more
> movie goers away.

And because they weren't purchasing at the candy bar - they wouldn't be that
profitable to keep anyway.

--
main.luser [ML]

Online DVD Rentals
http://tinyurl.com/fbax

From:	Wally
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:01:54 +1100

Department of Consumer Protection deputy commissioner Anne Driscoll said
cinemas were entitled to ban food and drink not bought from them as part
of their entry terms and conditions.

Consumers took their own food and drink because it was usually cheaper
or the cinema's range was not wide enough.

"Consumers who are upset about the restriction in choice are generally
advised to shop around and consider other venues," Ms Driscoll said.

http://www.thewest.com.au/20050106/news/general/tw-news-general-home-sto130191.html

From:	Sylvia Else
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:43:56 +1100

Wally wrote:
>
> Department of Consumer Protection deputy commissioner Anne Driscoll said
> cinemas were entitled to ban food and drink not bought from them as part
> of their entry terms and conditions.
>
> Consumers took their own food and drink because it was usually cheaper
> or the cinema's range was not wide enough.
>
> "Consumers who are upset about the restriction in choice are generally
> advised to shop around and consider other venues," Ms Driscoll said.
>
> http://www.thewest.com.au/20050106/news/general/tw-news-general-home-sto130191.html
>

Better still, do everyone a favour, and don't eat or drink there.

Sylvia.

From:	Bertie the Bunyip
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	9 Jan 2005 03:52:02 GMT

Sylvia Else
sednews:41DF812C.3030907@not.at.this.address:

>
>
> Wally wrote:
>>
>> Department of Consumer Protection deputy commissioner Anne Driscoll
>> said cinemas were entitled to ban food and drink not bought from them
>> as part of their entry terms and conditions.
>>
>> Consumers took their own food and drink because it was usually
>> cheaper or the cinema's range was not wide enough.
>>
>> "Consumers who are upset about the restriction in choice are
>> generally advised to shop around and consider other venues," Ms
>> Driscoll said.
>>
>> http://www.thewest.com.au/20050106/news/general/tw-news-general-home-s
>> to130191.html
>>
>
> Better still, do everyone a favour, and don't eat or drink there.
>

Sez Sylvia Else, net-nazi..

Berti e

From:	John Tserkezis
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sat, 08 Jan 2005 18:17:30 +1100

Sylvia Else wrote:

>> http://www.thewest.com.au/20050106/news/general/tw-news-general-home-sto130191.html

> Better still, do everyone a favour, and don't eat or drink there.

You can do one better. Vote with your wallet and don't view there either.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622

From:	ant
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 9 Jan 2005 13:30:47 +1100

From:	Brett McConnie
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 09:09:31 GMT

"ant" wrote in message
news:34bjaoF44jmghU1@individual.net...
> When a cinema bans all gulping crackling and slushing of food at the
> pictures, I'll go back to watching films in cinemas. It's bloody horrible
> the way people carry on.

It can be quite disgraceful. My personal view is that you don't go to a
restaurant to see a movie so why go to a cinema to eat?
--
"How's it goin' royal ugly dudes?"

From:	DAVO
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Wed, 12 Jan 2005 21:45:26 GMT

"John Tserkezis" wrote in message
news:41df87b3$0$3844$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Sylvia Else wrote:
>
> >>
http://www.thewest.com.au/20050106/news/general/tw-news-general-home-sto130191.html
>
> > Better still, do everyone a favour, and don't eat or drink there.
>
> You can do one better. Vote with your wallet and don't view there
either.
> --
> Linux Registered User # 302622

I agree 100%. I have since stopped attending and also pulled my advertising
off ($550 per month) in protest at the local cinemas here. I have also made
it public why! Now if everybody did the same something would change. I mean
I know how much they pay for a packet of Fantlales say, yet they sell them
for $4.00. The biggest rip-off is popcorn. We pay $6.60 for the largest box
of it and it would cost no more than 10cents worth of corn and butter to
produce it. Ok so there is the cost of the box, lease on the oven, and
power. Total cost 20cents. The next rip-off is the soft drinks, $3.80 for a
Pepsi and because it's post-mix, cost is around 20cents. All we ask for is a
fair go.

DAVO

From:	Cyber Trekker
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sat, 08 Jan 2005 07:56:54 GMT

John Tserkezis wrote:

> Sylvia Else wrote:
>
>>>
http://www.thewest.com.au/20050106/news/general/tw-news-general-home-sto130191.html
>
>> Better still, do everyone a favour, and don't eat or drink there.
>
> You can do one better. Vote with your wallet and don't view there
> either.

Good on you, mate! At least there's someone with some sense and perspective.

Don't you think the extreme capitalism that we have in today's world has
distorted people's ability to think clearly and make what should be
rational decisions? It's a pity.

From:	Sylvia Else
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sat, 08 Jan 2005 19:41:27 +1100

Cyber Trekker wrote:
> John Tserkezis wrote:
>
>
>>Sylvia Else wrote:
>>
>>
> http://www.thewest.com.au/20050106/news/general/tw-news-general-home-sto130191.html
>
>>>Better still, do everyone a favour, and don't eat or drink there.
>>
>> You can do one better. Vote with your wallet and don't view there
>> either.
>
>
> Good on you, mate! At least there's someone with some sense and perspective.
>
> Don't you think the extreme capitalism that we have in today's world has
> distorted people's ability to think clearly and make what should be
> rational decisions? It's a pity.

On that level, the issue is whether the revenue lost as a result of
people deciding not to go at all is offset by the extra revenue gained
from the rest as a result of them buying food or drink rather then
bringing it.

I wouldn't want to make a call on how that pans out.

Sylvia.

From:	Chuk
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:04:05 +1100

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 07:56:54 GMT, Cyber Trekker
wrote:

>John Tserkezis wrote:
>
>> Sylvia Else wrote:
>>
>>>>
>http://www.thewest.com.au/20050106/news/general/tw-news-general-home-sto130191.html
>>
>>> Better still, do everyone a favour, and don't eat or drink there.
>>
>> You can do one better. Vote with your wallet and don't view there
>> either.
>
>Good on you, mate! At least there's someone with some sense and perspective.
>
>Don't you think the extreme capitalism that we have in today's world has
>distorted people's ability to think clearly and make what should be
>rational decisions? It's a pity.

Just to put a slightly different perspective on this, my relatives
from Norway were absolutely staggered to see that we can take our own
wine to a Restaurant. They just couldn't see how that could possibly
be tolerated.

"Will they let you bring your own food too?" was the question I got.

And I know there have ben hassles in cases where people wanted to take
their own Birthday cakes to a restaurant.

From:	Wally
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 09 Jan 2005 10:31:23 +1100

Chuk wrote:

>
> "Will they let you bring your own food too?" was the question I got.
>

Only if it is elk.

From:	SyVideoGuy
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 9 Jan 2005 19:54:15 +1000

From:	Wally
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 09 Jan 2005 21:36:31 +1100

SyVideoGuy wrote:
> "John Tserkezis" wrote in message
> news:41df87b3$0$3844$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
>>Sylvia Else wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>http://www.thewest.com.au/20050106/news/general/tw-news-general-home-sto130191.html
>>
>>>Better still, do everyone a favour, and don't eat or drink there.
>>
>> You can do one better. Vote with your wallet and don't view there
>>either.
>>--
>>Linux Registered User # 302622
>>
>
>
> I guess the point is they have a monoply (cinemas in general at least) , and
> if you want to go to and see the 'latest' movie you have to go to the
> cinema. The world has gone truly mad if I cant take a bottle of water into
> the cinema with me !
>
> Anyone know the legalities behind all this? I know there are some keen legal
> minds on here.
>
>

According to the WA consumer affairs commissioner; tough

From:	Onelia Herriot
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 9 Jan 2005 22:15:39 +1100

"SyVideoGuy" wrote in message
news:34cdaiF48p7enU1@individual.net...
>
> "John Tserkezis" wrote in message
> news:41df87b3$0$3844$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>> Sylvia Else wrote:
>>
>>>> http://www.thewest.com.au/20050106/news/general/tw-news-general-home-sto130191.html
>>
>>> Better still, do everyone a favour, and don't eat or drink there.
>>
>> You can do one better. Vote with your wallet and don't view there
>> either.
>> --
>> Linux Registered User # 302622
>
> I guess the point is they have a monoply (cinemas in general at least) ,
> and if you want to go to and see the 'latest' movie you have to go to the
> cinema.

Remember we are in Australia. The "latest" movie has already been seen by
most of teh world and VERy cheap though inferior copies are available
everywhere. Why spend $30 pp (ticket and snacks) when you can get a copy for
only $5 and eat whatever you like!

From:	SyVideoGuy
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 9 Jan 2005 22:01:00 +1000

"Onelia Herriot" wrote in message
news:41e11260$0$21120$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> "SyVideoGuy" wrote in message
> news:34cdaiF48p7enU1@individual.net...
>>
>> "John Tserkezis" wrote in message
>> news:41df87b3$0$3844$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>> Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>
>>>>> http://www.thewest.com.au/20050106/news/general/tw-news-general-home-sto130191.html
>>>
>>>> Better still, do everyone a favour, and don't eat or drink there.
>>>
>>> You can do one better. Vote with your wallet and don't view there
>>> either.
>>> --
>>> Linux Registered User # 302622
>>
>> I guess the point is they have a monoply (cinemas in general at least) ,
>> and if you want to go to and see the 'latest' movie you have to go to the
>> cinema.
>
> Remember we are in Australia. The "latest" movie has already been seen by
> most of teh world and VERy cheap though inferior copies are available
> everywhere. Why spend $30 pp (ticket and snacks) when you can get a copy
> for only $5 and eat whatever you like!
>
mmm thought this was a legal question here?

From:	Peter
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 09 Jan 2005 12:34:22 GMT

In article <34cdaiF48p7enU1@individual.net>, SyVideoGuy
wrote:

> I guess the point is they have a monoply (cinemas in general at least) , and
> if you want to go to and see the 'latest' movie you have to go to the
> cinema. The world has gone truly mad if I cant take a bottle of water into
> the cinema with me !
>
> Anyone know the legalities behind all this? I know there are some keen legal
> minds on here.

While technically legal, the question would be where the T&C are
displayed before purchase of the ticket. If they are at entry the
contract has already been formed and it's tough shit.

Next time I see a movie I'm going to look and make a point of it.

From:	Madrid
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:02:45 +1100

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 12:34:22 +0000, Peter wrote:

> In article <34cdaiF48p7enU1@individual.net>, SyVideoGuy
> wrote:
>
>> I guess the point is they have a monoply (cinemas in general at least)
>> , and if you want to go to and see the 'latest' movie you have to go to
>> the cinema. The world has gone truly mad if I cant take a bottle of
>> water into the cinema with me !
>>
>> Anyone know the legalities behind all this? I know there are some keen
>> legal minds on here.
>
> While technically legal, the question would be where the T&C are
> displayed before purchase of the ticket. If they are at entry the
> contract has already been formed and it's tough shit.
>
>
> Next time I see a movie I'm going to look and make a point of it.

If you must. But please keep it zipped to avoid embarrassing yourself.

From:	Onelia Herriot
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:30:58 +1100

"Peter" wrote in message
news:090120052301233044%spamfromnewsgroups@chatomatic.net...
> In article <34cdaiF48p7enU1@individual.net>, SyVideoGuy
> wrote:
>
>> I guess the point is they have a monoply (cinemas in general at least) ,
>> and
>> if you want to go to and see the 'latest' movie you have to go to the
>> cinema. The world has gone truly mad if I cant take a bottle of water
>> into
>> the cinema with me !
>>
>> Anyone know the legalities behind all this? I know there are some keen
>> legal
>> minds on here.
>
> While technically legal, the question would be where the T&C are
> displayed before purchase of the ticket. If they are at entry the
> contract has already been formed and it's tough shit.
>
The terms and conditions at all three in my local area are where you present
your ticket to enter therefore you are not entering the contract with a full
knowledge of the conditions (ie they SHOULD be where you purchase the
ticket)

From:	ant
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Tue, 11 Jan 2005 12:33:26 +1100

"Onelia Herriot" wrote in message
news:41e24b58$0$12240$5a62ac22@per-
> The terms and conditions at all three in my local area are where you
> present your ticket to enter therefore you are not entering the contract
> with a full knowledge of the conditions (ie they SHOULD be where you
> purchase the ticket)

It's no good printing the terms on the ticket. You don't get your hands on
the ticket, and those terms, until you've purchased it. you can't be said
to have agreed to terms you only had access to after purchase.

ant

From:	Peter
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Thu, 13 Jan 2005 00:41:47 GMT

In article <34gon6F4au4d4U1@individual.net>, ant
wrote:

> "Onelia Herriot" wrote in message
> news:41e24b58$0$12240$5a62ac22@per-
> > The terms and conditions at all three in my local area are where you
> > present your ticket to enter therefore you are not entering the contract
> > with a full knowledge of the conditions (ie they SHOULD be where you
> > purchase the ticket)
>
> It's no good printing the terms on the ticket. You don't get your hands on
> the ticket, and those terms, until you've purchased it. you can't be said
> to have agreed to terms you only had access to after purchase.

There is a case that states that conditions on the back of a reciept or
ticket is not valid.

From:	Brissie
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Tue, 11 Jan 2005 11:57:19 +1000

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 12:33:26 +1100, "ant"
wrote:

>
>"Onelia Herriot" wrote in message
>news:41e24b58$0$12240$5a62ac22@per-
>> The terms and conditions at all three in my local area are where you
>> present your ticket to enter therefore you are not entering the contract
>> with a full knowledge of the conditions (ie they SHOULD be where you
>> purchase the ticket)
>
>It's no good printing the terms on the ticket. You don't get your hands on
>the ticket, and those terms, until you've purchased it. you can't be said
>to have agreed to terms you only had access to after purchase.

And you can return it with a full refund if you disagree with the
terms.

From:	Ken Oaf
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sat, 08 Jan 2005 18:48:06 +1100

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:01:54 +1100, Wally wrote:

>
> Department of Consumer Protection deputy commissioner Anne Driscoll said
> cinemas were entitled to ban food and drink not bought from them as part
> of their entry terms and conditions.
>
> Consumers took their own food and drink because it was usually cheaper
> or the cinema's range was not wide enough.
>
> "Consumers who are upset about the restriction in choice are generally
> advised to shop around and consider other venues," Ms Driscoll said.

If a person can't go without food and drink for a couple of hours then I would
suggest he or she see a doctor.

From:	quietguy
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sat, 08 Jan 2005 22:10:18 +1100

Ken it is not about 'cant go without', it is that for kids having popcorn or
sweets and a drink are part of the total 'going to the movies' experience. They
enjoy it.

But like many others, if I take a couple of kids to the movies I resent having
pay ridiculous prices for food and drink - a bottle of softdrink fro the
supermarket at 90c and a bag of lollys also from the s/market make the outing
affordable.

While it is certainly something I certainly wouldn't do or advocate, I bet there
will be a lot of angry young guys who will slash seats and things like that to
get even if they are pevented from bringing their own stuff in to the theatre.
In the long run it will probably cost management more through implementing this
ban than they would have lost in profits without it.

David

Ken Oaf wrote:

>
> If a person can't go without food and drink for a couple of hours then I would
> suggest he or she see a doctor.

From:	Highlandish
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sat, 8 Jan 2005 23:24:21 +1100

Quoth The Raven "quietguy " in
41DFBF97.B5A3F08B@REMOVE-TO-REPLYoptusnet.com.au
> Ken it is not about 'cant go without', it is that for kids having
> popcorn or sweets and a drink are part of the total 'going to the
> movies' experience. They enjoy it.
>
> But like many others, if I take a couple of kids to the movies I resent
> having pay ridiculous prices for food and drink - a bottle of softdrink
> fro the supermarket at 90c and a bag of lollys also from the s/market
> make the outing affordable.
>
> While it is certainly something I certainly wouldn't do or advocate, I
> bet there will be a lot of angry young guys who will slash seats and
> things like that to get even if they are pevented from bringing their
> own stuff in to the theatre. In the long run it will probably cost
> management more through implementing this ban than they would have lost
> in profits without it.
>
> David

the cinemas are also attempting to keep the cleaning time and bill down by
providing only foods wrapped in manageable packaging and foodstuffs that
wont be too hard to clean, KFC for instance would make a greasy mess, while
other foodstuff supplied by the cinema would only be sticky.
--
Take out the _CURSEING to reply to me

"The artist is nothing without the gift, but the gift is nothing without
work." - Emile Zola (1840-1902)

From:	John Tserkezis
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 09 Jan 2005 01:39:58 +1100

Highlandish wrote:

> the cinemas are also attempting to keep the cleaning time and bill down by
> providing only foods wrapped in manageable packaging and foodstuffs that
> wont be too hard to clean, KFC for instance would make a greasy mess,

Most if not all cinemas have policies in place that disallow hot food or drinks.
Other (non-Greater Union) cinema chains do not allow hot food and/or drinks,
but do not specifically disallow externally purchased cold food and drinks.

> while other foodstuff supplied by the cinema would only be sticky.

You mean cinema floors are sticky for some OTHER reason?
--
Linux Registered User # 302622

From:	JohnP
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 9 Jan 2005 12:20:49 +1030

"John Tserkezis" wrote in message
news:41dfef66$0$16979$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Highlandish wrote:
>
> > the cinemas are also attempting to keep the cleaning time and bill down by
> > providing only foods wrapped in manageable packaging and foodstuffs that
> > wont be too hard to clean, KFC for instance would make a greasy mess,
>
> Most if not all cinemas have policies in place that disallow hot food or drinks.
> Other (non-Greater Union) cinema chains do not allow hot food and/or drinks,
> but do not specifically disallow externally purchased cold food and drinks.

Hoyt's at Tea Tree Plaza (and I assume others) made the brilliant alliance with Pizza Haven and you could
actually buy 6" pizza from over the candy bar! Whatever fvckwit shat that brain fart out in a directors
meeting should have been shot. Thankfully it died the woodchuck death it deserved. Imagine trying to focus
on a movie in an other wise stale air theatre and some jerk rolls in with his mates all sprouting mini
supreme. JFC! To top it off the other day Marian Megaplex (Greater Union) allowed idiots in with hot subways.
The two couples all looked the same round and totally inconsiderate when they began their picnic in the
movies!

> > while other foodstuff supplied by the cinema would only be sticky.
>
> You mean cinema floors are sticky for some OTHER reason?

ewwwwwwww

> Linux Registered User # 302622

From:	zaphy
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 09 Jan 2005 12:02:14 +1000

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 12:20:49 +1030, "JohnP"
unleashed:

>Hoyt's at Tea Tree Plaza (and I assume others) made the brilliant alliance with Pizza Haven and you could
>actually buy 6" pizza from over the candy bar! Whatever fvckwit shat that brain fart out in a directors
>meeting should have been shot. Thankfully it died the woodchuck death it deserved. Imagine trying to focus
>on a movie in an other wise stale air theatre and some jerk rolls in with his mates all sprouting mini
>supreme.

Wouldn't bother me, the only problem is the smell would make me
hungry! At least you can eat pizza relatively quietly..

--
zaphy

From:	ant
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 9 Jan 2005 13:34:06 +1100

"zaphy" wrote in message
> Wouldn't bother me, the only problem is the smell would make me
> hungry! At least you can eat pizza relatively quietly..

Not the way people eat nowadays. Fill mouth with food. Put some more in.
Chew with mouth open. Talk while displaying contents of mouth to as many as
possible. Repeat. YUCK.

ant

From:	Highlandish
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 9 Jan 2005 14:15:44 +1100

Quoth The Raven "ant " in
34bjh0F47vf4eU1@individual.net
> "zaphy" wrote in message
>> Wouldn't bother me, the only problem is the smell would make me
>> hungry! At least you can eat pizza relatively quietly..
>
> Not the way people eat nowadays. Fill mouth with food. Put some more in.
> Chew with mouth open. Talk while displaying contents of mouth to as
> many as possible. Repeat. YUCK.
>
> ant

the lights are out, who can see?

--
Take out the _CURSEING to reply to me

"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)

From:	JohnP
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Thu, 13 Jan 2005 17:10:23 +1030

"Highlandish" wrote in message news:34c7btF49uf4mU1@individual.net...
> Quoth The Raven "ant " in
> 34bjh0F47vf4eU1@individual.net
> > "zaphy" wrote in message
> >> Wouldn't bother me, the only problem is the smell would make me
> >> hungry! At least you can eat pizza relatively quietly..
> >
> > Not the way people eat nowadays. Fill mouth with food. Put some more in.
> > Chew with mouth open. Talk while displaying contents of mouth to as
> > many as possible. Repeat. YUCK.
> >
> > ant
>
> the lights are out, who can see?
>
.....there is still the sound. These people were never taught to eat with their mouths closed.

From:	SyVideoGuy
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 9 Jan 2005 20:00:51 +1000

"JohnP" wrote in message
news:tYqdnXD66NRjEH3cRVn-vw@giganews.com...
>
> "John Tserkezis" wrote in message
> news:41dfef66$0$16979$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>> Highlandish wrote:
>>
>> > the cinemas are also attempting to keep the cleaning time and bill down
>> > by
>> > providing only foods wrapped in manageable packaging and foodstuffs
>> > that
>> > wont be too hard to clean, KFC for instance would make a greasy mess,
>>
>> Most if not all cinemas have policies in place that disallow hot food
>> or drinks.
>> Other (non-Greater Union) cinema chains do not allow hot food and/or
>> drinks,
>> but do not specifically disallow externally purchased cold food and
>> drinks.
>
> Hoyt's at Tea Tree Plaza (and I assume others) made the brilliant alliance
> with Pizza Haven and you could
> actually buy 6" pizza from over the candy bar! Whatever fvckwit shat that
> brain fart out in a directors
> meeting should have been shot. Thankfully it died the woodchuck death it
> deserved. Imagine trying to focus
> on a movie in an other wise stale air theatre and some jerk rolls in with
> his mates all sprouting mini
> supreme. JFC! To top it off the other day Marian Megaplex (Greater Union)
> allowed idiots in with hot subways.
> The two couples all looked the same round and totally inconsiderate when
> they began their picnic in the
> movies!
>
Just to complicate it a bit, I once bought "Nachos" in the gold cinema in
Brisbane, from the cinema itself ! BTW it is virtually impossible to eat
nachos in the dark whilst wearing a white shirt ! Not one of my best
decisions !

From:	ML
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 16 Jan 2005 07:48:42 GMT

> Just to complicate it a bit, I once bought "Nachos" in the gold cinema in
> Brisbane, from the cinema itself ! BTW it is virtually impossible to eat
> nachos in the dark whilst wearing a white shirt ! Not one of my best
> decisions !

I reckon those Nachos were impossible. I couldn't tell what I was digging my
hands into when lounged back.

--
main.luser [ML]

Online DVD Rentals
http://tinyurl.com/fbax

From:	Brissie
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 09 Jan 2005 14:59:44 +1000

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 22:10:18 +1100, quietguy

wrote:

>Ken it is not about 'cant go without', it is that for kids having popcorn or
>sweets and a drink are part of the total 'going to the movies' experience. They
>enjoy it.

You can't buy hot popcorn from anywhere else. So if popcorn is part of
the movie experience they have to buy it from the cinema always

>While it is certainly something I certainly wouldn't do or advocate, I bet there
>will be a lot of angry young guys who will slash seats and things like that to
>get even if they are pevented from bringing their own stuff in to the theatre.

Yes they'll get a criminal record as payback Oo:|

There are security cameras you know

>In the long run it will probably cost management more through implementing this
>ban than they would have lost in profits without it.

From:	Bruce Murphy
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	09 Jan 2005 23:38:30 +0800

Brissie writes:

> >violation of the agreement made (pay money to watch a movie, don't get
> >let in), then things get altogether more interesting.
>
> They aren't in violation though. When the customer bought the ticket
> they agreed to the terms

There is a long case history illustrating that implicit agreements,
not formally brought to the attention of the parties and agreed to,
are in fact without value.

Do you believe that if there was a sign behind the ticket counter that
said "Management reserves the right to rape cute theatregoers of
either ", that this would suddenly make this legal? Are you, in
short, a lunatic?

B>

From:	Brissie
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 10:57:09 +1000

On 09 Jan 2005 23:38:30 +0800, Bruce Murphy
wrote:

>Brissie writes:
>
>> >violation of the agreement made (pay money to watch a movie, don't get
>> >let in), then things get altogether more interesting.
>>
>> They aren't in violation though. When the customer bought the ticket
>> they agreed to the terms
>
>There is a long case history illustrating that implicit agreements,
>not formally brought to the attention of the parties and agreed to,
>are in fact without value.

They are brought attention to the public though. There are signs. So
unless they can't read they agree

>Do you believe that if there was a sign behind the ticket counter that
>said "Management reserves the right to rape cute theatregoers of
>either ", that this would suddenly make this legal? Are you, in
>short, a lunatic?

Rape is a crime you lunatic

From:	ant
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:00:30 +1100

"Brissie" wrote in message

> Rape is a crime you lunatic

So is stealing food!

ant

From:	Brissie
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:41:04 +1000

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:00:30 +1100, "ant"
wrote:

>"Brissie" wrote in message
>
>> Rape is a crime you lunatic
>
>So is stealing food!

Confiscating is not the same as stealing.

From:	atec
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:02:20 +1000

Brissie wrote:
>
> On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:00:30 +1100, "ant"
> wrote:
>
> >"Brissie" wrote in message
> >
> >> Rape is a crime you lunatic
> >
> >So is stealing food!
>
> Confiscating is not the same as stealing.
differing name same shiite.

From:	John Tserkezis
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:37:53 +1100

atec wrote:

>>>So is stealing food!

>>Confiscating is not the same as stealing.

> differing name same shiite.

The way they're likely to handle this is to ask you to dispose the
food/drinks you bought into the bins just outside, just before entering the cinema.

They are not confiscating the food, and you are "voluntarily" disposing or
otherwise giving your property away.

--
Linux Registered User # 302622

From:	atec
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:48:24 +1000

John Tserkezis wrote:
>
> atec wrote:
>
> >>>So is stealing food!
>
> >>Confiscating is not the same as stealing.
>
> > differing name same shiite.
>
> The way they're likely to handle this is to ask you to dispose the
> food/drinks you bought into the bins just outside, just before entering the cinema.
>
> They are not confiscating the food, and you are "voluntarily" disposing or
> otherwise giving your property away.
and when you say no ? ... gets interesting ?
>
> --
> Linux Registered User # 302622

From:	John Tserkezis
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:36:00 +1100

atec wrote:

>> They are not confiscating the food, and you are "voluntarily" disposing or
>> otherwise giving your property away.

> and when you say no ? ... gets interesting ?

They have right to refuse you entry.

The fact you have purchased a ticket does not give you right to operate
contrary to their terms and conditions of entry.

The interesting part might come if they don't let you know what those terms
and conditions are.

Don't quote me on this, but from memory, when it comes to the 'fine print',
though they may be obliged, they are not _required_ to list all terms apon
purchase of ticket, however, they ARE required to disclose said terms if the
customer asks.

I haven't been a customer for several years, they may very well list their
terms on the back of the ticket. Dunno. Can anyone check? Or perhaps someone
can ask their local cinema?
--
Linux Registered User # 302622

From:	Wally
Subject:	Who to contact at AHL/Greater Union in regards to the food bans.
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 21:33:19 +1100

Greg_Dean@ahl.com.au

From:	atec
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:46:13 +1000

point is if they sell you a ticket as I know has occurred when the
customer if "holding" then I don't believe they cinema has any right to
deny you , and if they do then of course a refund is in order...
not that Im concerned as I might go on a Tuesday once a year if I cant
download movies of my choice...

John Tserkezis wrote:
>
> atec wrote:
>
> >> They are not confiscating the food, and you are "voluntarily" disposing or
> >> otherwise giving your property away.
>
> > and when you say no ? ... gets interesting ?
>
> They have right to refuse you entry.
>
> The fact you have purchased a ticket does not give you right to operate
> contrary to their terms and conditions of entry.
>
> The interesting part might come if they don't let you know what those terms
> and conditions are.
>
> Don't quote me on this, but from memory, when it comes to the 'fine print',
> though they may be obliged, they are not _required_ to list all terms apon
> purchase of ticket, however, they ARE required to disclose said terms if the
> customer asks.
>
> I haven't been a customer for several years, they may very well list their
> terms on the back of the ticket. Dunno. Can anyone check? Or perhaps someone
> can ask their local cinema?
> --
> Linux Registered User # 302622

From:	Brissie
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 23:33:21 +1000

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:46:13 +1000, atec <"atec77(away)"@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>point is if they sell you a ticket as I know has occurred when the
>customer if "holding" then I don't believe they cinema has any right to
>deny you , and if they do then of course a refund is in order...
> not that Im concerned as I might go on a Tuesday once a year if I cant
>download movies of my choice...

You're going on accusing the cinemas of committing a crime of 'theft'
by the customers voluntarily handing over their food, and say the
cinema should be stopped.

Yet you commit a blatant crime constantly. There is no doubt
downloading movies is illegal

Ever heard the word hypocrit?

From:	JohnP
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Thu, 13 Jan 2005 17:18:05 +1030

"Brissie" wrote in message news:iu05u057ev0g1ubrcsa2gcdpn2rvvdp72p@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:46:13 +1000, atec <"atec77(away)"@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >point is if they sell you a ticket as I know has occurred when the
> >customer if "holding" then I don't believe they cinema has any right to
> >deny you , and if they do then of course a refund is in order...
> > not that Im concerned as I might go on a Tuesday once a year if I cant
> >download movies of my choice...
>
> You're going on accusing the cinemas of committing a crime of 'theft'
> by the customers voluntarily handing over their food, and say the
> cinema should be stopped.
>
> Yet you commit a blatant crime constantly. There is no doubt
> downloading movies is illegal

LOL you ponce!

> Ever heard the word hypocrit?

LOL ever heard the word sucker?

From:	Chasing Kate
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:43:06 +1030

Brissie wrote:

> On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 22:10:18 +1100, quietguy
> wrote:
>
> >Ken it is not about 'cant go without', it is that for kids having popcorn or
> >sweets and a drink are part of the total 'going to the movies' experience. They
> >enjoy it.
>
> You can't buy hot popcorn from anywhere else. So if popcorn is part of
> the movie experience they have to buy it from the cinema always
>
> >While it is certainly something I certainly wouldn't do or advocate, I bet there
> >will be a lot of angry young guys who will slash seats and things like that to
> >get even if they are pevented from bringing their own stuff in to the theatre.
>
> Yes they'll get a criminal record as payback Oo:|
>
> There are security cameras you know

And would it really be worth the effort to prosecute such a matter?

From:	John Tserkezis
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 09 Jan 2005 16:58:53 +1100

Chasing Kate wrote:

>>Yes they'll get a criminal record as payback Oo:|

>>There are security cameras you know

> And would it really be worth the effort to prosecute such a matter?

Since there's no law against bringing your own food into a cinema, only
company policy, the most they can do is take away your food, or refuse entry.

They really don't even have a financial incentive to do it.

--
Linux Registered User # 302622

From:	Bruce Murphy
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	10 Jan 2005 11:00:57 +0800

Brissie writes:

> On 09 Jan 2005 23:38:30 +0800, Bruce Murphy
> wrote:
>
> >Brissie writes:
> >
> >> >violation of the agreement made (pay money to watch a movie, don't get
> >> >let in), then things get altogether more interesting.
> >>
> >> They aren't in violation though. When the customer bought the ticket
> >> they agreed to the terms
> >
> >There is a long case history illustrating that implicit agreements,
> >not formally brought to the attention of the parties and agreed to,
> >are in fact without value.
>
> They are brought attention to the public though. There are signs. So
> unless they can't read they agree

That's not how contract law works.

> >Do you believe that if there was a sign behind the ticket counter that
> >said "Management reserves the right to rape cute theatregoers of
> >either ", that this would suddenly make this legal? Are you, in
> >short, a lunatic?
>
> Rape is a crime you lunatic

And so is theft. Which is another way of putting confiscation without
compensation. Are you getting the point yet?

B>

From:	Brissie
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 09 Jan 2005 17:55:14 +1000

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:43:06 +1030, Chasing Kate
wrote:

>Brissie wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 22:10:18 +1100, quietguy
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Ken it is not about 'cant go without', it is that for kids having popcorn or
>> >sweets and a drink are part of the total 'going to the movies' experience. They
>> >enjoy it.
>>
>> You can't buy hot popcorn from anywhere else. So if popcorn is part of
>> the movie experience they have to buy it from the cinema always
>>
>> >While it is certainly something I certainly wouldn't do or advocate, I bet there
>> >will be a lot of angry young guys who will slash seats and things like that to
>> >get even if they are pevented from bringing their own stuff in to the theatre.
>>
>> Yes they'll get a criminal record as payback Oo:|
>>
>> There are security cameras you know
>
>
>
>And would it really be worth the effort to prosecute such a matter?
>

I was referring to the public vandalising the seats being prosecuted,
not people taking food in.

People are prosecuted for stealing 20c items from shops, so vandalism
will definitely be. There'll be a civil suit too.

From:	Chasing Kate
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Mon, 10 Jan 2005 01:02:09 +1030

Brissie wrote:

> On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:43:06 +1030, Chasing Kate
> wrote:
>
> >Brissie wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 22:10:18 +1100, quietguy
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Ken it is not about 'cant go without', it is that for kids having popcorn or
> >> >sweets and a drink are part of the total 'going to the movies' experience. They
> >> >enjoy it.
> >>
> >> You can't buy hot popcorn from anywhere else. So if popcorn is part of
> >> the movie experience they have to buy it from the cinema always
> >>
> >> >While it is certainly something I certainly wouldn't do or advocate, I bet there
> >> >will be a lot of angry young guys who will slash seats and things like that to
> >> >get even if they are pevented from bringing their own stuff in to the theatre.
> >>
> >> Yes they'll get a criminal record as payback Oo:|
> >>
> >> There are security cameras you know
> >
> >
> >
> >And would it really be worth the effort to prosecute such a matter?
> >
>
> I was referring to the public vandalising the seats being prosecuted,
> not people taking food in.

Ah sorry my bad

From:	zaphy
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sun, 09 Jan 2005 17:59:15 +1000

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 14:59:44 +1000, Brissie
unleashed:

>On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 22:10:18 +1100, quietguy
> wrote:
>
>>Ken it is not about 'cant go without', it is that for kids having popcorn or
>>sweets and a drink are part of the total 'going to the movies' experience. They
>>enjoy it.
>
>You can't buy hot popcorn from anywhere else.

Yeah you can - Kernals, for one.

--
zaphy

From:	Cyber Trekker
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Sat, 08 Jan 2005 07:53:10 GMT

Ken Oaf wrote:

> On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:01:54 +1100, Wally wrote:
>
>>
>> Department of Consumer Protection deputy commissioner Anne Driscoll said
>> cinemas were entitled to ban food and drink not bought from them as part
>> of their entry terms and conditions.
>>
>> Consumers took their own food and drink because it was usually cheaper
>> or the cinema's range was not wide enough.
>>
>> "Consumers who are upset about the restriction in choice are generally
>> advised to shop around and consider other venues," Ms Driscoll said.
>
> If a person can't go without food and drink for a couple of hours then I
> would suggest he or she see a doctor.

Gawd! You miss the point of the post entirely.

From:	Bruce Murphy
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	11 Jan 2005 14:54:20 +0800

Brissie writes:

> On 11 Jan 2005 11:47:50 +0800, Bruce Murphy
> wrote:
>
> >Irrelevant. Once you've been offered a movie to watch (the price
> >board), accepted the offer and tendered monies, and then gotten your
> >ticket, it's all over w.r.t adding extra conditions.
>
> No it's not. Same if you buy software, open it, read the license, and
> disagree with it. You can't read the software license before buying it
> because it's in the box, so if you buy it and disagree with it, you
> return it for a full refund.

And I think you'll find that these terms are not enforceable under
Australian law. None of the software industry has been stupid enough
to try enforcing them yet, though.

B>

From:	quietguy
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:50:37 +1100

> I note however that most stores advice that software is not returnable
> for refund, only for an exchange for the same item if a fault is evident.

Basically they want to stop people buying software to take home and copy,
then obtain a refund by returning it. Not unreasonable I guess in this day
and age of plentiful CD and DVD burners.

Having the right to return the opened software for refund it because you
disagree with the licence conditions would seem to negate the above policy

Buggered if I know, but looks like a loophole there for someone to use

David

>
> >
> > No it's not. Same if you buy software, open it, read the license, and
> > disagree with it. You can't read the software license before buying it
> > because it's in the box, so if you buy it and disagree with it, you
> > return it for a full refund.
>
> B>

From:	Brissie
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Wed, 12 Jan 2005 13:50:29 +1000

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:50:37 +1100, quietguy

wrote:

>> I note however that most stores advice that software is not returnable
>> for refund, only for an exchange for the same item if a fault is evident.
>
>Basically they want to stop people buying software to take home and copy,
>then obtain a refund by returning it. Not unreasonable I guess in this day
>and age of plentiful CD and DVD burners.
>
>Having the right to return the opened software for refund it because you
>disagree with the licence conditions would seem to negate the above policy
>
>Buggered if I know, but looks like a loophole there for someone to use

Shops that refuse to are breaking the law

Electornics Boutique allow you to return software for a full refund up
to 7 days after buying it even if the box has been opened.

From:	Cyber Trekker
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Wed, 12 Jan 2005 04:30:48 GMT

Brissie wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:50:37 +1100, quietguy
> wrote:
>
>>> I note however that most stores advice that software is not returnable
>>> for refund, only for an exchange for the same item if a fault is
>>> evident.
>>
>>Basically they want to stop people buying software to take home and copy,
>>then obtain a refund by returning it. Not unreasonable I guess in this
>>day and age of plentiful CD and DVD burners.
>>
>>Having the right to return the opened software for refund it because you
>>disagree with the licence conditions would seem to negate the above policy
>>
>>Buggered if I know, but looks like a loophole there for someone to use
>
> Shops that refuse to are breaking the law

According to Australian law, it is an offence to not refund or exchange
faulty items or those items that do not serve the purpose for which they
were purchased. Business policy has nothing to do with it, as you from your
response at least probably realise. Businesses can and do make up all the
policies they want and come up with all forms of excuses to justify their
stance, but that doesn't mean the policy is in accordance with the law.

Another thing, according to the law it is the customer that has the choice
of either a refund or exchange if the item is faulty or does not serve the
purpose for which it was purchased, not the business dictating to the
customer what they are prepared to offer.

These laws equally apply to online purchases.

Businesses will, of course, often try to convince you otherwise. But most of
us realise that business, like government, often lies its head off.

From:	Ivan Rayner
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:23:36 +0000 (UTC)

Cyber Trekker wrote:
> Another thing, according to the law it is the customer that has the choice
> of either a refund or exchange if the item is faulty or does not serve the
> purpose for which it was purchased, not the business dictating to the
> customer what they are prepared to offer.

Not quite right. Where the item, lets say a battery, is faulty, then
the store has the option to replace it with another battery of the same
type. You cannot demand a refund if the store can give you a
replacement.

If however, the item is not suitable because the battery doesn't fit
the camera you specifically bought it for _and_ told the store the
purpose for the battery when you bought it, then you may demand a
refund. Ie. no replacement of that type of battery would suit your
needs.

Ivan
--
Ivan Rayner
ivanr@sgi.com

From:	John Smith
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:51:18 +1100

Ivan Rayner wrote:

>> Another thing, according to the law it is the customer that has the
>> choice of either a refund or exchange if the item is faulty or does
>> not serve the purpose for which it was purchased, not the business
>> dictating to the customer what they are prepared to offer.
>
> Not quite right. Where the item, lets say a battery, is faulty, then
> the store has the option to replace it with another battery of the
> same type. You cannot demand a refund if the store can give you a
> replacement.

WRONG. If an item is faulty, you are entitled to a refund, repair, or
replacement -- at YOUR option. Proof from NSW Fair Trading web site:

http://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/shopping/refundsrepairs.html

And I quote:

"When do you have a right to a refund?
Simply, a refund would be in order if the goods:
1 - have a fault that you could not have known about when you purchased
them
2 - do not do the job that you were led to believe they would do
3 - do not match a sample you were shown
4 - are not as they were described."

Thus, if the battery was faulty, then items (1) and (2) would apply.

From:	Cyber Trekker
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Wed, 12 Jan 2005 21:34:38 GMT

John Smith wrote:

> WRONG. If an item is faulty, you are entitled to a refund, repair, or
> replacement -- at YOUR option. Proof from NSW Fair Trading web site:
>
> http://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/shopping/refundsrepairs.html

Thank you, John, for the link to substantiate my claim that it's ultimately
the customer's option to decide whether, in accordance with the particular
situation at hand, to have either a refund, a replacement or repair of the
item. Such has been the consumer legislation in Australia for years now and
that which has been promoted by the various governmental consumer bodies.

The same thing, for example, is said at the official Websites of the
Ministerial Council on Consumer Affairs, the Consumer Affairs and Fair
Trading and the most revealing information at the Department of Consumer
and Employment Protection in Perth.

The URL to the DCEP refund info page is:
http://www.docep.wa.gov.au/cp/dev_publications/business_notes/refund.html

I hope this puts a quick and necessary stop to the misinformation that
businesses and business-type people promulgate in society through their
uninformed business myths. Of course, businesses usually argue against
anything that benefits the consumer.

From:	Brissie
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Wed, 12 Jan 2005 23:01:19 +1000

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:23:36 +0000 (UTC), Ivan Rayner
wrote:

>Cyber Trekker wrote:
>> Another thing, according to the law it is the customer that has the choice
>> of either a refund or exchange if the item is faulty or does not serve the
>> purpose for which it was purchased, not the business dictating to the
>> customer what they are prepared to offer.
>
>Not quite right. Where the item, lets say a battery, is faulty, then
>the store has the option to replace it with another battery of the same
>type. You cannot demand a refund if the store can give you a
>replacement.

Legally you can. Most places like KMart, Big W, Warehouse will give a
refund in those cases.

Heck the Warehouse will give you a refund if you return stuff for any
purpose evem 2-3 months after you bought it. Which is why I worry
about buying stuff there. I've bought an electric shaver there, and
when I got home could tell it had clearly already been used, as the
battery was charged and there was hair in the clippers. At least Big W
and KMart dispose of stock like that when it's returned and don't put
it back on the shelf.

From:	Chasing Kate
Subject:	Re: Greater Union try to stop pepole bringing in food?
Date:	Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:38:45 +1030

Brissie wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:23:36 +0000 (UTC), Ivan Rayner
> wrote:
>
> >Cyber Trekker wrote:
> >> Another thing, according to t