Category: Financial

So one of my Roomba Schedulers died a week or 2 ago. Yes, I owned more than 1 Roomba Scheduler. Yes, carrying the Roomba one flight of stairs is more work than I would like to do.

My Roomba was making a quacking sound (like a duck’s quack) when I would tell it to go clean. It actually sounded more like a short ‘meh’. Going through iRobot’s FAQ, I found this article: What is Roomba saying to me? The 2nd row appeared to be my problem: “Ehh” (Play Sound)

It suggested: The cliff sensors are dirty or malfunctioning, or the battery is need recharging

The battery definitely doesn’t need recharging as it’s been charging for a week and the color is green. I took a can of compressed air and started squirting at the cliff sensors. At first I had no idea what cliff sensors were, but apparently there’s 4 of them around the front bumper which helps detects stairs and drops so they don’t go charging downhill. If you still can’t spot them, you can take a look at their diagram here: What are Cliff Sensors?

That didn’t help along with their other suggestions. I submitted a support ticket and their reply was basically the same. They said if that didn’t fix it, I should provide them with the serial number of my Roomba and they can escalate this, which I’m assuming they’ll send a replacement part or even a whole new Roomba. Interestingly enough, after a night of having the Roomba sit on my desk, it started working, but failed about 5 minutes later making the “ehh” sound.

Their customer support has been great. I believed I mentioned this already. Last time the plastic thing on my Roomba’s trash bin was starting to rip and they said they’d ship me a new one immediately. However, the trash bin was out of stock, and instead they shipped me a compatible trash bin (which was of a different color) and said after the correct color trash bin was in stock, they’d ship that one to me too.

However, I decided to take the easy way out. Given the fact I purchased this from Costco last July, I brought it back and got a refund and purchased a new one. The guy asked me if there was a problem and I was honest and told him it stopped working and would make a beeping sound. I asked if they had anymore in stock and if there was, can I do an exchange. He goes (as I expected him to say), that he would have to refund me the money and I could go and purchase the new one and there were indeed 23 in stock.

Interestingly enough, the Roomba was currently on sale. Online, it shows ($269.99 – $50) $219.99 shipped, but in store, the actual price was $209.99 ($259.99 – $50). So I made off with $50 + tax difference. Sweet!

While I was at Costco, I also got my tires rotated and rebalanced. I’m always skeptical about their system as they never needed me to verify my identity when I picked up my keys. I guess people here are just that honest. I told them my car was the silver Honda Civic and they told me it would be ready in 2 minutes. They handed me my invoice of $0 and told me to bring it over to the garage. After showing them the invoice, they handed the keys over to me.

Another funny coincidence happened today. Since I had plenty of food at home, my only damage today was a Roomba Scheduler, which couldn’t really be considered damage as I walked out of Costco with more money than I came in with. Take that for a change. Anyway, while I was waiting for my car to be ready, I was enjoying the nice warm weather eating a churro. There was another man who’s only purchase was also a Roomba Scheduler. I thought interesting…

Then I walked into the Tire Center and there he was. He was also getting his tires rotated. Another coincidence. Unfortunately, he didn’t have the same car as me. Oh well, I thought those 2 coincidences were interestingly enough to share.

I’m a big fan of Consumerist, well, at least used to be. I still read their blog posts, but they have a very different agenda than what I’d expect. I thought their main goal was to educate and help protect consumers, but through misinformation, I often question if the good they do offset the damage they cause. Along the way, they might protect consumers, but when you spread both truth and lies, it becomes hard to as a reader to distinguish making me cautious in trusting anything they put out.

Of course it could be due to the different authors they have. Some may be genuinely good, while others I can only describe as having a questionable agenda.

Take for example this recent post: Forever Stamps Are A Scam, I would like you to share my comment:

Actually, Consumerist were the ones that decided to spin what Slate said. Just look at the title and the 1st sentence:

Forever Stamps Are A Scam

By law, “Forever Stamps” won’t save you any money, says Slate.

First of all, the word “scam” and the phrase “save money” never appear in the article. All the article talks about is the absurdity of some people wanting to invest in “forever stamps”, which to be honest, did cross my mind, however after simple calculations and later on this article further solidified, was in fact a bad investment choice.

Consumerist decided to take this article and spin it to make you believe that Slate said these stamps are a scam and won’t save you money.

I honestly question if the author of this Consumerist piece actually read the article…

This is one in many many questionable posts that I’ve replied to and it angers me that the authors take these things lightly and won’t come out and correct their mistake, even when I tell them about it. I’ve submitted fewer and fewer stories to them as I don’t think they deserve my support anymore. They take a story and try to make the most absurd headline to attract readers. Their main agenda appears to be attract readers in hopes to generate ad revenue.

Other questionable posts include advertisement of a sandwich shop (twice) as a main story. What does that even have to do with Consumerist. If it was a restaurant review blog, I wouldn’t have cared. But the story has in no way a helpful consumer story. Then there’s the garage sale post awhile back where they talk about getting rid of junk (good thing) and goes on to list all their stuff on sale on eBay. They welcomed others to post their eBay listings on that page, but you know the sole purpose of that post was to get more eyes on their eBay auctions. Then there was an rather useless article about how Chase is spending money putting up posters around New York. What the *beep* was that about!?!? This is just simple marketing. Why pick on Chase? This list can go on and on…

I really want the old Consumerist back, but that’s like asking for the old Slashdot back, probably something that won’t happen.

So as you’ve probably heard with the recent postage prices being raised, USPS (United States Postal Service) has introduce the Forever Stamp. I actually picked up a pack of 20 when I was at Safeway earlier this week. Nothing too fancy. Has a picture of a bell and on the said it says: USA FIRST-CLASS FOREVER. Ungsunghero and I jokingly discussed about “investing” in forever stamps and wait a number of years and sell them back out. However, we’ve decided the return would be less than ideal, probably worst than the 5% interest rate we get at an online savings account.

Then I read this article: Should I Invest in “Forever” Stamps? (from Digg) – Absolutely not.:

The postal rate climbed 2 cents on Monday, about a month after the United States Postal Service introduced its new “forever” stamp. As of last week, the USPS had sold more than $82 million worth of the forever stamps, which lock in the 41-cent rate for eternity. One man in Pennsylvania walked into a post office and made an $8,000 investment on his own. Should we all be stocking up?

Absolutely not. Since 1971, postal rates have increased more slowly than the actual inflation rate, as measured by the U.S. Consumer Price Index. So, despite the numerous rate hikes over the last 36 years, stamps have actually been getting cheaper. The 20-cent stamp from 1981, for instance, would be equivalent to 45 cents in today’s dollars—which makes today’s rate 10 percent cheaper than it was 26 years ago. Should this historical pattern hold, you’d be paying more for today’s forever stamps than you would for any stamp in the future, no matter how high the rate goes.

However, the forever stamp is an excellent idea and although it may be a less than ideal investment plan, the idea behind it has been long due. It would certainly make life easier as you wouldn’t have to go to the post office and purchase 2¢ stamps immediately after a raise. It’s definitely a lot more convenient to the consumer. Like right now, I have 3 39¢ stamps left which probably won’t be used until I have to mail a letter that’s more than 1oz, or the next time I drop by the post office to purchase some more 2¢ stamps, which hardly ever happens as the post office is a crazy place I tried to avoid at all costs.

However, lets take a step back and look at the investment plan. The plan may actually work if you’re precise. If you were to purchase a whole bunch of forever stamps right before the next raise (let’s assume 41¢ to 43¢), meaning to purchase it at 41¢ and sell them at 43¢. If you could sell them all off in 3 months, that’s a 19.5% APR. So an $8,000 investment in 3 short months have become $8390.24. Of course this is assuming you can sell it at face value and so on.

But let’s take the most ideal situation. Currently you get 5% back on certain credit cards when you make purchases at supermarkets, making a 41¢ stamp closer a little less than 39¢. Lets say you offer a 1¢ discount to those who purchase from you (selling it for 42¢ instead of 43¢), basically giving them a 2.3% discount from the post office rates. If you can sell off all your stamps in 3 months, that’s a 7.8% gain in 3 months, or 31.3% APR. However, as noted, these are the ideal conditions and you can only do it every time USPS decides to bump fees, however those are usually announced far in ahead and you can prepare yourself if you’re planning to do this.

Another interesting topic was brought up while talking to Ungsunghero and somehow the topic of working at the post office came up. I divulged my ideas of how the post office should change and become extremely competitive. Today UPS, FedEx, and DHL, offer online postage printing with no extra fees. You get the same rates online as you would at your local shipping outlet. However, the inconvenient part of UPS, FedEx, and DHL is that you actually have to drop it off at a shipping counter, either that be Kinkos or Office Depot, it’s not as convenient as just dropping it into your mail box or giving it to your postman, which you know comes every day around a certain time.

USPS already offers free postage printing for Priority Mail and Express Mail, but for first class, media mail, and parcel mail, they are only offering it through other services like Pitney Bowes, which charges a fee every time you use them. Just like I find the fact that E-file for taxes charges you a fee to save them time is ridiculous, it’s the same with USPS charging a fee for you to print postage. With online postage printing, you don’t have to hire as many clerks to man the post office, save the cost of printing stamps as the customer will print their own, and every letter will have a verified address and maybe even a barcode to help sorting.

However, to print USPS postage without any fees today, you have to go through a hack via PayPal: Print USPS First Class, Media Mail, Parcel Mail Postage for FREE!

If only I could knock some sense into USPS and the IRS.

So I was reading an article over at Consumerist: Check Fraud Is Alive, Well, And Preventable, which talked about check washing, where you use water or some chemical to dissolve regular ink off a check, and write a new amount and maybe even a new payee. They then suggested the use of a “secure” ink instead of a regular ballpoint pen to prevent this.

This got me thinking. How often do people use checks these days? Back in the day before credit cards and eChecks, I can see this as common scenario. I mean once in awhile I still see someone at a supermarket or Costco take out their checkbook to write a check. Speaking of which, apparently if you want to use a check at Costco, the check has to be in the card holder’s name. However, they’ll accept debit/credit cards that are not in the card holders name which I found interesting.

Anyway, back to the original topic. When I see people whip out a check, it always surprises me why in this day and age they’d want to use a check and not a debit card per se. I’ve always seen checks as inherently flawed due to the fact as long as someone has your routing number and your account number (both available if they get ahold of a copy your check), they can then produce their own checks with the same information. There’s some verification these days, but not everyone does it. Also, all it takes for me to link accounts is a routing number and an account number. Some financial institutions have a secondary check where they make 2 small deposits into the account you want to link and make you verify you’re the account owner. A long time ago, I thought I’d open a bunch of checking account and link them all to PayPal and make them deposit tiny amounts. However, that plan was scrapped after I decided how much effort was needed to just make a very small amount (similar to the scheme where you get those coupons/rebate forms that have 1/100 cent value and cash in. KACHING!)

Anyway, in this age and time, I only write checks to people I’m familiar with and trust. Everything else, I do bill pay/eChecks (where the bank transfers the money or mails the check for me). I don’t think I’ve ever used my bank card as a debit card either. The last check I wrote was to Derek since we were splitting a huge order and the amount was not a friendly figure. Before that it was probably back in college and I don’t even remember what anymore. Maybe to link my account on ING Direct?

I have 6 check books (3 for Washington Mutual and 3 for Bank of America) and have not completed one of those checkbooks yet. I got them when I first opened my accounts which was right before I went to college.

Another interesting point is that I never keep over $500 in any of my checking accounts, usually around the $200 range. The reasoning behind that isn’t because I don’t think its secure. It’s just that they have 0% interest, so I have no reason to keep money there besides paying bills, which I’ve already swapped over most to my ING Direct Electric Orange account.

Similarly, this article was posted a few days later: Fraud hits home — my front porch! (from Consumerist) – If you close your account because some jerk stole your student loan payment check and is trying to cash it, you might want to switch banks. Otherwise, Bank of America might helpfully link your new account to your old one so the #%@$# can still cash the stolen check.

Obviously Bank of America is in the wrong here and they should’ve done everything they could to rectify the problem as soon as possible with least amount of inconvenience to their client, but of course this is never the case. They probably made it even worse by making the client jump through hoops to resolve this problem. But that leads me to the main question of this entry. Why wasn’t he using bill pay or EFT (electronic fund transfer) to pay his student loans? I even get an extra 0.25% discount on my interest when I chose EFT. That way, a random check of yours could not have been stolen and if electronic transfer was not and option and Bank of America had to print and mail a check, chances of that being altered/forged is very unlikely given that they printed the check with “secure” ink and probably have a way to verify the check’s information.