CompuServe Messages

Steve, It was more than technically incorrect…it was flat wrong. The other customer didn't deserve a trade-in value…he/she had nothing to trade in. you didn't deserve a discount…you weren't buying another Commodore product. But your dealer played games with Commodore…and made it look like you bought the 2091 or that the other customer traded in the 2090. Neither of which occurred. Now, if you had sold the 2090 to the other customer, for it's trade in value and the other customer had traded it in…then all would have been quite legal and above board. But that's not what occurred. I realize your dealer did this…not you or the other customer. But the point is that your dealer cheated. The end result is that Commodore's intent…to get current customers to upgrade their Commodore equipment for newer Commodore equipment at a discount. In other words, to encourage Commodore sales. What ended up occuring is that Commodore paid you to buy someone else's equipment. Don