HM, you're leaping to conclusions that the expiry date disables the cartridge. You can still EAT expired food, the date just indicates the point at which the materials cannot reasonably be guaranteed to be "good." You can't guarantee that a plastic widget will be functional in 5, 10, or 20 years. Or whatever the timeframe is.

Staples hasn't managed their stock in a responsible fashion. Staples is selling expired products (glatt, see the OP).

All this being said, without a receipt, NOBODY will "take your word" that you bought something somewhere.

Incidentally, was HP supposed to put a new cartridge in their Star Trek transporter and beam it to you?

Neither the clerks at Staples nor the consumer have any idea the product is expired because the expiration date is not printed on the outside of the box. Sure, the manager at Staples should only take shipments on as many cartridges as they expect to sell in a reasonable amount of time, but by not printing the expiration date on the cartridge, the manufacturer must take the most blame here.

It may not apply to monster's particular printer, but I'm leaping nowhere. HP does expire cartridges. According to their site, it's not all of them, and some printers let you override the expiration. Anecdotes here, including multiple people who had their printers work again after removing the battery that lets the printer remember the date.

Also, footfootfoot, Epson didn't come off too great either in my surfing. But the chip resetter would take care of that.

@glatt: I don't mean the customer, clerk, or manager of Staples. It's a coporation. If they don't have appropriate systems in place to track their stock with logical parameters, then they need to either implement these systems, or stop selling products for which it is understood that this will be a problem. Again, all this being said, I'm sure they will still require a receipt to be produced.

@HM: Sorry, I misspoke. I should have said that the information to support the conclusion has not been presented in this thread.

If the "expiration date" does in fact disable the cartridge, then I personally feel that this is wrong, and I personally feel that it is wrong not to print the date on the box. For these reasons I would agree that HP "sucks" in this scenario. However, as to the direct complaint of trying to return a product to where you bought it, HP can't be blamed for Staples return policy. Not unless this constitutes a breach of their licensed reseller contract.

Oh yeah, their policy or strategy is pretty lousy. They practically give away the pritners knowing that they will ream you with the ink cartridges. The pritner takes 6 cartridges @ ~ $12-14 each. The chip doesn't monitor the actual ink used, it monitors the number of times the printer called for ink. Thus, printing out a single . is the same to the chip as printing out a page of solid color. I've reset the same cartridge up to 4 times before it ran out of ink. The other feature of the chip is that it is supposed to prevent re-filling the cartridge. W/o a chip resetter you can refill the cartridge but the printer won't print if it thinks a cartridge is out. You cannot even print a b&w document if cyan is out. The printer stops working.

So, the chip resetter is the thing that makes this printer ok in my book. I still think Epson is a duplicitous company, but I have a work-around.

And all this revelation certainly should result in an apology for being a piss-bucket to monster.

And no one cares what you "personally" feel unless you are "personally" butt-fucking someone in the mouth while you're selling your HP stock.

:lol:

:shock:

No aplogy necessary. She did not explain the basis of having a legitimate problem with HP, simply lumped them in with Staples. I still don't understand how "I need to print today" could be solved over the phone.

The problem turned out to be that the expiration date supposedly disables the cartridge (learned on page two) but even this was covered by HP as a problem with Staples stocking expired product, and, once again, left the only problem being having to produce a receipt to show it was even purchased at Staples.


I make the distinction "personally" because I realize that coprporate policies are not written to suit my "feelings."

Not a solution for Monster, but something to consider for all.

I did a little math a couple of years ago and figured I could save about 10 cents a page printing on a laser printer versus an ink-jet printer. Then I figured out how many pages Mrs. Z and the Zings were printing.

When I tallied it up I could more than pay for a low-end laser printer in less than a year. My experience has been that they are less trouble too.

YMMV

Does that include the cost of setting up and maintaining the tank for the sea bass?

The Laser printers I've used do shitty color pictures.

Keep your cartridge-hogging inkjet for photos only. Set your default printer to your new, document-printing laser printer.

If you have to buy a set of color cartridges to print christmas photos, etc., it won't hurt as much--as a "special occasion."

I don't do enough document printing to justify spending a couple hundred on another printer.

Yeah, if you don't do a lot of B&W it won't make sense for you. That's why I added "YMMV".

I used to be under the impression that Americans abbreviated everything. Not so, I've learned. Aussies do though. srsly? no-one here saya "cart" for cartridge? they always know what i mean in the store and the scripted robot at the call center knew....