Greg
Registered Shopper
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2010
- Messages
- 2,320
ASA Adjudication on Sit-up Ltd
Sit-up Ltd t/a Bid TV
Unit 11 Acton Park Industrial Estate
Eastman Road
London
Acton
W3 7QE
Date: 7 December 2011
Media: Television
Sector: Retail
Number of complaints: 1
Complaint Ref: A11-171720
Background
Ad
Two teleshopping broadcasts on Bid TV, viewed in September 2011, for an "Intempo Evolve" home entertainment system, in the format of a reverse auction; in both ads, as the items were sold the "quantity left" figure on screen decreased. As the figure approached zero, the presenter made statements such as "[the producer] just told me people are going to miss out again" and "Be on that phone now! I don't want you missing out". The presenter then asked the producer "Can you get any more in? We have to do it now. How many can you get?" and persuaded the producer to release more stock of the product. In the first broadcast the presenter was given 25 more units and he stated "I've got 25 more, that's all I've got" and then when they ran out he was given an additional 25 units. In the second broadcast the presenter was given 30 more units once the original number had sold out, followed by additional 20 units.
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the auction misleadingly implied that there was a limited amount of stock remaining and that that put unfair pressure on viewers to make a decision about whether to purchase the item during the auction.
BCAP Code
3.1 3.31
Response
Sit-up said that during an individual product sell, the quantity that was displayed on-screen was all that was available for consumers to purchase at that time. The quantity on-screen was not a full reflection of the stock that may be available for them to offer of the particular product, just as what was seen on a shop floor might not reflect all of the stock available. They stated that when the item in question proved to be popular they made the decision to make more, previously unscheduled stock, available for purchase, just as any retailer would replenish stock when it sells out. They acknowledged that they suggested to the customer that they had a limited opportunity to buy the product and therefore to make it immediately available afterwards offered a confusing message concerning the availability of the stock and implied undue pressure to purchase. They had reviewed the way they managed stock and would ensure that extra units of a specific product were never scheduled immediately after the close of an individual product sell. They said that when a product was sold on multiple occasions throughout the day, they would ensure that the presenter highlighted that the quantity was available to purchase "at this time" and not to suggest that it was the last available stock.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted that the on-screen text showed the "quantity left" figure decrease to zero and that, during the auction, the presenter said "[the producer] just told me people are going to miss out again" and "I've got 25 more, that's all I've got". We considered that viewers would understand that to mean that once the number on-screen reached zero there would be no stock of the item left. We considered that to make the product available again immediately after the auction had ended offered a confusing message to the customer and placed undue pressure on them to purchase. We welcomed Sit-up's decision to review the way they managed their stock and their assurance that they would not suggest they were offering the last available stock if that was not the case. Nevertheless, we were concerned that the auction could put unfair pressure on viewers to make a purchasing decision and that they may not have had sufficient opportunity to make an informed choice about the product and, because of that, we concluded that the ad was misleading.
The ad breached BCAP Code rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising) and 3.31 (Availability).
Action
The ad must not be broadcast again in its current form. We told sit-up to ensure that they would not suggest they were offering the last available stock if that was not the case.
Sit-up Ltd t/a Bid TV
Unit 11 Acton Park Industrial Estate
Eastman Road
London
Acton
W3 7QE
Date: 7 December 2011
Media: Television
Sector: Retail
Number of complaints: 1
Complaint Ref: A11-171720
Background
Ad
Two teleshopping broadcasts on Bid TV, viewed in September 2011, for an "Intempo Evolve" home entertainment system, in the format of a reverse auction; in both ads, as the items were sold the "quantity left" figure on screen decreased. As the figure approached zero, the presenter made statements such as "[the producer] just told me people are going to miss out again" and "Be on that phone now! I don't want you missing out". The presenter then asked the producer "Can you get any more in? We have to do it now. How many can you get?" and persuaded the producer to release more stock of the product. In the first broadcast the presenter was given 25 more units and he stated "I've got 25 more, that's all I've got" and then when they ran out he was given an additional 25 units. In the second broadcast the presenter was given 30 more units once the original number had sold out, followed by additional 20 units.
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the auction misleadingly implied that there was a limited amount of stock remaining and that that put unfair pressure on viewers to make a decision about whether to purchase the item during the auction.
BCAP Code
3.1 3.31
Response
Sit-up said that during an individual product sell, the quantity that was displayed on-screen was all that was available for consumers to purchase at that time. The quantity on-screen was not a full reflection of the stock that may be available for them to offer of the particular product, just as what was seen on a shop floor might not reflect all of the stock available. They stated that when the item in question proved to be popular they made the decision to make more, previously unscheduled stock, available for purchase, just as any retailer would replenish stock when it sells out. They acknowledged that they suggested to the customer that they had a limited opportunity to buy the product and therefore to make it immediately available afterwards offered a confusing message concerning the availability of the stock and implied undue pressure to purchase. They had reviewed the way they managed stock and would ensure that extra units of a specific product were never scheduled immediately after the close of an individual product sell. They said that when a product was sold on multiple occasions throughout the day, they would ensure that the presenter highlighted that the quantity was available to purchase "at this time" and not to suggest that it was the last available stock.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted that the on-screen text showed the "quantity left" figure decrease to zero and that, during the auction, the presenter said "[the producer] just told me people are going to miss out again" and "I've got 25 more, that's all I've got". We considered that viewers would understand that to mean that once the number on-screen reached zero there would be no stock of the item left. We considered that to make the product available again immediately after the auction had ended offered a confusing message to the customer and placed undue pressure on them to purchase. We welcomed Sit-up's decision to review the way they managed their stock and their assurance that they would not suggest they were offering the last available stock if that was not the case. Nevertheless, we were concerned that the auction could put unfair pressure on viewers to make a purchasing decision and that they may not have had sufficient opportunity to make an informed choice about the product and, because of that, we concluded that the ad was misleading.
The ad breached BCAP Code rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising) and 3.31 (Availability).
Action
The ad must not be broadcast again in its current form. We told sit-up to ensure that they would not suggest they were offering the last available stock if that was not the case.
Last edited:
