Poll: Is it free?

[LondonBeer]

The telecoms company Orange does a 2 for 1 at cinemas on Wednesdays.

My question is one relating to semantics.

Is the second seat free given that someone must pay for the first seat?

My rational is that

If you pay 0 you receive 0 seats.
If you pay for 1 seat without Orange you receive 1 seat.
If you pay for 1 seat with Orange you receive 2 seats.

The options where you receive a seat both have a cost regardless that the person sitting in the second 'free' seat hasnt actually paid. It is only 'free to them'. It itself is not free.

 

[BlueberryMUNCH]

...I'm confused...

*thinks*

Right. Well, how I think of Orange Wednesdays is a half price ticket; whenever I do it, me and my friend will pay half half each.

So nah, it's not free. Just cheaper. For me, anyway.

...The...poll...confuses...me...

I NEED SOME SLEEP.

 

[Hader]

Nothing is ever free.

So....no.

 

[xdom125x]

If you are paying for Orange, then that second seat isn't free. You are still paying in a roundabout way.

 

[bak00777]

i've always thought of Buy one get one free as meaning they are half price each.

 

[GiantRaven]

i've always thought of Buy one get one free as meaning they are half price each.

Yeah, this is what I thought. It isn't free, just cheaper.

 

[Drakmeire]

Ummmm
<spoiler=Caution violence>http://goteaminternet.com/img/docs/3591.jpg
PS this gif can be posted on anything
I guess it's free but only for 1 person

 

[Furious Styles]

No, its just half price

 

[Sheaphard117]

Regarding the Orange example, the amount that you pay for your phone contract is paying for
everything in the contract (plus) a weekly cinema ticket. If you then decide to take advantage
of this bought ticket, then its available. If not, then you just wasted some money.

That is how I would look at that example anyway.

However I belive it depends on the situation

e.g. buying a chocolate bar from a shop one week

Then

buying the same chocolate bar, from the same shop next week, but getting a second one free
in a BOGOF deal.

I would consider this a 'getting stuff for free' as the value exchanged between the two weeks has not altered.

 

[6unn3r]

Nothing is ever free.

So....no.

Even Oxygen? I best save up then if i hope to be able to breathe next week.

 

[Hader]

Nothing is ever free.

So....no.

Even Oxygen? I best save up then if i hope to be able to breathe next week.

Opportunity cost man. Imagine, if your lungs didn't have to constantly be breathing for you. They could get so much more done. End world hunger, cure cancer, etc.

 

[Kpt._Rob]

Nothing is ever free.

So....no.

Even Oxygen? I best save up then if i hope to be able to breathe next week.

Well, in terms of economics, yes, oxygen is free. But if you wanted to look at it from a thermodynamic perspective, no, oxygen is most certainly not free.

OT: What I would say is that if the price of the ticket is the same as it would be on any other day, then yes, it's free. It's a bonus, a gift they give you if you come on a certain day. Or at least that's the logic they would use to justify the use of the term "free" from a legal perspective.

Whether or not that makes it genuinely free... it's hard to say. But laws and truths rarely have too much to do with each other, sometimes all you can do is go along with it.

 

[Who Dares Wins]

Two grammatical mistakes in the poll option. Grammar Nathzee aside, it's free, you pay for one and get one without paying for it, so it's free.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

There actually is an important difference between BOGO and half off. With BOGO, whether you want two items or not, you get them for what is usually the full price for one item. If you don't need the second item, you're free to turn it down, but you're still going to pay full price. With half off, you have the option of only buying one item, therefore saving money if you only need the one. When something is BOGO, I always get the second item; if it's half off, whether I buy that second one or not depends on how much of the product I need, and how much money I have available at the time.

 

[Pain Is Inevitable]

Nothing is free, everything is buyable.

 

[LondonBeer]

Awesome. the gist of the argument was that the second 'free' seat was free. I stated its not because someone somewhere is paying for it.

Not in the literal the chair cost energy to make but the literal. The seat although free for use was not free to open its free to use status. A price was paid to sit in it.

To make the matter more interesting it was actually a husband saying his wife paid for the seat so it was free to him. This is of course ludicrous because a husband and wife are a legal entity co-dependant on each other. So money from wifey is still a deficit to the husband.

 

[s0p0g]

now, the first time i miss the "other" button

in the example you gave, the "free" seat isn't free; i look at offers of that kind as "50% off", because that's what you get: 2x something for half the original price for 1x sth.

but of course, there are free things: if someone just gave me a ticket for cinema, or the cinema itself gave me a free ticket after i alreay bought one, without having told me beforehand, that'd be free, no?
happens rarely, sure, but it does happen

or have you ever been offered candy or crisps or whatever by a coworker? "just 'cause"? maybe one could argue about that example and construct some conditions and assumptions around that to make it a quid pro quo situation, but in general, i'd say that's free.

for example, there's this girl/young woman at work who offered a piece of her chocolate bar(s) to me and others. now the two of us don't have much to do with each other, so she certainly wasn't expecting/had reason to expect something in return at some point in the (near) future. so, that was free chocolate, wasn't it? (which i didn't take, but that doesn't really matter now, does it)

 

[LondonBeer]

now, the first time i miss the "other" button

in the example you gave, the "free" seat isn't free; i look at offers of that kind as "50% off", because that's what you get: 2x something for half the original price for 1x sth.

but of course, there are free things: if someone just gave me a ticket for cinema, or the cinema itself gave me a free ticket after i alreay bought one, without having told me beforehand, that'd be free, no?
happens rarely, sure, but it does happen

or have you ever been offered candy or crisps or whatever by a coworker? "just 'cause"? maybe one could argue about that example and construct some conditions and assumptions around that to make it a quid pro quo situation, but in general, i'd say that's free.

for example, there's this girl/young woman at work who offered a piece of her chocolate bar(s) to me and others. now the two of us don't have much to do with each other, so she certainly wasn't expecting/had reason to expect something in return at some point in the (near) future. so, that was free chocolate, wasn't it? (which i didn't take, but that doesn't really matter now, does it)

But my point is 'free to you' is subjective. Objectively it is not free that person paid for it & is giving it you. Since altruism doesnt exist she is gaining either a phsychological reward for complying with social niceties or a physiological reward from her brain for sharing. Although it appears to you to be free (Having no cost to you), she has paid money for the chocolate and profits from the offer. Assuming the chocolate was free to her, she benefits socially from the exchange in the form of repricocity or the Golden Rule.

'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.'

She might be be aware but you would be socially indebted to her and feel obliged to give her chocolate the next time you had some. The only people who are exempt from this function are sociopaths.

Summary - The chocolate was free to you. But someone paid for it. Therefore the chocolate has a precondition requiring its giving meaning it has a cost even if it isnt to you.

 

[s0p0g]

blah

But my point is 'free to you' is subjective. Objectively it is not free that person paid for it & is giving it you. Since altruism doesnt exist she is gaining either a phsychological reward for complying with social niceties or a physiological reward from her brain for sharing. Although it appears to you to be free (Having no cost to you), she has paid money for the chocolate and profits from the offer. Assuming the chocolate was free to her, she benefits socially from the exchange in the form of repricocity or the Golden Rule.

'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.'

She might be be aware but you would be socially indebted to her and feel obliged to give her chocolate the next time you had some. The only people who are exempt from this function are sociopaths.

Summary - The chocolate was free to you. But someone paid for it. Therefore the chocolate has a precondition requiring its giving meaning it has a cost even if it isnt to you.

ok, now i understand.
well, basically you're boiling down to the conservation of momentum or energy (=effort =cost)
then of course nothing is without cost, whereever the cost may lie

 

[Whateveralot]

Saying that something is for free but it has prerequisites, does not exclude the possiblity of the prerequisites being free. Does that make it free per se? No, but it does not mean that it costs money either.

What i'm trying to say is that the fact that it has prerequisites should not matter. It's about the thing you can get for free. This is free and will always be free; you can not debate about that. It's a fact.

BUT, when a prerequisite DOES cost money, it will cost you. But you get what you pay for: you pay for the prerequisite, you get the prerequisite. After that, the thing you can get for free, is free. It is something extra and it does not cost you money.