Rick Astley and Mr. Met: A match made in heaven?
(Credit: Sarah Harbin/CNET Networks)The title of this post was inspired by Deadspin commenter BlastItBiggs.
After April Fool's Day, it got horribly gauche to practice the art of "Rickrolling"--tricking people into watching the video for Rick Astley's "Never Gonna Give You Up," or surprising someone by playing the corny pop song. The goofy Internet fad was so utterly overblown on 4/1/08 that the Web seemed to collectively agree that nobody should ever subject anybody to it again.
The New York Mets, however might have to deal with it for a little while longer.
Innocently enough, the baseball team decided to hold an online contest to determine the tune for its traditional eighth-inning sing-along. Despite the fact that the "Stephen Colbert Bridge" debacle should've taught the world a lesson about the perils of online polls, the contest included a write-in option. Prank-friendly geek hubs Digg and Fark linked to the poll, and sure enough, "Never Gonna Give You Up" came out on top.
MetsBlog.com reported that the song played at 4:03 p.m. EDT during the Mets' season opener against the Philadelphia Phillies, who ended up beating the Mets 5-2.
But this might be the only Mets game to get Rickrolled. Gawker Media sports blog Deadspin reported that when the Digging and Farking masses flooded the contest with votes for "Never Gonna Give You Up," the powers-that-be at Shea Stadium decided to issue a mulligan, sort of.
"Rather than commit to that as the new eighth-inning tune since it probably doesn't reflect the fan base's wishes, the Mets will play the top six selections once apiece during the first six games of their home stand," a New York Daily News article linked on Deadspin read. "The one that draws the largest crowd response will stick." Hey, Rick's still got a chance.
And considering the Mets haven't won a World Series since Rick Astley was popular the first time around, "Never Gonna Give You Up" might be a good choice regardless.
CNET News.com's Tom Krazit contributed to this report by noticing the Rickroll mention as he obsessively hit "reload" on MetsBlog.com all afternoon hoping to learn that his beloved Kings of Queens had actually won a game. Sorry, dude.
The erratic play of the New York Mets appears to have spurred at least one city resident and iPhone owner on a perplexing quest for justice.
Either the iPhone price cut is making people wacky, or there's something in the water in Queens.
(Credit: CNET Networks)Dongmei Li, a resident of the borough of Queens, sued Apple earlier this week for "price discrimination" brought on by the $200 drop in the price of the iPhone announced earlier this month by Apple CEO Steve Jobs. Li names Apple, Jobs and AT&T as defendants in her suit, filed on Monday and spotted by AppleInsider.
The claims in the case make about as much sense to me, a long-suffering Mets fan, as the continual game of bullpen roulette played by team manager Willie Randolph, who also plies his trade in Queens (for now). According to documents filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, there are three central claims to Li's case.
The first? "Apple's price reduction has hurt early purchasers' competition with Apple because they cannot sell it for as high a profit as they could have before the price cut." Li says she bought the $499 4GB model, discontinued after the price cut, on iPhone Day. Obviously, nobody's going to spend more than $499 on a 4GB iPhone today when they can go out and buy the 8GB one for $399, so Li's potential profits are indeed dashed.
But it's not like the early iPhone resellers made substantial profits on their purchases in the first place. And is Apple really obligated to take into account the potential profits of individuals reselling their iPhones when making pricing decisions? I'm not lawyer, but that theory seems a bit off the straight and narrow, kind of like a Guillermo Mota fastball.
The second one is even better. "Apple's price reduction has hurt early purchasers' competition with later purchasers because they cannot resell their iPhones for as low a price as later purchasers may." Why not? What exactly is preventing you from selling your iPhone for as low a price as you want?
If you're serious, Ms. Li, I'll give you ten bucks for it. If that's too high, I can come down to $5. But that's my lowest offer.
That's not even my favorite one. In another claim, she advances one of the most creative conspiracy theories I've read yet concerning Apple's motivation for the iPhone price cut.
Both the Mets, and this lawsuit, could use your prayers.
(Credit: Flickr user saragoldsmith)First, she alleges that Apple is losing money on each sale of a $399 8GB iPhone. Just for the sake of argument, we'll assume that illogical unsupported statement is accurate. So, then, what would be Apple's motivation?
"Apple is selling its iPhone for an unreasonably low price to hurt competition between early and later purchasers so that the early purchasers cannot resell for as high a profit as they could have without the price cut. Apple is selling its iPhone for an unreasonably low price to hurt the competition that purchasers pose to it from reselling their iPhones."
There you have it, folks, it's all become clear. Apple wasn't trying to sell more iPhones during the upcoming holiday season. They weren't trying to kick-start demand to hit their sales targets for the quarter. They weren't trying to milk profits out of their faithful early adopters. They are trying to rip the heart out of that nonexistent iPhone resale market to deny profits to individuals who thought they were Apple's resellers.
I thought New York was a hip, tech-savvy place these days. There's no shortage of iPhone owners irked by the steep and sudden drop in price, but this is the wackiest iPhone lawsuit I've seen since that guy from suburban Chicago who thought Apple was forcing his battery to die after a year. Probably a long-suffering Cubs fan.
People, it's just baseball, let's not let it drive us to commit wild acts of litigation. However, I can understand what it feels like to battle against the odds. After all, ya gotta believe.
- prev
- 1
- next
