In my retirement years, I look more closely at commercials, ads, and movies; and the inconsistencies, poor grammar, and occasional misinformation stand out like red flags. I just don't think the current crop of writers is up to snuff, especially those in the advertisement industry.
Money Mutual has an advertisement with a picture of Montel Williams: Get a short term cash loan of up to $1,000 by tomorrow.** Per Montel: 'Money Mutual's online network is a cash source you can trust for finding a short term cash loan quickly and easily.'
It states further: "...a cash advance is a signature loan backed by future sources of income, usually your paycheck...
However, it states in the same ad: '** The operator of this website is not a lender, does not broker loans to lenders and does not make short term cash loans or credit decisions. This website does not constitute an offer or solicitation to lend...the operator of this website is not an agent, representative or broker of any lender and does not endorse or charge you for any service or product. Not all lenders can provide up to $1,000...Typically lenders will not perform credit checks with the three credit reporting bureaus...Credit checks or consumer reports through alternative providers may be obtained by some lenders.'
Yet the ad goes on to ask: "Why does Montel Williams endorse Money Mutual, a payday loan company?' How can this be if the small print data is correct? Not a lender; does not broker loans; does not make short term cash loans; is not an agent or representative of any lender; but the ad also states that Money Mutual is a payday loan company.
The questions remain: If all these data are true, just what is Money Mutual? It states it 'does not constitute an offer or solicitation.' So if not all lenders can lend up to $1,000, why are they utilized? Potential lenders 'typically' will not use credit bureaus, but they'll probably use other sources for the same credit information.' That seems a lot of effort expended for relatively small loans. Watch the interest grow.
As an alternative, you can use a credit card to get a needed advance without a problem. Or your own bank could lend some money with your savings account to back it.
If you do get a loan you'll be paying interest for the money and additional charges or fees for the lender to pay Money Mutual for it's services---though the latter, as it claims, does not broker loans etc.
There's no free lunch.
E-Harmony
You have to hand it to those advertising guys at E-Harmony. First it was ‘active’ to use E-Harmony but ‘passive’ to go to bars and look for a mate yourself. Then it was a young woman who was a small business owner and didn’t have the time to search for a mate herself, so she had E-Harmony do it. Now, we hear that E-Harmony isn’t a ‘dating’ site after all. It’s a ‘matching’ site. I’m not sure what the difference is. It isn’t a marriage bureau, is it? We’re also told now that E-Harmony isn’t ‘...as shallow as some of those other sites...’ He must mean the aforesaid ‘dating’ sites. How much is some? One? Two? Three? More? And based on the English sentence in the ad, that must mean that E-Harmony is also shallow---otherwise why compare it to ‘some of those other sites in such a way?’ And the details? If compared to one or two other sites, then E-Harmony must be about the third most shallow site. It’s hard to say since their advertising has been all over the place with contradictions in recent months.
But wait! The latest ad says: ‘...We can match you on more levels than other dating sites...’ Whoa there! I thought E-Harmony wasn’t a dating site? I’ll tell you a secret. If their ‘compatibility’ questions are as confused as their ads, then prepare yourself for a real live huggy bear as a mate.
Money Mutual has an advertisement with a picture of Montel Williams: Get a short term cash loan of up to $1,000 by tomorrow.** Per Montel: 'Money Mutual's online network is a cash source you can trust for finding a short term cash loan quickly and easily.'
It states further: "...a cash advance is a signature loan backed by future sources of income, usually your paycheck...
However, it states in the same ad: '** The operator of this website is not a lender, does not broker loans to lenders and does not make short term cash loans or credit decisions. This website does not constitute an offer or solicitation to lend...the operator of this website is not an agent, representative or broker of any lender and does not endorse or charge you for any service or product. Not all lenders can provide up to $1,000...Typically lenders will not perform credit checks with the three credit reporting bureaus...Credit checks or consumer reports through alternative providers may be obtained by some lenders.'
Yet the ad goes on to ask: "Why does Montel Williams endorse Money Mutual, a payday loan company?' How can this be if the small print data is correct? Not a lender; does not broker loans; does not make short term cash loans; is not an agent or representative of any lender; but the ad also states that Money Mutual is a payday loan company.
The questions remain: If all these data are true, just what is Money Mutual? It states it 'does not constitute an offer or solicitation.' So if not all lenders can lend up to $1,000, why are they utilized? Potential lenders 'typically' will not use credit bureaus, but they'll probably use other sources for the same credit information.' That seems a lot of effort expended for relatively small loans. Watch the interest grow.
As an alternative, you can use a credit card to get a needed advance without a problem. Or your own bank could lend some money with your savings account to back it.
If you do get a loan you'll be paying interest for the money and additional charges or fees for the lender to pay Money Mutual for it's services---though the latter, as it claims, does not broker loans etc.
There's no free lunch.
E-Harmony
You have to hand it to those advertising guys at E-Harmony. First it was ‘active’ to use E-Harmony but ‘passive’ to go to bars and look for a mate yourself. Then it was a young woman who was a small business owner and didn’t have the time to search for a mate herself, so she had E-Harmony do it. Now, we hear that E-Harmony isn’t a ‘dating’ site after all. It’s a ‘matching’ site. I’m not sure what the difference is. It isn’t a marriage bureau, is it? We’re also told now that E-Harmony isn’t ‘...as shallow as some of those other sites...’ He must mean the aforesaid ‘dating’ sites. How much is some? One? Two? Three? More? And based on the English sentence in the ad, that must mean that E-Harmony is also shallow---otherwise why compare it to ‘some of those other sites in such a way?’ And the details? If compared to one or two other sites, then E-Harmony must be about the third most shallow site. It’s hard to say since their advertising has been all over the place with contradictions in recent months.
But wait! The latest ad says: ‘...We can match you on more levels than other dating sites...’ Whoa there! I thought E-Harmony wasn’t a dating site? I’ll tell you a secret. If their ‘compatibility’ questions are as confused as their ads, then prepare yourself for a real live huggy bear as a mate.
