Chaitra: Hello! Welcome to Adobe Customer Service.
Chaitra: Hi Devon
Chaitra: I understand that you wish to cancel your subscription, let me help you with that.
Chaitra: May I know the reason for cancellation please?
Me: I'm not using the software enough to justify the cost.
Chaitra: Thank you for the information.
Me: No problem!
Chaitra: I have checked and see that you have Creative Cloud membership (one-year) subscription, which was purchased on 18 Jun 2013.
Chaitra: Before you decide to cancel your subscription, let me give you an offer.
Chaitra: I can give you 1 month free subscription which will help you save a months subscription fee and next month of your membership will be free, with your annual commitment.
Chaitra: Will you be interested in 1 month free offer?
Me: No, I don't think so, but thank you for the offer.
Me: Is that it?
Chaitra: If you wish I can provide you next 2 months free as an exception which would save next 2 months fee for you , If you are willing to continue and complete your current annual commitment.
Chaitra: Would you wish to continue with the subscription with 2 months free subscription?
Me: The only way I would consider keeping the service is if you could permanently lower the monthly cost. I'm not getting value out of my $50 monthly subscription and a free month or two won't change that. I would keep the service if I could have access to all the apps for $20/month. Otherwise, I'd like to cancel.
Chaitra: If I change the plan to 29.99 USD, do you wish to continue with the subscription?
Me: No thank you. Please cancel it.
Chaitra: Before , I go ahead and cancel your subscription are you interested in photography so I can change your subscription to photography plan which is 9.99 USD per month which includes Lightroom and photoshop in it ?
Me: No thank you.
Chaitra: Devon, you have purchased a subscription with annual commitment, since you wish to cancel the subscription before the end of one year period, you will be billed 50% of your monthly rate for the remaining months in your annual commitment as early termination fee.
Chaitra: If you pay early termination fee, you will not be able to use the product, however If you continue with the subscription with 2 month free subscription you will be able to use the subscription and also get two months free subscription. In this case, I would suggest you to take an advantage of two months free subscription.
Chaitra: Are we still connected?
Me: I thought you said my subscription started in 2013? Why would I pay an early termination fee?
Chaitra: I see that you have change the plan on Jan 7, 2014.
Me: OK. So, one year from that date would have been January 7, 2015.
Chaitra: you have renewed for the another year.
Chaitra: I would like to inform you that, all Adobe subscription renew automatically, if you don't cancel the subscription in 12th month you will be moved to second year cycle. We have sent the notification email regarding the second year commitment for the subscription as we send a notification email for every renewal of the subscription.
Me: If that's true, this is the 12th month of my subscription. Today would be the day it would renew. I want to cancel before that happens.
Chaitra: I checked and see that I your subscription billing date is today, that is 07 Jan 2016.
Chaitra: In this case, If O cancel the subscription also the subscription will reactivate.
Me: You're telling me that if I cancel today, the subscription will automatically renew for another year even though it has been canceled?
Me: That sounds like a bug in your billing software. I'm not responsible for that.
Chaitra: Since today is the billing date, the monthly billing has already been started and it is not possible to stop it
Me: Can you connect me with your supervisor?
Chaitra: Also once you get charged, the payment gets updated and it reactivate the service so that you can use it till the month.
Chaitra: I am canceling it now
Me: Can you ensure I won't be charged any termination fees since I have satisfied my year commitment?
Chaitra: And forwarding the case to our relevant department to make sure it gets canceled permanently
Chaitra: Yes, there won't be any fee.
Chaitra: I have already taken care of that
Me: Excellent. Thank you.
Chaitra: You will have access to the apps till Feb 7 2016
Chaitra: You will no longer get charged except today for it,.
Chaitra: You are welcome.
Chaitra: Is there anything else I can help you with?
Me: Nothing else. Thank you.
Chaitra: You are welcome.
Chaitra: Have a great day.
Chaitra: Thank you for contacting Adobe. We are available 7 days a week, 24 hours a day. Goodbye!
Wisconsin Governor and Republican presidential candidate Scott Walker will sign a bill Wednesdayfinalizing his controversial plan to spend $250 million in state, county and city funds — plus tens of millions more in interest and future tax breaks — on a new basketball arena for the Milwaukee Bucks.
Walker has characterized the plan to replace the existing 27-year-old NBA arena as beneficial to taxpayers, arguing that the state would lose even more money if they declined to do so. But voices from across the political spectrum are blasting the plan, saying that pouring money into private sports stadiums is a terrible investment, and arguing the team’s Wall Street billionaire owners should shoulder the burden, since they’ll be reaping the profits.
“Government shouldn’t be in the business of financing private sports stadiums,” said the Koch brothers-backed group Americans for Prosperity Wisconsin. “The current deal is based on fuzzy math, complicated accounting and millions of taxpayer dollars. Whether it comes from the state, the county, the city or other authority, these are taxpayer dollars.” The Libertarian CATO Instituteadded: “Any presidential candidate who believes that taxpayer-subsidized stadiums are ‘a good deal’ shouldn’t be anywhere near the federal Treasury.”
The fact that the current Bucks arena is still $20 million in debt only bolsters their arguments.
Originally, Walker attempted to insert the $250 million arena deal into the massive two-year state budget that happened to cut $250 million from the University of Wisconsin, among othercontroversial provisions. But after outcry from both sides of the aisle, it was introduced as a separate bill, which passed after an intense barrage of lobbying.
Now, the generous public financing is raising questions about conflicts of interest.
On the very day that Walker began pushing for taxpayers to foot much of the bill for the new arena, one of the team’s owners donated $150,000 to his super PAC. The investor, Jon Hammes, has donated directly to Walker’s past campaigns, as well, to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars, and this year, Walker hired him as his national finance co-chairman. Another Bucks owner, Ted Kellner, gave $50,000 to Walker’s Super PAC.
Aides to Walker have denied any pay-for-play connection, noting that other Bucks owners havedonated to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
Though the state bill will become law this week, the economically depressed city of Milwaukee has yet to vote on its own portion of the financing. Workers in the city, who were unable to secure provisions in the state bill guaranteeing living wages and local hiring policies at the new arena, will now turn the pressure on both the City Council and the Bucks owners.
“There’s a real chance to make a breakthrough,” Peter Rickman with Milwaukee’s Good Jobs Alliance told ThinkProgress. “No one trusted the state government to take on this critical issue, since we’ve seen an unbroken string of five years of attacks on working class and poor people, unions, and wages. But there are still a wealth of decisions to be made the local level regarding investment in parking and infrastructure, land permits, and the surrounding commercial properties. And when public money is going to be invested in things like these large-scale projects, we need to ask, ‘Is it going to make the good jobs crisis worse, or is it going to make it better? Is it going to only create poverty-wage service sector jobs?'”
Rickman’s coalition is not only calling for an agreement that gives workers at the new stadium a living wage and the right to unionize, they’re pushing for a promise that the jobs will go to the people who live in the impoverished neighborhoods surrounding Milwaukee’s downtown.
“This used to be one of the best places in the country for African Americans families, because of the good union jobs in factors and foundries,” he explained. “Those jobs weren’t always good; workers fought to make them good. But when those jobs disappeared they were largely replaced with low-wage service sector jobs. Our fight right now is to continue the history of turning bad jobs into good jobs.”