Canada's Wonderland accused of misleading online pricing by Competition Bureau
The Competition Bureau filed an application against Canada's Wonderland on Monday, alleging that the theme park has been using 'misleading tactics' to lure the public into buying not-so-cheap thrills.
The bureau's legal filing states the park ignored a formal cease-and-desist notice in July 2023 and continued to promote cheaper pricing on its website and social media channels that excluded mandatory processing fees, ranging from $0.99 to $9.99. These fees, the bureau alleges, were incrementally revealed during the purchasing process — 'dripping' into the final price.
'(Drip pricing is) intended to deceive and to trick and to nudge people towards spending where they wouldn't otherwise,' said Vass Bednar, executive director of the master of public policy program at McMaster University in Hamilton.
The bureau's lawsuit alleges 'Wonderland has engaged in this deceptive marketing practice, known as drip pricing, since at least June 2022 ... The processing fee is an ongoing source of revenue for Wonderland.'
Canada's Wonderland, located in Vaughan and owned by the U.S.-based Six Flags Entertainment Corp., said the charges were 'unfounded' and 'unsubstantiated,' in a written statement on the park's website.
'Canadians should always be able to trust the initial advertised price,' competition commissioner Matthew Boswell said in a statement.
In 2024, the Competition Tribunal
ruled against Cineplex
in a similar case brought forward by the Competition Bureau. The movie-house chain was ordered to pay a record penalty of more than $38.9 million, as well as legal costs. The fine was equivalent to the amount it collected from consumers through a $1.50 online booking fee between June 2022 and December 2023.
Cineplex is appealing the decision.
'I would expect to see the bureau seek something similarly meaningful, especially considering Wonderland has been given substantial notice and warning,' said Bednar, co-author of 'The Big Fix: How Companies Capture Markets and Harm Canadians.'
It's 'very intriguing,' Bednar said, that the bureau's case cites alleged examples of the park's misleading ads on social media. A screenshot from one of the park's Instagram posts is 'Example A' in the bureau's filing with the tribunal.
'Get ready for thrills all season long,' the post stated. 'Grab your Silver Pass now for just $89 and enjoy unlimited visits until Labour Day.'
The park's website still features the $89 pass, the Star confirmed on Monday. To learn the final price, a consumer must click past a page of optional upgrades to get to another page with a green button that states 'pay in full' with the amount owing listed as $88.97. Clicking on that green button leads to a final page where the actual final price is revealed. The pass doesn't cost $89 but $107.56, which includes HST and a $6.99 'processing fee.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Anna Sorokin claims she's received hundreds of death threats over bunnies abandoned in New York park
Con artist Anna Sorokin claims she's received hundreds of death threats after she was accused of abandoning bunnies she posed with during a photoshoot in New York. The 34-year-old so-called fake heiress, who was convicted of grand larceny in 2019 for defrauding banks, hotels, and her friends out of hundreds of thousands of dollars, posted photos to her Instagram account last week capturing her posing in the Big Apple with two bunnies on red leashes. Someone later reported seeing the same rabbits roaming in Brooklyn's Prospect Park. Since posting the photos on her account, which boasts 1.1 million followers, Sorokin said she's been bombarded with death threats. She claims to have had nothing to do with the logistics of the photoshoot. 'I am deeply alarmed by the death threats and hundreds of vile, harassing messages flooding my social media,' she wrote in a statement on Instagram Tuesday. The Independent has asked the NYPD if Sorokin has informed police about the alleged death threats. Sorokin posted a series of photos and videos last week from the photoshoot. Dressed in a blue mini dress and matching heels — an ensemble that allowed her ankle monitor to be on full display — Sorokin holds her long blonde locks in one hand and holds the red bunny leashes with the other outside a Subway station in downtown Manhattan. Sorokin served almost four years in prison over duping Manhattan's elite and spent another 18 months in immigration detention for overstaying her U.S. visa. She is now required to wear an ankle monitor as part of the terms of her house arrest. Terry Chao, a blogger, saw one of the rabbits in Prospect Park hiding in a bush, the New York Times reported. She told the outlet that she had recognized the bunny from a Facebook group, where some bunnies had recently been listed for adoption. 'They went and got those bunnies for the shoot, basically as props, and then dumped them,' Chao told the paper. 'They don't have any survival mechanisms like wild rabbits do.' Sorokin shared screenshots from a text exchange that suggest a person named Christian Batty ditched the rabbits in the park. The Independent has made attempts to contact Batty. Chao said in an Instagram statement that Batty had reached out to her before the photoshoot to scout for bunnies. He later showed up and helped her rescue a bunny from the shoot, she said. Batty apologized in a since-deleted Instagram post, which was reposted by Sorokin and Chao. 'When I realized the rabbits were being surrendered to me, I panicked,' the post read. 'At 19, with no experience caring for animals, no pet-friendly housing, and no knowledge of available resources, I felt overwhelmed and made the worst possible choice. Believing, mistakenly, that there were existing rabbits in that area, I released them there, thinking that was my best option.' Sorokin said she had nothing to do with the planning of the photoshoot. She said she had agreed to pose for the photographer, Jasper Egan Soloff. His lawyer disputed Sorokin's claims. 'This was not Jasper's photo shoot, and he did not arrange any of the details surrounding it,' he told the NYT, noting his client had been hired to take photos of Sorokin. 'Jasper had no knowledge or input as to how the bunnies were obtained or what happened to them after the photo shoot.' In a statement on Instagram on Tuesday, Sorokin said she donated $1,000 to the nonprofit All About Rabbits Rescue. The Independent has reached out to the nonprofit to confirm that it had received a donation from Sorokin.
NBC News
8 hours ago
- NBC News
Anna Sorokin says she received hundreds of death threats over bunnies abandoned in Brooklyn park
Anna "Delvey" Sorokin says she's received hundreds of death threats in the days since was was accused of dumping pet rabbits she posed with for a photoshoot in a Brooklyn park. The fake German heiress who stole tens of thousands of dollars from banks posed alongside three bunnies on the streets of Manhattan's posh Tribeca neighborhood last week. The bunnies were recognized and discovered in Brooklyn's Prospect Park days later, prompting fierce online backlash. But the headline-making New York City socialite — who vehemently denied responsibility for the discarded bunnies — said in an interview with NBC News that she's particularly shocked by the strong reaction over the incident. 'It just seems to me like everything I do is just wrong," Sorokin, 34, said in a phone call with NBC News. "I can never do right by these people.' Sorokin shared screenshots of dozens of hateful messages she's received within the last few days to her Instagram — which she called "unusable" — with NBC News. Some of them suggest that she she should be killed or take her own life, including one that advises Sorokin to get someone to "make a carpet out of your skin." 'It seems like a lot of these people, just because they're engaged in animal rescue, they feel like they're entitled to insult you or talk to you or say anything because they're hiding behind this thing that they're doing,' she said. The 34-year-old, whose life was depicted in Netflix's hit 2022 series "Inventing Anna," took the photoshoot with the bunnies on August 3 to create content for her Instagram account, which has more than 1.1 million followers. Shortly before the shoot, she posted on Instagram story asking if any of her followers in the New York City metropolitan area had a pet rabbit she could borrow for the shoot, Sorokin said. Christian Batty, a 19-year-old hair stylist Sorokin met briefly last year, reached out to her and offered what he described as a friend's rabbits, she said. Sorokin added that she paid Batty to provide the rabbits and for his Uber to return the rabbits to their owner in Yonkers — or so she thought. A screenshot of the Uber receipt Sorokin shared with NBC News show the ride's drop off location was just south of Prospect Park, where the rabbits were later spotted. Days later, she said she started receiving messages on social media about the rabbits being spotted in Prospect Park. A Facebook user posted images of the domesticated bunnies in the park to a public Facebook group dedicated to rabbits, House Rabbit Society, and other users connected them to Sorokin's photos. Sorokin initially thought the posts were fake, but the flood of messages did not stop. At first, Batty denied dumping the rabbits in the park, according to screenshots of text messages between Sorokin, Batty and photographer Jasper Soloff that Sorokin posted on her Instagram story and shared with NBC News. "Jasper had no knowledge or input as to how the bunnies were obtained or what happened to them after the photo shoot," Soloff's attorney, Gary Adelman, said in a statement. Batty did not immediately return a request for comment. Hours later, Batty confessed that he did dump the rabbits and absolved Sorokin of any involvement, according to a statement he posted to his Instagram account, which has since been taken down. "When I realized the rabbits were being surrendered to me, I panicked," Batty said in the statement, screenshots of which were provided by Sorokin. "At 19, with no experience caring for animals, no pet-friendly housing, and no knowledge of available resources, I felt overwhelmed and made the worst possible choice." "Believing, mistakenly, that there were existing rabbits in that area, I released them there, thinking that was my best option," he added. Sorokin pushed back on the notion that Batty's age was an issue. "He's old enough to move to New York and live on his own, he should have enough common sense to handle rabbits," Sorokin said. "We're not like asking him to do anything that requires high IQ from him. I just don't know what to say." Sorokin said that she was concerned about how the incident might affect her pending immigration case. Sorokin was convicted by a Manhattan jury in April 2019 on four counts of theft services, three counts of grand larceny and one count of attempted grand larceny after being accused of defrauding banks and friends of tens of thousands of dollars. Prosecutors said that Sorokin convinced friends and businesses to loan her money to afford a lavish lifestyle under the guise that she was the daughter of a oil baron or diplomat, worth tens of millions of dollars. In 2021, Sorokin was released on parole while she fights deportation. She has been forced to wear an electronic ankle monitor and cannot leave a 75-mile house arrest radius based in New York. "This time, I've done nothing wrong," she said. "And I had the best intentions and it's really frustrating." The New York Times reported that the rabbits were rescued by blogger Terry Chao, who spotted the rabbits in the park. Chao could not immediately be reached for comment. Sorokin said she donated $1,000 to the group All About Rabbits Rescue in the aftermath of the scandal. She also denied harming the rabbits by putting them in leashes, as some have suggested online. "I don't know, I'm not a bunny professional. I didn't know the leashes were such a big deal," she said. "We would put them down for, I don't know, a minute or two, take a picture and pick them up. We were not walking them by any means. And they seemed to be happy."
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Don't snoop through your partner's phone. Learn to sleuth instead
Put yourself in Emma's shoes: You're scrolling on your phone and get a text notification that says, 'Hey girly, your boyfriend said you guys would have a threesome with me, and I think he didn't tell you about that.' Would you (a) ignore the message or (b) look through his conveniently unattended phone? If you chose (b), don't feel too bad. Nearly 30% of American adults say it's at least sometimes acceptable to look through a significant other's phone without permission, according to a Pew Research Center survey. 'I have looked through many of my partners' phones, and I definitely have quite a few stories,' said Emma, who didn't want to include her last name to protect her privacy. An age-old debate surrounding phone snooping has been revived by the July breakup between JaNa Craig and Kenny Rodriguez, stars of the 2024 season of the reality dating show 'Love Island USA.' 'Discovering that someone you loved isn't who you thought they were and that the relationship you thought you were building hasn't been genuine since day one has been truly devastating,' Craig wrote in an Instagram story post confirming the split. Craig's friend then took to Instagram to advise other women in relationships to 'go thru your mans phone TODAY' if they had access. (Craig and Rodriguez haven't confirmed the more specific details of their breakup.) Searching through someone's phone may not be aligned with a person's character and values, but they might have valid suspicions and no other way find the truth — so they look. Doing so may turn out to be fair game when you learn incriminating information, according to divorce lawyer Dennis R. Vetrano, who is also a mediator and content creator based in New York's Hudson Valley. Not so much to this psychologist. 'In general, I think that invading another person's private space — whether it's snooping on their phone, reading their personal journal, or invading their physical space — is unethical without their permission,' said Dr. Cortney Warren, board certified clinical psychologist and adjunct clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Snooping also can be illegal, depending on privacy laws in your state or other jurisdiction, so it's not advised that you go through your partner's phone, according to Vetrano. But is such snooping even necessary anymore? With so much out in the public sphere online, do you really need to snoop? Why not replace snooping with sleuthing? Do you need to look through a partner's phone? The easy answer is no. While snooping is considered a breach of privacy because you're searching for information someone hasn't given you permission to access, with sleuthing you're working with information that's available in an online public space. And so many people are online: Seventy percent of American adults are on Facebook, 50% on Instagram, and 33% on TikTok, according to a 2024 survey. Sleuthing is easier these days with the creation of websites that can locate dating profiles, apps that track location, and most notably, social media platforms that allow you to see everyone who a person follows and the content they like. It's all there for anyone to mine. That was the case with Emma. 'I had already been kind of suspicious of this boyfriend for a while,' Emma said. 'So I was sleuthing through (his) TikTok following, and it was just girl after girl after girl of those OnlyFans models and anime cosplayers that, you know, cosplay minor characters in very inappropriate ways.' Is sleuthing OK to do? 'Technology is out there to track everything that you do, so I think the question — is it the right thing to do — is really something that we have to center on,' said Dr. Angela Corbo, a professor and chair of the department of communication studies at Widener University in Chester, Pennsylvania. As far as Emma was concerned, going through her previous partners' social media followings was justified because she was accessing public information and she ended up finding evidence of behavior she didn't like. 'I had been very straight up with my partners, and I don't like (them) following OnlyFans models because honestly, it was kind of embarrassing when everybody can see that your partner is liking photos and sharing weird adult content videos publicly,' she said. When it comes to social media, people can formulate an image of what another person is like based on who they follow and the content with which they interact. 'I think social media is a great way of getting an idea without waiting for someone to show you, or without having to break someone's boundaries and invade their privacy,' said Diana Prime, a relationship coach on Instagram and TikTok. 'If someone has adult-rated content, if they're following OnlyFans models, that is enough to not continue a relationship with that person because it gives you an insight to what they do.' Is snooping through someone's phone still wrong? Yes, Warren said. Snooping is also a sign of other troubles, such as not respecting your partner, Prime said. In that case, you're 'not going to think twice about invading their privacy.' Generally, sleuthing 'is different in the sense that the material online is often public — so the deceptive element of violating a partner's personal boundaries is less pronounced,' said Warren, author of 'Letting Go of Your Ex: CBT Skills to Heal the Pain of a Breakup and Overcome Love Addiction.' Think of it like this: Say you're sitting beside a partner and happen to glimpse a notification on their phone. 'You've done nothing wrong,' Corbo said. 'I think it's when you go behind somebody's back to retrieve information that they're not giving you permission for — I think that's when a violation has occurred.' You're already in breakup territory if you're feeling like your partner's behavior leaves you no other option but to snoop. 'That's a deeper-rooted problem that will lead to bigger issues down the road, and that's enough to walk away from someone, because what happens when you find information by snooping is that you hurt your own feelings times 10,' she said. 'It will do you more damage to snoop through that person's phone than to honor your own intuition about something being off,' Prime added. 'What within you wants to play things out, versus just trusting yourself the first time?' If your ex-partners have treated you badly and you're regularly suspicious of a partner who hasn't given you a reason to be, Corbo suggested evaluating your feelings and considering the evidence before you assume the worst. Get inspired by a weekly roundup on living well, made simple. Sign up for CNN's Life, But Better newsletter for information and tools designed to improve your well-being. CNN's Kristen Rogers contributed to this report. Solve the daily Crossword
