Bizarre, Society

Company Tells Kid To Puck Off: 11-Year-Old Denied Prize for 89-Foot Shot

This month, Nate Smith, 11, had a dream come true for a little boy. He made an 89-foot shot at a charity hockey event in Fairbault, Minnesota for a $50,000 prize. He had taken his twin brother Nick’s place when Nick went outside shortly before his name was called. Now the company, Odds on Promotion, is saying that he cannot receive the prize because it was not his ticket.

The company will make a $20,000 contribution to charity in his name instead. Why not $50,000? Moreover, since the boys have identical DNA signature, couldn’t this be viewed from a socio-biological standpoint as a gray area?

The father, Pat Smith, did the honest thing the next day and said that it was actually the other twins’ ticket and that sent the company lawyers to work. The rules say that it must be the ticket of the person participating — an understandable rule since you could enlist a ringer. However, this was his twin brother who had stepped out of the stadium.

What do you think?

Source: ABC

45 thoughts on “Company Tells Kid To Puck Off: 11-Year-Old Denied Prize for 89-Foot Shot”

  2. “I don’t often disagree with you Kike but this time”

    Woosty,

    I feel I know your thoughts far too well by now to take offense. In truth it cracked me up at my keyboard, knowing you would be abashed. 🙂

  3. “Bodice busitng”? Do you have fantasies about the St. Pauli Beer girl? :)”

    Roco,

    I’ve never been a “breast man” and consider those who are, or who cater to the notion that sex is about a man “taking” a woman, immature. 🙂

  4. “I don’t often disagree with you Kike but this time”
    Obviously …AAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHH!
    sorry Mike

  5. “The real “lesson” taught to the kids was don’t depend on the honesty of business because it is an honesty born in in convenience and also aborted at the convenience of a given company.”~Mike Spindell
    ————————
    I don’t often disagree with you Kike but this time ….the kids could be taught to be more upfront and not get into this sort of mess. The company, going by the given information, did not fall away from the contract. In fact, they tried to make good on a bad situation. Better lesson….what have these monster companies been doing that they cannot even get credit for going above and beyond. It is a sad testiment that giving 40,000 is not enough in the publics eye because of the string of ‘screwings’ thier wake…

Comments are closed.