Some replacement auto parts have a CORE charge added at the time of purchase. Car batteries and axles are common examples. It's an acronym: Cash On Receipt of Exchange.
Contrary to what AutoZone or other stores may tell you, that old part is not a "core". You redeem the old part for the CORE. For the Cash On Return of Exchanged part. The supplier does not "buy the core back". The CORE fee was paid as a deposit. The deposit is returned only by the supplier who is holding the deposit. No return, and the supplier pockets the fee.
The confusion comes from rebuilt or re-manufactured assemblies. You could swap out a transmission or engine or carburetor. Your old parts had value for re-sale, re-build, or as scrap. You paid a CORE charge at the carb shop and brought back your old carb after a little shade-tree mechanical work. As long as all of the major parts were serviceable, you'd get the deposit back. Otherwise, all you had was scrap metal. The term is "serviceable core". See the confusion?
But, a car battery does not have a serviceable core. One does not rebuild a battery. It's fed into a shredder to separate the plastic shell, lead plates, and acid solution for material recovery. Some axle assemblies can be re-manufactured, and you'll get your CORE deposit back even if the CV boots and clamps are missing. So...it's like a "core", but not quite.
The CORE fee or deposit encourages re-use and recycling. It keeps car batteries out of the trash. Some states mandate the fee for certain sizes of batteries. But, it's CORE not "a core". Some states require CORE fees for car batteries.
Check the terms of the CORE policy. For car batteries, as long as it's the same class of battery, the CORE fee must be paid to the person holding the receipt, no matter the brand. It does not need to be serviceable. For an engine, you can't buy a Chevy crate V8 and return the four-banger you pulled out your Miata. They won't care how cool your new rocket is...the CORE fee or core fee was based on exchanging the same engine in a serviceable condition. If your part is not serviceable, there is a different price for buying without an exchange.
Don't loose the battel. We can speak the good English!
Saturday, January 25, 2014
Thursday, January 9, 2014
Thursday, April 5, 2012
Mystery blur in sattelite images
Saw this blog post on Zagg about blurred areas in Google Maps satellite images.
Funny, the image on Google is blurred, but Microsoft (Bing) is showing it. Yahoo is terrible resolution, and is missing an entire section.
The only thing I see is an array of four vertical structures in a diamond shape, pointing roughly NE. There are three smaller vertical structures in and around the larger four.
Antennae? Hunting for or talking to subs? Launchers? Who knows?
But if it's so hush-hush, why is there a 2009 image that's unblurred?
There used to be some mining in that area, then it died off. Wikipedia says the population has grown back in recent years.
The plot thickens.
Funny, the image on Google is blurred, but Microsoft (Bing) is showing it. Yahoo is terrible resolution, and is missing an entire section.
The only thing I see is an array of four vertical structures in a diamond shape, pointing roughly NE. There are three smaller vertical structures in and around the larger four.
Antennae? Hunting for or talking to subs? Launchers? Who knows?
But if it's so hush-hush, why is there a 2009 image that's unblurred?
There used to be some mining in that area, then it died off. Wikipedia says the population has grown back in recent years.
The plot thickens.
Google Map's image with 2011 copyright watermark |
Yahoo's image marked 2009. (www.flashearth.com) |
Microsoft's image, marked 2009. Notice diamond shape indicated by yellow arrow. |
No clue what it is, or why so secret. Any ideas? |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)