nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Studio Pass VS Premium

todd_469234

From what I can tell it's basically the same thing except if you've already purchased Premium you don't get access to this new content that is being brought to Studio Pass.

Find more posts tagged with

Announcements

Comments

albamicheli

If you join Studio pass you get access to premium too... which I am not too happy about as I have already paid for it a year ago.

tobiasresch

I think this Breville quite directly asking for a class action lawsuit. Why did I pay for a lifetime of "premium" content only for "premium" content to be renamed "studio pass" a short while later and my access to it revoked?

brian_martin2001

While many of us were upset by this, there are two things to keep in mind:

1. Read the terms and conditions

2. Whay were they doing before Breville came along? Going belly up.

tobiasresch

1. T&C almost don't matter in a class action. So even if they had weaselly phrasing in there, the threat of a jury trial is often enough to reach a good settlement.

2. Their bad business model and strategy from a few years ago is not my responsibility.

brian_martin2001

Good luck finding a lawyer who will take this and enough people to instigate a class action lawsuit.

jamesalanhall

1. Small print (t&c) can't legally negate the bigger print commitments (all recipes forever).

2. You buy something you get the good and bad. If Breville buys CS then it takes on existing debts and obligations. If Breville is just an investor, and CS as a legal entity continues, then it's obligations continue until it's either bankrupt or ceases existence.

Ultimately the consequence of bad management is that if the business can't meet it's obligations it closes and has to start a new brand (or at least a new company).

It's like having your cake and eat it too. They want to trade off the existing brand, but ignore the obligations associated with it. It doesn't (or shouldn't) work that way in reality.

brian_martin2001

Shouldn't and doesn't are two radically separate things. As i told "T", go talk to a lawyer, present what you have. Good luck finding one that will take it on.