Oh, it’s a fail on TWO levels! Free’s should not have an apostrophe, which is funny because fees does not have one. AND it should be fewer fees rather than less fees since fees are quantifiable. Good one, Joyce!!!!
The apostrophe thing is kind of ambiguous, since “free” doesn’t have a plural (as pointed out above). In this case I don’t think one is necessary; since “free” is capitalized and the “s” is not, it’s pretty clear that they are pluralizing “free” and not trying to spell “frees.” Another alternative would just be to put “free” in quotes, or just leave it singular.
FREE’s is wrong. It should be FREEs (and CD’s, 1990′s, etc. are all also wrong). It’s wrong to say that FREE is an adjective – it’s not, in this case – it has been made into a noun.
If I was in charge, I’d have made it “Less FEES, more FREES” (yes, I know it should be ‘fewer’ but colloquialisms are OK.)
i’m tired today, why is this a fail?
Oh, it’s a fail on TWO levels! Free’s should not have an apostrophe, which is funny because fees does not have one. AND it should be fewer fees rather than less fees since fees are quantifiable. Good one, Joyce!!!!
good explanation. however i’ve seen worse grammar at our local target, i’ll stick to the fail blog.
If they mean “free”s, then FREE’s could be considered correct. Free is an adjective anyway, so it doesn’t have a plural.
So when an adjective is used (albeit poorly) as a plural noun, it’s supposed to have an apostrophe s?
Just wondering.
The apostrophe thing is kind of ambiguous, since “free” doesn’t have a plural (as pointed out above). In this case I don’t think one is necessary; since “free” is capitalized and the “s” is not, it’s pretty clear that they are pluralizing “free” and not trying to spell “frees.” Another alternative would just be to put “free” in quotes, or just leave it singular.
But if they went with just “free”, they wouldn’t have such a clever advertising rhyme
FREE’s is wrong. It should be FREEs (and CD’s, 1990′s, etc. are all also wrong). It’s wrong to say that FREE is an adjective – it’s not, in this case – it has been made into a noun.
If I was in charge, I’d have made it “Less FEES, more FREES” (yes, I know it should be ‘fewer’ but colloquialisms are OK.)
Fees are not necessarily quantifiable, as it could be the amount of the fee, and not the number of fees.
(Devil’s Advocate!)
how about: “Less of a fee, more of the free”?
or Less fee, more FREE
or Less of a fee, more that’s FREE
or (my fav) more FREE for less fee
(more FREE for less of a fee – to be correct)
you guys are missing the point entirely.
it’s got nothing to do with the words fees or free’s
“over 125 free ATMs”
^^ this is what is a FAIL, as the bank is literally offering free machines
^Although that may very well be why this was posted, it’s not incorrect. A free ATM is one that doesn’t charge per transaction. This is a common term.
As for the jingle, I like “More for free, smaller fee!”
“I like to be free, we murder those fees”
“When free, there’s no fees”
“We be free without that fee” (I know)
And so on. Sorry they wouldn’t all work in that specific instance, I really just had fun making those up.