Re: Yo! David Maynard! (Was: Rebates -- Best Buy rebate scam)
- From: David Maynard <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 02:44:43 -0500
JAD wrote:
"David Maynard" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:12a59v9sbh3gs38@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
JAD wrote:
"Curmudgeon" <curmudgeon5@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:mn.e2237d66efcf0000.54228@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
JAD explained :
the reason this thread always turns into a marathon is because your
both
correct. Bottom line is that mail in rebates are not in the consumers
best
interest.
Sure they are. At least most of them.
no they are not,,,,they are a inconvience and not necessary. its a
'hook'.
They are designed for marketing stats and all kinds of sales info.
Corporations know exactly how much they made on the 'lazy ' consumer,
so
therefore there is a thought process for profit based on the 'lazy '
guy.
You see something wrong with that notion? I think that's called "good
business sense"?
rebates are much like your attempt to bait me into an argument that
doesn't
exist. Why not just lower the price of the product
Because they aren't 'lowering the price' and if you really want to see
people scream 'scam' let 'em bounce the 'retail price' back up after a
temporary lowering. "Oh sure, raise the price now that I'm 'hooked'."
Your only looking at one type of product obviously..like what printer
cartridges? Sure I can see that,,,,but then don't tell me there is not a
scam when it comes to that. Until the aftermarket reman companies finally
got going we were STUCK!
What is this,? the 'what's the definition of ' lowing the price'.
simplified ...that's what it is.
I see how you get that impression from my colorful, limited, example but, no, I'm speaking of products in general because, while people are sanguine about 'sales', 'special offers' and 'rebates', they generally expect price stability, or feel something's amiss.
My example was just one embodiment but the general effect doesn't need a purchase. Say someone is 'thinking' about buying a computer but it's one price this week, higher a month later, and then something else a month after that. Bouncing prices on something not even bought won't sit any better than the 'hooked' example and the prospective buyer would be screaming "well, if it's a 'temporary' price then why the hell didn't you SAY so?" and it doesn't take much imagination to envision the 'sneaky motives' consumers would ascribe to the price changes.
A rebate "says so."
And bouncing the 'retail price' all over the place would screw up the
entire pricing structure, what with dealer discount programs tied to
retail
and such, as well as just about every accounting, inventory,
manufacturing,
and product management tool.
come on Dave, all that can be absorbed easily.
That's easy for *you* to say, when you don't have to do it.
the distributors and accounti
ng and all that crap are the company's problem, rebates make it a consumer
problem. It simply makes their job easier, on MANY levels, and dumps the
inconvenience unto the consumer.
No, what gets 'dumped on the consumer' isn't precipitated for 'easy accounting'. It's to reduce fraud.
And who said 'bouncing'? It goes down, and
normally its either a brand new product or one that's being updated or
phased out. One that either has little inventory or is inventory that
distributors would love to get rid of. It's all about accounting, How to
take money from X account and put it into z without any inconvenience and
very little cost to the company and its vendors.
No offense but you apparently haven't looked at what motivates rebates because it's seldom just to move some obsolete product.
Got no idea how you come up with the 'accounting' bit or what it means.
Can you call it a scam? No. Is it illegal? No. Does it walk the line on
occasion? Yes. Is every company honest about their rebates? No. Does it
serve the consumers best interest? No.
Hard to imagine how you can so definitively assert that a discount doesn't serve the consumer's interest.
Does it serve the company's best
interest? Yes, otherwise it wouldn't exist.
Of course. But the problem I see with your analysis is a presumption the two are incompatible, especially when most reputable companies operate on the theory that the first leads to the second.
Its an acceptable practice now,
like the legal ease you can never read at the bottom of your TV screen
during Car or drug commercials. As a younger man I shopped 20% 40% off
retail prices,
Which is routine today, before the rebates.
I had not even heard of mail in rebates then....didn't seem
to collapse the human race.
Living in caves didn't collapse the human race either but that's hardly a reason to go back to them.
Not to mention it's not even possible to 'lower the retail price' but only
if you buy it in conjunction with XYZ, or from dealer A, or in Hackensack.
Dave, the retail prices of things are changed all the time. And may I say
that it RARELY GOES DOWN,
Inflation is another matter entirely.
so you can raise it but not lower it? Someone
should tell Wal Mart to quit cutting those prices, tell them its not
possible.
First you say they don't and then you cite an example of them doing so?
With most of these 'mail in rebates', the consumer does very very well
if he/she applies due diligence. If they're too lazy or sloppy with
their rebate info? Tough stroke.
which is what i said
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Prev by Date: Re: HD no longer recognizable by XP pro once used in XP Home
- Next by Date: Re: I NEED HELP WITH SOME COMPUTER STUFF!!!!!!!
- Previous by thread: Re: P4 Temperature, questionable heat sink mounting.
- Next by thread: Re: Yo! David Maynard! (Was: Rebates -- Best Buy rebate scam)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
