M
measekite
Enough with this already. It has been trampled to death.
G
George E. Cawthon
No that was a response to your saying that sellersPetey said:
to Costco have to reduce the quality of their
merchandise. And I am refuting that.
What I am saying is that one of the reasons the
product disappears from Costco, is that it
develops a market and spreads to other stores that
pay more for the product. New products are sold
to various stores, and Costco introduces a lot of
those along with other stores. Costco drops the
product, other stores continue to carry it. The
product didn't go away, it is still being sold.
How does that fit with your explanation of Costco
squeezing them out?
G
George E. Cawthon
Petey said:
Oh, I didn't say they don't have poor quality
goods. People are willing to pay for poorer
quality if the price is low enough.
What I said, is that people who are willing to buy
a product at a specific price, will not be willing
to continue buying at the price if the product
quality goes down. They may select another
equally poor quality product at a lower price, or
they may select a better quality product at the
same price.
There is no argument that there is a wide range of
quality in some products and people buy all ranges
of quality. But price and quality come as a
package. Only the really dumb pay top dollar for
poor quality.
L
leo
George said:
Costco is definitely _not_ the place where new products be put in the
market.
O
Oliver Costich
Right. I have never seen a product that appeared at Costco before
anywhere else.
B
Big Bill
What goofup at Ilford?
Did you read the OP's post? Ilford's response to his query?
There was no goofup. The paper has a different number then the OP was
used to, even though the name was the same. IOW, Ilford, Sam's, and
others who actually shop well know there's a difference.
When I shop at Costco (I don't use Sam's, but the difference is
slight at best) and find a product that appears to be the same as I'm
used to somewhere else, but the price is appreciably lower, I know it
ain't the lack of tile on the floor that accounts for the difference.
I've been shopping for a few years now. I know, for example, that
warehouse stores often have products made specially for them with
different specs that what smaller stores buy from, for example,
Ilford's catalog.
TANSTAAFL.
M
measekite
Not True, Sams is a warehouse Walmart.Big said:
B
Big Bill
Never say never.
Indeed, there are scenarios where reduced sales mean higher profits.
For example, a "shortage" of a popular item (brought on by reduced
production) can allow a company to charge more.
Remember the gas "shortages" of the late 70s?
L
leo
Big said:
If it's not the same, Ilford should use a different name, besides
packaging. Call it special edition, or silver, or Sams special,
whatever. It's not electronics, people don't look at the model #.
G
George E. Cawthon
leo said:
Right. Photographic papers and film are know by
their names, e.g. Kodabromide F3 SW is a specific
paper regardless of any batch number.
And Kodak Premium Picture Paper for inkjet prints,
high gloss, is a specific paper. Even though it
can be designated by numbers, Kodak themselves
normally refer to it by name. Keeping the name
and giving it another number (meaning it is
different) would be fraud. Most office supplies
go by name even if they have a number designation.
B
Big Bill
You're trying to pick nits.
There are few differences to the consumer between Sam's and Costco,
other than idealogical ones.
B
Big Bill
I happen to agree.
However, that's not the reality we have to deal with.
You're welcome to complain, and that might change things, *in the
future*. In the meantime, we must deal with reality as it exists.
O
Oliver Costich
I places I have lived that have both a Sams and a Costco, the COstoc
seems to carry more upscale merchandise.
B
Big Bill
We use Costco, our daughter uses Sam's, so I get to go to both.
I've not noticed that myself, but it could be that I'm just oblivious
to that particular difference.
I think the free food samples in Costco are better, though.
A
Arthur Entlich
Actually, now that you explain your lineage, it explains a lot of other
things as well. A lot of the attitudes you express here probably also
"aren't your fault".
Art
Ron Hunter wrote:
things as well. A lot of the attitudes you express here probably also
"aren't your fault".
Art
Ron Hunter wrote:
A
Arthur Entlich
Matt,
You are wasting your typing fingers. Didn't you read the views of your
detractors? If it isn't "profitable" to the US, it doesn't warrant
getting involved.
The one absolutely valuable lesson that the Bush administration and the
9-11 events have revealed clearly to the world is that the US government
only acts within its own interest, for the well being of those it is
most heavily in debt to, or owned or run by.
Art
Matt Silberstein wrote:
You are wasting your typing fingers. Didn't you read the views of your
detractors? If it isn't "profitable" to the US, it doesn't warrant
getting involved.
The one absolutely valuable lesson that the Bush administration and the
9-11 events have revealed clearly to the world is that the US government
only acts within its own interest, for the well being of those it is
most heavily in debt to, or owned or run by.
Art
Matt Silberstein wrote:
A
Arthur Entlich
Ron Hunter wrote:
Oh really?
And how much of the GDP is paid out "privately" in the US on medical
costs? (And how much of that is ripped off by your lovely "for profit"
insurance and medical system). And how many people in the US just end
up dead before they "wait months if not years" for the surgery they
need, because they have no insurance.
The doctors that flee, BTW, happen to usually be the unethical ones who
went into medicine for the money anyway, so, good riddance, and further,
if they had nowhere else to go, because the other countries also worked
under socialized medicine, that would solve that problem pretty fast,
wouldn't it.
You obviously have never lived in a country with good socialized
medicine. I have both lived in the US (half my life) and in Canada and
Europe (half my life) and I would NEVER consider going back to the US as
an option.
Simply put, the US provides medicine for SOME of the people, those who
can afford the horrific costs (and why do I bet you have a nice paid for
health plan through your employer or pension while you would deny that
of Walmart employees (which you parasitically live off of by shopping
there)). In the meantime, a good percentage of Americans suffer with no
health care or substandard health care, and the proof is in the UN
rankings that show the US, the great wealthy super-duper power, never
even gets close to the top of the list for health, education or standard
of living, year after year. Daily, people in the US are bankrupted
financially by health care costs; the poor, the elderly, the sickly,
those with rare diseases.
Now, I will agree on one thing, Canada has suffered tremendously as a
result of having the misfortune of our geography, situated right next to
your toxic country. Your private insurers scramble to get the Canadian
business and are helping to ruin our medical system. Your medical
"corporations" (who used to be called doctors), lobby here continually
to try to break up the medical system we have. Stupid Canadians, which
unfortunately, there are too many of, who don't know better, look to the
US as a model of a perverse "cheap tax" haven, and suffering from US
Envy, due to their ignorance, have voted in governments here that have
slowly damaged our health system. Even then, however, it's still better
for most people than what the US offers. We have a healthier population
as a country than the population of the US. I know that nothing matters
to you but yourself, and maybe your immediate family, but here in Canada
there still does exist the understanding that a healthy and educated
society benefits everyone, that keeping guns out of the population
protects everyone, and that keeping right-wing fundamentalist crazies
out of public office (by not voting for them) protects the separation of
"church" and state so all people can be equally represented under law
with fairness.
In all my days, I have never seen a more paranoid population as exists
in the US today. You people consider any society more evolved and saner
than your own a threat to your way of life, and I suppose in some ways,
it is. Heck, the rest of the world just might work on solving things
like global climate change without you, and wouldn't that be horrible,
so your country does everything in its power to derail the process and
spew your poisonous pollution and greenhouse gases at a rate unsurpassed
by any other country. Well, Mr. "Texian", while your crazy government
goes around punching holes in the permafrost looking for oil in fragile
tundra of Alaska, so you can drive SUVs, the rest of the world works on
fuel cells, and while your country continues to foul your nest so you
have no clean water left, coming north begging for a cup of clean
drinking water, we'll probably be good neighbors and give you some out
of pity, and just shake our heads the way people do when encountering
fools and madmen.
Art
Ron Hunter wrote:
Oh really?
And how much of the GDP is paid out "privately" in the US on medical
costs? (And how much of that is ripped off by your lovely "for profit"
insurance and medical system). And how many people in the US just end
up dead before they "wait months if not years" for the surgery they
need, because they have no insurance.
The doctors that flee, BTW, happen to usually be the unethical ones who
went into medicine for the money anyway, so, good riddance, and further,
if they had nowhere else to go, because the other countries also worked
under socialized medicine, that would solve that problem pretty fast,
wouldn't it.
You obviously have never lived in a country with good socialized
medicine. I have both lived in the US (half my life) and in Canada and
Europe (half my life) and I would NEVER consider going back to the US as
an option.
Simply put, the US provides medicine for SOME of the people, those who
can afford the horrific costs (and why do I bet you have a nice paid for
health plan through your employer or pension while you would deny that
of Walmart employees (which you parasitically live off of by shopping
there)). In the meantime, a good percentage of Americans suffer with no
health care or substandard health care, and the proof is in the UN
rankings that show the US, the great wealthy super-duper power, never
even gets close to the top of the list for health, education or standard
of living, year after year. Daily, people in the US are bankrupted
financially by health care costs; the poor, the elderly, the sickly,
those with rare diseases.
Now, I will agree on one thing, Canada has suffered tremendously as a
result of having the misfortune of our geography, situated right next to
your toxic country. Your private insurers scramble to get the Canadian
business and are helping to ruin our medical system. Your medical
"corporations" (who used to be called doctors), lobby here continually
to try to break up the medical system we have. Stupid Canadians, which
unfortunately, there are too many of, who don't know better, look to the
US as a model of a perverse "cheap tax" haven, and suffering from US
Envy, due to their ignorance, have voted in governments here that have
slowly damaged our health system. Even then, however, it's still better
for most people than what the US offers. We have a healthier population
as a country than the population of the US. I know that nothing matters
to you but yourself, and maybe your immediate family, but here in Canada
there still does exist the understanding that a healthy and educated
society benefits everyone, that keeping guns out of the population
protects everyone, and that keeping right-wing fundamentalist crazies
out of public office (by not voting for them) protects the separation of
"church" and state so all people can be equally represented under law
with fairness.
In all my days, I have never seen a more paranoid population as exists
in the US today. You people consider any society more evolved and saner
than your own a threat to your way of life, and I suppose in some ways,
it is. Heck, the rest of the world just might work on solving things
like global climate change without you, and wouldn't that be horrible,
so your country does everything in its power to derail the process and
spew your poisonous pollution and greenhouse gases at a rate unsurpassed
by any other country. Well, Mr. "Texian", while your crazy government
goes around punching holes in the permafrost looking for oil in fragile
tundra of Alaska, so you can drive SUVs, the rest of the world works on
fuel cells, and while your country continues to foul your nest so you
have no clean water left, coming north begging for a cup of clean
drinking water, we'll probably be good neighbors and give you some out
of pity, and just shake our heads the way people do when encountering
fools and madmen.
Art
Ron Hunter wrote:
A
Arthur Entlich
The situation reported regarding Walmart indeed has been documented
numerous times.
Art
numerous times.
Art
A
Arthur Entlich
I don't know who is responsible for the lowered quality of products sold
at some of the discount big box stores, but it definitely happens.
Several months back Loblaws Super Store was selling Epson Photo paper,
with the identical product number on it as that sold elsewhere, in 100
sheet or so packages for a "great price". However, upon sampling it, I
discovered the paper was literally nearly half the thickness of the same
product sole elsewhere in 20 sheet packages for considerably more money.
The big box version was so thin as to ripple out of the package and by
the time the ink hit it, well, forget it.
I don't know who was to blame for this product. The big box, Epson,
collaboration of the two, a counterfeit product, all I know is it ended
up no deal for anyone who used the product.
And the problem is I'd imagine many of the buyers were unfamiliar with
the other product of the same number, so they couldn't make a direct
comparison to know they had been provided with an inferior product,
which saved them nothing due to the quality differences.
Art
at some of the discount big box stores, but it definitely happens.
Several months back Loblaws Super Store was selling Epson Photo paper,
with the identical product number on it as that sold elsewhere, in 100
sheet or so packages for a "great price". However, upon sampling it, I
discovered the paper was literally nearly half the thickness of the same
product sole elsewhere in 20 sheet packages for considerably more money.
The big box version was so thin as to ripple out of the package and by
the time the ink hit it, well, forget it.
I don't know who was to blame for this product. The big box, Epson,
collaboration of the two, a counterfeit product, all I know is it ended
up no deal for anyone who used the product.
And the problem is I'd imagine many of the buyers were unfamiliar with
the other product of the same number, so they couldn't make a direct
comparison to know they had been provided with an inferior product,
which saved them nothing due to the quality differences.
Art
A
Arthur Entlich
Your argument is likely half the story.
In all the time I have used Epson Photo paper, I have never seen the
paper sold by the big box store in Epson's line up. It was obviously a
special run, maybe even an exclusive for that big box store. A buyer
likely contacted Epson and they agreed on the product at a price. I
would be very surprised that Epson went and reduced the thickness by
nearly half without agreement by the big box. I suspect that prior to
the end deal, samples change hands and are agreed upon.
I am not sure the product is reconfirmed when the product arrives at
warehouses. I imagine it is delivered to many warehouses at once and
then further distributed, but I still suspect that a contract didn't get
signed until the exact product was agreed upon.
Art
In all the time I have used Epson Photo paper, I have never seen the
paper sold by the big box store in Epson's line up. It was obviously a
special run, maybe even an exclusive for that big box store. A buyer
likely contacted Epson and they agreed on the product at a price. I
would be very surprised that Epson went and reduced the thickness by
nearly half without agreement by the big box. I suspect that prior to
the end deal, samples change hands and are agreed upon.
I am not sure the product is reconfirmed when the product arrives at
warehouses. I imagine it is delivered to many warehouses at once and
then further distributed, but I still suspect that a contract didn't get
signed until the exact product was agreed upon.
Art