On 4/25/05, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I understand what you're saying Frank... > > This is one of those topics where what side of the argument one's on makes > all the difference.
I believe that's rather the nature of arguments, Tom! <LOL> > 1. The camera shop opened it's doors and expects me to peruse, hoping for a > sale. Of course. > 2. Do they have the right to expect a sale just because I walked in their > door? Of course not. As you said above, they "hope" that you might buy something from them, if not at that time, perhaps in the future. > 3. No. Yes. (Just being argumentative. Although an argument is more than simply the naysaying of the other side's reasoned position. That's merely contradictions. no it's not. yes it is. not.. is...) > 4. Should I hand them over some cash simply because they let me come in > their store? No, I was being tongue-in-cheek. I don't expect anyone to do so. > 5. No. (I'm not the kind that will spend 15 - 60 min wasting a salesman's > time either, so that may be a difference). Actually that's a cost of doing > business which might be why their prices are higher. I doubt it. If they're a small operation, they likely didn't lose any sales while catering to you. > 6. If the store were to discount their price to induce me to buy, I might. Wouldn't we all? > > This all get's back to philosphy I think. The camera shop is a capitalist > venture, hoping to make as much profit off me as possible. Absolutely. However, that concept need not apply to every single transaction. The clever shop will sometimes forego a larger profit from time to time, in the hopes that a larger one might follow. Loss-leaders are not unheard of, even in small shops. Discounts to long-time customers aren't unheard of, either. I guess my point is that not necessarily every transaction must maximize profit every time, in a capitalist model. Good businessmen and women are in it for the long term. The short-term profiteers don't usually stick around that long. Another point to be made is that the internet guys and the big-boxes go for the biggest mark-ups possible as well, and not only due to lower overhead. If they ~could~ charge you more, they would. But, they know that if they charged the same as mom and pop, that's likely where you'd buy. Sometimes pricing is predatory, and as soon as the competition goes under, up go the prices. The company I > work for hopes to pay me as little as possible and mark up my rate to the > end client as high as possible, again maximizing profit. So should I > dupefully turn a blind eye and take it on the chin, or should I as a smart > consumer, try to conserve as much of my capital as possible, making it > stretch further? That's a personal decision. If the positives of spending more (more personalized service, keeping local retailers and possibly wholesalers in business, generally making the downtown business area of a given town or city more lively by keeping those businesses alive, etc.) are outweighed by price in your mind, then that's fair enough. Buy cheaper. It's your prerogative in a capitalist society; you need not justify it. Just know that there may be consequences; if they aren' t important to you, then that's the end of the discussion. > > Those same camera shop employees probably shop at a big name > department/electronics store when shopping for washers, dryers and audio > equipment, not the mom & pop appliance stores. They probably purchase their > medicines at a big name pharmacy, not the mom & pop, for exactly the same > reasons as I may not have purchased a camera from them. That's pure speculation on your part. It's sort of what > goes around comes around. Not a very convincing argument, if your premise is not supported by facts (see above). I believe that's called a "straw man". Those same camera store employees also take the > in-store employee discount for photography-related purchases. They don't > pay full price either. That's a cost of doing business, part of a remuneration package that each individual business negotiates with their employees. I don't see what it has to do with this discussion. Anyway, Tom I'm glad that we can have this discussion without bitterness or rancor. We obviously have views that aren't going to be changed by the type of conversation that can be had on a list like this. Still, it's interesting to see how others view their world. <vbg> cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
