Printable View
Kmart is the only toy stocking store that price matches in New Zealand -- the other big two (Farmers and the Warehouse don't). Haven't tried for a long time to price match anything. I nornmally just wait for Farmers to have one of their sales with a blanket % of all toys or import from the USA.
Corporations exist with the primary objective of maximising returns to their key stakeholders. It's no secret that many organisations have in this modern era broadened their definition of stakeholder to include the financiers, suppliers, the local community, and, last but not least, customers. Corporations frequently vindicate their strategies by contending that they are attempting to add and create value for their customers. That, however, is frequently at odds with their aim of maximising shareholder value. There's an inherent contradiction in this.
The objective of price matching is to function as a signal to the customer to be confident in the brand, the retailer. This builds the reputation of a business, elevates its status and brand, gives its brand relevance and meaning which translates into shareholder value - the ultimate objective of such a policy. There is value in this.
The pre-conditions attached to many price-matching policies attempt to curb the impact of price-matching itself. They are concerned with the creation of an artificial image of a corporation committed to the best price when it in fact is not. This defeats the purpose of price-matching. This limits the value that customers can derive from the policy. To many a person, the pre-conditions implicitly require a search cost. IE. to have the same item in stock. This is not knowledge that is easily ascertainable. So what? We require the customer to venture forth into several competitor's stores and seek proof themselves before daring to price-match? The policy, it would not be unfair to say, has little substantive value. It is an artifical veil that corporations can step behind to give the impression that they do care about price. There is no value in this.
And therein lies a disparity. Price-matching policies are rarely mutually beneficial. Rather, they are dress and weighed down with ever so slight qualifications that severely water down the benefit they are supposed to offer the customer. At best, price-matching is a complicated and difficult process that does reap some rewards. At worst, it is an illusion. Perhaps the real answer lies in the middle somewhere.
We have not even yet turned our minds to the other sources of power imbalances between ourselves and major corporations. A cursory examination would reveal that there is a wide divide between the individual consumer and the corporation. But that matters not. What we are discussing is price-matching. The essence of price-matching is to create value for the customer across similar product ranges, to build trust and confidence in a retailer's brand. I think that the events from which this discussion ignited are simply a reflection of this. In essence, we achieved the essence of what price-matching is about and to contend otherwise is to tangle oneself within a web of overcomplicating qualifications.
:rolleyes: Boy you seriously wanna get smacked.. *smacks*...Quote:
Originally Posted by sifun
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by JuzMel
Just managed to get TRU to price-match BigW's Movie Voyager price (in the July toy catalogue) for their Mudflap and Inferno toys. And I don't see it as being sneeky or deceptive either. They are price matching their 'Movie Voyagers' with BigW's 'Movie Voyagers'. If TRU were that keen to make money off exclusive items, they should show up at the register 'Exclusive item, not to be price matched'. As it stands, I legitimately pointed out that Mudflap and Inferno registered as 'Transformers Voyager' in their systems at the check-out, and showed them the quoted BigW catalogue of 'Movie Voyager', and the example photo of the same packaging. The person at the register was quick to accept the price to match because it was price-matching to a *size class* in the BigW catalogue. If the catalogue had mentioned a particular toy, or 'non-exclusives' or 'regular series' only, it would have been different. But this was TRU matching a price that was advertised at BigW for *all* Movie Voyagers.
The person at the register did comment that it was a huge discount, which I mentioned that there were some really cheap toys in the July sales, blah blah blah... making sure I didn't mention how TRU usually overprices toys anyway :p
At $45 down to $24.83 each, it was almost like getting 2 for the price of 1. :D
But I almost missed the chance though, because I tried to get a catalogue from BigW first, but they said that they had run out way back on Friday!! I did the next best thing and go to each of the instore service counters and asked if they had any spares left. The Layby counter did, and were very generous in letting me have it. :)
That one bit of generosity saved me $40. :)
If they were keen, they should also have a "TRU exclusvie" sticker on the box... :pQuote:
Originally Posted by griffin
agree....Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle
Price matching, as this thread demonstrates, is a filthy tangled difficult mess - just the way retailers like it. It's a way for retailers to *feel* like they're offering something good while only rarely having to actually follow through.
I cut through the mess with either no-receipt exchanges, or a repurchase-and-switcheroo.
Target are quite happy to do the former. I bought Prowl and Lockdown at the K-Mart sale for about $20 each, since they had no Wave 2 Deluxes. I took them to my nearest Target and asked if I could exchange them, apologising for having no receipt. There was no complaint at all; I went down and got my Ratchet and Blackarachnia, and they kept my Prowl and Lockdown. I filled in a little slip with my name and address, and I'm home free.
The latter is a more complex where you actually have to purchase all the toys, then return the ones you don't want to the store with the highest priced receipt.
I know some people might consider this a bit ethically dodgy, but it saves massive hassle, and no-one is actually getting ripped off, since they are undifferentiated products (i.e. the TFs sold by KMart are the same as the ones sold by Target), and everybody ends up withe either the same number of toys or payment for those toys. :cool:
Sofaman you have a way with words. Lol
Well said Sofaman. There are the tactics I employ as well. Also, if you don't have the capital when there is a sale, you can layby figures you don't want, but of the class that you do, and when the figurers you DO want are in, collect the layby and do the switcheroo. This saves the up front capital investment.