Online buys prompt retail inquiry

[tron07]

lol.

Just a quick story. I went into a game shop to get Okami on Wii. It had been out for a while, but I hadn't seen any copies in Australia, so I went inot a game shop to see if they could track one down.

Apparently they couldn't. the reason, "Okami didn't exist on wii." Erm, yes it did, but the shop was telling me I was wrong.

One week later I had a copy from the UK for $20.

some of the games was not release over here, thus it doesn't exist...

My wii is moded.... never buy any games before, and the wii is in cold storage, playing PS3 most of the time.

[1AZRAEL1]

Well alot of retailers won't be happy with this report from the Productivity Commision

IMO, retailers need to find a way to entice customers back to there stores, instead of alienating them further with futile pursuits like this.

[Shirokaze]

Well alot of retailers won't be happy with this report from the Productivity Commision

IMO, retailers need to find a way to entice customers back to there stores, instead of alienating them further with futile pursuits like this.

Interesting article, Eli Greenblat seems a tad bitter

The only thing that will bring customers back is an improvement on prices. I'm sick of hearing retailers having a sook over the cost of upkeep when it really is such a small percentage of the issue.

For example, when I worked at Harvey Norman I was able to see the cost of all the items that came into the store. I found that quite often prices that the store paid the suppliers were more than what Umart was selling the exact same product for to the public.

Now I would imagine that Umart, being a bricks and mortar store as well as an online business, would share a lot the costs that Harvey Norman has to endure like rental, the cost of hiring staff and insurance etc. So why is it that they seem to be able to stay afloat? Cheaper suppliers combined with moving large amounts of stock at a low percentage markup is my guess.

All Interactive Distribution, a major supplier to stores like HN and Gametraders, still sells new release console games for around the $70 mark depending on the title. Why would anyone bother purchasing from stores that can't afford to offer it for less than the $60-ish dollars I would pay to get the same item from Zavvi, OzGameShop, The Hut or even eBay? This is the reason that Gametraders has begun to lean heavily on parallel importing.

Fix the suppliers, fix the biggest part of the problem IMO.

[gamblor916]

It's just simple math. Who cares about the 10% gst if I can get it for 50% less online. Charging gst on posted goods isn't going to change anything.

[1AZRAEL1]

It's just simple math. Who cares about the 10% gst if I can get it for 50% less online. Charging gst on posted goods isn't going to change anything.

And as the article says, really hard to enforce. If they did manage to find a way, I would still buy online because it's cheaper. Simple as.

[Accel]

I would shop at retail more if Perth had real shopping hours and not ones from the 1950s

[Prowl]

For example, when I worked at Harvey Norman I was able to see the cost of all the items that came into the store. I found that quite often prices that the store paid the suppliers were more than what Umart was selling the exact same product for to the public.

I don't buy that for a second. What they do is buffer the "cost" price so the staff cannot see what the true cost is. That way they protect their margin even if they sell at "cost". Either that or there is a rebate structure in place to offset the artificial cost.

This is a procurement managers speciality. Inflate the costs so that the store/site budget is X for procuring business essentials & then claim back the rebate as a hard saving validating their position by showing savings whilst hiding the real cost price of doing business.

I won't go into details but at the company I work for item X costs $1.02 on the system. I spoke to my supplier & he accidently told me the "true cost" which is $0.62.

In order to remain competitive in the marketplace I often have to go in a low margin or a negative one. The business is fine with that as they still make hidden margin but it screws my sales figures & impacts my commission. I have tricks that I use to counter that & protect my margin but trust me all large corporates do this.

[Tetsuwan Convoy]

I would shop at retail more if Perth had real shopping hours and not ones from the 1950s

LOL!

I would be more likely to buy less online if the service were any good. I am tired of knowing more than most of the staff I encounter when buying something. That is assuming I can get anyone to notice me in the first place...

So for me, high prices, bad service and closed shops makes me shop online.

[Jay-Tron]

Sometimes pushy sales people can wreck your shopping experience as well. You do your research, decide what you want, go into a shop to buy it and the sales people try to sell you add-ons and/or tell you you should buy the more expensive product because it'll be better for you even though it cost more and they just don't seem to take no for an answer. A little bit of info and advice is nice but when they go on and on and try to make you buy things you don't want it makes you not want to go back there...

[Shirokaze]

I don't buy that for a second. What they do is buffer the "cost" price so the staff cannot see what the true cost is. That way they protect their margin even if they sell at "cost". Either that or there is a rebate structure in place to offset the artificial cost.

This is a procurement managers speciality. Inflate the costs so that the store/site budget is X for procuring business essentials & then claim back the rebate as a hard saving validating their position by showing savings whilst hiding the real cost price of doing business.

I won't go into details but at the company I work for item X costs $1.02 on the system. I spoke to my supplier & he accidently told me the "true cost" which is $0.62.

In order to remain competitive in the marketplace I often have to go in a low margin or a negative one. The business is fine with that as they still make hidden margin but it screws my sales figures & impacts my commission. I have tricks that I use to counter that & protect my margin but trust me all large corporates do this.

Prowl, you're absolutely spot on. Harvey Norman adds a massive sum to some items, laptops and monitors especially, but when you have a high enough level account in POS you can see the invoice price, how much is added on top by head office for their 'rebate', and the amount added to cover shipping.

For example, a while ago I saw a $314 Samsung monitor at Umart. At Harvey's it was invoiced for $332 +18ish shipping + $66 rebate = "cost" of $416 stickered at the Samsung RRP of $499.99.

I'm not saying that stores don't hold any of the blame, like you said it's a fairly standard practice for larger companies which screws over the commission based staff more than anyone else. But IMO the suppliers are still the biggest problem.

Here's another article (like the one Azrael linked) about the productivity commission report. It's regarding the price of Video Games and references exerts about supplier issues

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2011/08/the...-in-australia/