not to be sold separately

kirving

91011 wrote: »

What utter CRAP!

A shop charges vat on the SELLING price of the goods. If the bar was 1.21 and cost the shop 70c, then the vat element is 21c.

If the shop charged 1.21 and bought at 10 then the vat is still 21c.

Ok, no need to go nuts. Notice how I asked it as a question, as opposed to making an outright statement? I did that because I didn't know.

davo10

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Well yes......the consumer is paying more than they should becaus the retailer has fattened up his profit using the consumer's discount.

What utter crap, shops are businesses, businesses are in the business of making profits, some items they make profits on, some they do not if they cannot sell by sell by date. Do you believe all business owners think when they get a discount on bulk buying, "i must pass on all that discount to the consumer and not make any extra profit"?, No is the answer.. Businesses are not philanthrophic, they cannot afford to be, they will always have items on which they will lose money eg. fresh fruit produce.

Again and this is the crux of the argument, the consumer was not charged any more than the normal price for the item regardless of what it says on the packaging.

I think you should also consider that many suppliers and manufacturers used to have a "recommended retail price" on their items and did not allow the vendor to sell the item below this price, did you think that was fair?, in this case the vendor is buying from the supplier at a discount and selling it at a price which does not exceed the norm, sounds like good business to me.

bryaner

davo10 wrote: »

What utter crap, shops are businesses, businesses are in the business of making profits, some items they make profits on, some they do not if they cannot sell by sell by date. Do you believe all business owners think when they get a discount on bulk buying, "i must pass on all that discount to the consumer and not make any extra profit"?, No is the answer.. Businesses are not philanthrophic, they cannot afford to be, they will always have items on which they will lose money eg. fresh fruit produce.

Again and this is the crux of the argument, the consumer was not charged any more than the normal price for the item regardless of what it says on the packaging.

I think you should also consider that many suppliers and manufacturers used to have a "recommended retail price" on their items and did not allow the vendor to sell the item below this price, did you think that was fair?, in this case the vendor is buying from the supplier at a discount and selling it at a price which does not exceed the norm, sounds like good business to me.

Wrong the customers in the shop across from me are being charged for 40g packs of crisps while only getting 25g..

Typical greedy shopkeepers not happy making profit on 40g packs feck em.

Exclamation Marc

bryaner wrote: »

Wrong the customers in the shop across from me are being charged for 40g packs of crisps while only getting 25g..

Typical greedy shopkeepers not happy making profit on 40g packs feck em.

Nobody is forcing the customer to pay for the 25g packet of crisps at the 40g price, the shopkeeper can charge whatever he likes.

bryaner

FireballPitcher wrote: »

Nobody is forcing the customer to pay for the 25g packet of crisps at the 40g price, the shopkeeper can charge whatever he likes.

Their not anymore over his greedy stunt I'll give it 6 months till the boards are up..

Bogger77

bryaner wrote: »

Wrong the customers in the shop across from me are being charged for 40g packs of crisps while only getting 25g..

Typical greedy shopkeepers not happy making profit on 40g packs feck em.

Wrong, the customers in the shop across the road are paying for 25g packets, you think they're paying too much. They're willing to pay, it seems.

bryaner

Bogger77 wrote: »

Wrong, the customers in the shop across the road are paying for 25g packets, you think they're paying too much. They're willing to pay, it seems.

See above..

Exclamation Marc

bryaner wrote: »

Their not anymore over his greedy stunt I'll give it 6 months till the boards are up..

Maybe they will be.

But the shopkeeper has done nothing wrong. It's called competition, if people pay for a smaller bag at a higher price, he'll continue charging it. I don't see the problem here, he's trying to make money and if customers aren't happy with it they have feet which they can use to spend their money elsewhere.

It's like pulling the whole "OH I PAY €0.95 FOR A 500ML BOTTLE OF COKE IN DUNNES, AND YOU SELL IT FOR €1.45!!!! WHAT A RIP OFF" argument.

Price differences, competition wars, people trying to make money, get used to it.

bryaner

FireballPitcher wrote: »

Maybe they will be.

But the shopkeeper has done nothing wrong. It's called competition, if people pay for a smaller bag at a higher price, he'll continue charging it. I don't see the problem here, he's trying to make money and if customers aren't happy with it they have feet which they can use to spend their money elsewhere.

It's like pulling the whole "OH I PAY €0.95 FOR A 500ML BOTTLE OF COKE IN DUNNES, AND YOU SELL IT FOR €1.45!!!! WHAT A RIP OFF" argument.

Price differences, competition wars, people trying to make money, get used to it.

Na he will be closed I'll enjoy seeing the boards up..

davo10

bryaner wrote: »

Wrong the customers in the shop across from me are being charged for 40g packs of crisps while only getting 25g..

Typical greedy shopkeepers not happy making profit on 40g packs feck em.

You see, this is a stupid post. If the vendor advertises the product as 45g and there is only 25g in the bag, then that is false advertising and an offence. If the purchaser pays X for Y as advertised then that is the purchaser's fault if it is too expensive.

Bryaner was the product branded 40g and only contains 25g?, post your evidence.

Zab

FireballPitcher wrote: »

Maybe they will be.

But the shopkeeper has done nothing wrong. It's called competition, if people pay for a smaller bag at a higher price, he'll continue charging it. I don't see the problem here, he's trying to make money and if customers aren't happy with it they have feet which they can use to spend their money elsewhere.

It's like pulling the whole "OH I PAY €0.95 FOR A 500ML BOTTLE OF COKE IN DUNNES, AND YOU SELL IT FOR €1.45!!!! WHAT A RIP OFF" argument.

Price differences, competition wars, people trying to make money, get used to it.

I agree in principle but not in reality. The problem is that people will assume that it's a certain size of pack/bar/can as that's what it's always been and still is everywhere else. When they take a smaller pack out of a multi-pack and sell it for the same price as the full size they're pulling a fast one. I agree that it's buyer beware in a legal sense, but that doesn't make it right or something that should be defended.

I have absolutely no problem if the multi-pack items are the same size or are priced accordingly. That's between the shop and the manufacturer.

Exclamation Marc

Zab wrote: »

I agree in principle but not in reality. The problem is that people will assume that it's a certain size of pack/bar/can as that's what it's always been and still is everywhere else. When they take a smaller pack out of a multi-pack and sell it for the same price as the full size they're pulling a fast one. I agree that it's buyer beware in a legal sense, but that doesn't make it right or something that should be defended.

I have absolutely no problem if the multi-pack items are the same size or are priced accordingly.

I completely agree with you. Legally its not wrong, morally its pretty low.

I mean if he's intending to dupe people with smaller packets then they're definitely pulling a fast one, but as most people will realise after the first purchase and therefore not be a return customer it will hit them in the end.

I'm not defending the practice or condoning it, I always believe these shops get the eventual come-around, but its not illegal or worth reporting to authorities which some people seem to be suggesting. But the shop is entitled to charge whatever price they like (once its not false advertising), there's no legal duty to not sell multipack products as singles.

Zab wrote: »

That's between the shop and the manufacturer.

Well usually the manufacturer will have little knowledge or interest in these sort of shops as the shops orders come from wholesalers rather than manufacturers.

davo10

The issue seems to be that if goods marked "not to be ....." are sold seperately and are in fact smaller than the norm yet sold at the same price, then that is deceitfull, but if they are the same size then what's the problem?.

Incidently, I would have thought that manufacturers do these promotions when they have an oversupply of stock and for brand recognition so they are also getting something out of it. The ones I most commonly see are Coke and crisps, are these bottles and packets smaller than ususal?, perhaps someone in the retail sector who reads this could inform us.

pleasant Co.

Just to clear up some confusion, multipacks of tayto's/walkers do in fact contain smaller portions per individual packet of crisps compared with their regular single pack counterpart. Usually it's 25g Vs 45g (can vary with brand), and this is marked on the packet as such.

Padraig Mor

davo10 wrote: »

What utter crap, shops are businesses, businesses are in the business of making profits, some items they make profits on, some they do not if they cannot sell by sell by date. Do you believe all business owners think when they get a discount on bulk buying, "i must pass on all that discount to the consumer and not make any extra profit"?, No is the answer.. Businesses are not philanthrophic, they cannot afford to be, they will always have items on which they will lose money eg. fresh fruit produce.

Again and this is the crux of the argument, the consumer was not charged any more than the normal price for the item regardless of what it says on the packaging.

I think you should also consider that many suppliers and manufacturers used to have a "recommended retail price" on their items and did not allow the vendor to sell the item below this price, did you think that was fair?, in this case the vendor is buying from the supplier at a discount and selling it at a price which does not exceed the norm, sounds like good business to me.

Try civility sometime mate!

I still don't get what your problem is - it's easy to understand really. This is not about business to business bulk buying - this is about promotional offers from manufacturers who supply specific items bulk packed for a consumer discount and make this clear on the packaging. Manufacturers specifically bulk pack items for sale to the consumer at a price lower than buying them individually - i.e. a saving for the consumer. The shop then separates them and sells them at full price, effectively stealing the customer's discount for themselves. Let's do an example (figures imaginary, of course):

Shop buys individual cans of Coke from Mr. Coca Cola at €0.80 each. Shopkeeper applies 25% markup and sells at €1.

Shop buys 6 can multipack ("buy 4 get 2 free") for €3.20 (€0.60/can) with understanding from Mr. Coca Cola that this will be sold with normal 25% markup at RRP of €4, i.e. the consumer saves €2. Note that the shop still makes the same markup!

However, shop instead splits the pack and sells the cans for €1 each, a 67% markup. Thirsty consumer buys 6 cans and pays €6.

Gain to dodgy shopkeeper: €2. Loss to consumer: €2.


Now is this illegal? No. Is it acting the maggot and taking advantage of the consumer? Yes. Of course, this is aside from any legal aspects to details on item etc.....

bryaner

davo10 wrote: »

You see, this is a stupid post. If the vendor advertises the product as 45g and there is only 25g in the bag, then that is false advertising and an offence. If the purchaser pays X for Y as advertised then that is the purchaser's fault if it is too expensive.

Bryaner was the product branded 40g and only contains 25g?, post your evidence.

He is selling 25g packs at the 40g price, look I certainly have no problem with making profit but this splitting multipacks and selling them at the 40g standard price is pure greed.

As I stated before people have sussed this shopkeeper out and he will pay the ultimate price in the end..

donstavros

Well I don't have a problem with splitting the multi-packs and I would never wish any business to fail.

tut tut bryaner: "Na he will be closed I'll enjoy seeing the boards up.. "

jor el

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Gain to dodgy shopkeeper: €2. Loss to consumer: €2.

No, the consumer has lost nothing, as the consumer can still buy a 6 pack for the price of 4, if willing to buy it. If the consumer is only looking for 1 can though, then they get no discount. The fact that the retailer bought them at a discounted wholesale price is irrelevant. This does not cost the consumer anything, the only one at a loss is the supplier.

bryaner wrote: »

He is selling 25g packs at the 40g price

This is the only time I'd have a problem with a retailer breaking up multi-packs, if they're selling a smaller quantity at the same price as the larger one. If they have the two products on display at the same, then obviously you would choose the larger one, but if there is only one, then this is just a case of a shop charging over the odds for a particular item.

If you go from one shop to another, you can see Lucozade 330ml (to take just one example) selling for anything from €1.10 to €1.80. This is for the exact same product that cost the retailer the exact same to buy. Some retailers will always charge more to the consumer than others. So one shop charging 80c for a 25g bag of crisps, when another charges 80c for 40g, is nothing more than one retailer price gouging. The same retailer could easily charge €1.20 for 40g bag if they wanted to, and make the same profits.

hightower1

jor el wrote: »

This does not cost the consumer anything, the only one at a loss is the supplier..

It puts the product / supplier at risk. Also the shop keeper could choose if he so wished to pass the saving on to the customer but instead pockets it. So to the consumer its potential loss seeing as they hav eno controll over if the shopkeep puts out multipack units sepratly or not, they are buying the same product but not making a saving which is being made by the shop keep.

bryaner

donstavros wrote: »

Well I don't have a problem with splitting the multi-packs and I would never wish any business to fail.

tut tut bryaner: "Na he will be closed I'll enjoy seeing the boards up.. "

Tut tut me hole, he would be fine only he got a rep for his tactics now the people walk 100 meters more.

All his own doing..

Minstrel27

Greedy shopkeepers are doing nobody any favours. Shame on them.

senordingdong

Minstrel27 wrote: »

Greedy shopkeepers are doing nobody any favours. Shame on them.

The worst part is that they will undoubhtably try to justify their actions with 'these hard-times'.

Twoandahalfmen

There's nothing wrong with splitting if they survive by doing it so what if they make an extra 1 or 2 euro by splitting. We still get are product.

cats.life

this thread is 3 yrs old and they are still doing it, i no of a pub who is splitting his bottles of beer.

Twoandahalfmen

Sure they sell cans in the pubs for 3 euro in the pub which are part of a multipack. The muliipacks are 4€ so €18 a pack is a. Nice profit 450%. How they are they going bust is beyond me.

dudara

Zombie thread - closed

dudara