Now this is really a complete rip off! Kinda shocking in the difference.

Zhane

I was in HMV in Henry street(? sorry dont know dublin that well) when i seen the entire season of Buffy in one boxset, I was really interested and when i looked at the price it was €300, which I though would be cheaper than buying them individually. that was until i checked Amazon.co.uk, even with the euro changeover its still €130 cheaper, check it out for yourself!!!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000AM6NCW/qid=1131148253/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/202-5757097-8498263

JohnC.

Play.com have it for another £5 cheaper, and free delivery, so that's another bit saved.
http://www.play.com/play247.asp?page=title&r=R2&title=705358&p=57&g=72&pa=sr
Ends up at €207.99.

But HMV are probably selling at the RRP, whereas online retailers undercut it. Play.coms price is 27% below RRP according to the site.

But I had a similar experience just today in high street shops with another box, the complete X-Files set. Zhivago selling for €299 and Game Stop selling for €215.99. It's one thing with online retailers being a lot cheaper. It's worse to see such a difference in similar high street stores. Although now that's I've just checked, the Game Stop price is exactly the same as Play.com.

Laguna

Isn't everybody aware that all high street retailers are a complete rip off, irrespective of what country you live in?, bit of a public secret really..

LFCFan

Gift Grub 6 is €14.95 in Golden Discs and a few doors up it's €21.95 in HMV. In any other country where people are more price concious, you wouldn't see this but the Irish are pretty useless when it comes to shopping around.

gerrycollins

i think every one has an example or two the complete 24 season 1-4 is nearly €300 in virgin but on amazon you can get it for as little as €120 approx!! just to show shop around and on line retailers with less overheads are much cheaper its the way forward people

MorningStar

Why did you even post this here?
Prices vary, amazing news!
Shop around has always been the way to go.
The suppliers drop the stock prices and this can lead to original stock being more expensive is still in store.
Golden Discs actually buy cheap stock, massivcve bulk and end of line stuff to keep prices down.
On-line stores are cheaper due to cheaper running costs.

Hobart

MorningStar wrote:

Why did you even post this here?
Prices vary, amazing news!

I could ask you the same question you troll!! He posted it here so that people, without your amazing intellectual ability, can see the disparity between prices off-line as opposed to on-line. He was also talking from a personal perspective.

Shop around has always been the way to go.

Zing. See, your a genius!!

Golden Discs actually buy cheap stock, massivcve bulk and end of line stuff to keep prices down.

Where's your proof of that? Oh!! Let me guess. You worked there while studying English at Trinners!! No? Your boyfriend worked there as a part time security guard?

On-line stores are cheaper due to cheaper running costs.

Rubbish. Have you any concept of the running costs of say, Amazon, versus a franchise such as Tower Records? Running costs are a small part of the picture.

Now instead of trying to be a smart-arse and gain a couple of points on the "one upmanship" ladder, you should have thought a little bit about your answer and formulated a reply that actually made some sense. :rolleyes:

Mr E

Yikes... did you get out of the wrong side of the bed this morning and whack your head?

MorningStar

Hobart wrote:

I could ask you the same question you troll!! He posted it here so that people, without your amazing intellectual ability, can see the disparity between prices off-line as opposed to on-line. He was also talking from a personal perspective.
Zing. See, your a genius!!
Where's your proof of that? Oh!! Let me guess. You worked there while studying English at Trinners!! No? Your boyfriend worked there as a part time security guard?
Rubbish. Have you any concept of the running costs of say, Amazon, versus a franchise such as Tower Records? Running costs are a small part of the picture.

Now instead of trying to be a smart-arse and gain a couple of points on the "one upmanship" ladder, you should have thought a little bit about your answer and formulated a reply that actually made some sense. :rolleyes:

Actually your post is more like a trolls. As a mod you should at least understand how to at least appear to be civil. AS you have recognised my intellectual ability let me comment on yours
and wild assumptions on me are inaccurate too.

I work with retails world wide and I know the running costs of companies probably a little more than somebody who bets on animals running around in circles. You whole post is about your one upmanship so you have no superior view here.

I pointed out why prices might vary while you have just flamed me for no reason. Try to be at least civil

Hobart

MorningStar wrote:

Actually your post is more like a trolls. As a mod you should at least understand how to at least appear to be civil.

My moderation of Horse Racing, has nothing got to do with my posting of this fora. I have as much rights as you or any other user. As for being civil, I think you should eat a slice of your own cake there.

AS you have recognised my intellectual ability let me comment on yours
and wild assumptions on me are inaccurate too.

Where have I made wild assumptions about you? Would you please point this out?

I work with retails world wide and I know the running costs of companies probably a little more than somebody who bets on animals running around in circles.

You have no idea what my job is. I could be your boss for all you know, stop making wild assumptions about me. Also, just because I have an interest in Horse Racing, it does not equate to me having an interest in gambling. Horse Racing is a lot more than that.

You whole post is about your one upmanship so you have no superior view here.

I presume you mean "Your"? My whole post was as it is and has nothing got to do with one upmanship. Your post is rude, unnecessary and inaccurate.

I pointed out why prices might vary while you have just flamed me for no reason. Try to be at least civil

I have not flammed you. I have replied to your rude and inaccurate post in the manner in which you replied to the OP's.

MorningStar

Hobart wrote:

Where have I made wild assumptions about you? Would you please point this out?

Hobart wrote:

Where's your proof of that? Oh!! Let me guess. You worked there while studying English at Trinners!! No? Your boyfriend worked there as a part time security guard?

My initial post was at worst sarcastisc while you are just being rude and agressive and I ask you stop.

Guy:Incognito

Hobart wrote:

Rubbish. Have you any concept of the running costs of say, Amazon, versus a franchise such as Tower Records? Running costs are a small part of the picture.

Running costs have a huge bearing on prices. Renting a large store on Grafton street and paying up to 10 staff (example) the current high rate (comparitvly) of pay is more costly than renting a warehouse in the back arse of no-where and paying a couple of guys to stick stamps on suff and post them.

Hobart

Stekelly wrote:

Running costs have a huge bearing on prices. Renting a large store on Grafton street and paying up to 10 staff (example) the current high rate (comparitvly) of pay is more costly than renting a warehouse in the back arse of no-where and paying a couple of guys to stick stamps on suff and post them.

I was commenting on the apparent fact that:

On-line stores are cheaper due to cheaper running costs.

This is untrue, as it is too wide sweeping. Is is only a part of the picture and totally inaccurate. I would have expected somebody who "claims" to have experience in this area to have known better.

gerrycollins

jesus talk about handbags at dawn

Laguna

Well, online stores do have a far lower operating cost as many of them (especially Play.com) operate their warehouse stocking system on a 'Just in time' basis, they keep a certain stock of items they know will continually sell and a low stock (sometimes none) of more expensive items, only ordering them in when they've been ordered. This way they don't waste money buying in, for example, 10000 5gb iPod Nano's when in six months Apple might not manufacture them anymore, leaving Play with a load of redundant stock and having wasted money.

MorningStar

Hobart wrote:

I was commenting on the apparent fact that: This is untrue, as it is too wide sweeping. Is is only a part of the picture and totally inaccurate. I would have expected somebody who "claims" to have experience in this area to have known better.

I disagree, running costs of an on-line store versus a traditional shop is cheaper for most goods there are very few exceptions. I know this for a fact you can keep your opinion and base it on what ever way you think you know it.

gerrycollins

will the pair of handbag fighting ladies bring their proof to the discussion and put up or shut up talk about know it alls

Hobart

gerrycollins wrote:

will the pair of handbag fighting ladies bring their proof to the discussion and put up or shut up talk about know it alls

Gerry, why don't you practice what you preach. Stop acting like a silly newbie.

Runnig costs are just a part of the reason why online stores can offer cheaper goods. They are not the be all and end all of it. To say so is incorrect. They also have the ability to factor in bulk buying, currency fluctuations, joint marketing initiatives etc.... most of which a high street franchise does not have the opportunity to exploit. The JIT factor is negligable when it comes to sites like play.com, amazon etc... as they are not actually manufacturing anyting. It works well for companies such as Dell.

I could go on but the subject matter is quite tiresome.

Gurgle

Hobart wrote:

They also have the ability to factor in bulk buying, currency fluctuations, joint marketing initiatives etc.... most of which a high street franchise does not have the opportunity to exploit.

Huh ?
An international chain of stores like HMV / Virgin / Game can't compete on the bulk buying, currency fluctuation etc ?

Thats pretty much the entire point in having a franchise instead of operating independantly.

Your online store can save costs mainly on:
- Staff
- Security
- Rent
- Cleaning
- Shoplifting

They all pay the distributors more or less the same cost per unit / cost per thousand / cost per million.

All the big chain store corporations have warehouses where they buy in bulk and ship out to the shops are required.

Difference is, in the shop you're paying for the costs of running a retail outlet as well as the warehouse.

(& the high street stores generally run at a higher profit margin)

MorningStar

Hobart wrote:

Gerry, why don't you practice what you preach. Stop acting like a silly newbie.

Runnig costs are just a part of the reason why online stores can offer cheaper goods. They are not the be all and end all of it. To say so is incorrect. They also have the ability to factor in bulk buying, currency fluctuations, joint marketing initiatives etc.... most of which a high street franchise does not have the opportunity to exploit. The JIT factor is negligable when it comes to sites like play.com, amazon etc... as they are not actually manufacturing anyting. It works well for companies such as Dell.

I could go on but the subject matter is quite tiresome.

Running costs cover everything including bulk buying and stock managment. It is cheaper to run an on-line store it is not all about just having a shop. Most Stores on the highstreets are not franchises either.
You obviosly don't know what running costs mean. On-line stores are cheaper to run, fact, end of point.

gerrycollins

Hobart wrote:

Gerry, why don't you practice what you preach. Stop acting like a silly newbie.

well excuse me for speaking ill let u in on a little secret

I run a medium size shop
on an operating margin of 20%
60% of that goes on wages
10%on loans
12%on tax
15% on other costs,capital expenses,waste disposal,insurance(a killer but getting better)secuirity etc

if i reduce my wages by 2% it is the equivalent of extra sales of €100000 a year so either i reduce my wages or increase sales both of which are difficult with price wars etc

if i reduse my ESB by 3.5% i will save €5000 a year but very hard with the way its calaulated (loading)

i have bulk buying capacity and free stock but that only helps keep my prices down to match my competitors, increasing my profit margin(not mark up) by 1% it will be the difference between me breaking even and making a loss at the end of the year but then i lose customers and the cycle begins

if manufactors,distributors,insurance companies,minimum wage,waste disposal and others reduce their charges to me i will in theory make more profit but which will in turn will let me reduce my prices which in turn will increase my footfall through the door allowing the balance to remain(dont start on groceries order or rip off etc im not into that)

last year i made a loss after everything was paid and this year looks no different but im not raising prices im trying to reduce my costs bulk buying only works if ur buying by the lorry load which no one can do even on line retailers so its not an option for me plus im buying from the cheapest out there already so i cant change suppliers

This is proven fact for me anyways i cant speak for on line retailers but i know what effects me and my business

Dfitzer

MorningStar wrote:

Why did you even post this here?
Prices vary, amazing news!
Shop around has always been the way to go.
The suppliers drop the stock prices and this can lead to original stock being more expensive is still in store.
Golden Discs actually buy cheap stock, massivcve bulk and end of line stuff to keep prices down.
On-line stores are cheaper due to cheaper running costs.

Jaysus you are one ignorant rude so & so - the man posted something that i for one found interesting and that was all you had to bring to the discussion

Guy:Incognito

Dfitzer wrote:

Jaysus you are one ignorant rude so & so - the man posted something that i for one found interesting and that was all you had to bring to the discussion

Since when is "shut up, that's why" not a valid arguement?:)

MorningStar

Dfitzer wrote:

Jaysus you are one ignorant rude so & so - the man posted something that i for one found interesting and that was all you had to bring to the discussion

And calling somebody ignorant is the highest form or formal manners. It should at best been posted in bargin alert section rather than the "rip off" section. He is being ignorant by posting it here plus I had to point out the obvious.