Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 124269	2012-04-15 11:05:00	Up to 50% off graphics cards.	Trev (427)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1270294	2012-04-15 11:05:00	www.wiseguys.co.nz :)	Trev (427)
1270295	2012-04-15 15:54:00	But are they reliable?	Speedy Gonzales (78)
1270296	2012-04-15 19:36:00	Their "special" on an asus 560Ti is more than computerlands current price and they claim a $294 saving. Inflating the prices then discounting the difference back off is a BS marketing strategy.	dugimodo (138)
1270297	2012-04-15 21:18:00	Agree with dugi, their claimed RRPs are completely out of touch with actual market prices. Even with their "massive savings" a good number of those cards are cheaper elsewhere.	inphinity (7274)
1270298	2012-04-15 21:38:00	Inflating the prices then discounting the difference back off is a BS marketing strategy.It's also illegal (misleading advertising). Advertised discounts must be off the common market price for the same item - they can't be based on another arbitrarily high figure, and can't be based on the RRP if the RRP is significantly higher than the common market price. I can't remember exactly which act covers this, but I'm reasonably confident it's the Fair Trading Act.	Erayd (23)
1270299	2012-04-15 21:50:00	Slightly off topic, but I notice a couple of computer companies advertise all their prices +GST, with the actual price listed much smaller. I thought that was banned many years ago as misleading also. It certainly bugs me.	dugimodo (138)
1270300	2012-04-15 22:39:00	It's also illegal (misleading advertising). Advertised discounts must be off the common market price for the same item - they can't be based on another arbitrarily high figure, and can't be based on the RRP if the RRP is significantly higher than the common market price. I can't remember exactly which act covers this, but I'm reasonably confident it's the Fair Trading Act. Briscoe's do this sort of marketing and as far as I know it is legal. They have been mentioned in the Consumer Mag. and they said there was nothing wrong with what they are doing. :)	Trev (427)
1270301	2012-04-15 23:54:00	Slightly off topic, but I notice a couple of computer companies advertise all their prices +GST, with the actual price listed much smaller. I thought that was banned many years ago as misleading also. It certainly bugs me. Curse you PBTech! (I think there is a setting on the site to turn it on though). Its annoying how these "lower" prices show up in pricespy though.	icow (15313)
1270302	2012-04-16 04:16:00	Briscoe's do this sort of marketing and as far as I know it is legal. They have been mentioned in the Consumer Mag. and they said there was nothing wrong with what they are doing. :)I don't know the details of Briscoes' pricing strategy, but don't they actually sell those items at the 'original' (high) price most of the time (therefore making a large discount off that legit)? Briscoes has also been investigated by the commerce commission in the past for, among other things, misleading advertising / pricing. See here (www.nzherald.co.nz) and here (pdf) (www.comcom.govt.nz). Note the quotes below also. While it seems like this particular point is largely based on case law and is open to interpretation by the courts, it does seem reasonably clear that 'non-discount discounts' are definitely not ok. No person shall, in trade, engage in conduct that is misleading or deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive. No person shall, in trade, in connection with the supply or possible supply of goods or services or with the promotion by any means of the supply or use of goods or services,— (a)make a false or misleading representation that goods are of a particular kind, standard, quality, grade, quantity, composition, style, or model, or have had a particular history or particular previous use; or (b)make a false or misleading representation that services are of a particular kind, standard, quality, or quantity, or that they are supplied by any particular person or by any person of a particular trade, qualification, or skill; or (c)make a false or misleading representation that a particular person has agreed to acquire goods or services; or (d)make a false or misleading representation that goods are new, or that they are reconditioned, or that they were manufactured, produced, processed, or reconditioned at a particular time; or (e)make a false or misleading representation that goods or services have any sponsorship, approval, endorsement, performance characteristics, accessories, uses, or benefits; or (f)make a false or misleading representation that a person has any sponsorship, approval, endorsement, or affiliation; or (g)make a false or misleading representation with respect to the price of any goods or services; or (h)make a false or misleading representation concerning the need for any goods or services; or (i)make a false or misleading representation concerning the existence, exclusion, or effect of any condition, warranty, guarantee, right, or remedy; or (j)make a false or misleading representation concerning the place of origin of goods. Retailers are reminded that advertising sale prices that are no cheaper than every day prices can put them in breach of the Fair Trading Act...It is fine to advertise a sale when the discounts are real, but it is misleading to use the term when there is no difference in price. ...The commission issued compliance advice to 17 bicycle retailers, telling them comparison prices with RRP should only be used when RRP reflects local market rates... In widespread advertising in late 2010 and early 2011, Progressive Enterprises claimed customers could save “at least 20%”or “at least 25%” off all beer at its Countdown, Foodtown and Woolworths supermarkets. The Commission believes that consumers would reasonably have expected the 20% to 25% off claim to mean either: that they would save 20% to 25% off the price at which the beer was offered for sale immediately prior to the promotion OR that they would save 20% to 25% off the usual price of the beer. However the Commission’s investigation found that in a number of cases, the discount was calculated off neither of these prices. Progressive confirmed that the discounts were calculated off Progressive’s “standard shelf price” for the products. The Commission found that in a number of cases, it had been a lengthy period of time since the beer had been offered at the standard shelf price. For example a 12 pack of NZ Pure was advertised as “20 % off” but had not been sold at the standard shelf price or close to it for the previous eight months. In another example, a 15 bottle pack of Steinlager Classic beer was advertised with “at least 20% off”. In some of the Progressive Enterprises supermarkets it had been more than six months since that product had been sold at the $31.68 standard shelf price. “We believe that this practice breaches the Fair Trading Act. The Commission considers it misleading to use a standard shelf price as the basis for a saving claim when that price has not been displayed or charged for lengthy periods of time,” said Commerce Commission General Manager of Competition, Kate Morrison. Kathmandu was fined $28,000 plus costs in the Auckland District Court today for breaching the Fair Trading Act by advertising goods as being "on sale" when they had been available at the discounted price for months prior to the sale and, in some cases, when they were also available at the same "sale" price afterwards. Kathmandu had advertised various items of clothing as being available at a discount of up to 50 to 60% off normal retail price during their nationwide sales. However, some of these items had already been available in store at this reduced price; the Astra jacket in "Moonlight" was advertised in the Easter Sale 2004 at the discounted price of $79.95 but was already available at this price from 29 January 2004 until 23 August 2004. In her summing up, Judge Kiernan noted that although Kathmandu has now changed the way it displays its products in store, clearly differentiating between those items on sale and those already discounted, it had failed to respond to previous approaches by the Commission on this matter. Commerce Commission Director Fair Trading Deborah Battell welcomed the fine and said it sent a sharp warning to all traders to exercise care when advertising items as part of a sale. "Kathmandu failed to put in place proper procedures to differentiate between goods that were discounted for the sale period and those that had already been offered at the reduced price because they were discontinued lines. Consumers were led to believe that the advertised deals were available for a limited time only, when the price was, in fact, the normal price.	Erayd (23)
1270303	2012-04-16 05:04:00	I had a quick look but I think that I will stick with shops like ComputerLounge, Elive and Ascent. Pricespy can be handy for research into pricing.	Bobh (5192)
1 2