Consumer Affairs

[1eyedtiger]

I'm sitting here listening to Today, Tonight, where an story is been shown about the mark ups that supermarket chains are charging for goods. I personally believe that the Australian public is being ripped off every day by all sorts of businesses involving just about every good or service imaginable.
I'm interested to know what other's think of the issue.

 

[Tiger74]

the supermarkets actually go out of their way to be the lowest price point maker. they have people who go to local stores and groceries to ensure that their retail price is higher than that of the supermarket. if the retails price is lower, the wholesaler/manufacturer usually gets a nasty phone call demanding immediate discounting or threats to withdrawl the product. they dont like the little guys having any price advantage at all.

In terms of rip-offs, I cannot go past used cars. of the 3 I have purchased in my life, 2 were complete money sapping duds

 

[eight ace]

You should stop relying on Today Tonight or its channel 9 cousin for information immediately.

 

[1eyedtiger]

It's not just about supermarkets. I have it on good authority that a well known truck manufacturer charges something like 700% markups on it's spare parts. This is apparently standard in the automotive car industry. I also have it on good authority that a well known car manufacturer (Different source) charges a whole day labor and a couple of hundred bucks for a $20 part that takes 15 minutes to fit.

 

[Liverpool]

No such thing as a rip-off.

It's either good business acumen to have a price nice and high as well as having the demand.....or customers don't to their homework beforehand.....or both.

 

[mld]

If a $20 part takes 15 minutes to fit, do it yourself.

 

[1eyedtiger]

Not everyone is a mechanic and most car companies have similar markups. Most people would simply accept the word of the dealer. No-one has time to do everything in one lifetime. You select what you want to do and rely on others for the rest. The only reason I know about the car company in question is because I know someone who works for them. Most others would be completely unaware that they were being exploited.
This is getting off the track a little. I only provided a couple of examples to try and stimulate discussion about something other than religion and politics for a change. But if you want another example, there have more than a few grumbles about the price of food at the footy.
There is a fine line between "good business practices" and outright exploitation of the population. Particularly in industries where the public has little or no bargaining power and where companies are in collusion with each other. The oil industry is a good example of that. It just hasn't been proven and even if it was, there's not a enough political willpower to do anything about it. It doesn't stop it from being a rip-off though.

 

[Six Pack]

No such thing as a rip-off.

It's either good business acumen to have a price nice and high as well as having the demand.....or customers don't to their homework beforehand.....or both.

What about customers without the means of doing their homework? Such as children, the elderly and the mentally ill? What about a situation where a monopoly exists?

 

[poppa x]

If a business charges too much then eventually customers will go elsewhere. No business can survive in the long term by ripping people off. Consumers have choice. Using your example of food at the footy, the public can avoid this by bringing their own sandwiches. If enough people did this then the food prices would come down. The fact they remain high means the customer is prepared to pay the high price. The food vendors also have to pay a very high "license fee" to get the footy franchise which they must recover from people who buy their pies and chips etc.

Supermarkets? Their net profit after tax is about 4% of sales. So; all up their costs (including overheads) are about 96 cents in the dollar and they charge us $1.00 - no rip off here.

Methinx you are chasing conspiracies that don't exist.

 

[Six Pack]

And so how come petrol stations seem to put their prices up on a Thursday evening, and those same prices mysteriously fall again late on Sunday?

 

[Jools]

Actually, it's usually Wednesday afternoon around most of Melbourne, often see large queues at stations on Tuesday evening/Wednesday morning.

 

[Liverpool]

No such thing as a rip-off.

It's either good business acumen to have a price nice and high as well as having the demand.....or customers don't to their homework beforehand.....or both.

What about customers without the means of doing their homework? Such as children, the elderly and the mentally ill? What about a situation where a monopoly exists?

A) If they still have the capacity to purchase goods/services, then they still have the capacity to either shop around themselves, or ask others for advice.
You're making excuses for people's poor judgement.
People need to take responsibility for their own actions, Six Pack.

B) A monopoly such as?

 

[Six Pack]

No such thing as a rip-off.

It's either good business acumen to have a price nice and high as well as having the demand.....or customers don't to their homework beforehand.....or both.

What about customers without the means of doing their homework? Such as children, the elderly and the mentally ill? What about a situation where a monopoly exists?

A) If they still have the capacity to purchase goods/services, then they still have the capacity to either shop around themselves, or ask others for advice.
You're making excuses for people's poor judgement.
People need to take responsibility for their own actions, Six Pack.

B) A monopoly such as?

so, you are saying that either:

a. it's good business to rip off people who aren't capable of making the same judgements as you or I?

or

b. to hell with the disabled, the elderly and the infirm and children

 

[Liverpool]

No such thing as a rip-off.

It's either good business acumen to have a price nice and high as well as having the demand.....or customers don't to their homework beforehand.....or both.

What about customers without the means of doing their homework? Such as children, the elderly and the mentally ill? What about a situation where a monopoly exists?

A) If they still have the capacity to purchase goods/services, then they still have the capacity to either shop around themselves, or ask others for advice.
You're making excuses for people's poor judgement.
People need to take responsibility for their own actions, Six Pack.

B) A monopoly such as?

so, you are saying that either:
a. it's good business to rip off people who aren't capable of making the same judgements as you or I?
or
b. to hell with the disabled, the elderly and the infirm and children

No.
I'm saying that people need to take responsibility for their own actions instead of blaming everyone else.
If people don't have the capability to make lucid judgements for themselves, then maybe they aren't the ones who should be purchasing goods/services to begin with.

You still haven't answered my monoploy question.
I await your response.

 

[RemoteTiger]

Having the experience of selling Information Technology Software Hardware Services etc. since 1979 I must agree with Liverpool in this instance.

The vendor is not - repeat not - responsible for the buyers lack of business acumen (read inability to shop around).

Let me explain via a sales situation that happened to me back in the early 1990s -

I was selling Mainframe Software for a multi-national software company to a large Government Department. The software I was proposing did the job required by the Government Department however I knew of an opposition software product that not only did the same job but also did more - which the Government Department would need in the future.

Now do I do -

The right thing by my customer - the Government Department - and advise them of the other product - which will cost the multi-national software company I work for the sale (and we are talking 100s of 1000s of dollars here)? OR

The right thing by my employer who pays my wages and commissions my workers compensation my superannuation my expenses and say nothing to the Government Department about the oppositions product?

In the end I sought advice on the ethics of the situation from a mentor who had helped me for many years prior (and still does). His career is a public servant (then) in the Ombudsmens office (now with Attorney's General) - he advised me in no uncertain terms - that I am NOT RESPONSIBLE for the lack of market research completed by a buyer. If my product does what the buyer requires and I do not misrepresent my product (saying that it does things it does not) then I have fulfilled my ethical and legal obligations to the customer.

In the end I sold the software to the Government Department - they still use it happily to this day.

So IMO Liverpool is correct in this instance - the onus is on the buyer to buy what is required - the only onus on the vendor is to not misrepresent the capabilities of the product. How the product is priced is always open to negotiation between the buyer and the vendor - even supermarkets spy on other retail providers to ensure that the price they are offering is competitive - this in itself is a form of negotiation between the market (consumers) and its vendors.

IMO the concept - Buyer Beware - should be taught at every school in Australia not just in Commercial Law classes......cheers RT

 

[Liverpool]

So IMO Liverpool is correct in this instance - the onus is on the buyer to buy what is required - the only onus on the vendor is to not misrepresent the capabilities of the product. How the product is priced is always open to negotiation between the buyer and the vendor - even supermarkets spy on other retail providers to ensure that the price they are offering is competitive - this in itself is a form of negotiation between the market (consumers) and its vendors.

IMO the concept - Buyer Beware - should be taught at every school in Australia not just in Commercial Law classes......cheers RT

Agree 100% Remote.
While it is the responsibility of the buyer to shop around and the onus is on them at the end of the day to spend their money wisely.....it is still the responsibility of the retailer to abide by the trade-practices act, which is the law.
That is important.

What about customers without the means of doing their homework? Such as children, the elderly and the mentally ill? What about a situation where a monopoly exists?

A) If they still have the capacity to purchase goods/services, then they still have the capacity to either shop around themselves, or ask others for advice.
You're making excuses for people's poor judgement.
People need to take responsibility for their own actions, Six Pack.
B) A monopoly such as?

so, you are saying that either:
a. it's good business to rip off people who aren't capable of making the same judgements as you or I?
or
b. to hell with the disabled, the elderly and the infirm and children

No.
I'm saying that people need to take responsibility for their own actions instead of blaming everyone else.
If people don't have the capability to make lucid judgements for themselves, then maybe they aren't the ones who should be purchasing goods/services to begin with.
You still haven't answered my monoploy question.
I await your response.

Sixpack,
This might answer some of the concerns you raised:

http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/705064/fromItemId/3669

 

[Six Pack]

I'm not talking about 'blame' Livers, I am talking about some sort of social or community responsibility.

 

[Liverpool]

I'm not talking about 'blame' Livers, I am talking about some sort of social or community responsibility.

It's all here mate:

http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/705064/fromItemId/3669

That is what businesses need to abide by.
If they do that, then the rest of it is up to the consumer, as they have to have some sort of responsibility in all this as well.

 

[Six Pack]

Stop avoiding the issue. We both know that some people don't have the capacity to make the same astute decision you and I can make.

In your world these people are suckers.

 

[Liverpool]

Stop avoiding the issue. We both know that some people don't have the capacity to make the same astute decision you and I can make.
In your world these people are suckers.

I'm certainly not avoiding anything, and to be frank, I think you should be the last person to accuse anyone on this forum of that.
You dodge any question asked.....how's that "monopoly" question coming along, by the way?

Retailers and businesses exist for one thing.....to make money.
They have to abide by the laws (which I have given you the site specific to the concerns raised by you, about people with disadvantages)....and that is where their legal responsibility ends for the business.

However, businesses/retailers are not supposed to be 'baby sitters' for the consumer.
If people cannot make astute decisions, or take responsibility for their own decisions, then they shouldn't be making these decisions in the first place.