Sid. We differ here. I think the behavior described is extremely reprehensible and probably illegal. If I am wrong what I suggest would do no harm. If I am right then you are out of line to discourage reporting it.
Charles, where we differ is in the language you used, specifically the accusation. That is what is out of bounds.
I have purchased 5 cameras thru them, returning each one to upgrade to the next!
Criminal fraud? Thievery? What words would you use? Answer that honestly please. And why after this subject had been dormant did you decide to revive it?
Charles Richmond IT & Security Consultant
Operating System Design, Drivers, Software
Villa Del Rio II, Talamban, Pit-os, Cebu, Ph
Well I just got a job for holding the sign for T-Mobile. THe guy at CIngular said he would call me once he knows what his other 2 people are doing. Time to save up! Only $910 to go...
Good work! Best of luck with the savings plan!
Ian
Moderator Journeys/Sports/Big Picture :: Need some help with dgrin?
Criminal fraud? Thievery? What words would you use? Answer that honestly please. And why after this subject had been dormant did you decide to revive it?
Because I've been out of town.
And you called some a thief. That's not something consistent with dgrin. Find another forum to make posts like that, don't do it here.
And you called some a thief. That's not something consistent with dgrin. Find another forum to make posts like that, don't do it here.
How do you characterize the behavior? You are being evasive which makes me think you agree. Someone comes on dgrin and not only brags about the behavior but solicits others to do it and *you* pick on me.
Charles Richmond IT & Security Consultant
Operating System Design, Drivers, Software
Villa Del Rio II, Talamban, Pit-os, Cebu, Ph
How do you characterize the behavior? You are being evasive which makes me think you agree. Someone comes on dgrin and not only brags about the behavior but solicits others to do it and *you* pick on me.
of costco's policies and capitalism in general
costco is a business, they have a $21 billion market capitalization. they have an executive team that makes the decisions on how the company is run, and the policies they'll do business under. in a capitialist society (which we have have in the u.s. last time i checked), the market will decide if what costco is doing is smart or not smart, from a business standpoint.
to shop at costco, one must provide all sorts of personal information. costco knows the details of every purchase, every transaction made by its' membership. there's no need to "report real name and address" to them, as they already have it. if costco has a problem with a member's use of their liberal return policies, they'll handle it. and if they don't have a problem, why should anybody?
btw, i've had the same accused of me. i buy my lenses at b&h whenever possible, becuase they have a 14-day no questions asked return policy. i've returned lenses (15mmm canon fisheye comes to mind) simply becuase after trying it out for a week, i decided it wasn't for me. wrong? nope. again, b&h is a business. if they can't make profits with their policies, then quite simply, they'll change their policies. and, this policy is why i buy exclusively from b&h.
to call someone a thief for using a policy by a public company that's available to anyone who shops at costco, that's what i find reprehensible and morally wrong. furthermore, it's totally out of bounds with regard to the spirit of this online community.
btw, i've had the same accused of me. i buy my lenses at b&h whenever possible, becuase they have a 14-day no questions asked return policy. i've returned lenses (15mmm canon fisheye comes to mind) simply becuase after trying it out for a week, i decided it wasn't for me. wrong? nope. again, b&h is a business. if they can't make profits with their policies, then quite simply, they'll change their policies. and, this policy is why i buy exclusively from b&h.
to call someone a thief for using a policy by a public company that's available to anyone who shops at costco, that's what i find reprehensible and morally wrong. furthermore, it's totally out of bounds with regard to the spirit of this online community.
Using a return policy in the way indicated is far far different than the way that you or I use return policies. I *might* find some of your behavior reprehensible but so far as I know, nothing you have done is at the level of the behavior we are discussing. As for the good of the site and the online community, INHO it would have been far better served by a moderator clamping down on the post advocating the behavior discussed. Heck delete the entire thread and reduce the liability that is being created by having actual site insiders on record as defending the behavior.
Charles Richmond IT & Security Consultant
Operating System Design, Drivers, Software
Villa Del Rio II, Talamban, Pit-os, Cebu, Ph
costco is a business, they have a $21 billion market capitalization. they have an executive team that makes the decisions on how the company is run, and the policies they'll do business under. in a capitialist society (which we have have in the u.s. last time i checked), the market will decide if what costco is doing is smart or not smart, from a business standpoint.
to shop at costco, one must provide all sorts of personal information. costco knows the details of every purchase, every transaction made by its' membership. there's no need to "report real name and address" to them, as they already have it. if costco has a problem with a member's use of their liberal return policies, they'll handle it. and if they don't have a problem, why should anybody?
btw, i've had the same accused of me. i buy my lenses at b&h whenever possible, becuase they have a 14-day no questions asked return policy. i've returned lenses (15mmm canon fisheye comes to mind) simply becuase after trying it out for a week, i decided it wasn't for me. wrong? nope. again, b&h is a business. if they can't make profits with their policies, then quite simply, they'll change their policies. and, this policy is why i buy exclusively from b&h.
to call someone a thief for using a policy by a public company that's available to anyone who shops at costco, that's what i find reprehensible and morally wrong. furthermore, it's totally out of bounds with regard to the spirit of this online community.
Andy,
Very well said.
Now, I do have a question with reguard to B&H's return policy. For example, what did they do with that 15mm lens you returned? Was it sent back to Canon, or resold as new?
Using a return policy in the way indicated is far far different than the way that you or I use return policies. I *might* find some of your behavior reprehensible but so far as I know, nothing you have done is at the level of the behavior we are discussing. As for the good of the site and the online community, INHO it would have been far better served by a moderator clamping down on the post advocating the behavior discussed. Heck delete the entire thread and reduce the liability that is being created by having actual site insiders on record as defending the behavior.
charles, we differ here, too. you have your opinion... that's cool. i will continue to use favorable (to me) business policies when i shop. if the business owner can't make money, they'll change their policies.
there's nothing wrong with landrum's behavior. if there was, i'm sure the local cops would be on top of it. you are certainly entitled to your opinion - but you've got to admit, the word you used to describe landrum was way ott. disagree all you want with someone, and defend your position vigorously, but please, do so in a civil and friendly tone.
there's nothing wrong with landrum's behavior. if there was, i'm sure the local cops would be on top of it.
Andy, that attitude is disturbing to me. You are saying that as long as it isn't illegal it isn't wrong. I disagree. There is a difference between moral and legal behavior. It isn't illegal for me to hurt someone's feelings, but it is wrong for me to do so. See the point?
Its not that what she did is illegal, its that is is unethical.
Andy, that attitude is disturbing to me. You are saying that as long as it isn't illegal it isn't wrong. I disagree. There is a difference between moral and legal behavior. It isn't illegal for me to hurt someone's feelings, but it is wrong for me to do so. See the point?
Its not that what she did is illegal, its that is is unethical.
merc,
what's disturbing to me, is that you guys are beating on someone who is abiding by the policies of a company. it's up to the company to decide what their policies are, and to a degree, you and i, also. we can choose to do business there, or not, based on our feelings about the policy. but, we shouldn't condemn anyone for legitimately using the policies to their advantage.
i'm a big believer in the free market economy - and the market will ultimately dictate whether costco decides that the policy is advantageous to them or not.
i don't stand in judgement of others in a case like this. on their website their terms and conditions are quite clear.
what's disturbing to me, is that you guys are beating on someone who is abiding by the policies of a company.
Point taken. I over-reacted. I saw it as yet another instance in our society where people don't think they have to pay for anything anymore. Free music, free software, they'll ask for photographs for free, free health care, the list goes on. And returning a camera, not because it is defective but because you simply wanted a new one, just doesn't set well with me.
I'm all for free markets myself, Andy. I'm a die-hard capitalist. But I'm also a big believer in responsibility and respect, and that goes both directions. CostCo is trying to make lives easier on their customers and show us respect by not asking questions when we return something. I beleive we should return the favor and not take advantage of such policies, because when abused those policies will need to be adjusted. I'd rather not see that happen.
There are consequences to actions, and there are no free lunches, and that was the entire point I was trying to get at. That's why I believe that the actions taken, while legal, were still "wrong".
Point taken. I over-reacted. I saw it as yet another instance in our society where people don't think they have to pay for anything anymore. Free music, free software, they'll ask for photographs for free, free health care, the list goes on. And returning a camera, not because it is defective but because you simply wanted a new one, just doesn't set well with me.
I'm all for free markets myself, Andy. I'm a die-hard capitalist. But I'm also a big believer in responsibility and respect, and that goes both directions. CostCo is trying to make lives easier on their customers and show us respect by not asking questions when we return something. I beleive we should return the favor and not take advantage of such policies, because when abused those policies will need to be adjusted. I'd rather not see that happen.
There are consequences to actions, and there are no free lunches, and that was the entire point I was trying to get at. That's why I believe that the actions taken, while legal, were still "wrong".
Update: I've been holding the sign and so far I have....$897.50 to go!
I've been recycling cans and bottles to make some extra money, but it's gonna take quite a few cans to get a lot. It's alright, though...I drink a lot of soda and water bottles.:D
Update: I've been holding the sign and so far I have....$897.50 to go!
I've been recycling cans and bottles to make some extra money, but it's gonna take quite a few cans to get a lot. It's alright, though...I drink a lot of soda and water bottles.:D
-Steve
Keep working toward your goal and I'm sure you will be sucessful.
Update: I've been holding the sign and so far I have....$897.50 to go!
I've been recycling cans and bottles to make some extra money, but it's gonna take quite a few cans to get a lot. It's alright, though...I drink a lot of soda and water bottles.:D
-Steve
Good luck, mate. There's the old cliche that nothing good comes easy - if you stick with it, you're gonna savor that camera!
Ok, so I still have $750 to go until the camera. I may get a job permit and work at Jack in the Box to make some more money (I live within walking distance of one). I haven't been holding the sign for a while since my mini disc player broke and that's what I listened to while I was holding the sign. I'm also sick right now, so I don't feel like standing on the corner with a sore throat and coughing all the time. I'll update again if I decide to work at Jack in the Box.
I made $40 today helping my dad with some work he is doing in the side yard. I mixed about ten 60 pound bags of cement and did some other things.
I've noticed some price drops on the 300D. Hopefully by the time I make enough money, there will be a newer version.:D
Andy, that attitude is disturbing to me. You are saying that as long as it isn't illegal it isn't wrong. I disagree. There is a difference between moral and legal behavior. It isn't illegal for me to hurt someone's feelings, but it is wrong for me to do so. See the point?
Its not that what she did is illegal, its that is is unethical.
But businesses run off of what is legal, not ethical. There are just as many legal situations that benfit business that are unethical to the consumer. I GUARANTEE you that the owners and lawyers of that business lose no sleep over it. The pendulum swings both ways.
And personally, I think getting stuck with something that you don't like or want does sometimes take a little time to establish, and more than once I have returned stuff on the very last day of the return policy. If I don't put an product through its paces to find out of it is for me...then shame on me. If I do that, generally, I still would have liked more time to work with it to make sure it isn't me that is the problem, but prefer to return it within the return policy.
I agree that in the end, a store ENFORCES their policies..even when it screws them. That is part of their business. And I can attest to the fact that when stores do this for me, and bend over backwards...anything I may have STOLEN from then gets bought back 5 times over. In business you sometimes turn the cheek on losing money long enough to make even more money later. Its called reelin' them in..
I'll take it one step further. I work for a manufacturer of electronics doing tech support. Often people don't get manuals from open boxes or other accessories. Technically, we don't owe them a thing because in most cases those open boxes were discounted for missing that stuff, or because it was with the unit at ship time, and its missing because the dealer lost it. At that point, its up to the store or the customer to pay for the replacement of those parts/accessories, and the dealer "usually" chooses not to do it, citing the reduced price as the reason (which may or may not cover the cost of the missing accessory). For some of the cheaper accessories..even though we have EVERY right to say, "sorry, buy it...", we will send them for free to the customer anyway, because for the few bucks it costs us to cover a manual or power cord, we can satisfy a customer that will spend another $100-$1000 on our electronics in the future. And I have been at my company for 10 years, and have actually developed friendships with recurring callers that have been calling over that time for questions, support, warranty coverage, and accessory purchases. So I KNOW this works!
I have been ignoring this thread, but I do want to throw a work in.
A store has a return policy that I would hope is there to encourage you to buy with confidence, not so that you can upgrade your product once a year without ever paying more than the cost of the expensive unit. Those who say there is nothing wrong with the practice because it fits the stores policy and if they lose money they will change the policy are missing a point. I feel the policy is there to protect you from buying a low quality product and being stuck with it. In the end... they will change the policy, and those consumers who are just trying to return a defective product will be the ones to pay the price.
A few years back there were large numbers of people "Buying" camcorders to take on their vacation. When they returned from vacation, they returned the item and got their money back. They had the tapes and paid nothing. They could repeat this process forever, always have a camcorder when they wanted one and never actually pay for it. People did this with laptop computers and cameras as well. Someone payed for those camcorders, thats right. The store passed the loss on to the rest of the consumers. I paid for it every time I bought DVDs or Blank CDs or ink for my printer.
Now most stores have a short time limit on these items and a policy that they will only exchange it for the SAME item. Now you pay for this abusive use of the previous return policy by having less options when you are truly not happy with a product.
I think it is legal, but I also think it is an abuse of a policy and in the end, the rest of us pay for the camera, no matter how you slice it. If you dont mind buying other folks camera's, then by all means spread the word.
Personally...
I've been thinking about this, and well, I agree that returning the unit almost a year later for an upgrade is not right in and of itself. But at the same time, I think manufacturers should support current users by offering cheaper than buying a whole new camera upgrade paths to begin with. Many manufacturers do not do this. So, in the long run, what he is doing is poetic justice. Because when push comes to shove, he is just balancing the equation to keep his piece of the pie fresh.
As far as the cost coming back to us. I doubt it. Most dealers make such a high per centage of profit on certain items, that they can truly sell the unit for 40% less, and not take a loss. So the occasional person doing what he is doing is not even going to dent the market. Trust me, if it got bad enough that it would start to effect pricing, then they'd change the policy before they changed the pricing. Right now, the competition on items is tight enough, that manufacturers are often following the dealers request to make units 5-20 cents cheaper per unit so they can pass those savings on to the customer (5 cents cheaper to them, translates to about $10 cheaper for you). The dealers are not looking to boost the price of items. Especially not a store like Costco. If push comes to shove, many stores now sell stuff over e-bay, and still make some good money selling it as a used or reconditioned item at just a little above their cost price.
I haven't updated in quite a while, but I still have $500 to go. Half way there. That electronics show in Las Vegas is soon, isn't it? Don't they usually release new models soon after that show? Maybe there will be a new model of the 300D.
I've been going to work with my dad sometimes on the weekend and doinga bit of work to make some money. I got my iPod for Christmas, so I an do sign holding, but the only problem is it gets dark too early here to stay out for very long.
Comments
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
Operating System Design, Drivers, Software
Villa Del Rio II, Talamban, Pit-os, Cebu, Ph
Ian
And you called some a thief. That's not something consistent with dgrin. Find another forum to make posts like that, don't do it here.
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
Operating System Design, Drivers, Software
Villa Del Rio II, Talamban, Pit-os, Cebu, Ph
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
costco is a business, they have a $21 billion market capitalization. they have an executive team that makes the decisions on how the company is run, and the policies they'll do business under. in a capitialist society (which we have have in the u.s. last time i checked), the market will decide if what costco is doing is smart or not smart, from a business standpoint.
to shop at costco, one must provide all sorts of personal information. costco knows the details of every purchase, every transaction made by its' membership. there's no need to "report real name and address" to them, as they already have it. if costco has a problem with a member's use of their liberal return policies, they'll handle it. and if they don't have a problem, why should anybody?
btw, i've had the same accused of me. i buy my lenses at b&h whenever possible, becuase they have a 14-day no questions asked return policy. i've returned lenses (15mmm canon fisheye comes to mind) simply becuase after trying it out for a week, i decided it wasn't for me. wrong? nope. again, b&h is a business. if they can't make profits with their policies, then quite simply, they'll change their policies. and, this policy is why i buy exclusively from b&h.
to call someone a thief for using a policy by a public company that's available to anyone who shops at costco, that's what i find reprehensible and morally wrong. furthermore, it's totally out of bounds with regard to the spirit of this online community.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Operating System Design, Drivers, Software
Villa Del Rio II, Talamban, Pit-os, Cebu, Ph
Very well said.
Now, I do have a question with reguard to B&H's return policy. For example, what did they do with that 15mm lens you returned? Was it sent back to Canon, or resold as new?
Thanks,
Sam
charles, we differ here, too. you have your opinion... that's cool. i will continue to use favorable (to me) business policies when i shop. if the business owner can't make money, they'll change their policies.
there's nothing wrong with landrum's behavior. if there was, i'm sure the local cops would be on top of it. you are certainly entitled to your opinion - but you've got to admit, the word you used to describe landrum was way ott. disagree all you want with someone, and defend your position vigorously, but please, do so in a civil and friendly tone.
lol on the "liablility?" that's a riot
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Andy, that attitude is disturbing to me. You are saying that as long as it isn't illegal it isn't wrong. I disagree. There is a difference between moral and legal behavior. It isn't illegal for me to hurt someone's feelings, but it is wrong for me to do so. See the point?
Its not that what she did is illegal, its that is is unethical.
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
merc,
what's disturbing to me, is that you guys are beating on someone who is abiding by the policies of a company. it's up to the company to decide what their policies are, and to a degree, you and i, also. we can choose to do business there, or not, based on our feelings about the policy. but, we shouldn't condemn anyone for legitimately using the policies to their advantage.
i'm a big believer in the free market economy - and the market will ultimately dictate whether costco decides that the policy is advantageous to them or not.
i don't stand in judgement of others in a case like this. on their website their terms and conditions are quite clear.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Point taken. I over-reacted. I saw it as yet another instance in our society where people don't think they have to pay for anything anymore. Free music, free software, they'll ask for photographs for free, free health care, the list goes on. And returning a camera, not because it is defective but because you simply wanted a new one, just doesn't set well with me.
I'm all for free markets myself, Andy. I'm a die-hard capitalist. But I'm also a big believer in responsibility and respect, and that goes both directions. CostCo is trying to make lives easier on their customers and show us respect by not asking questions when we return something. I beleive we should return the favor and not take advantage of such policies, because when abused those policies will need to be adjusted. I'd rather not see that happen.
There are consequences to actions, and there are no free lunches, and that was the entire point I was trying to get at. That's why I believe that the actions taken, while legal, were still "wrong".
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
no worries, merc
my econ prof in college always said this: tinfl - there is no free lunch
in this case, the cost of lunch ultimately could be that costco decides that they can't afford to continue this policy.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
I've been recycling cans and bottles to make some extra money, but it's gonna take quite a few cans to get a lot. It's alright, though...I drink a lot of soda and water bottles.:D
-Steve
http://redbull.smugmug.com
"Money can't buy happiness...But it can buy expensive posessions that make other people envious, and that feels just as good.":D
Canon 20D, Canon 50 1.8 II, Canon 70-200 f/4L, Canon 17-40 f/4 L, Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro, Canon 430ex.
TML Photography
tmlphoto.com
Good luck, mate. There's the old cliche that nothing good comes easy - if you stick with it, you're gonna savor that camera!
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
Keep up the good work Steve!
Ok, so I still have $750 to go until the camera. I may get a job permit and work at Jack in the Box to make some more money (I live within walking distance of one). I haven't been holding the sign for a while since my mini disc player broke and that's what I listened to while I was holding the sign. I'm also sick right now, so I don't feel like standing on the corner with a sore throat and coughing all the time. I'll update again if I decide to work at Jack in the Box.
I made $40 today helping my dad with some work he is doing in the side yard. I mixed about ten 60 pound bags of cement and did some other things.
I've noticed some price drops on the 300D. Hopefully by the time I make enough money, there will be a newer version.:D
http://redbull.smugmug.com
"Money can't buy happiness...But it can buy expensive posessions that make other people envious, and that feels just as good.":D
Canon 20D, Canon 50 1.8 II, Canon 70-200 f/4L, Canon 17-40 f/4 L, Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro, Canon 430ex.
when you do, it'll be worth it.
Ian
But businesses run off of what is legal, not ethical. There are just as many legal situations that benfit business that are unethical to the consumer. I GUARANTEE you that the owners and lawyers of that business lose no sleep over it. The pendulum swings both ways.
And personally, I think getting stuck with something that you don't like or want does sometimes take a little time to establish, and more than once I have returned stuff on the very last day of the return policy. If I don't put an product through its paces to find out of it is for me...then shame on me. If I do that, generally, I still would have liked more time to work with it to make sure it isn't me that is the problem, but prefer to return it within the return policy.
I agree that in the end, a store ENFORCES their policies..even when it screws them. That is part of their business. And I can attest to the fact that when stores do this for me, and bend over backwards...anything I may have STOLEN from then gets bought back 5 times over. In business you sometimes turn the cheek on losing money long enough to make even more money later. Its called reelin' them in..
I'll take it one step further. I work for a manufacturer of electronics doing tech support. Often people don't get manuals from open boxes or other accessories. Technically, we don't owe them a thing because in most cases those open boxes were discounted for missing that stuff, or because it was with the unit at ship time, and its missing because the dealer lost it. At that point, its up to the store or the customer to pay for the replacement of those parts/accessories, and the dealer "usually" chooses not to do it, citing the reduced price as the reason (which may or may not cover the cost of the missing accessory). For some of the cheaper accessories..even though we have EVERY right to say, "sorry, buy it...", we will send them for free to the customer anyway, because for the few bucks it costs us to cover a manual or power cord, we can satisfy a customer that will spend another $100-$1000 on our electronics in the future. And I have been at my company for 10 years, and have actually developed friendships with recurring callers that have been calling over that time for questions, support, warranty coverage, and accessory purchases. So I KNOW this works!
MainFragger
A store has a return policy that I would hope is there to encourage you to buy with confidence, not so that you can upgrade your product once a year without ever paying more than the cost of the expensive unit. Those who say there is nothing wrong with the practice because it fits the stores policy and if they lose money they will change the policy are missing a point. I feel the policy is there to protect you from buying a low quality product and being stuck with it. In the end... they will change the policy, and those consumers who are just trying to return a defective product will be the ones to pay the price.
A few years back there were large numbers of people "Buying" camcorders to take on their vacation. When they returned from vacation, they returned the item and got their money back. They had the tapes and paid nothing. They could repeat this process forever, always have a camcorder when they wanted one and never actually pay for it. People did this with laptop computers and cameras as well. Someone payed for those camcorders, thats right. The store passed the loss on to the rest of the consumers. I paid for it every time I bought DVDs or Blank CDs or ink for my printer.
Now most stores have a short time limit on these items and a policy that they will only exchange it for the SAME item. Now you pay for this abusive use of the previous return policy by having less options when you are truly not happy with a product.
I think it is legal, but I also think it is an abuse of a policy and in the end, the rest of us pay for the camera, no matter how you slice it. If you dont mind buying other folks camera's, then by all means spread the word.
I have enough trouble actually paying for my own.
I've been thinking about this, and well, I agree that returning the unit almost a year later for an upgrade is not right in and of itself. But at the same time, I think manufacturers should support current users by offering cheaper than buying a whole new camera upgrade paths to begin with. Many manufacturers do not do this. So, in the long run, what he is doing is poetic justice. Because when push comes to shove, he is just balancing the equation to keep his piece of the pie fresh.
As far as the cost coming back to us. I doubt it. Most dealers make such a high per centage of profit on certain items, that they can truly sell the unit for 40% less, and not take a loss. So the occasional person doing what he is doing is not even going to dent the market. Trust me, if it got bad enough that it would start to effect pricing, then they'd change the policy before they changed the pricing. Right now, the competition on items is tight enough, that manufacturers are often following the dealers request to make units 5-20 cents cheaper per unit so they can pass those savings on to the customer (5 cents cheaper to them, translates to about $10 cheaper for you). The dealers are not looking to boost the price of items. Especially not a store like Costco. If push comes to shove, many stores now sell stuff over e-bay, and still make some good money selling it as a used or reconditioned item at just a little above their cost price.
MainFragger
I've been going to work with my dad sometimes on the weekend and doinga bit of work to make some money. I got my iPod for Christmas, so I an do sign holding, but the only problem is it gets dark too early here to stay out for very long.
http://redbull.smugmug.com
"Money can't buy happiness...But it can buy expensive posessions that make other people envious, and that feels just as good.":D
Canon 20D, Canon 50 1.8 II, Canon 70-200 f/4L, Canon 17-40 f/4 L, Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro, Canon 430ex.