Subject:
|
Re: S@H Prices
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 22 Sep 1999 13:49:33 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
cmasi@cmasi.chem.tulane.SPAMCAKEedu
|
Viewed:
|
599 times
|
| |
|
|
My impression is that the S@H prices were higher than normal retail by
almost 10%. My conclusion is based on anecdotal evidence, not a thorough
market study.
Christopher
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> Just a nit, I agree with the theme of the post, but what you're
> basically complaining about is the retail prices. S@H prices are (except
> for specials) basically just a pretty fixed markup (rounded to the
> nearest quarter(1)) of the suggested retail...
>
> 1 - I have never heard anyone comment on this. Most US based companies
> do the .95 or .99 thing on the end of prices. Even TLG standard retail
> usually ends in a .99 or .49 cent price. S@H doesn't.
> --
> Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
> - - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
> fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ Member ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to
> lugnet.
>
> NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
> will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: S@H Prices
|
| (...) Yes, that's almost always true. But then, they don't charge you for shipping. So the 10% is basically a shipping & handling fee. (25 years ago, 22-Sep-99, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: S@H Prices
|
| Just a nit, I agree with the theme of the post, but what you're basically complaining about is the retail prices. S@H prices are (except for specials) basically just a pretty fixed markup (rounded to the nearest quarter(1)) of the suggested (...) (25 years ago, 22-Sep-99, to lugnet.general)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
