To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.loc.ukOpen lugnet.loc.uk in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Local / United Kingdom / 6965
6964  |  6966
Subject: 
Re: Should we be worried about shop@home?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.theory
Date: 
Sat, 28 Jul 2001 17:26:27 GMT
Viewed: 
69 times
  
In lugnet.general, Lawrence Wilkes writes:

<snip>
So my point still stands.
SAH is simply a way for Lego to retain more of the profit.

regards
lawrence

(IMHO / ymmv) Shop at Home is both a profit and a cost center. Having people to
answer the phones, take order, package and ship does not come for free. I do not
know how TLC does the internal dollars, but I would not be surprised if the
manufacturing division 'wholesales' the product to the S@H division at or about
the same discount from MSRP as they do to retailers of comparable size. That way
they can tell where the corporate profits (or losses) are flowing from. The
singular advantage is that S@H gets some products that do not appear elsewhere.

However, note the 'German' exception to the Metroliner reissue. I wonder how TLC
treating the German retailers differently than others (in the EU) sits with the
EU trade governance.

Ray



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Should we be worried about shop@home?
 
"Troy Cefaratti" <mnementh@dsl.telocity.com> wrote in message news:GH6wyC.2A5@lugnet.com... (...) That's the retail channel that it is protecting by not allowing them to sell all the new juicy SAH exclusives is it? Or the retail channel that it (...) (23 years ago, 28-Jul-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.theory)

6 Messages in This Thread:


Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR