Sunday 19th of May 2024

in flim-flam land .....

in flim-flam land .....

Have you heard about the trick they use in fruit shops? If they want to make money from a large load of lettuce they divide it into two. They put half in a ''bargain bin'' and charge something like $3 a kilo. They put the other half at the quality end of the store and charge $6. The well-heeled and uncertain pay $6. Those with less money and keener for value pay $3.

It earns the shop much more than if it had just charged $6 (if mightn't have been able to shift all the lettuce) and much more than if it had just charged $3 (rich folks would have kept the extra $3 in their pockets). It also makes more than if the shop had just charged a single price somewhere in between, such as $4.50. Well-off customers would have still hung on the extra dollars and some needy customers would have still been priced out. The technique is called price discrimination. It may be retail's most clever invention, and it's everywhere.

Arnott's once made a near-identical but cheaper brand of biscuits called Sunshine. It placed the packs at the bottom of racks where the well-heeled wouldn't look but the bargain hunters would.

Some restaurants in Manly quietly ask whether patrons are locals before offering cheaper prices. They don't want to scare off locals looking after their dollars but they do want to get the most out of visitors primed to spend.

The trick in price discrimination is to hide what you are doing. And to let someone- else do the work of sorting your customers.

Sometimes they'll do it themselves. Computer manufacturers offer ''cash-backs'' with expensive machines. Money-conscious buyers send in the certificates (it's one of the reasons they buy the machines). Well-off buyers don't bother.

Banks offer discount or honeymoon rates to customers who switch but not to those who stay. They figure those who don't move don't much mind paying more, unless they threaten to leave in which case they are quickly looked after. Phone companies are masters at this.

General practitioners are in a very good position to assess for themselves the paying potential of their patients. In a just-published study of 267,000 medical records, Meliyanni Johar, of the University of Technology, finds low-income patients are typically bulk billed while high-income patients are charged 15 per cent more.

New technology is being applied to the task. This newspaper has reported that Australian web-based retailers charge higher prices to customers from wealthier suburbs. Amazon has experimented with charging its regular customers more. The online customers don't know it's happening: they are only presented with one price (which is sometimes a higher price if they are accessing the web from an Apple machine).

One of the easiest ways to divide up your customers is to let the government or an educational institution do it for you. Cinemas don't charge less for students out of the goodness of their hearts. They do it to fill cinemas without cutting everyone's price. If they are at risk of filling their cinemas with full-paying customers they often suspend their discounts. McDonald's offers a seniors' discount. It does it not because it is partial to seniors but to free-ride on the work the government has already done issuing cards to price-sensitive customers.

The easiest way of all to price discriminate is to brand an entire country. DVDs are region-coded in part to make it hard for Australians to take advantage of the cheaper prices in the United States and Indonesia. Nescafe attempted to cut off supplies to Aldi when it had the temerity to import lower-priced Indonesian jars labelled ''For sale in Indonesia only.''

For many years Australian music companies succeeded in making it illegal to import legally produced cheaper versions of their own songs. These days, although it is legal to import music at overseas prices, iTunes won't let you. If you're from Australia it'll charge $20.99 for an album. If you're from the US it'll charge $12.99. If you make the mistake of getting an Amazon Kindle delivered to an Australian address each eBook you buy from then on will cost more than if you had had it delivered to the US.

The consumer group Choice says one of the Microsoft software development packages is so expensive here it costs $8500 less to buy it in the US. It is worthwhile paying someone to fly to the US, buy it and fly back.

(Except you would have to pay Australian prices for the flight, often double the price of tickets bought overseas.)

Why would international commerce discriminate against an entire nation? ''Willingness to pay'' is one of the answers the Treasury comes up with in its submission to Parliament's IT pricing inquiry, due to report soon. Affluent and not too concerned about value, we're globally classified as soft touches.

At home, there's always the risk we'll see through the ruse of someone selling the same product for two prices. So retailers will often roughen the product up, perhaps punching and bruising half the lettuces so they are genuinely worse than the other half. In the US white goods retailers are said to take hammers to some of their fridges so they can sell them as ''shop soiled''.

These practices offend our sensibilities. But, appallingly, they are what our own government's new $37 billion national broadband network is planning in the prices it charges retailers. It wants to hobble the speed for ordinary users and have no block for users who pay a higher price.

The constraint is artificial. There is nothing to stop it giving all Australians the truly phenomenal speeds of which it is capable. If it wants to charge for usage it can charge for data.

Former Telstra economist John de Ridder has told the Competition Commission its thinking is mired in the past. It is imposing scarcity where none exists, ''building a motorway and then only using one lane''.

Unless we are given what we have already paid to build, most of us might never know what it's truly capable of.

How Shoppers Are Duped

 

made in eurstralya...

 

made in orstralya...
Your shopping trolley may be filled with Belgian potatoes or American oranges, but as far as you're aware they're all 'Made in Australia'.

Consumer groups are calling for an overhaul of food labelling in Australia, saying it is "confusing" and "often misleading".It is mandatory for all packaged foods in Australia to carry a country of origin claim, but currently there is nothing to specify what terms are used, consumer groups say.

Under current federal laws, food can be labelled 'Made in Australia', 'Australia Made', 'Manufactured in Australia', 'Grown in Australia', 'Australian Owned' and 'Product of Australia', even if the food is from other countries.

The 'Product of' claim is "much stricter" than the general 'Made in' claim, according to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.Consumer group Choice is now seeking the support of the federal government to simplify the country of origin claims, reducing the labels to just three claims: 'Product of Australia', 'Manufactured in Australia' and 'Packaged in Australia'.
Food policy advisor for Choice, Angela McDougall, said the proposed reforms will give credibility to the terms 'Product of Australia' and 'Manufactured in Australia'.
"Australian consumers want to support Australian products. Knowing where our food comes from is very important to Australians, which is why these proposed changes are so important," she said.

By moving to the use of simpler terms, Ms McDougall says shoppers will be able to identify exactly which ingredients come from Australia and overseas.Ms McDougall said under the proposal frozen vegetables could no longer say 'made in Australia with local and imported ingredients', but say 'packaged in Australia with Australian peas and carrots, with imported potatoes'.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/shopping/made-in-australia--or-is-it-labels-mislead-shoppers-consumer-groups-say-20130124-2d8ft.html#ixzz2IqkGf3Za

 

goodonya dicky...

 

dicky

Dick Smith must curse the day he ever made his Australia Day commercial, which has brought him and his company the strife of priceless publicity. But more important is the burning question: is the ad racist? Ben Pobjie considers every possible answer. And then some.

It seems that whenever Australia Day begins to loom before us like a great patriotic blackhead on the nose of our calendars, the spectre of racism rears its ugly, flag-draped head.

And commenting on the issue is, of course, fraught with danger: after all one man's racism is another man's innocent pride in the superiority of people who share his skin colour. There's such a fine line between "patriotism" and "being a dick" that in many ways, it's not a line at all and they are literally the same thing.

With this in mind, how do we look at Dick Smith's latest appeal to patriotism? The plucky little Aussie battler, who worked his way up from nothing and made a fortune by dropping radios out of a balloon or something, saw his fresh attempt to win customers for his range of Australian-made foods with a slick TV spot fall flat when he was prevented from showing the ad in his preferred 6.00pm timeslot, the ensuing media furore delivering Smith's worst nightmare: free publicity. How he must curse the day he ever made the commercial, never dreaming it would bring him the strife of 160,000 YouTube views and multiple mainstream news stories about his company.

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4483692.html?WT.svl=theDrum

 

 

Uncle Dick Smith is far cleverer than the average bear... But he has a hard sell... And advertising on teevee costs heaps of money.... And selling AUSTRALIAN ONLY PRODUCE could be a no-no in this country where we love Belgium chocolates???... See story above...

 

It's too easy to make Australian only product but it's hard to sell because of pricing... And I am sure the smoking Belgicomano swear on the bible that they are not dumping export in Aussieland...

 

If only the Aussie dollar was not so high compared to the US dollar but hang on, it has been more or less steady against the Euro, despite the Euro being on death row every second day... Manipulation of the markets?... Noooooooooooooo, really???...

So what about making an advert that "could be seen as racist" but is not really?... "Banned" for being whatever, but shown in the news because of the controversy...

 

And Anthony Mundine is not going to sing "Australia Fair"...... 

ANTHONY Mundine has resurrected plans to boycott Australia's national anthem before next Wednesday's IBF world title clash with Daniel Geale, a day after backing down from his threat.

A curt Mundine arrived at yesterday's public training session refusing to talk to media after The Daily Telegraph revealed his plans to boycott the anthem.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/boxing-mma/anthony-mundine-reissues-threat-to-protest-australian-anthem-before-

But hang on a minute...

Anthony Mundine decides not to protest playing of Australian anthem prior to Daniel Geale bout

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/top-stories/anthony-mundine-decides

 

Only in the murdoch press...