Try before you buy. Then buy.

John says:

10:23am | 23/04/11

WTF TChone I don’t recall Julia stating women were better than men. How about you write something relevant to the story rather than grinding your own ideological axe.

TChong says:

11:33am | 23/04/11

Axes to grind johnboy?
Settle down there big fella.
My comment is tongue-in- cheek.
Dont take everything so serios. No good for your blood pressure.
But, a big may be needed , just so you know.

acotrel says:

08:46am | 23/04/11

Even when we had tariff protection, the importers mark-up was about 100% above the landed cost of imported goods. What is it now?

Cate P says:

09:23am | 23/04/11

acotrel, 100% is a conservative mark-up for some goods.

Mik says:

02:29pm | 23/04/11

Don’t worry, both are coming. The government already said taxes, because of low business income for the year, are 4 billion down. Soon with no one buying in Australia, there will be no money for social security and social programs like Medicare and free schools. Many business streams are down, it is just that mining income is covering up the disaster.  One of the Asian prime ministers once said Australia would become the white trash of Asia - maybe it’s on it’s way. Many people are coming into my work to say they have been retrenched because the businesses they work for are not getting orders/jobs/contracts-maybe I am next?

Mik says:

02:29pm | 23/04/11

Don’t worry, both are coming. The government already said taxes, because of low business income for the year, are 4 billion down. Soon with no one buying in Australia, there will be no money for social security and social programs like Medicare and free schools. Many business streams are down, it is just that mining income is covering up the disaster.  One of the Asian prime ministers once said Australia would become the white trash of Asia - maybe it’s on it’s way. Many people are coming into my work to say they have been retrenched because the businesses they work for are not getting orders/jobs/contracts-maybe I am next?

Kika says:

06:58pm | 24/04/11

Look at the Aussie dollar - we are punching way above our weight at the moment. The economy isn’t as rosy as they are trying to make out. We’re going to crash and people are pulling in the reigns as we speak.

acotrel says:

09:11am | 23/04/11

@Lyn How much can you buy a pair of bloomers for online? Can you make do without them for 3-4 days?

Cate P says:

09:27am | 23/04/11

pretty much nailed it, Lyn.  Retail is a competitive business and the e-retailers are winning at the moment.  Australian retailers need to look at where they can compete and work on it.  Don’t blame the customer, we’re always right, remember??

Justin says:

11:55am | 23/04/11

So dumb and short sighted. Either color match yourself, and buy online, or use the services of the store and buy in store. You’ll be the first to whinge how greedy the retailers are when they start making you to pay for the color matching.

Amused says:

10:27pm | 23/04/11

I’ve worked in retail for a long time now, and people ask me for all sorts of weird and wonderful devices which may, and sometimes may not exist, but NEVER has ANYONE asked me for a waterproof MP3 player.

The reason none of us stock them is purely because there is no demand for such an item.

In order to sell things, you need people who want to buy them. If there is no demand, you just don’t bother.

Alicia says:

04:51pm | 23/04/11

Ditto! I’m not shopping in stores because I simply can’t afford it. I would love nothing more than to throw my cash around on new clothing but I don’t HAVE any to spare.

The only clothing I’ve purchased online is a Rugby shirt I couldn’t get in Darwin and costumes from overseas for a birthday party, again because I couldn’t get anything decent in Darwin.

I would be reluctant to go into a shop charging a try-on free, especially for shoes because I have wide feet and it can be hard to find something that fits and is comfortable.

This whole “online shopping is killing us” cry is bullshit anyway.

Steve says:

05:38pm | 23/04/11

Kika. 2 months without new shoes! 6 months without new clothes! This is a truly deperate situation that you are in. When shoppers like you withdraw from the market then retailers are in trouble. sit down with your grandparents and ask them what the depression was like. You don’t know what desperatiopn is.

Audra Blue says:

06:28pm | 23/04/11

I, too, would love to buy new clothes, mainly for work, but the budget won’t allow it.  And it’s not a matter of “poor me”.  I’ve lost a lot of weight over the last 12 months and my old clothes just don’t fit any more.  I still wear some of them but I’ve had to bodgy them up to make them fit properly.

You know life is pretty difficult when you have to save for a whole month just to buy a $25 skirt.  As for shoes, don’t get me started.  I have two different pairs for work and I rotate them and try to be as gentle as I can with them.  But I will have to start budgeting now to buy another pair so that all pairs can last a little longer.

KIka says:

06:48pm | 24/04/11

Well Steve lucky for my grandmother she had the skills to make clothes herself. She didn’t pass these skills onto my mother and then onto me. So unlucky for me, I can’t make my own clothes and am reliant on overpriced poor quality imported clothes from China which fall apart within at least a year - maximum - of moderate usage.  So you go to Portmans and buy a skirt - you know the type - the latex-cotton blend type. Spend $60.00 because it’s from ‘Portmans’ and not Target or Big W and then within a few weeks the hem is falling out and you need to get the zip fixed at the tailors which costs you another $30.00 to keep it going another 6 months…

The retailers have no sympathy from me. They sell us junk from China at top dollar rates (don’t give me the whole woe is me I have massive overheads…oh yeah? So you are still in business and your CEO’s look like they are doing ok) so it’s no wonder people are turning to buy the same useless poor quality junk themselves at prices that are fair and reasonable for the product they are buying.

libertarian vegetarian says:

06:15pm | 23/04/11

I suppose you also can’t believe that retail shops have to pay retail rents, or pay retail staff time and a half or double time or even triple time so people can come in on Saturdays, Sundays or public holidays and try things on and then buy them elsewhere, from someone who is only paying for a warehouse and regular 9 - 5 staff to process the orders and pick and pack.  Or from overseas where the staff are paid a tiny percentage of what employers are forced to pay here.
Idiot.

stephen says:

07:48pm | 23/04/11

Buy buy ?

marley says:

08:44am | 24/04/11

It isn’t necessarily “bogans” that are doing this….Otherwise, though, I agree with your point.

Kika says:

06:55pm | 24/04/11

I love the flippant use of the word bogan to describe people within our own culture who you can’t understand or agree with. It’s like using the word ‘un-Australian’. What’s so bogan about looking for a bargain? Perhaps you work or own a retail store?

Well… put it this way. I am the type of customer where if I get too much harassment in a store by a sales person I will simply walk out. It doesn’t matter how much you try, I will leave. I like to do my shopping by myself and will ask for help if and when I need it. A lot of people actually like purchasing things online because you can sit and relax and actually do the research, planning and shopping on your own without having salespeople in your face trying to convince you to buy something else.

libertarian vegetarian says:

12:58pm | 26/04/11

Kika, the article is not about shopping on line, it’s about going into a store, trying things on and then buying them elsewhere.
I have my own business, not in retail though, so I can understand the concepts here. It is beyond ‘looking for a bargain’, it is the deliberate wasting of staffs time and causing shop wear to items you have no intention of buying.  How many times do you see items on the reduced rack because they have make up smears or dirt or tears or pulls from being tried on.
As you say you prefer to be left alone when you shop, it must be safe to assume you are not guilty of any of the behaviour listed in the article.
And bogan is as bogan does, whether you are from Vaucluse or Mt Druitt, if you have no manners or respect for others, you are a bogan.

JJJ says:

09:04am | 24/04/11

I am not sure it is fair to compare the prices of goods in shops O/S with Austalia. Firstly, we have a minimum wage that employees have to pay their workers (unlike the US). Secondly, rental prices in Australia are relatively costly compared to those in most other countries (from what I am led to believe). Shops need to take that into account when selling goods.
Eg. I was in Kenya last year and they sell bananas for 3c (Aust). I bought bananas for $3 EACH last week here in Aust. It’s ridiculous to compare the two, as most Kenyans are lucky to earn 30c (Aust) a day. I know Americans (generally) earn less than Aussies too(hence ‘tipping’).
The internet HAS changed shopping, however as a few commenters have said, you shouldn’t be surprised when shop keepers start charging people to ‘try’ if they aren’t selling enough product! It is a difficult situation though, as I have never gone to a shop with the intention NOT to buy - the item(s) just haven’t fit/suited me.

Correctal says:

10:31am | 24/04/11

JJJ
The US has a minimum wage.

marley says:

01:08pm | 24/04/11

@JJJ - sorry, but I do not buy your argument.  Your bananas were cheaper because Kenyan labour is cheaper.  But the camera wasn’t built by Americans or Australians, it was built in Asia, so labour costs for production are the same.

As for the actual process of selling the camera, the US does have minimum wages (lower than Australia’s, but I doubt that the effort to sell me a camera is worth $300 of the clerk’s time).  And I ‘d be a bit surprised if store rental costs are lower in Waikiki than in Canberra or Melbourne or small-town NSW - and oddly enough, the camera price was pretty much identical in all three.  And, for that matter, on the internet from Australian vendors.  All at a mark up a good $300 above what I could get it for from a storefront shop in the US.  Something’s wrong there.

That being said, I wouldn’t go to a store with the intention of sizing something and ordering from the internet.  But if I price something in Australia and know I can get it for a fraction of the price on-line (books are a good example) I have no compunction about hitting the internet.  Book prices in particular are ridiculous here anyway.

marley says:

08:51am | 24/04/11

@Stephen - why is online buying “cheating?”  I’m not talking about the people who waste the time of people working in brick and mortar stores then order online, I’m talking about people such as myself who buy things like books and cameras online without using up anyone’s time but my own.

Why do you think I’m cheating by purchasing something at a considerably lower price than I would get from a regular outlet, but Myers isn’t cheating by charging some of its customers 40% more for their cooking gear than the price you ended up paying?

There are two parties to a business transaction - and if one of them is being overcharged, the buyer/seller relationship is exploitative and most “unsocial.”  And it’s the retailer whose honour is in question, not the buyer’s.

stephen says:

03:13pm | 24/04/11

Marley@
A retailer is really a feedback merchant between the inventor/producer/maker and the consumer/customer.
A retailer should be trained in the mechanics of the product they sell, so that when a new product comes to the market, the seller can be a more responsible agent for an article’s success.
A product’s efficacy can be relayed to the producer. Any improvements can be investigated and subsequent info. relayed to the manufacturer.
This all sounds hi-falutin, but perhaps the role of a seller can be improved upon, thereby vitiating online sales.
I’ve bought clothes online. (only because there was no local agent - ‘listening, Abercrombie and Fitch’ - and they were the wrong style. No chance to return them.)
In future i will pay the right price and have the option of getting only the right product.
If you think retailers overcharge, you can still barter, which I sometimes do.

marley says:

05:02pm | 24/04/11

@Stephen - sorry, but I don’t see why an on-line vendor is any less of a feedback merchant than a store-front vendor.  Both can tell an inventor/manufacturer pretty quickly that something is selling, or isn’t, and whether they’re getting complaints about a product. 

Anyway, a lot of what you’re saying is just not relevant to a whole lot of things one buys on-line. I don’t need a clerk to explain to me how a book works.  Or a CD.  Or for that matter a computer or a camera.  (And in fact most of the sales clerks, assuming you can find one, do a damn poor job of it anyway).  I can do all my research on the ‘net before selecting a product (and I do that with a lot of things, whether I’m going to buy them on-line or in-store - so I quite often know more than the saleperson anyway).

No, when I want a particular item, I want the right product at the right price.  Books are a particular bugbear with me - why is it that a book sold in Australia can be purchased for 30 to 50% less on-line (or in real stores in Canada, the US and the UK?)  Frankly, I think you’d be out of your mind to pay Australian prices for books.  CDs - likewise, plus the choice is generally pretty poor unless you’re into rap or garage.  Heck, I even buy pet products on-line - quite a bit cheaper than getting the same items from the local pet store.  We buy wine on-line as well, and some electronics (my experience with buying a computer was quite positive, by the way). 

I seldom buy clothes on line, though my other half does occasionally.  Again, prices here are quite inflated compared with overseas. 

As to bargaining, do it all the time - but, there’s no way a camera shop is going to knock $300 of an $800 camera to get it down to a price comparable to what I can get if for in the States or on-line.  That’s the problem.

And none of this really tells me why you think on-line buying is “cheating.”  I think it’s just sensible.  If the storefront vendor cannot compete on price (and most of them aren’t particularly competitive on service either) well then, I think it would be foolish to pay over the odds for something.

Kika says:

07:02pm | 24/04/11

You really think you got a good deal at 40%?
Does it matter if you spoke to a human? You arent talking to a human on this blog - you are typing it into cyberspace for other people to read and ponder. If what you say is true, then shouldn’t you be out debating the pros and cons of online retail to a real person?
And who cares if she wrapped it up pretty? Are you actually going to use the pans or keep them on decoration?

It’s not the 1960’s anymore. It’s 2011. Consumers are tech savvy and can use the net to do pretty much whatever they want. If the big retailers can’t handle that, then maybe they’ve totally underrated the intelligence of their customers for way too long.

Why can’t they have a proper online catalogue? The Myer website is ridiculous and David Jones is even worse.  They can still have their stores for their customers still stuck in the 80’s and have a warehouse stocked full of their stuff for online customers too.

stephen says:

10:01pm | 24/04/11

I think the value of something is its usefullness, ie. at the development stage, and this is determined as feedback. The worth of it, however, is set by the retailer who sets a price according to what the market will bear.
This is what happens now, I think.
But if the retailer has a stake, and indeed a risk in a product’s success in sales, (which I noted above) then a final price would be an agreement between manufacturer and seller.
Currently, the seller gets his stock and kicks up the retail price at 100%.
But if a seller has an investment, (necessarily) in a product’s innovation and development, (even at the post -production stage) then he incurs a risk in it’s sales success.
The seller wouldn’t really have been involved in its development, but would have more to lose, if it fails to sell, than merely a new shop elsewhere.
A customer knows that currently a product is sold at twice the price of its acquisition by the retailer, which is a motive for online buying.
Someone needs to change this equation.

stephen says:

03:13pm | 25/04/11

Hmmm…I was hopin for a disputation.
Tell’em what I thought : not mere elaboration.

Cate P says:

02:24pm | 24/04/11

absolutely true.  I have gone to shops countless times, catalogue in hand, only to be told they haven’t got the item and don’t know when its coming in.  I’ve tried rainchecks, but I’ve never yet got the call saying its here.

stephen says:

03:24pm | 24/04/11

A 14B size bra you can only get at Nimbin.
(Amazing how at such a place girls knockers are gynormous yet the only living thing wearing ‘suspenders’ are very very expensive steers.)