- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Los Angeles prosecutors office going after major retailers
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:31 am to Rouge
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:31 am to Rouge
quote:
Why is "the consumer should know better" considered an acceptable counter argument?
why is it a bad one?
regardless of how we get here, the issue is if the price of the good was a price the consumer believed was a good price for that good. the consumer, regardless of sales, ultimately has to make this decision. the consumer market is not even a market of incomplete information, as you can cross check prices (really easily these days)
0
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:32 am to Rouge
quote:
The government is not trying to set or control pricing of goods and/or services
no they're trying to control the advertised former price of a good, which is absurd
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:33 am to Rouge
quote:
unfortunately, this scenario does not apply to your understanding of the free market
It completely does.
quote:
This is about dissemination of information to the consumer
I understand. Have you shopped for groceries before? If you go to one place, a gallon of milk may be $3.49, if you go to another place a gallon of milk may be $3.19. It's up to you as a consumer to determine at what price you value the item. Same with clothes, shoes, electronics, vehicle..etc.
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:34 am to Nuts4LSU
quote:
If you claim you were selling it for $100 and now you're selling it for $60, but the truth is you never sold it for $100, you are lying to the customer in an effort to convince them the product is worth more than it really is. That's pretty much the definition of false advertising.
If MSRP is $100 and they advertise "Was $100, Now $60", I don't see how that is false advertising.
This post was edited on 12/9/16 at 7:34 am
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:34 am to SlowFlowPro
as a general rule, "consumer protection" laws assume the consumer is too stupid to understand a simple market exchange. if we are to take away this agency from the consumers, what other contractual rights should the government be stripping these consumers of? shouldn't the retailer know this ahead of time? all these laws do is create instability in the market (one way only) that raises transaction costs, which will raise prices for all consumers
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:35 am to Rouge
Say b-bye to Jos A Bank
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:36 am to The Mick
quote:
Say b-bye to Jos A Bank
And Harbor Freight
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:37 am to Rouge
Another lawyer money grab "for the people".
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:38 am to ThatMakesSense
quote:agree to disagree
unfortunately, this scenario does not apply to your understanding of the free market
It completely does.
Not sure why so many people are just ok with deceptive sales practices. Guess it is separating the socioeconomic wheat from the chaffe
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:39 am to Rouge
quote:
agree to disagree
Fair enough. I was just pointing out that you don't need to buy an item from a specific place, you have options.
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:39 am to Rouge
quote:
Not sure why so many people are just ok with deceptive sales practices.
well the issue is final price. this isn't a bait and switch where the price or product changes
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:52 am to SECdragonmaster
quote:
Another lawyer money grab "for the people".
This is a county prosecutors office. Not a get rich quick plaintiff attorney.
This post was edited on 12/9/16 at 8:20 am
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:56 am to Nuts4LSU
Saying it's marked down from 100 is not the same as saying we have been selling it for 100. Just that the value is seen to be 100 and we are selling it for less. You can say something is worth 100, but you sell it for 60 and not be falsely advertising. And if you are doing that, it is true to say that you have marked it down or that it is on sale. As long as it functions as advertised and you know the price you are paying, it is your duty as a Co sumer to understand the value of the product. Otherwise we are saying supply and demand is horse shite and that suppliers have to tell us what everything is worth while demanders just eat up what ever they tell us.
This post was edited on 12/9/16 at 7:57 am
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:58 am to KG6
quote:
Saying it's marked down from 100 is not the same as saying we have been selling it for 100. Just that the value is seen to be 100 and we are selling it for less.
logic goes out the window with "consumer protection" laws, which rely on "deceptive" as their rule typically
ANYthing can be interpreted as deceptive, so the law just creates instability in the market to protect people the government presumes can't make their own decisions
Posted on 12/9/16 at 7:59 am to Rouge
Sounds like Jos A Bank was ahead of the curve here with the buy 1 get 9 free suit sale.
Posted on 12/9/16 at 8:08 am to SECdragonmaster
quote:
Another lawyer money grab "for the people".
Basically true but it's the city of Los Angeles going after the deep pockets. I wonder how much of any settlement/judgment will go to those "harmed" by the advertising versus how much will go to the city?
Posted on 12/9/16 at 8:16 am to Rouge
This is just true gold, instead of going after the MAJOR crime issues in LA, the DA's office is spending it's budget going after JCpenny's for before pricing.
Seems a pretty shitty choice to invest both time and money into with crime rates exploding but whatever they want to do after all it is Cali
quote:
Crime is on the increase in Los Angeles. Violent crime was up 20.2 percent and and all crime was up 12.6 percent when 2015 is compared with 2014, according to Los Angeles Police Department data.
Seems a pretty shitty choice to invest both time and money into with crime rates exploding but whatever they want to do after all it is Cali
Posted on 12/9/16 at 8:21 am to Rouge
Good to see they are going after one of the most pressing issues of our times.... 
Meanwhile they are in a city with 187290584735624089573490753 illegal immigrants needing to be deported.
Meanwhile they are in a city with 187290584735624089573490753 illegal immigrants needing to be deported.
Posted on 12/9/16 at 8:22 am to Rouge
Amazon is guilty of this ocassionally
Posted on 12/9/16 at 8:28 am to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
Was $99. Now $79". They never sold them or even listed them at $99
quote:
f the msrp is 100 and they sell it for 60 then there's no issue
quote:
I don't think that is what is heppening in these cases.
Unless Kohls is the actual manufacturer, then they do not have to offer the items at MSRP. MSRP is the manufacturer suggested retail price. Having had a retail business, I can tell you that the business' buyer will get rate cards that have different levels of pricing for items including the MSRP. Its the company's duty to put the item for sale at the price you (meaning your company) or the market dictates. As long as they arent selling over msrp, then there is nothing wrong with what they are doing.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News