Disappointed

Status
Not open for further replies.
icelink said:
You are lucky the order was canceled.....mec gar is crap.....oem or nothing spend a few more bucks for flawless perfection
Click to expand...

We sell thousands of Mec Gar per year, 100% satisfaction.
Where do you think most firearms manufactures have their OEM mags made ??
You are obviously privy to some information witch we are not, perhaps something you saw at the factory ? Some technical report you have ? how about sharing ??
John
 
Brian46 said:
first time the issue was explained in this manner, but you already know that if you looked at the correspondence I had with your sales staff via the provided order number

so you were not out of stock, just priced the item wrong online and would not make good on the order at the advertised price which showed in stock (which it was at the time of my order by your own admission)

Thanks for admitting to it.
Click to expand...

OH MY, it is difficult to explain to you....

By the time your order came to be processed Brian the old inventory was sold out.... Please note the word "OLD" This is not unusual we often run out of a given product which we may have purchased sometime ago. When we go to more recent arrivals we MUST adjust according to the more recent costs..

When you placed your order, on Saturday Dec 12 th we were showing "in stock" however by the time the staff started filling orders from the week end ( Monday the 15th) the old stock was sold out.... surely you can understand this.... ?

Numerous increases will be seen this year due to many factors, should we ignore the downward slide of our dollar (over 35%) , the increase in sea freight, the increase for inland shipping (off shore), increases in Canadian shipping, ??

I do hope I have kept this simple and you can understand our operation, Marstar is somewhat larger than your corner gun shop, we have inventory from years ago up to inventory arriving in several shipments in 2016
John

 
johnone said:
OH MY, it is difficult to explain to you....

By the time your order came to be processed Brian the old inventory was sold out.... Please note the word "OLD" This is not unusual we often run out of a given product which we may have purchased sometime ago. When we go to more recent arrivals we MUST adjust according to the more recent costs..

When you placed your order, on Saturday Dec 12 th we were showing "in stock" however by the time the staff started filling orders from the week end ( Monday the 15th) the old stock was sold out.... surely you can understand this.... ?

Numerous increases will be seen this year due to many factors, should we ignore the downward slide of our dollar (over 35%) , the increase in sea freight, the increase for inland shipping (off shore), increases in Canadian shipping, ??

I do hope I have kept this simple and you can understand our operation, Marstar is somewhat larger than your corner gun shop, we have inventory from years ago up to inventory arriving in several shipments in 2016
John
Click to expand...

Your explanation above is very clear:

OLD STOCK and on hand selling at the advertised price

NEW STOCK on hand and selling at a new price simple

Just say so in your advertising...............just say when old stock runs out at this price we will be applying a new price or honor the price you advertise on the new stock.

If you fail to advertise that fact, then you should honor your advertisement.

I don't know how many sales would have been affected and how much you would have had to "eat" to honor your ad, but your explanation rubs me the wrong way.

Ya ok, so you are big..............then a few loss leaders should be no biggie.

A big shop that allows itself to get involved in a public "pissing" match is demonstrating a fundamental lack of good PR.

Whatever happened to the customer is always right?
 
Last edited:
slarsen47 said:
Your explanation above is very clear:

OLD STOCK and on hand selling at the advertised price

NEW STOCK on hand and selling at a new price simple

Just say so in your advertising...............just say when old stock runs out at this price we will be applying a new price or honor the price you advertise on the new stock.

If you fail to advertise that fact, then you should honor your advertisement.

I don't know how many sales would have been affected and how much you would have had to "eat" to honor your ad, but your explanation rubs me the wrong way.

Ya ok, so you are big..............then a few loss leaders should be no biggie.

A big shop that allows itself to get involved in a public "pissing" match is demonstrating a fundamental lack of good PR.

Whatever happened to the customer is always right?
Click to expand...

Oh boy, that will be good :popCorn:
 
Brian46 said:
I had an issue not that long ago as well when I placed an order on an item that showed in stock online



I was told the item was not in stock a couple of days later, then a day after that I was again informed that magically they had found more stock but at a new price of $225.

I promptly cancelled my order and purchased elsewhere rather than pay 3 times more for an item than advertised.
Click to expand...


Sounds like the good old bait and switch....

Which is ILLEGAL in Canada.

The OP and others in this thread may want to take a read of this and consider filing a formal complaint with the Better Business Bureau:

http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/00522.html#sale

Section 74.04 of the Competition Act is a civil provision. It prohibits "bait-and-switch" selling which occurs when a product is advertised at a bargain price, but is not available for sale in reasonable quantities. The provision does not apply if the advertiser can establish that the non-availability of the product was due to circumstances beyond its control, the quantity of the product obtained was reasonable, or the customer was offered a rain check when supplies were exhausted.

If a court determines that a person has engaged in conduct contrary to section 74.04, it may order the person not to engage in such conduct, to publish a corrective notice and/or to pay an administrative monetary penalty of up to $750,000 in the case of a first time occurrence by an individual and $10,000,000 in the case of a first time occurrence by a corporation. For subsequent orders, the penalties increase to a maximum of $1,000,000 in the case of an individual and $15,000,000 in the case of a corporation.
Click to expand...

One of the defenses available to the retailer in this situation hedges upon a "rain-check" being offered as a show of good faith.
In this case Marstar obviously had the ability to offer a raincheck, however they made the conscious decision to try to sell the same exact product that was advertised (and already technically sold) less than a day before at 3X the price.

The other defense rests on non availability of the product.... (Again Marstar does not have a defense...stock was readily available on Marstar's own admission)

Not just illegal but also a PR nightmare....
 
Last edited:
how much annualized profit will marstar now lose as a result of not doing the right thing (/due to people not liking the way this single transaction was handled), especially when compared to the $145 difference/loss in revenue. at the very least the "dollar" can only be blamed for what... a 15-20% increase in price? Not 150-200%, nevermind 300%.
 
Marstar and the John(s) have always been standoffish and seem to fight against helping customers I've read a lot of their threads and it has steered me away from doing business with them




O
John Deer said:
Sounds like the good old bait and switch....

Which is ILLEGAL in Canada.

The OP and others in this thread may want to take a read of this and consider filing a formal complaint with the Better Business Bureau:

http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/00522.html#sale



One of the defenses available to the retailer in this situation hedges upon a "rain-check" being offered as a show of good faith.
In this case Marstar obviously had the ability to offer a raincheck, however they made the conscious decision to try to sell the same exact product that was advertised (and already technically sold) less than a day before at 3X the price.

The other defense rests on non availability of the product.... (Again Marstar does not have a defense...stock was readily available on Marstar's own admission)

Not just illegal but also a PR nightmare....
Click to expand...
 
johnone said:
OH MY, it is difficult to explain to you....

By the time your order came to be processed Brian the old inventory was sold out....
John
Click to expand...
If that is the case, (which I highly doubt considering what I ordered) You may want to fix your online shop then to update price as inventory sells.

slarsen47 said:
If you fail to advertise that fact, then you should honor your advertisement.

I don't know how many sales would have been affected and how much you would have had to "eat" to honor your ad, but your explanation rubs me the wrong way.

Ya ok, so you are big..............then a few loss leaders should be no biggie.

A big shop that allows itself to get involved in a public "pissing" match is demonstrating a fundamental lack of good PR.

Whatever happened to the customer is always right?
Click to expand...
icelink said:
Oh man sorry didn't catch that part of the story.....the store should honor the advertised price by all means.....
Click to expand...
Indeed they should.
 
John Deer said:
Sounds like the good old bait and switch....

Which is ILLEGAL in Canada.

The OP and others in this thread may want to take a read of this and consider filing a formal complaint with the Better Business Bureau:

http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/00522.html#sale



One of the defenses available to the retailer in this situation hedges upon a "rain-check" being offered as a show of good faith.
In this case Marstar obviously had the ability to offer a raincheck, however they made the conscious decision to try to sell the same exact product that was advertised (and already technically sold) less than a day before at 3X the price.

The other defense rests on non availability of the product.... (Again Marstar does not have a defense...stock was readily available on Marstar's own admission)

Not just illegal but also a PR nightmare....
Click to expand...
I know it is illegal, that is why I posted, the owner of the company may not know what his salespeople are doing......but we know that is not the case by the response
 
slarsen47 said:
Your explanation above is very clear:

OLD STOCK and on hand selling at the advertised price

NEW STOCK on hand and selling at a new price simple

Just say so in your advertising...............just say when old stock runs out at this price we will be applying a new price or honor the price you advertise on the new stock.

If you fail to advertise that fact, then you should honor your advertisement.

I don't know how many sales would have been affected and how much you would have had to "eat" to honor your ad, but your explanation rubs me the wrong way.

Ya ok, so you are big..............then a few loss leaders should be no biggie.

A big shop that allows itself to get involved in a public "pissing" match is demonstrating a fundamental lack of good PR.

Whatever happened to the customer is always right?
Click to expand...

Work in the industry for a few years before repeating this again.
 
slarsen47 said:
Your explanation above is very clear:

OLD STOCK and on hand selling at the advertised price

NEW STOCK on hand and selling at a new price simple

Just say so in your advertising...............just say when old stock runs out at this price we will be applying a new price or honor the price you advertise on the new stock.

If you fail to advertise that fact, then you should honor your advertisement.

I don't know how many sales would have been affected and how much you would have had to "eat" to honor your ad, but your explanation rubs me the wrong way.

Ya ok, so you are big..............then a few loss leaders should be no biggie.

A big shop that allows itself to get involved in a public "pissing" match is demonstrating a fundamental lack of good PR.

Whatever happened to the customer is always right?
Click to expand...

Perhaps you would be kind enough to explain how we should wor the matter of new stock vs ol stock ??

In this case our customer ordered a linker of WW-11 vintage which we purchased as part of the multi millions of dollars of material out of the former Yugoslavia....

That stock sold out and obviously could not be replaced, trust me the factory closed more than 60 years ago....
The one s now on our site are of Vietnam era and were purchased as part of a Government contract at a higher price....

We don't intend to have "a pissing match" strange when we reply to the experts here, we are at fault, when we do not reply we also catch hell....
John
 
Quote Originally Posted by icelink View Post
Oh man sorry didn't catch that part of the story.....the store should honor the advertised price by all means.....

Please let me know where we an purchase more of these at the original low price, I am a buyer

It is quite obvious you have extensive experience in the surplus trade, so PLEASE let me know....

John
 
John..........quit before you fall father behind.

You will look much better if you acknowledge the error of your ways and promise to not bait and switch anymore.

And since you are in the millions and big.............why would you quibble so much about something worth few dollars.

On principle you lose. Have you not yet figured out that you are not going to win this one?
 
I wish the local road crews would take some of the sand that seems to be in everyone's ######s and put it on the street out front hahaha
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom