What? You make no sense as Sig handguns use MecGar magazines when you purchase them new from factory.Originally Posted by icelink
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
What? You make no sense as Sig handguns use MecGar magazines when you purchase them new from factory.
What?
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
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
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 by slarsen47; 01-29-2016 at 01:04 PM.
I stand for freedom, law and order, justice, low taxes, prosperity, healthy lifestyle and property rights.
But I am "old school" and can see the "writing on the wall".
Oh boy, that will be good
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/e...0522.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.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.
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 by John Deer; 01-29-2016 at 01:51 PM.
Bit of class action?
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
Posting Permissions
