I think this qualifies for gloat status:
Was shopping at Rockler after Xmas to check out their clearance items.
Sliding table : Regular $249, 25% off on clearance.
Then I see they have an in-store coupon for an additional 50% off any
already clearanced item, so that would be about $93! So I grab the
sliding table and when he rings it up:
Instead of doing 25% off and then 50% to get $93, he does 75% off the
total price instead!
Bottom line = Sliding table for $62! And all I came in for was a
magnetic wristband, which I forgot because I was too jazzed!
Since they had 2 of them, I called a pal o mine and he ran down and
grabbed up the second one, which the dude rung up the same way.
I installed the table and it works very well (especially for that
price!). Anyone else have comments about using this table? (Its the
same as the Mule sliding table, rebranded for rockler).
Woodshopdemos.com had some helpful hints for installing it.
Then I apologize for starting this whole sub-thread, Rob. This time with no
"buts" or anything. Congrats on your table!
Clint
"rob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Actually, I bought several things, and didn't realize he rung it up
> wrong til I thought about it later and reviewed the receipt. It
> sounded right at the time.
>
> "Clint Neufeld" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<bHgNb.95782$ts4.23943@pd7tw3no>...
> > Personally, I think you should have stopped the gloat just before you
knowly
> > took advantage of someone else's mistake. You already had a good price,
> > bully for you. But I think the GGV (gross gloat value) is reduced for
> > cheating. It's like taking advantage of the widder-women.
> >
> > Just my $0.02CDN. And yes, before you ask, I have stopped a
transactions
> > when I thought the clerk was ringing things through incorrectly (in my
> > favor). Bully for me, I know...
> >
> > Clint
> >
> > "rob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > I think this qualifies for gloat status:
> > >
> > > Was shopping at Rockler after Xmas to check out their clearance items.
> > > Sliding table : Regular $249, 25% off on clearance.
> > > Then I see they have an in-store coupon for an additional 50% off any
> > > already clearanced item, so that would be about $93! So I grab the
> > > sliding table and when he rings it up:
> > > Instead of doing 25% off and then 50% to get $93, he does 75% off the
> > > total price instead!
> > > Bottom line = Sliding table for $62! And all I came in for was a
> > > magnetic wristband, which I forgot because I was too jazzed!
> > >
> > > Since they had 2 of them, I called a pal o mine and he ran down and
> > > grabbed up the second one, which the dude rung up the same way.
> > >
> > > I installed the table and it works very well (especially for that
> > > price!). Anyone else have comments about using this table? (Its the
> > > same as the Mule sliding table, rebranded for rockler).
> > > Woodshopdemos.com had some helpful hints for installing it.
<Dave Fleming> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I normally don't get involved in 'pissing contests' like this but...
>
> Clint [email protected]
> Run this by a lawyer for starts and see if the original poster was
> LEGALLY in the wrong.
> That is in ***The Code Of Civil Procedure Of the State*** wherein
> this occured.
If you have to find out if something is illegal, then you pretty well know
you shouldn't be doing it!
I normally don't get involved in 'pissing contests' like this but...
Clint [email protected]
Run this by a lawyer for starts and see if the original poster was
LEGALLY in the wrong.
That is in ***The Code Of Civil Procedure Of the State*** wherein
this occured.
The many analogies or quasi-analogies made in this thread are to my
eye just plain sour grapes.
If the Quatrain...Let the BUYER beware has validity so does Let the
SELLER be on his/her/its toes. folla?
>Well, I guess I have more faith in a company like Rockler to properly phrase
>a sale advertisement than I do in someone reporting a gloat to exactly
>replicate the sales statement, if you know what I mean. In any case, I
>thought the OP (who hasn't responded to the slanderous statements being made
>about him, BTW) was thinking he got an even better deal because the clerk
>was making a mistake. After re-reading his post, he didn't ever claim that
>he thought he was getting a an even better deal than he originally though.
>I assumed that, which was wrong of me. For all I know, he might have
>thought he made a mistake in the calculation, or that Rockler had a
>"special" way of calculating it that was different than every other store
>out there, or whatever.
>
>Rob, where-ever you are, I apologize for thinking that you were additionally
>gloating about being able to take advantage of someone else's mistake based
>on your original post. I still have a suspicion that you knew that the
>clerk was making a mistake, but you didn't say anything, but that's making
>assumptions that I probably shouldn't. It still seems too close to taking
>advantage of someone else who doesn't know any better, like the old widder
>woman selling off her husband's Unisaw for $100. In any case, I probably
>didn't need to crap on your parade route.
>
>Clint
>
<huge sniperoo of previous verbage>
Tales of a Boatbuilder Apprentice
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/djf3rd/
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 10:07:18 GMT, Unisaw A100 <[email protected]>
brought forth from the murky depths:
>mttt wrote:
>>What bother's me is that buying a DJ-20 for $100 from some guy is considered
>>a real gloat.
>>My notion of what's proper/right/ethical/moral tells me that both actions
>>are improper and taking advantage of someone.
You forgot the "used and broken/cracked" part, mttt.
>Though in the case of the "hunnert dollar jointer" the
>circumstances were quite different.
>
>The seller approached the buyer.
>
>The seller knew what he paid for it.
>
>The seller solicited a bid from the buyer.
You forgot the part about the buyer telling the seller
he didn't want to insult him and the seller saying "DO!",
Keef.
>The seller accepted the bid.
>
>Sounds to me like two adult males making an exchange of
>something the other had for what the other wanted. In other
>words, a whole nutter kettle of fish.
Nary a defect in the honorable exchange.
>Now, had the seller been a "widder woman" and the above
>reversed...
It would have been fair game/more fun? <evil grinne>
------------------------------------------------------------------
Vote early, Vote often, Vote for Chad!
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website & Database Development
<Dave Fleming> wrote in message
> I have made preparations and given strict instructions to my wife and
> sons that anything the sons don't want is to be sold/given/passed on
> to working shipwrights. NOTHING is to go to collectors or dilletantes,
> period.
Goes for other "tools" also. I play a 61 Fender Jazz Bass that I've been
offered in the neighborhood of $12K for a number of times. SWMBO knows that
it _will_ go into the hands of a "player", even it has to go cheap. I feel
the same way about my woodworking tools.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 1/12/04
Frankly given the quality of ths product they should just give it away..
they almost did?
"rob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I think this qualifies for gloat status:
>
> Was shopping at Rockler after Xmas to check out their clearance items.
> Sliding table : Regular $249, 25% off on clearance.
> Then I see they have an in-store coupon for an additional 50% off any
> already clearanced item, so that would be about $93! So I grab the
> sliding table and when he rings it up:
> Instead of doing 25% off and then 50% to get $93, he does 75% off the
> total price instead!
> Bottom line = Sliding table for $62! And all I came in for was a
> magnetic wristband, which I forgot because I was too jazzed!
>
> Since they had 2 of them, I called a pal o mine and he ran down and
> grabbed up the second one, which the dude rung up the same way.
>
> I installed the table and it works very well (especially for that
> price!). Anyone else have comments about using this table? (Its the
> same as the Mule sliding table, rebranded for rockler).
> Woodshopdemos.com had some helpful hints for installing it.
I would assume that if something was 75% off they would have some sort of
clause saying no additional coupons accepted or some such thing. I have
bought items at computer stores with instant rebates that made them cost $0
and they included mail in rebates, so they DID essentially pay me to take
the stuff home.
"Frank Ketchum" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Mike in Mystic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I disagree. To me "an additional 50%" added to 25% off = 75% off.
> Whenever
> > stores take 50% the ORIGINAL price, and 25% off the ORIGINAL price THAT
is
> > cheating, not the other way around. I think the way this worked out is
> > exactly how it should happen.
> >
>
> By that logic, if a store had something on sale for 75% off you had a
> coupon for an additional 50%, do you think they should pay you 25% to
walk
> off with their stuff?
>
> Frank
>
>
"MA Lee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:4PnNb.69089$I06.314351@attbi_s01...
> Frankly given the quality of ths product they should just give it away..
> they almost did?
What's wrong with it? The reviews I've read are positive.
-- Mark
Actually, I bought several things, and didn't realize he rung it up
wrong til I thought about it later and reviewed the receipt. It
sounded right at the time.
"Clint Neufeld" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<bHgNb.95782$ts4.23943@pd7tw3no>...
> Personally, I think you should have stopped the gloat just before you knowly
> took advantage of someone else's mistake. You already had a good price,
> bully for you. But I think the GGV (gross gloat value) is reduced for
> cheating. It's like taking advantage of the widder-women.
>
> Just my $0.02CDN. And yes, before you ask, I have stopped a transactions
> when I thought the clerk was ringing things through incorrectly (in my
> favor). Bully for me, I know...
>
> Clint
>
> "rob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I think this qualifies for gloat status:
> >
> > Was shopping at Rockler after Xmas to check out their clearance items.
> > Sliding table : Regular $249, 25% off on clearance.
> > Then I see they have an in-store coupon for an additional 50% off any
> > already clearanced item, so that would be about $93! So I grab the
> > sliding table and when he rings it up:
> > Instead of doing 25% off and then 50% to get $93, he does 75% off the
> > total price instead!
> > Bottom line = Sliding table for $62! And all I came in for was a
> > magnetic wristband, which I forgot because I was too jazzed!
> >
> > Since they had 2 of them, I called a pal o mine and he ran down and
> > grabbed up the second one, which the dude rung up the same way.
> >
> > I installed the table and it works very well (especially for that
> > price!). Anyone else have comments about using this table? (Its the
> > same as the Mule sliding table, rebranded for rockler).
> > Woodshopdemos.com had some helpful hints for installing it.
> I figured out a few years ago why only fairly young people have children,
> and they're fairly old by the time the kids are grown. <g>
After my eldest son was born he had colic. If he was held at 44.6 degrees
incline he was ok. At 44.5 and lower or 44.7 and higher he screamed his
tiny lungs out. I still recall one night that I stayed up all night keeping
him at 44.6 degrees. Contemporary photos, showing the shadows under my
eyes, validate the experience.
This is a survivable activity for a father in his 20's. I'm now in my mid
40's and I think I'd die if I had to do that for more than a couple nights
back to back ... ;-)
-- Mark
Am I my brother's keeper?
Dammit, I'm supposed to be!
Way to go mttt ....... I don't know ya, but I bet I'd like ya!
"mttt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Larry Jaques" <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 10:07:18 GMT, Unisaw A100 <[email protected]>
> > brought forth from the murky depths:
> >
> >
> > You forgot the "used and broken/cracked" part, mttt.
>
> Nope...
>
> > >Though in the case of the "hunnert dollar jointer" the
> > >circumstances were quite different.
> > >
> > >The seller approached the buyer.
> > >
> > >The seller knew what he paid for it.
> > >
> > >The seller solicited a bid from the buyer.
>
>
> No - Lord knows I'm done with this after this thread. And Lord knows I
have
> no idea what the guy was thinking selling a $1300 tool, albeit with a
> "crack" for a hunnert bux...
>
> Am I my brother's keeper? Yeah, dammit I am...
>
> I wasn't there, but I imagine I might have looked to see if the electrode
> burn marks were still on his temples, or some other rationale for the
price.
> Was he picking the Orange Cockroaches off his shirt and throwing them on
the
> Pink Elephant???
>
> Maybe, (or maybe I'd like to think that) I'd of asked him "Dude, do you
have
> a frickin' clue what this is worth?" Criminy - had you paid $200, or $500
> bux you'd still have a gloat.
>
>
> > >
> > >Sounds to me like two adult males making an exchange of
> > >something the other had for what the other wanted. In other
> > >words, a whole nutter kettle of fish.
>
> Yes, yes, yes.
> No widow involved.
> Maybe.
>
> Am I my brother's keeper?
> Dammit, I'm supposed to be!
>
>
>
I have to agree with UA100. I love a great deal (just got a Leigh 24"
Dovetail Jig for $100) and look for them all the time. Most of the
time I try to get a better deal and figure if they accept, then
they've accepted. However, one time I saw a brand new Delta 16.5" DP
for sale in the paper and was going to ask $150 for it, but when I
showed up I found that the husband had just had a stroke and couldn't
work the tools anymore and they needed the money for expenses. Ugh, I
couldn't do it, so I politely declined and left hoping she might get
more from someone else.
Guess it depends on the situation...
Mike
Unisaw A100 <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> mttt wrote:
> >What bother's me is that buying a DJ-20 for $100 from some guy is considered
> >a real gloat.
> >My notion of what's proper/right/ethical/moral tells me that both actions
> >are improper and taking advantage of someone.
>
> Though in the case of the "hunnert dollar jointer" the
> circumstances were quite different.
>
> The seller approached the buyer.
>
> The seller knew what he paid for it.
>
> The seller solicited a bid from the buyer.
>
> The seller accepted the bid.
>
> Sounds to me like two adult males making an exchange of
> something the other had for what the other wanted. In other
> words, a whole nutter kettle of fish.
>
> Now, had the seller been a "widder woman" and the above
> reversed...
>
> UA100
"Clint" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:j5qNb.106173$ts4.5823@pd7tw3no...
> Good Lord, no! What kind of a slam is that? May your tribe increase...
>
> :) My two kids are plenty already, and Christmas over at the in-laws is
> nuts as well. I'm done propagating, and if my tribe increases again, my
> wife will have a little explaining to do.
LOL! No offense intended!
My understanding is the blessing "May your tribe increase" applies to all
succeeding generations and their prosperity. It doesn't necessarily mean
you have to change any more diapers!
My eldest is graduating from Army basic training next week. The other is a
junior in high school. I've done my part; I don't think I have the energy
to raise any more from 0-20!
I figured out a few years ago why only fairly young people have children,
and they're fairly old by the time the kids are grown. <g> An explosion in
my daughter's room could only result in the room being neater... ;-)
-- Mark
"Mark Jerde" wrote in message
<snip>
>
> This is a survivable activity for a father in his 20's. I'm now in my mid
> 40's and I think I'd die if I had to do that for more than a couple nights
> back to back ... ;-)
Quitcherbitchin' ... my youngest was born when I was 42. She's now 18, I'm
'guess what' and it ain't over yet. In my supposed "quiet, reflective,
(woodworking?)" years it's time to pay for (*&*U$76 college .... again!
Actually, she's a joy to me. Beautiful, kind, considerate, 4.0 gpr, with an
old fashioned bent and NONE of the cultural trappings/problems/angst of
modern youth ... I'd do it again in a heartbeat, as I am sure you would. :)
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 1/12/04
"Mark Jerde" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Toller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:e8kNb.684$J%[email protected]...
> > He says he was charged $62 instead of the $93 he was expecting. He knew
> the
> > cashier was making a mistake and just took it.
> > That is exactly the same as seeing someone drop money and quickly
picking
> it
> > up before the guy looks around and sees it. In other words, it is
> stealing.
>
> From the OP's message:
>
> > Regular $249, 25% off on clearance. Then I see they have an
> > in-store coupon for an additional 50% off any already clearanced item
>
> It says, "clearanced item," not "clearance item's already unbelievably low
> price."
>
> It is possible the clerk rang it up right:
> 10% clearance + 50% coupon = 60% discount
> 25% clearance + 50% coupon = 75% discount
> 40% clearance + 50% coupon = 90% discount
>
> This may not be the case, but I see nothing in the verbiage that
*requires*
> the 50% discount applies to the discounted price instead of the full
price.
>
Except universal practice and common sense, which apparently mean nothing to
you.
In article <[email protected]>, "mttt" <[email protected]> wrote:
[snip]
>
>Am I my brother's keeper? Yeah, dammit I am...
>
[snip]
>
>Maybe, (or maybe I'd like to think that) I'd of asked him "Dude, do you have
>a frickin' clue what this is worth?" Criminy - had you paid $200, or $500
>bux you'd still have a gloat.
>
[snip]
>Am I my brother's keeper?
>Dammit, I'm supposed to be!
>
Amen, brother. Good post.
I understand what you're saying very well. To me it just makes more sense
to say "take 50% the already reduced price" rather than "take an additional
50% off". The word additional can mean a lot of things in this context. To
me it sounds like "add this new discount to the initial one and then take
the discount". Rockler should be smart enough to know to say "already
reduced price", IMO. GGV is retained at 100% hehe.
"Clint Neufeld" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:gciNb.95365$JQ1.1593@pd7tw1no...
> Percentages off are handled differently than dollar amounts off. The
> original poster assumed, as do Frank and I, that the final price would be
> .75 * .50 * retail price, not retail price - (0.25 * retail price) - (0.5
*
> retail price). If he had assumed your justification, he wouldn't have
come
> up with an expected price of 93, which he did.
>
> Anyways, you guys live your lives the way you want to, teach your kids the
> values you want, and I'll do the same. Rockler is probably going to
> survive, and was probably losing money on the deal regardless. The person
> at the front counter who can't do math will probably still have his job
> tomorrow, and the world will continue to turn.
>
> I still think it reduces the GGV, in any case. That's all I'm saying.
>
> Clint
>
> "Mike in Mystic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I would assume that if something was 75% off they would have some sort
of
> > clause saying no additional coupons accepted or some such thing. I have
> > bought items at computer stores with instant rebates that made them cost
> $0
> > and they included mail in rebates, so they DID essentially pay me to
take
> > the stuff home.
> >
> >
> > "Frank Ketchum" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > "Mike in Mystic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > I disagree. To me "an additional 50%" added to 25% off = 75% off.
> > > Whenever
> > > > stores take 50% the ORIGINAL price, and 25% off the ORIGINAL price
> THAT
> > is
> > > > cheating, not the other way around. I think the way this worked out
> is
> > > > exactly how it should happen.
> > > >
> > >
> > > By that logic, if a store had something on sale for 75% off you had a
> > > coupon for an additional 50%, do you think they should pay you 25% to
> > walk
> > > off with their stuff?
> > >
> > > Frank
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Sure, legally he may not have been in the wrong. Just like it's not wrong
to take advantage of the proverbial old widder-women in the gloats. They're
asking a price, you offer to pay the asking price. But it doesn't mean that
ethically it's not wrong. And it doesn't mean that a gloat about doing that
will be well received, at least not on one of my computers. Sure, you got
it for a fraction of what it's really worth. But sometimes money isn't
everything.
I go back to my analogy of what kind of behaviour I'm trying to instill in
my kids, and try to live by that code of conduct. If they find something of
value on the floor (money, toys, etc), the correct behaviour is to make a
decent effort to find the owner, not pocket it in the hopes that nobody
notices. If I walk out of the store and forget to pay for the milk that was
on the bottom of the shopping cart, do I brag to the kids about how we just
saved $3.00, or do I go back in and pay for it? I gotta say, having the
kids (almost 5, and 3) has been an eye opening experience.
Anyways, I think I'm about done on this thread, and almost wish I hadn't
clicked the Send button. But what the hell, a good discussion about ethics
is always a welcome distraction, right?
Clint
<Dave Fleming> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I normally don't get involved in 'pissing contests' like this but...
>
> Clint [email protected]
> Run this by a lawyer for starts and see if the original poster was
> LEGALLY in the wrong.
> That is in ***The Code Of Civil Procedure Of the State*** wherein
> this occured.
> The many analogies or quasi-analogies made in this thread are to my
> eye just plain sour grapes.
> If the Quatrain...Let the BUYER beware has validity so does Let the
> SELLER be on his/her/its toes. folla?
> >Well, I guess I have more faith in a company like Rockler to properly
phrase
> >a sale advertisement than I do in someone reporting a gloat to exactly
> >replicate the sales statement, if you know what I mean. In any case, I
> >thought the OP (who hasn't responded to the slanderous statements being
made
> >about him, BTW) was thinking he got an even better deal because the clerk
> >was making a mistake. After re-reading his post, he didn't ever claim
that
> >he thought he was getting a an even better deal than he originally
though.
> >I assumed that, which was wrong of me. For all I know, he might have
> >thought he made a mistake in the calculation, or that Rockler had a
> >"special" way of calculating it that was different than every other store
> >out there, or whatever.
> >
> >Rob, where-ever you are, I apologize for thinking that you were
additionally
> >gloating about being able to take advantage of someone else's mistake
based
> >on your original post. I still have a suspicion that you knew that the
> >clerk was making a mistake, but you didn't say anything, but that's
making
> >assumptions that I probably shouldn't. It still seems too close to
taking
> >advantage of someone else who doesn't know any better, like the old
widder
> >woman selling off her husband's Unisaw for $100. In any case, I probably
> >didn't need to crap on your parade route.
> >
> >Clint
> >
> <huge sniperoo of previous verbage>
> Tales of a Boatbuilder Apprentice
> http://pages.sbcglobal.net/djf3rd/
"mel" wrote in message
> 2. This man asked me to make an offer which he could have refused. I did
> not beat him down.
You CLEARLY established Market value of that particular item at that
particular time. MARKET VALUE = The price agreed upon between a seller, who
is not forced to sell, and a buyer, who is not forced to buy.
You're a good man, Charlie Brown ... and still sucketh big time!
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 1/12/04
Oh yeah, I also apologize for accusing you of gloating about being
dishonest/stealing. :) As well as taking over your thread!
Clint
"Clint" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:07pNb.102446$JQ1.97957@pd7tw1no...
> Then I apologize for starting this whole sub-thread, Rob. This time with
no
> "buts" or anything. Congrats on your table!
>
> Clint
>
> "rob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Actually, I bought several things, and didn't realize he rung it up
> > wrong til I thought about it later and reviewed the receipt. It
> > sounded right at the time.
> >
> > "Clint Neufeld" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<bHgNb.95782$ts4.23943@pd7tw3no>...
> > > Personally, I think you should have stopped the gloat just before you
> knowly
> > > took advantage of someone else's mistake. You already had a good
price,
> > > bully for you. But I think the GGV (gross gloat value) is reduced for
> > > cheating. It's like taking advantage of the widder-women.
> > >
> > > Just my $0.02CDN. And yes, before you ask, I have stopped a
> transactions
> > > when I thought the clerk was ringing things through incorrectly (in my
> > > favor). Bully for me, I know...
> > >
> > > Clint
> > >
> > > "rob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > I think this qualifies for gloat status:
> > > >
> > > > Was shopping at Rockler after Xmas to check out their clearance
items.
> > > > Sliding table : Regular $249, 25% off on clearance.
> > > > Then I see they have an in-store coupon for an additional 50% off
any
> > > > already clearanced item, so that would be about $93! So I grab the
> > > > sliding table and when he rings it up:
> > > > Instead of doing 25% off and then 50% to get $93, he does 75% off
the
> > > > total price instead!
> > > > Bottom line = Sliding table for $62! And all I came in for was a
> > > > magnetic wristband, which I forgot because I was too jazzed!
> > > >
> > > > Since they had 2 of them, I called a pal o mine and he ran down and
> > > > grabbed up the second one, which the dude rung up the same way.
> > > >
> > > > I installed the table and it works very well (especially for that
> > > > price!). Anyone else have comments about using this table? (Its the
> > > > same as the Mule sliding table, rebranded for rockler).
> > > > Woodshopdemos.com had some helpful hints for installing it.
>
>
"Toller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I haven't seen the Hecht's sale, but I suspect it wasn't like that; I've
> never seen one that was.
I agree they're rare. I agree it's probable the clerk made a mistake. But
I hate to see the OP condemned before all the facts are known... ;-)
-- Mark
Well, I guess I have more faith in a company like Rockler to properly phrase
a sale advertisement than I do in someone reporting a gloat to exactly
replicate the sales statement, if you know what I mean. In any case, I
thought the OP (who hasn't responded to the slanderous statements being made
about him, BTW) was thinking he got an even better deal because the clerk
was making a mistake. After re-reading his post, he didn't ever claim that
he thought he was getting a an even better deal than he originally though.
I assumed that, which was wrong of me. For all I know, he might have
thought he made a mistake in the calculation, or that Rockler had a
"special" way of calculating it that was different than every other store
out there, or whatever.
Rob, where-ever you are, I apologize for thinking that you were additionally
gloating about being able to take advantage of someone else's mistake based
on your original post. I still have a suspicion that you knew that the
clerk was making a mistake, but you didn't say anything, but that's making
assumptions that I probably shouldn't. It still seems too close to taking
advantage of someone else who doesn't know any better, like the old widder
woman selling off her husband's Unisaw for $100. In any case, I probably
didn't need to crap on your parade route.
Clint
"Mike in Mystic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I understand what you're saying very well. To me it just makes more sense
> to say "take 50% the already reduced price" rather than "take an
additional
> 50% off". The word additional can mean a lot of things in this context.
To
> me it sounds like "add this new discount to the initial one and then take
> the discount". Rockler should be smart enough to know to say "already
> reduced price", IMO. GGV is retained at 100% hehe.
>
>
> "Clint Neufeld" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:gciNb.95365$JQ1.1593@pd7tw1no...
> > Percentages off are handled differently than dollar amounts off. The
> > original poster assumed, as do Frank and I, that the final price would
be
> > .75 * .50 * retail price, not retail price - (0.25 * retail price) -
(0.5
> *
> > retail price). If he had assumed your justification, he wouldn't have
> come
> > up with an expected price of 93, which he did.
> >
> > Anyways, you guys live your lives the way you want to, teach your kids
the
> > values you want, and I'll do the same. Rockler is probably going to
> > survive, and was probably losing money on the deal regardless. The
person
> > at the front counter who can't do math will probably still have his job
> > tomorrow, and the world will continue to turn.
> >
> > I still think it reduces the GGV, in any case. That's all I'm saying.
> >
> > Clint
> >
> > "Mike in Mystic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > I would assume that if something was 75% off they would have some sort
> of
> > > clause saying no additional coupons accepted or some such thing. I
have
> > > bought items at computer stores with instant rebates that made them
cost
> > $0
> > > and they included mail in rebates, so they DID essentially pay me to
> take
> > > the stuff home.
> > >
> > >
> > > "Frank Ketchum" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > >
> > > > "Mike in Mystic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > I disagree. To me "an additional 50%" added to 25% off = 75% off.
> > > > Whenever
> > > > > stores take 50% the ORIGINAL price, and 25% off the ORIGINAL price
> > THAT
> > > is
> > > > > cheating, not the other way around. I think the way this worked
out
> > is
> > > > > exactly how it should happen.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > By that logic, if a store had something on sale for 75% off you had
a
> > > > coupon for an additional 50%, do you think they should pay you 25%
to
> > > walk
> > > > off with their stuff?
> > > >
> > > > Frank
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
I appreciate the apology and if it makes you feel any better it wasn't that
long ago I was in a position that I needed the money so I sold a Rockwell
10" RAS...you remember the kind.... like they don't make anymore.. one my
father gave me..... and a Delta 6 inch jointer also given to me by my
father.... sold them both for a whopping $250. Do I regret it? You
betcha... Do I resent the man for taking advantage of it? Nope....it wasn't
his fault I provided him with the opportunity. Could he have been more
benevolent and offered me more? Had I made known my situation he might quite
possibly have done so...but I didn't. Being thy brother's keeper and being
benevolent requires the knowledge of a need. It is impractical to waste
benevolence on those who don't need it since it might rob you of the ability
when someone actually does. I'm climbing down off my soapbox now..nice
soapbox...think I'll post pictures of it to abpw...<g>.
Personally, I think you should have stopped the gloat just before you knowly
took advantage of someone else's mistake. You already had a good price,
bully for you. But I think the GGV (gross gloat value) is reduced for
cheating. It's like taking advantage of the widder-women.
Just my $0.02CDN. And yes, before you ask, I have stopped a transactions
when I thought the clerk was ringing things through incorrectly (in my
favor). Bully for me, I know...
Clint
"rob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I think this qualifies for gloat status:
>
> Was shopping at Rockler after Xmas to check out their clearance items.
> Sliding table : Regular $249, 25% off on clearance.
> Then I see they have an in-store coupon for an additional 50% off any
> already clearanced item, so that would be about $93! So I grab the
> sliding table and when he rings it up:
> Instead of doing 25% off and then 50% to get $93, he does 75% off the
> total price instead!
> Bottom line = Sliding table for $62! And all I came in for was a
> magnetic wristband, which I forgot because I was too jazzed!
>
> Since they had 2 of them, I called a pal o mine and he ran down and
> grabbed up the second one, which the dude rung up the same way.
>
> I installed the table and it works very well (especially for that
> price!). Anyone else have comments about using this table? (Its the
> same as the Mule sliding table, rebranded for rockler).
> Woodshopdemos.com had some helpful hints for installing it.
"Clint Neufeld" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:gciNb.95365$JQ1.1593@pd7tw1no...
> Percentages off are handled differently than dollar amounts off. The
> original poster assumed, as do Frank and I, that the final price would be
> .75 * .50 * retail price, not retail price - (0.25 * retail price) - (0.5
*
> retail price). If he had assumed your justification, he wouldn't have
come
> up with an expected price of 93, which he did.
>
> Anyways, you guys live your lives the way you want to, teach your kids the
> values you want, and I'll do the same. Rockler is probably going to
> survive, and was probably losing money on the deal regardless. The person
> at the front counter who can't do math will probably still have his job
> tomorrow, and the world will continue to turn.
Sure and you can shave a few dollars off that income tax
or coast through that stop sign. The US will continue to
exist and your town will still be safe. But that doesn't
change the fact that it's wrong. If that's the values you
intend to teach your kids well, there's nothing more to say.
Dennis Vogel
"Mark Jerde" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Toller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > Except universal practice and common sense, which apparently mean
nothing
> to
> > you.
>
> Agreed it's contrary to what usually happens, but I believe I've had sales
> which were percentage additive. IIRC there was a Hecht's sale like that.
> 10% off, bring in the 25% coupon from the paper, get 35% off in toto.
>
> The clerk may not have been "Huckleberry Dumbbell" but *could* have been
> ringing things up as instructed.
All true. And all the guy had to do was simply ask
if the clerk did it right. And he didn't so that speaks
volumes to me.
Dennis Vogel
pfft!
Congrats on the gloat!
A "gloat," by it's very definition, is a sly or malicious pleasure -
typically at another's expense. With very little effort perusing this
newsgroup, you will find many such examples; some entirely innocuous, some a
bit more in the gray.
For instance, price matching or percentage cash back is a method by which
one vendor tries to gain competitive advantage over another. It is very
common practice of the frequenters of this forum to knowingly manipulate
this marketing method to their advantage when they know full well that one
business or the other will lose out.
We then post that as a "gloat." "Hey everybody, look what I got away with!
Look how I rooked the system!"
Saying this lucky fella is "stealing" is a bit much for me. Though can be
typical of folks who are filled with a sense of righteous indignation mixed
with a false bravado the anonymity of the Internet provides them.
Regards... and congrats!
jbd
"Toller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:e8kNb.684$J%[email protected]...
> He says he was charged $62 instead of the $93 he was expecting. He knew
the
> cashier was making a mistake and just took it.
> That is exactly the same as seeing someone drop money and quickly picking
it
> up before the guy looks around and sees it. In other words, it is
stealing.
>
>
>
being the one whom you claim took advantage of someone in an unethical
manner I must defend myself with the following points.
1. This man was the sole owner of the property in question....not an
employee of the actual owner.
2. This man asked me to make an offer which he could have refused. I did
not beat him down.
3. Broken part aside, the jointer is of a higher value to the likes of us
true, however to him it was scrap iron. If you, for some reason, came into 8
tons of potatoes and wanted to get rid of them you'd probably be thrilled to
take less than market value. (yeah I know.. stupid but it's a point)
4. I've since helped him find a buyer for some of the other equipment at a
price he established.
5. Taking advantage of a good deal where both parties walk away contented
isn't unethical...it's just wise.
6. Taking advantage of someone who is down on their luck is unethical..not
the case here.
7. You're just friggin jealous.
To all my sanctimonious, self-righteous, judgmental "brethren" I pose the
following questions. "Am I my brother's keeper?" was a question posed by
Cain to God. What was God's answer to that direct question? There wasn't
one...
Now, blow the dust off your bible and turn to Matthew 13: 44 and read the
parable of the man who found a treasure in the field. He found it then HID
IT again...then he went and bought the field... with great joy I might add.
This parable was used to illustrate the wisdom of the man...not how he took
advantage of the owner of the field.
Now that being said.....forgive me for gloating (boasting) on my actions. I
know better.
And finally, as long as we are quoting scripture how about the one that goes
"judge not lest ye be judged yourself"?
Percentages off are handled differently than dollar amounts off. The
original poster assumed, as do Frank and I, that the final price would be
.75 * .50 * retail price, not retail price - (0.25 * retail price) - (0.5 *
retail price). If he had assumed your justification, he wouldn't have come
up with an expected price of 93, which he did.
Anyways, you guys live your lives the way you want to, teach your kids the
values you want, and I'll do the same. Rockler is probably going to
survive, and was probably losing money on the deal regardless. The person
at the front counter who can't do math will probably still have his job
tomorrow, and the world will continue to turn.
I still think it reduces the GGV, in any case. That's all I'm saying.
Clint
"Mike in Mystic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I would assume that if something was 75% off they would have some sort of
> clause saying no additional coupons accepted or some such thing. I have
> bought items at computer stores with instant rebates that made them cost
$0
> and they included mail in rebates, so they DID essentially pay me to take
> the stuff home.
>
>
> "Frank Ketchum" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Mike in Mystic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > I disagree. To me "an additional 50%" added to 25% off = 75% off.
> > Whenever
> > > stores take 50% the ORIGINAL price, and 25% off the ORIGINAL price
THAT
> is
> > > cheating, not the other way around. I think the way this worked out
is
> > > exactly how it should happen.
> > >
> >
> > By that logic, if a store had something on sale for 75% off you had a
> > coupon for an additional 50%, do you think they should pay you 25% to
> walk
> > off with their stuff?
> >
> > Frank
> >
> >
>
>
"Clint" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Y8pNb.102483$JQ1.7560@pd7tw1no...
> Oh yeah, I also apologize for accusing you of gloating about being
> dishonest/stealing. :) As well as taking over your thread!
It's nice to see apologies aired in the same public view as the original
misunderstandings. Hats off to you, Clint. May your tribe increase.
-- Mark
"Toller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:e8kNb.684$J%[email protected]...
> He says he was charged $62 instead of the $93 he was expecting. He knew
the
> cashier was making a mistake and just took it.
> That is exactly the same as seeing someone drop money and quickly picking
it
> up before the guy looks around and sees it. In other words, it is
stealing.
From the OP's message:
> Regular $249, 25% off on clearance. Then I see they have an
> in-store coupon for an additional 50% off any already clearanced item
It says, "clearanced item," not "clearance item's already unbelievably low
price."
It is possible the clerk rang it up right:
10% clearance + 50% coupon = 60% discount
25% clearance + 50% coupon = 75% discount
40% clearance + 50% coupon = 90% discount
This may not be the case, but I see nothing in the verbiage that *requires*
the 50% discount applies to the discounted price instead of the full price.
-- Mark
"rob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> I think this qualifies for gloat status:
I see you're catching from flack for this. I'm more torn - as I think you
were the recipient of someone else's mistake, and I personally *might* have
asked them to double check their math. Maybe, might-of, don't know.
What bother's me is that buying a DJ-20 for $100 from some guy is considered
a real gloat.
My notion of what's proper/right/ethical/moral tells me that both actions
are improper and taking advantage of someone.
Net/net - as someone else put it - you live by your values and I'll live by
mine.
"mel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Now that being said.....forgive me for gloating (boasting) on my actions.
I
> know better.
Please don't. I was *wrong* to accuse/impune!
For the life of me - I don't know what they heck I was thinkin'/drinkin'.
I'm old enough to know better. Old enough to know that I probably had a
small fraction of the facts! Old enough to know better!
Flat out - frickin' wrong.
And I am sorry!
>
> And finally, as long as we are quoting scripture how about the one that
goes
> "judge not lest ye be judged yourself"?
Touche!
Good Lord, no! What kind of a slam is that? May your tribe increase...
:) My two kids are plenty already, and Christmas over at the in-laws is
nuts as well. I'm done propagating, and if my tribe increases again, my
wife will have a little explaining to do.
Clint
"Mark Jerde" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Clint" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:Y8pNb.102483$JQ1.7560@pd7tw1no...
> > Oh yeah, I also apologize for accusing you of gloating about being
> > dishonest/stealing. :) As well as taking over your thread!
>
> It's nice to see apologies aired in the same public view as the original
> misunderstandings. Hats off to you, Clint. May your tribe increase.
>
> -- Mark
>
>
I disagree. To me "an additional 50%" added to 25% off = 75% off. Whenever
stores take 50% the ORIGINAL price, and 25% off the ORIGINAL price THAT is
cheating, not the other way around. I think the way this worked out is
exactly how it should happen.
"Clint Neufeld" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:bHgNb.95782$ts4.23943@pd7tw3no...
> Personally, I think you should have stopped the gloat just before you
knowly
> took advantage of someone else's mistake. You already had a good price,
> bully for you. But I think the GGV (gross gloat value) is reduced for
> cheating. It's like taking advantage of the widder-women.
>
> Just my $0.02CDN. And yes, before you ask, I have stopped a transactions
> when I thought the clerk was ringing things through incorrectly (in my
> favor). Bully for me, I know...
>
> Clint
>
> "rob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I think this qualifies for gloat status:
> >
> > Was shopping at Rockler after Xmas to check out their clearance items.
> > Sliding table : Regular $249, 25% off on clearance.
> > Then I see they have an in-store coupon for an additional 50% off any
> > already clearanced item, so that would be about $93! So I grab the
> > sliding table and when he rings it up:
> > Instead of doing 25% off and then 50% to get $93, he does 75% off the
> > total price instead!
> > Bottom line = Sliding table for $62! And all I came in for was a
> > magnetic wristband, which I forgot because I was too jazzed!
> >
> > Since they had 2 of them, I called a pal o mine and he ran down and
> > grabbed up the second one, which the dude rung up the same way.
> >
> > I installed the table and it works very well (especially for that
> > price!). Anyone else have comments about using this table? (Its the
> > same as the Mule sliding table, rebranded for rockler).
> > Woodshopdemos.com had some helpful hints for installing it.
>
>
"Larry Jaques" <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 10:07:18 GMT, Unisaw A100 <[email protected]>
> brought forth from the murky depths:
>
>
> You forgot the "used and broken/cracked" part, mttt.
Nope...
> >Though in the case of the "hunnert dollar jointer" the
> >circumstances were quite different.
> >
> >The seller approached the buyer.
> >
> >The seller knew what he paid for it.
> >
> >The seller solicited a bid from the buyer.
No - Lord knows I'm done with this after this thread. And Lord knows I have
no idea what the guy was thinking selling a $1300 tool, albeit with a
"crack" for a hunnert bux...
Am I my brother's keeper? Yeah, dammit I am...
I wasn't there, but I imagine I might have looked to see if the electrode
burn marks were still on his temples, or some other rationale for the price.
Was he picking the Orange Cockroaches off his shirt and throwing them on the
Pink Elephant???
Maybe, (or maybe I'd like to think that) I'd of asked him "Dude, do you have
a frickin' clue what this is worth?" Criminy - had you paid $200, or $500
bux you'd still have a gloat.
> >
> >Sounds to me like two adult males making an exchange of
> >something the other had for what the other wanted. In other
> >words, a whole nutter kettle of fish.
Yes, yes, yes.
No widow involved.
Maybe.
Am I my brother's keeper?
Dammit, I'm supposed to be!
"Toller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Except universal practice and common sense, which apparently mean nothing
to
> you.
Agreed it's contrary to what usually happens, but I believe I've had sales
which were percentage additive. IIRC there was a Hecht's sale like that.
10% off, bring in the 25% coupon from the paper, get 35% off in toto.
The clerk may not have been "Huckleberry Dumbbell" but *could* have been
ringing things up as instructed.
It's tough condemning someone before all the *facts* are in.
-- Mark
"Mike in Mystic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I disagree. To me "an additional 50%" added to 25% off = 75% off.
Whenever
> stores take 50% the ORIGINAL price, and 25% off the ORIGINAL price THAT is
> cheating, not the other way around. I think the way this worked out is
> exactly how it should happen.
>
By that logic, if a store had something on sale for 75% off you had a
coupon for an additional 50%, do you think they should pay you 25% to walk
off with their stuff?
Frank
"mel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> To all my sanctimonious, self-righteous, judgmental "brethren" I pose the
> following questions. "Am I my brother's keeper?" was a question posed by
> Cain to God. What was God's answer to that direct question? There wasn't
> one...
>
> Now, blow the dust off your bible and turn to Matthew 13: 44 and read the
> parable of the man who found a treasure in the field. He found it then HID
> IT again...then he went and bought the field... with great joy I might
add.
> This parable was used to illustrate the wisdom of the man...not how he
took
> advantage of the owner of the field.
>
> Now that being said.....forgive me for gloating (boasting) on my actions.
I
> know better.
>
> And finally, as long as we are quoting scripture how about the one that
goes
> "judge not lest ye be judged yourself"?
>
>
>
I have a certain respect for a guy that will take it to the opposition of
their ground. That said, I'd like to mention that that was a legitimate
purchase and yes, Virginia - you do suck:)
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:10:30 -0700, Wes Stewart <n7ws@_arrl.net>
wrote:
>On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:24:27 -0600, Unisaw A100 <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>
>|Next you'll be telling us the best meal you ever got in your
>|life was from Denny's.
>
>It's possible :-) Read of my experience with an "upscale" Tucson
>restaurant:
>
>http://www.tucsonweekly.com/gbase/opinion/Content?oid=oid:44129
>
a click on that link.... the comment right above yours was from my
friend Jeff. small world.
Bridger
"Unisaw A100" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> UA100
There are no more gloats.
www.owwm.com
J
<snip>
>Sounds to me like two adult males making an exchange of
>something the other had for what the other wanted. In other
>words, a whole nutter kettle of fish.
>
>Now, had the seller been a "widder woman" and the above
>reversed...
>
>UA100
When a poor starving apprentice. The other apprentices and I made it
a practice of visiting the Union Hall each week and checking the
Bulletin Board for the Death Notices. And then dash like hell to the
florist, pick up a bunch of 'posies' and skeedaddle to the home of the
newly deceassed shipwright.
The ploy went something like this.
Show up with 'posies', wearing a long face and pay your respects to
the new widow. In the course of converstation casually bring up ' Old
Mikes Tools'. If the opening presented itself and sometimes it did...
SNAP, like the jaws of a Great White Shark you struck!
Go out to the garage or down to the basement and be shown his tool
chest/s. Oh and Ah over his nice tools and well you people can figure
out the rest of the speil. Poor apprentice, hungry family at home
yadda yadda. We ALL got some good deals that way until it got out of
hand with some fellas passing on to others outside the trade, what we
were up to.
Complaints were made to the Hall and changes were made.
Now the tools if the family so wished, were brought to the Hall and,
on Meeting nights would be auctioned off. With the money going to the
family. Since the Meetings were for members only it still was a good
way to acquire tools and frankly in the light of my years better
behaviour for us apprentices.
BUT, I still from time to time, cannot think back to those days
without a gleam in my eye over the thrill of the chase.
I have made preparations and given strict instructions to my wife and
sons that anything the sons don't want is to be sold/given/passed on
to working shipwrights. NOTHING is to go to collectors or dilletantes,
period.
PAX
Tales of a Boatbuilder Apprentice
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/djf3rd/
"mel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> being the one whom you claim took advantage of someone in an unethical
> manner I must defend myself with the following points.
Yessir - I did assert/state that. And will dutifully read your clarification
of what happened.
>
> 1. This man was the sole owner of the property in question....not an
> employee of the actual owner.
> 2. This man asked me to make an offer which he could have refused. I did
> not beat him down.
> 3. Broken part aside, the jointer is of a higher value to the likes of us
> true, however to him it was scrap iron. If you, for some reason, came into
8
> tons of potatoes and wanted to get rid of them you'd probably be thrilled
to
> take less than market value. (yeah I know.. stupid but it's a point)
> 4. I've since helped him find a buyer for some of the other equipment at
a
> price he established.
> 5. Taking advantage of a good deal where both parties walk away contented
> isn't unethical...it's just wise.
> 6. Taking advantage of someone who is down on their luck is unethical..not
> the case here.
Thank you for the clarification.
My apologies for the accusation.
> 7. You're just friggin jealous.
Yes!
And I've been reading too many "gloat" posts here.
"mel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> possibly have done so...but I didn't. Being thy brother's keeper and
being
> benevolent requires the knowledge of a need. It is impractical to waste
> benevolence on those who don't need it since it might rob you of the
ability
> when someone actually does. I'm climbing down off my soapbox now..nice
> soapbox...think I'll post pictures of it to abpw...<g>.
Agreed...
Fastow (Enron) in the news, Tyco, Martha Stewart...
White collar crime, Club Fed and worse.
New parent...
How the heck am I supposed to teach my kids intangibles like empathy and
morality?
Dammit, I'm sometimes confused by what's "right/moral/ethical/proper"!
Sometimes I read the gloats and wonder how I'd feel if that was my kid
posting?
Once in a blue moan, I read a gloat and jump in - where I ought'a not be
jumpin'... :)
Dennis Vogel wrote:
> All true. And all the guy had to do was simply ask
> if the clerk did it right. And he didn't so that speaks
> volumes to me.
This is a long thread and you may have missed it. He bought several items
and didn't notice it till he got home.
Now, should he call the store up? <g>
-- Mark
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:24:27 -0600, Unisaw A100 <[email protected]>
wrote:
>You walked out of Rock-a-lars with a gloat?
>
>Next you'll be telling us the best meal you ever got in your
>life was from Denny's.
Hmmm... you sound like a guy who never did shift work and got off when
the only place open for "dinner" was Chez Waffel. After a few meals
involving their infamous LaserCut<tm> bacon and only-went-outta-date-
yesterday pancake batter, Denny's would be a huge step up the old
culinary ladder.
Michael
Waffle House. It's not just not for breakfast anymore... :)
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:24:27 -0600, Unisaw A100 <[email protected]>
wrote:
|Next you'll be telling us the best meal you ever got in your
|life was from Denny's.
It's possible :-) Read of my experience with an "upscale" Tucson
restaurant:
http://www.tucsonweekly.com/gbase/opinion/Content?oid=oid:44129
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:50:55 GMT, Larry Jaques
<novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> scribbled:
>On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 10:07:18 GMT, Unisaw A100 <[email protected]>
>brought forth from the murky depths:
>
>>mttt wrote:
>>>What bother's me is that buying a DJ-20 for $100 from some guy is considered
>>>a real gloat.
>>>My notion of what's proper/right/ethical/moral tells me that both actions
>>>are improper and taking advantage of someone.
>
>You forgot the "used and broken/cracked" part, mttt.
>
<snip>
>>Now, had the seller been a "widder woman" and the above
>>reversed...
>
>It would have been fair game/more fun? <evil grinne>
From the Anti-FAQ just as a reminder:
1.12 IS THIS A GLOAT?
It's a gloat only if you cheat a poor old widder lady out of her
rightful inheritance or if you rip off a store by taking
advantage of the dumb manager/clerk/cashier's stupidity. Nothing
else qualifies, not even Bessey clamps obtained at Sears,
regardless of their length.
Luigi
Note the new email address.
Please adjust your krillfiles (tmAD) accordingly
Replace "nonet" with "yukonomics" for real email address
"Mark Jerde" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Toller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > Except universal practice and common sense, which apparently mean
nothing
> to
> > you.
>
> Agreed it's contrary to what usually happens, but I believe I've had sales
> which were percentage additive. IIRC there was a Hecht's sale like that.
> 10% off, bring in the 25% coupon from the paper, get 35% off in toto.
>
> The clerk may not have been "Huckleberry Dumbbell" but *could* have been
> ringing things up as instructed.
>
> It's tough condemning someone before all the *facts* are in.
>
I am bit sensitive because a company I was with gave a 50% wholesale
discount off retail, with another 10% for orders over $1000. That type of
thing was standard in the industry; the hardware industry as a matter of
fact.
Anyhow, once or twice a year somebody would give me a hard time over why
they only got a 55% discount, rather than a 60% discount. It didn't happen
often, but it was sure aggravating when it did. I suppose with ten thousand
customers, some of them are bound to have new and undertrained clerks now
and then.
I haven't seen the Hecht's sale, but I suspect it wasn't like that; I've
never seen one that was.
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 19:34:39 GMT, "Mike in Mystic" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>I disagree. To me "an additional 50%" added to 25% off = 75% off. Whenever
>stores take 50% the ORIGINAL price, and 25% off the ORIGINAL price THAT is
>cheating, not the other way around. I think the way this worked out is
>exactly how it should happen.
nope you take off the 25% then take the 50% off of what's left. this does not
come out to 75% off.
--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.
mttt wrote:
>What bother's me is that buying a DJ-20 for $100 from some guy is considered
>a real gloat.
>My notion of what's proper/right/ethical/moral tells me that both actions
>are improper and taking advantage of someone.
Though in the case of the "hunnert dollar jointer" the
circumstances were quite different.
The seller approached the buyer.
The seller knew what he paid for it.
The seller solicited a bid from the buyer.
The seller accepted the bid.
Sounds to me like two adult males making an exchange of
something the other had for what the other wanted. In other
words, a whole nutter kettle of fish.
Now, had the seller been a "widder woman" and the above
reversed...
UA100