I think there is a loose definition of "cost" being tossed around here, and it's pretty much useless to argue about who's right because, in certain ways, both groups are right.
- The "Hey, I've worked at retail, I've seen the "cost" screens and we make like $1 on a laptop" camp: I don't think this is true. What you are seeing is a "cost plus" figure accounting for costs from the distributor plus the costs of running CompUSA (paying executive, employee salaries, other overhead). The money you above the "cost" you see on the screen is what accounts for the profits recorded by CompUSA, CircuitCity, etc. That's why the industry is suffering so much...very few companies are making enough money to report an actual profit.
- The "CompUSA's cost must be like 50% of the selling price" camp. Though, I bet CompUSA pays pays a LOT less than the "cost" being shown on retail employee screens, there's no way they can sell things at their distributor cost + 7%. That's simply not what they're advertising, and I agree, it's pretty deceiving.
I remember a long time ago, the USA Today Datebook section had these big ads for a "cost + 5%" computer PC seller. I called them and after I heard their quote, I learned never to get excited over these "cost + %" sales anywhere.
Wow, I think I rambled on long enough.