Its over......Dell's Official Statement in Regards to the Rio Karma 20GB Jukebox for $50
Seems like the reply finally came in from Dell
Seems like the reply finally came in from Dell
What I don't understand though is why this keeps happening? You would think Dell would put in some safety measures to keep these dramatic pricing errors from happening?
At my place of business we have set our system up so it notifies the user when the make price changes and order has to go to a supervisor for approval if they do. If the price ever gets changed below cost a password has to be entered AND an e-mail is being sent to a manager. It also prints on a daily report that goes to the President of the company. So everybody around here knows you better pay damn good attention to pricing or otherwise your ass will be in trouble.
We do $50 Mill in sales/year, Dell makes plenty more than that. You'd think they'd have their ducks in a row and crap like this wouldn't happen.
I realize that everybody in their right mind should know that price couldn't be right, but then again, you never know! I've gotten $200.00 printers for free because of some marketing ploy, why not get a $350.00 MP3 player for less than $100.00?
At my place of business we have set our system up so it notifies the user when the make price changes and order has to go to a supervisor for approval if they do. If the price ever gets changed below cost a password has to be entered AND an e-mail is being sent to a manager. It also prints on a daily report that goes to the President of the company. So everybody around here knows you better pay damn good attention to pricing or otherwise your ass will be in trouble.
We do $50 Mill in sales/year, Dell makes plenty more than that. You'd think they'd have their ducks in a row and crap like this wouldn't happen.
I realize that everybody in their right mind should know that price couldn't be right, but then again, you never know! I've gotten $200.00 printers for free because of some marketing ploy, why not get a $350.00 MP3 player for less than $100.00?
What I don't get is how they can get away with saying that they aren't responsible for messing up their pricing...doesn't make sense to me, but whatever. Would've been nice to get it, but ohwell...
No biggie either way, looks like it's truly dead and gone, but they may still screw up and a few may slip through.
(or maybe the delay in the new shipping is to allow all of those that came in with the wrong price to be cancelled)
$324 is still about $200 more than I'd pay for one....
(or maybe the delay in the new shipping is to allow all of those that came in with the wrong price to be cancelled)
$324 is still about $200 more than I'd pay for one....
the sku change is to prevent those people with the item saved in the cart to slip through after the storm
all the ebayers are going to panic now.
stupid trolls.
oh yeah, if i ever found an "incredible" deal at dell, i won't tell unless i get mine first
stupid trolls.
oh yeah, if i ever found an "incredible" deal at dell, i won't tell unless i get mine first
Regardless of what Dell's "policy" is, how in the heck do they get away with this nonsense. How do I, the buyer, know for sure if a price is a mistake or not. Yes, this was an amazingly low price. If the price was advertised on fleabay or something I doubt I would have purchased one. But this was Dell, a retailer I know and trust. And I also know they habitually sell stuff at or below cost. I don't know why they do this. It could be a marketing experiment, it could be part of a shrewd sales strategy ... I don't know. I do know that if I order a product and receive a confirmation Dell owes me more than, "Sorry it was a mistake your order is cancelled." Maybe I am a reasonable guy and if they came to me and explained it was a mistake I'd give them a break. But to just cancel orders without so much as a by your leave is a serious breach of contract and customer trust.
If Dell were smart they would look at these orders on a case-by-case basis and just try to be a mensch about it. This was, after all, their fault. They can have a nice disclaimer but that does not free them from the responsibility of making sure prices are clearly marked and customers can count on a sale once it is made. Selling online saves Dell millions of dollars in costs; that same power also brings with it the potential to cause harm (like with a pricing mistake -- if indeed that is what this is).
If Dell were smart they would look at these orders on a case-by-case basis and just try to be a mensch about it. This was, after all, their fault. They can have a nice disclaimer but that does not free them from the responsibility of making sure prices are clearly marked and customers can count on a sale once it is made. Selling online saves Dell millions of dollars in costs; that same power also brings with it the potential to cause harm (like with a pricing mistake -- if indeed that is what this is).
Hey ExplodingBoy, they gave you a 10% off discount on the REAL price of the Rio...what more do you want???
you're right, you don't know but two things usually happen when something like this occurs.
1) Common sense kicks in. Chances are if one was researching into purchasing this item and came across Dell's site after seeing everywhere else sold it for $400 while Dell had it for $80, chances are it is probably is pricing error.
2) Dell lets you know. They have it in their policy that mistakes happen but they do a very good job of letting you know and usually offer some sort of discount. That's the way it is. Nothing you can do about it. Mistakes happen once in awhile and I will still order from Dell in the future with confidence because they are still a very good company.
Fallen Kell
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 6,240
- 555
- 126
Don't worry... There will be another Dell "price mistake" within a few days. Especially with their current track record over the last month.
For a 20GB unit the "REAL" Dell price is not that great. I won't be buying one. The 40GB unit is only a little more.
Maybe this time next year they will be giving these things away so you will use Dell's Music Service.
==Cocophone==
Maybe this time next year they will be giving these things away so you will use Dell's Music Service.
==Cocophone==
Dell is a great company that is absolutely doing the right thing here. I don't want them making foolish business decisions, like losing thousands of dollars on a pricing mistake. I want them to keep selling us great products and the lowest prices.
EVERY PERSON on this thread who bought this thing did so knowing it was a price mistake. Pleading ignorance now doesn't seem that sincere.
EVERY PERSON on this thread who bought this thing did so knowing it was a price mistake. Pleading ignorance now doesn't seem that sincere.
It depends on what you define as the right thing.
Frequent so-called price mistake? No, it actually hurts their reputation as an online retailer.
Refusal to honor those deals? Sure, it protects its share holders' interest.
Will the benefits be passed down to the consumers? No, because their goal is to make money off us.
A new product has to cover R&D costs. So, the company has to sell it at 50 or 100 bucks above cost to make them in the beginning until volume ramps up. A distributor, not even dell in this case has to jack it up another 20-30 bucks to make money. Dell, to cover costs and to make it cost effective usually jacks it up another 30-50 bucks...sometimes up to 75 or 80 bucks. I bet cost of parts isn't even 80 bucks on the thing. I know for a fact that the cost of a brand new pentium, all the silicone and materials is less than 5 bucks.
I'm in a new industry and parts on our board totals about 5 bucks. Manufacturing and testing costs thrown in is like 30 bucks and we're very very small. We sell these things at 100 bucks a pop and about 60 bucks profit on each one, depending on quantities.
I"m not sure if I'm more saddened or amused by these "pricing errors." Why anyone keeps shopping from this company, I just have no idea.
Personally, I haven't bought a thing from Dell since they played this game with some speakers a couple of years ago. Whereas most businesses seem to learn from their mistakes, Dell has made a career out of actually getting progressively worse.
Here's a simple everyday analogy for you:
You go shopping at a grocery store, and see a sale tag under the half-gallons of milk for $.99. You bring it up to the register and it rings up at $1.59. Instead of adjusting the price, the manager says you pay $1.59 or no milk.
You go back the next day and try to buy some flour. The sale ticket says $1.39. The flour rings up at $2.10. Again the manager refuses to sell it to you less than $2.10.
The third day, you go back and they have butter with a sales ticket that says $1.50 but it rings up at $3.00. Again, no sale unless you pay $3.00.
The fourth day, they have cheese on sale for $1.50 a brick, though it is regularly $3.00, and if you ring it up, it will show as $1.50.
Are you really going to go back to the store, on the offhand chance that one out of four times, they may actually honor the posted price?
No, likely you will go to another store (unless there are no other stores) because what's the point in buying from a place where the posted prices are taken seriously only every once in a while? Even if you will ultimately pay more at another retailer, there's a sense of security in knowing that the posted price is more than likely correct.
I know there's a sharp difference in cost of groceries and computer supplies. But Dell really has no respect for its client base. The constantly post errors, keep customers hanging on whether they will sell the products for the listed price, sometimes going as far as to blame the customers for the error, and only to eventually cancel most of the orders. Even if every once in a while they honor a deal (like the WD drives from last month), is it really worth all the time and aggravation in the long run?
The basic paradigm of selling is "The customer is always right." It doesn't mean that you should lose your back on everything. But a temporary loss is always preferable to a permanent loss. In the grocery store example from above, just about every grocery store I know will either adjust the price or even more likely give it to you for free. Why? They want you to come back. The $3.00 loss now is possibly hundreds in return in the future. And, they also learn. They take the incorrect tag down immediately, as to prevent the problem from reoccuring.
If I've learned one thing on these bargain boards over the years, its that the lost bargain today will likely be repeated in one way or another a short time down the road. Most aren't lost bargains...just delayed bargains.
In this case, I'd rather wait until the bargain appears from a more reputable source than Dell.
And there are few retailers I consider less reputable than Dell at the moment.
All IMHO.....
Personally, I haven't bought a thing from Dell since they played this game with some speakers a couple of years ago. Whereas most businesses seem to learn from their mistakes, Dell has made a career out of actually getting progressively worse.
Here's a simple everyday analogy for you:
You go shopping at a grocery store, and see a sale tag under the half-gallons of milk for $.99. You bring it up to the register and it rings up at $1.59. Instead of adjusting the price, the manager says you pay $1.59 or no milk.
You go back the next day and try to buy some flour. The sale ticket says $1.39. The flour rings up at $2.10. Again the manager refuses to sell it to you less than $2.10.
The third day, you go back and they have butter with a sales ticket that says $1.50 but it rings up at $3.00. Again, no sale unless you pay $3.00.
The fourth day, they have cheese on sale for $1.50 a brick, though it is regularly $3.00, and if you ring it up, it will show as $1.50.
Are you really going to go back to the store, on the offhand chance that one out of four times, they may actually honor the posted price?
No, likely you will go to another store (unless there are no other stores) because what's the point in buying from a place where the posted prices are taken seriously only every once in a while? Even if you will ultimately pay more at another retailer, there's a sense of security in knowing that the posted price is more than likely correct.
I know there's a sharp difference in cost of groceries and computer supplies. But Dell really has no respect for its client base. The constantly post errors, keep customers hanging on whether they will sell the products for the listed price, sometimes going as far as to blame the customers for the error, and only to eventually cancel most of the orders. Even if every once in a while they honor a deal (like the WD drives from last month), is it really worth all the time and aggravation in the long run?
The basic paradigm of selling is "The customer is always right." It doesn't mean that you should lose your back on everything. But a temporary loss is always preferable to a permanent loss. In the grocery store example from above, just about every grocery store I know will either adjust the price or even more likely give it to you for free. Why? They want you to come back. The $3.00 loss now is possibly hundreds in return in the future. And, they also learn. They take the incorrect tag down immediately, as to prevent the problem from reoccuring.
If I've learned one thing on these bargain boards over the years, its that the lost bargain today will likely be repeated in one way or another a short time down the road. Most aren't lost bargains...just delayed bargains.
In this case, I'd rather wait until the bargain appears from a more reputable source than Dell.
And there are few retailers I consider less reputable than Dell at the moment.
All IMHO.....
I wonder if you are from California if Item(9) of The CIVIL CODE, SECTION 1770
applies to this.
1770. (a) The following unfair methods of competition and unfair or
deceptive acts or practices undertaken by any person in a
transaction intended to result or which results in the sale or lease
of goods or services to any consumer are unlawful:
(1) Passing off goods or services as those of another.
(2) Misrepresenting the source, sponsorship, approval, or
certification of goods or services.
(3) Misrepresenting the affiliation, connection, or association
with, or certification by, another.
(4) Using deceptive representations or designations of geographic
origin in connection with goods or services.
(5) Representing that goods or services have sponsorship,
approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities
which they do not have or that a person has a sponsorship, approval,
status, affiliation, or connection which he or she does not have.
(6) Representing that goods are original or new if they have
deteriorated unreasonably or are altered, reconditioned, reclaimed,
used, or secondhand.
(7) Representing that goods or services are of a particular
standard, quality, or grade, or that goods are of a particular style
or model, if they are of another.
(8) Disparaging the goods, services, or business of another by
false or misleading representation of fact.
(9) Advertising goods or services with intent not to sell them as
advertised.
(10) Advertising goods or services with intent not to supply
reasonably expectable demand, unless the advertisement discloses a
limitation of quantity.
(11) Advertising furniture without clearly indicating that it is
unassembled if that is the case.
(12) Advertising the price of unassembled furniture without
clearly indicating the assembled price of that furniture if the same
furniture is available assembled from the seller.
(13) Making false or misleading statements of fact concerning
reasons for, existence of, or amounts of price reductions.
(14) Representing that a transaction confers or involves rights,
remedies, or obligations which it does not have or involve, or which
are prohibited by law.
(15) Representing that a part, replacement, or repair service is
needed when it is not.
(16) Representing that the subject of a transaction has been
supplied in accordance with a previous representation when it has
not.
(17) Representing that the consumer will receive a rebate,
discount, or other economic benefit, if the earning of the benefit is
contingent on an event to occur subsequent to the consummation of
the transaction.
(18) Misrepresenting the authority of a salesperson,
representative, or agent to negotiate the final terms of a
transaction with a consumer.
(19) Inserting an unconscionable provision in the contract.
(20) Advertising that a product is being offered at a specific
price plus a specific percentage of that price unless (1) the total
price is set forth in the advertisement, which may include, but is
not limited to, shelf tags, displays, and media advertising, in a
size larger than any other price in that advertisement, and (2) the
specific price plus a specific percentage of that price represents a
markup from the seller's costs or from the wholesale price of the
product. This subdivision shall not apply to in-store advertising by
businesses which are open only to members or cooperative
organizations organized pursuant to Division 3 (commencing with
Section 12000) of Title 1 of the Corporations Code where more than 50
percent of purchases are made at the specific price set forth in the
advertisement.
(21) Selling or leasing goods in violation of Chapter 4
(commencing with Section 1797.8) of Title 1.7.
(22) (A) Disseminating an unsolicited prerecorded message by
telephone without an unrecorded, natural voice first informing the
person answering the telephone of the name of the caller or the
organization being represented, and either the address or the
telephone number of the caller, and without obtaining the consent of
that person to listen to the prerecorded message.
(B) This subdivision does not apply to a message disseminated to a
business associate, customer, or other person having an established
relationship with the person or organization making the call, to a
call for the purpose of collecting an existing obligation, or to any
call generated at the request of the recipient.
(23) The home solicitation, as defined in subdivision (h) of
Section 1761, of a consumer who is a senior citizen where a loan is
made encumbering the primary residence of that consumer for the
purposes of paying for home improvements and where the transaction is
part of a pattern or practice in violation of either subsection (h)
or (i) of Section 1639 of Title 15 of the United States Code or
subsection (e) of Section 226.32 of Title 12 of the Code of Federal
Regulations.
A third party shall not be liable under this subdivision unless
(1) there was an agency relationship between the party who engaged in
home solicitation and the third party or (2) the third party had
actual knowledge of, or participated in, the unfair or deceptive
transaction. A third party who is a holder in due course under a
home solicitation transaction shall not be liable under this
subdivision.
(b) (1) It is an unfair or deceptive act or practice for a
mortgage broker or lender, directly or indirectly, to use a home
improvement contractor to negotiate the terms of any loan that is
secured, whether in whole or in part, by the residence of the
borrower and which is used to finance a home improvement contract or
any portion thereof. For purposes of this subdivision, "mortgage
broker or lender" includes a finance lender licensed pursuant to the
California Finance Lenders Law (Division 9 (commencing with Section
22000) of the Financial Code), a residential mortgage lender licensed
pursuant to the California Residential Mortgage Lending Act
(Division 20 (commencing with Section 50000) of the Financial Code),
or a real estate broker licensed under the Real Estate Law (Division
4 (commencing with Section 10000) of the Business and Professions
Code).
(2) This section shall not be construed to either authorize or
prohibit a home improvement contractor from referring a consumer to a
mortgage broker or lender by this subdivision. However, a home
improvement contractor may refer a consumer to a mortgage lender or
broker if that referral does not violate Section 7157 of the Business
and Professions Code or any other provision of law. A mortgage
lender or broker may purchase an executed home improvement contract
if that purchase does not violate Section 7157 of the Business and
Professions Code or any other provision of law. Nothing in this
paragraph shall have any effect on the application of Chapter 1
(commencing with Section 1801) of Title 2 to a home improvement
transaction or the financing thereof.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just thinking
applies to this.
1770. (a) The following unfair methods of competition and unfair or
deceptive acts or practices undertaken by any person in a
transaction intended to result or which results in the sale or lease
of goods or services to any consumer are unlawful:
(1) Passing off goods or services as those of another.
(2) Misrepresenting the source, sponsorship, approval, or
certification of goods or services.
(3) Misrepresenting the affiliation, connection, or association
with, or certification by, another.
(4) Using deceptive representations or designations of geographic
origin in connection with goods or services.
(5) Representing that goods or services have sponsorship,
approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities
which they do not have or that a person has a sponsorship, approval,
status, affiliation, or connection which he or she does not have.
(6) Representing that goods are original or new if they have
deteriorated unreasonably or are altered, reconditioned, reclaimed,
used, or secondhand.
(7) Representing that goods or services are of a particular
standard, quality, or grade, or that goods are of a particular style
or model, if they are of another.
(8) Disparaging the goods, services, or business of another by
false or misleading representation of fact.
(9) Advertising goods or services with intent not to sell them as
advertised.
(10) Advertising goods or services with intent not to supply
reasonably expectable demand, unless the advertisement discloses a
limitation of quantity.
(11) Advertising furniture without clearly indicating that it is
unassembled if that is the case.
(12) Advertising the price of unassembled furniture without
clearly indicating the assembled price of that furniture if the same
furniture is available assembled from the seller.
(13) Making false or misleading statements of fact concerning
reasons for, existence of, or amounts of price reductions.
(14) Representing that a transaction confers or involves rights,
remedies, or obligations which it does not have or involve, or which
are prohibited by law.
(15) Representing that a part, replacement, or repair service is
needed when it is not.
(16) Representing that the subject of a transaction has been
supplied in accordance with a previous representation when it has
not.
(17) Representing that the consumer will receive a rebate,
discount, or other economic benefit, if the earning of the benefit is
contingent on an event to occur subsequent to the consummation of
the transaction.
(18) Misrepresenting the authority of a salesperson,
representative, or agent to negotiate the final terms of a
transaction with a consumer.
(19) Inserting an unconscionable provision in the contract.
(20) Advertising that a product is being offered at a specific
price plus a specific percentage of that price unless (1) the total
price is set forth in the advertisement, which may include, but is
not limited to, shelf tags, displays, and media advertising, in a
size larger than any other price in that advertisement, and (2) the
specific price plus a specific percentage of that price represents a
markup from the seller's costs or from the wholesale price of the
product. This subdivision shall not apply to in-store advertising by
businesses which are open only to members or cooperative
organizations organized pursuant to Division 3 (commencing with
Section 12000) of Title 1 of the Corporations Code where more than 50
percent of purchases are made at the specific price set forth in the
advertisement.
(21) Selling or leasing goods in violation of Chapter 4
(commencing with Section 1797.8) of Title 1.7.
(22) (A) Disseminating an unsolicited prerecorded message by
telephone without an unrecorded, natural voice first informing the
person answering the telephone of the name of the caller or the
organization being represented, and either the address or the
telephone number of the caller, and without obtaining the consent of
that person to listen to the prerecorded message.
(B) This subdivision does not apply to a message disseminated to a
business associate, customer, or other person having an established
relationship with the person or organization making the call, to a
call for the purpose of collecting an existing obligation, or to any
call generated at the request of the recipient.
(23) The home solicitation, as defined in subdivision (h) of
Section 1761, of a consumer who is a senior citizen where a loan is
made encumbering the primary residence of that consumer for the
purposes of paying for home improvements and where the transaction is
part of a pattern or practice in violation of either subsection (h)
or (i) of Section 1639 of Title 15 of the United States Code or
subsection (e) of Section 226.32 of Title 12 of the Code of Federal
Regulations.
A third party shall not be liable under this subdivision unless
(1) there was an agency relationship between the party who engaged in
home solicitation and the third party or (2) the third party had
actual knowledge of, or participated in, the unfair or deceptive
transaction. A third party who is a holder in due course under a
home solicitation transaction shall not be liable under this
subdivision.
(b) (1) It is an unfair or deceptive act or practice for a
mortgage broker or lender, directly or indirectly, to use a home
improvement contractor to negotiate the terms of any loan that is
secured, whether in whole or in part, by the residence of the
borrower and which is used to finance a home improvement contract or
any portion thereof. For purposes of this subdivision, "mortgage
broker or lender" includes a finance lender licensed pursuant to the
California Finance Lenders Law (Division 9 (commencing with Section
22000) of the Financial Code), a residential mortgage lender licensed
pursuant to the California Residential Mortgage Lending Act
(Division 20 (commencing with Section 50000) of the Financial Code),
or a real estate broker licensed under the Real Estate Law (Division
4 (commencing with Section 10000) of the Business and Professions
Code).
(2) This section shall not be construed to either authorize or
prohibit a home improvement contractor from referring a consumer to a
mortgage broker or lender by this subdivision. However, a home
improvement contractor may refer a consumer to a mortgage lender or
broker if that referral does not violate Section 7157 of the Business
and Professions Code or any other provision of law. A mortgage
lender or broker may purchase an executed home improvement contract
if that purchase does not violate Section 7157 of the Business and
Professions Code or any other provision of law. Nothing in this
paragraph shall have any effect on the application of Chapter 1
(commencing with Section 1801) of Title 2 to a home improvement
transaction or the financing thereof.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just thinking
gcy: Unfortuantely Dell doesn't deal in CA so the law doesn't apply to them, as they are located in TX
I also wonder why this thread is so strangely compelling, but it is ...
I've had excellent luck with Dell. Their onsite service saved my butt a couple times. (They didn't ask why the motherboard was fried and I didn't tell them, they just replaced it ...)
I'm way more concerned about the fact that they seem to have outsourced their customer service (to India?), with the potential that has for being as wretched as Compaq/HP, than any of this stuff.
For the first time, my last call to Dell was one of those worse-than-useless experiences I've had with so many other companies. Sad if it represents a bigger trend.
I've had excellent luck with Dell. Their onsite service saved my butt a couple times. (They didn't ask why the motherboard was fried and I didn't tell them, they just replaced it ...)
I'm way more concerned about the fact that they seem to have outsourced their customer service (to India?), with the potential that has for being as wretched as Compaq/HP, than any of this stuff.
For the first time, my last call to Dell was one of those worse-than-useless experiences I've had with so many other companies. Sad if it represents a bigger trend.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter