"Trish Brown" wrote in message
node...
0tterbot wrote:
"Trish Brown" wrote in message
node...
Just
as an example: a garden fork costing $39 at Bunnings was $72 at the
nursery! Same brand, same size, same everything. Vastly different price!

that really only means the fork is worth $72 but you got it cheaper. by
this point everyone knows that bunnings (and so forth) do that. bringing
down the public's expectations of what things are actually "worth" is
part of the problem.

if i want cheap tools, i buy second-hand anyway. my forks were a few
dollars each :-) (probably that's all they're "worth", too g)
kylie
ROTFLMAO! Let me tell you, I had no problem at all paying $39 instead of
$72!

Yes, I understand the supermarket mentality as well as anyone, however I'm
not silly enough to stand on ceremony and fork out (Hee! I did a pun!)
almost double the amount of money for an item.

It has been my experience that things are 'worth' what the market will
bear.

no. that's just one way (of several) of setting a sale price; generally used
in conjunction with other factors. it's no reflection of "worth". bunnings
advertising insinuates they're actually performing some sort of public
service.

For example, I started working in the computer industry 'way back
when it was a pretty rarified atmosphere and needed consultants such as my
good self to ease people into their first computer purchase. We used to
make 32% in retail sales. When I left the industry in the mid-1990s, all
we could make was a bare 8% and struggled to earn extra with value-added
services. Today, I shudder to think what small businesses make compared to
the huge buying power of the chain stores. But we, the consumer, want
cheaper prices and ease of access and one-stop shopping.

well i'm a citizen & human being, not a "consumer", so apparently i don't
:-)

We certainly do get what we pay for, I find.

yes and no. further to my second-hand fork experience, i have two
second-hand ones (several dollars each) and a new one dh bought. the first
thing i did to my new fork was bent one of the tines on a hidden rock. i
suppose now it's only worth as much as its two fellow forks, isn't it?
seeing as i have no preference for any of them over the others, they are all
"worth" the same anyway, notwithstanding bent tines or not. in 5 years'
time, i'll have used the old ones as much as the newer one with the same
result (forked ground, one hopes, not bent tines!), therefore there can be
no drop in "worth" in any of them unless they become unusable.

so i would say, if you don't think a fork is "worth" wholesale cost plus
ordinary retail markup (i.e. $72), by all means don't pay it - get a second
hand one for $5. that's more clever than giving $39 to a company whose
policy is to drive out all competition (up to and including coffee & cakes,
for heaven's sake), thus enabling themselves to sell $39 forks to people who
are currently unemployed because their workplace folded under the pressure
of bunnings existence. :-)
kylie