mbcijim said:
I'm with Lee on this. I'm in the real estate business, and work exclusively for myself and my family. I do a lot of development work. I deliver the best product, quality, and customer service in my area. However, I am also very expensive compared to my competitors.
I go to meetings with corporate clients and some are shocked at my prices. In some cases I am 50-75% more expensive. Some have no interest in paying that price. On the other hand, I've always found enough willing to pay my prices. I'd rather have less, but more profitable, business, than ALL the business. You don't like it? Either pay my price or buy someone else's products. I have 0 interest in serving every person who comes into the door, like it or not.
In the last year I had one of these guys go somewhere else. About a month after he moved in his space. He has 100 employees in his building. We'll arcing in one of the electrical boxes caught on fire and cost him $100,000 in direct damage plus 3 days of shut down.
You get what you pay for. I make no apologies for it.
At the risk of the continued wrath of the membership, I see the difference in philosophies and business practices that we're discussing. The responders are are speaking about providing 'Value' in your transactions, things like intellectual property, experience in the industry, superior performance and service and so on. Those transactions all should command top dollar. I agree 100% with this philosophy.
I was referring to commodity purchases, where I go to buy a "thing", and then leave the store, most likely not to return or need anything else from them in regard to that transaction. In a situation like that, given that I can buy the exact same "thing" at three different locations, and then leave a satisfied consumer, I will choose the cheapest. As a simple example, if I go to buy a car and find that three different dealers have the same make and model and options I want, I'll buy from the dealer where I can make the best deal and keep the difference in my pocket.
While many or most will disagree with me, I view the purchase of my next wood stove in the same category. I have already done my research. I know what I want. I am just going to go out and buy it. If I can get three quotes for the same exact stove, from the same exact factory, with the same exact delivery and warranty, then I would be foolish not to buy the least expensive one. To my way of thinking its a commodity (like when I bought my refrigerator, stove, microwave, hot tub, etc.) and will treat it just like that, a commodity purchase. If I need information on the operation of the unit down the road the store it was bought from, the manufacturer and online boards like this one are all resources to get questions answered.
Installation of the stove is another thing, and of course I will use a licensed contractor, with appropriate permits, and NOW, with the service provider, I am paying for his value-add. For that I gladly pay the premium. This includes his prompt and efficient service, his knowledge of the trade, his experience, his contacts, and his efficiency in installation, and safety practices, both in his work and in his installation methodologies. I did much the same when I had my concrete driveway installed, and selected the highest priced contractor based on all the above factors, and his quote was higher by a factor of 2x
Hopefully this will help explain the arduous way in which I defend commodity purchases. Pay for the value-add when value add, experience, product and system knowledge, technical and safety skills are required, and pay commodity prices for commodities. In mbcijim's example, I am sure he charges a premium for his "services" (the high margin value-add), but when it's time to buy his supplies for the job he's going to look for the best deal every time.
To the point of the original thread... are burners so hot that no dealers will budge from MSRP, I still maintain that dealers holding firm to their price point is articificial and plays into the sentiments of the consumer, who of course can choose to walk away. I think we're all arguing the same point here.
The fact that's artificial is proven when I can find three different dealers and get the same exact product quoted as MSRP only and no way they can budge, while another offers a 9% discount, and yet a third offers a 15% discount. As the consumer, whether it was old pricing or excess inventory purchased some time ago that the vendor wants to move is absolutely immaterial to me as the purchaser. The point was, it pays to shop around, because while some vendors are unwilling to budge, there are others that will.
How anyone can infer that any of this discourse is "dealer-bashing" is a mystery to me.