Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-29-2012, 01:05 PM   #16
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 75
Original Poster
No, from what I understand the practice of "click here to see our price in the cart" will dissapear, because that's a way to get around the current rules - there's an agreement that an item can't be advertised below a certain price, but it can be sold below it.

Instead, the new agreement is that those items simply can't be sold below the minimum price set by the manufacturer.

03-29-2012, 01:38 PM   #17
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,494
I'm OK with this if pricing minimums are set closer to the recent street prices. If prices all go right up to list (and secondary market prices also rise) I will likely finally be tempted to sell almost everything I own and have an extremely limited kit.

OTOH - for Pentax's well-being, re-establishing a national B&M support network (traditional distribute/support/service structure) is critical to expanding the brand and executing Ricoh's planned approach to a segment of the professional market. Those who have for years called for a Full-Frame camera from Pentax should be dusting off their dancing shoes and looking at streets right about now.

And again - Be of good cheer Pentaxians. Ricoh has a plan and you will be happy.

Last edited by monochrome; 03-29-2012 at 03:51 PM.
03-29-2012, 03:38 PM   #18
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York
Posts: 3,016
This change impacts me in a way different than most of you. Consensus seems to be that the change will favor Pentax availability in local stores by increasing online prices at Amazon, B&H, Adorama. Local stores will have more incentive to stock Pentax because they won't be undersold by online retailers.

I am in New York, though, so B&H Photo and Adorama *are* my local stores. All of my camera and lens purchases in the last year have been done in person at their stores. I can see the product and buy it on the spot. I get good prices which are partially offset by high local sales taxes. If B&H and Adorama are forced to sell Pentax for the same price as everyone else, then NY-based buyers have an incentive to stop buying local and purchase online from other states in order to evade sales taxes.
03-29-2012, 03:57 PM   #19
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,494
QuoteOriginally posted by DeadJohn Quote
This change impacts me in a way different than most of you. Consensus seems to be that the change will favor Pentax availability in local stores by increasing online prices at Amazon, B&H, Adorama. Local stores will have more incentive to stock Pentax because they won't be undersold by online retailers.

I am in New York, though, so B&H Photo and Adorama *are* my local stores. All of my camera and lens purchases in the last year have been done in person at their stores. I can see the product and buy it on the spot. I get good prices which are partially offset by high local sales taxes. If B&H and Adorama are forced to sell Pentax for the same price as everyone else, then NY-based buyers have an incentive to stop buying local and purchase online from other states in order to evade sales taxes.
Well until we know what the volume pricing agreements are we can't know what will happen to large local dealers. In St. Louis we have a 9-store chain (Creve Couer Camera) that actually stocks Pentax, and continued to after the Hoya change. I wonder whether this will help or hurt them. Since it was intimated in an interview that JC personally calls on CCC I can't imagine PRI turning their back on one of their best customers.

All they need to do is publish a wholesale price list that is enforceable - it can include volume brackets. Smaller dealers could sell at the lowest price if they wanted - at a shorter margin than the larger dealers, who would buy at discounts.

03-29-2012, 04:11 PM   #20
Forum Member




Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Israel
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 55
Not good. Not good at all. Local prices for K-7 are more expensive then K-5 at ,say, BH. Add taxes and shipping and it is more or less the same. Need to go for DA 300 soon and not wait for 560mm prices.
03-29-2012, 04:34 PM   #21
Pentaxian
jimH's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: South Central Nebraska - USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,413
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
this isn't legal in Canada either Falk. AFAIK it's not legal in the US either.
You can have a MAP agreement (minimum advertised price) and in fact Nikon and Canon both have those in place. It's quite common. It doesn't stop a dealer selling below a price just advertising below that price (and it's beneficial to B&M guys who have to go head to head with the web in the states where people avoid state tax by shopping cross border on the web. If MAP holds pricing a little then the B&M guy can probably find a way to represent value to offset the tax issue (I still can't believe this deal exists in the US, nowhere else I know of lets this happen)
My State: Nebraska, asks on the 1040N form for a dollar amount spent on line or by catalog purchases out-of-state and not taxed with Nebraska sales tax to be reported for purposes of collecting sales tax in Nebraska. I know that the reporting of those out-of-state purchases is strictly voluntary by the tax payer, but I have been reporting them because I don't purchase on the web or by catalog to avoid Nebraska sales taxes, but to acquire products not available in my locality. I know that avoiding taxes might be the motive for purchasing in places other than brick and mortar stores by some, but it isn't mine. I don't believe in high Federal taxes, because in principal, I don't agree on how the money is spent, but I know how my state and local taxes are spent and I agree with them, so I don't object to paying them.

Last edited by jimH; 03-29-2012 at 04:36 PM. Reason: clarification
03-29-2012, 05:06 PM   #22
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,494
I regularly calculate the sales tax and compare that to the shipped price. For items that are Medium Flat Rate Box sized or smaller, once I get over something like $400 my sales tax is more than the cost of insured shipping most to the time. IOW, when the $/mass ratio is high, it pays to shop online. Otherwise it pays to shop locally. I typically buy from one of the BigThree and don't shop the price across them. I typically will NOT, however, touch locally and buy online. That just isn't fair.

We all assume the unilateral pricing policy will mean the end of B&H, Adorama and Amazon prices. In fact it might mean that a local dealer who can buy in volume (they exist) can compete on an after-tax versus after-shipping basis, or at least get close enough to make the decision interesting.

Have some faith. Pentax isn't going to cut the noses off its three best US customers.and it isn't going to allow its end-prices to cut its volume. Best Buy and Walmart, OTOH ---
03-29-2012, 05:13 PM   #23
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by DeadJohn Quote
If B&H and Adorama are forced to sell Pentax for the same price as everyone else, then NY-based buyers have an incentive to stop buying local and purchase online from other states in order to evade sales taxes.
And so what?

Maybe, you should blame the US government to make a law which gives online businesses an unfair advantage. In the EU, you pay sales tax even when shopping in another EU country. I even pay EU sales tax when purchasing software online from an US vendor on his US website (well, most of the time).

There is no reason why sales tax shouldn't be the same however you buy. It depends on where you live, not where you shop. Not paying your local taxes once was called smuggling ...

03-29-2012, 06:06 PM   #24
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
:ugh:
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
And so what?

Maybe, you should blame the US government to make a law which gives online businesses an unfair advantage. In the EU, you pay sales tax even when shopping in another EU country. I even pay EU sales tax when purchasing software online from an US vendor on his US website (well, most of the time).

There is no reason why sales tax shouldn't be the same however you buy. It depends on where you live, not where you shop. Not paying your local taxes once was called smuggling ...
Yes, and many of us come from proud cultures that hold the smuggler in high regard and believe that outwitting the revenuers is a badge of honor. In the US there is no law that says you have to pay more taxes than you owe and there are several Federal Court rulings that say it is perfectly legal to work at minimizing your tax obligation.
03-29-2012, 06:10 PM   #25
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,494
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
And so what?

Maybe, you should blame the US government to make a law which gives online businesses an unfair advantage. In the EU, you pay sales tax even when shopping in another EU country. I even pay EU sales tax when purchasing software online from an US vendor on his US website (well, most of the time).

There is no reason why sales tax shouldn't be the same however you buy. It depends on where you live, not where you shop. Not paying your local taxes once was called smuggling ...
It is a Sales Tax, not a Live Here Tax.
New York State is not a sovereign nation.
The US Government does not have the right to regulate the affairs of the several states. It says so in our Constitution.
What does the EU Constitution say?
03-29-2012, 06:12 PM   #26
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
It is a Sales Tax, not a Live Here Tax.
New York State is not a sovereign nation.
The US Government does not have the right to regulate the affairs of the several states. It says so in our Constitution. What does the EU Constitution say?
I know you did not start it, and I responded to the Europeans and their opinions about how things ought to be too, but this is looking like its shaping up to be a political discussion.
03-29-2012, 06:23 PM   #27
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York
Posts: 3,016
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
And so what?

Maybe, you should blame the US government to make a law which gives online businesses an unfair advantage. In the EU, you pay sales tax even when shopping in another EU country. I even pay EU sales tax when purchasing software online from an US vendor on his US website (well, most of the time).

There is no reason why sales tax shouldn't be the same however you buy. It depends on where you live, not where you shop. Not paying your local taxes once was called smuggling ...
So what? Read my full post - I was just pointing out how it will impact New York shoppers in a unique manner because the 2 primary Pentax online dealers both happen to be based here. I never blamed anyone or asked for a change in this new Pentax strategy. It's an interesting technicality that only affects consumers in one small part of the world and I have no expectation or demand for Pentax to set their pricing strategy based on it.

(I agree that the US tax system sucks. It's overly complex. It encourages citizens to hire accountants and lawyers in order to pay less tax, legally.)
03-29-2012, 06:32 PM   #28
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York
Posts: 3,016
Wow, lots of activity while I was writing my reply. I'll add that NY sales tax is sort of 2 taxes in one. It's a sales tax if you buy something in NY, paid at the time of sale. It behaves sort of like an import tax if you buy something out of state (whether online or while physically present in another state). Let's say I'm traveling in another state that has no sales tax. I purchase something and bring it back to NY with me. I'm supposed to inform NY and send in a tax payment.

The above is heavily simplified but illustrates how, as citizens, we have to go to great efforts to properly comply with the tax laws. I never intentionally evade taxes, but I do sometimes not fully comply with the law because the accounting effort wastes too much time. I also sometimes pay extra taxes because I opt not to go through the pain of documenting some small tax deductions. I hope it all averages out in the end
03-29-2012, 06:47 PM   #29
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,494
The ONLY thing that should be taxed is land. And there should be no exemptions or deductions. Think about it.
03-29-2012, 07:36 PM   #30
Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2011
Photos: Albums
Posts: 340
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
this isn't legal in Canada either Falk. AFAIK it's not legal in the US either.
Terminating a dealer who goes below a recommended price is resale price maintenance (RPM), which is per se illegal in NY and California and a few other states, and could be illegal under U.S. federal law as well, depending upon the facts. From this link

"RPM used to be per se illegal under federal antitrust laws, until the Supreme Court's decision in Leegin Creative Leather v. PSKS. In that case, the Supreme Court held that a manufacturer may reach an agreement with its retailers as to minimum resale price without automatically violating federal antitrust laws. Instead of being per se illegal, such agreements are analyzed under the rule of reason -- a fact specific inquiry that balances the anticompetitive effects and procompetitive benefits of a particular restraint. At the time the Leegin decision was said to have opened the door for all sorts of vertical price fixing agreements between manufacturers and retailers. Such has not been the case, however, because certain states, such as California and New York, have threatened to prosecute such arrangements under state antitrust laws. RPM agreements may still be per se illegal under state antitrust law, even if such agreements are not per se illegal under federal law."
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
amazon, mean, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, policy, price
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax Q pricing excanonfd Pentax Q 74 09-26-2011 05:48 PM
Pentax SMC 200mm A* f2.8 Pricing advice LennyBloke Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 09-08-2011 06:56 AM
Pentax K7 Pricing A.M.92 Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 01-22-2011 10:19 AM
Policy on K5 sensors? hut234 Ask B&H Photo! 7 12-18-2010 05:21 AM
USA Pricing vs Canada Pricing Babbs Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 11-18-2010 05:27 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:14 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top