Post edited 12:18 pm – August 29, 2012 by John in Missouri
Post edited 12:19 pm – August 29, 2012 by John in Missouri

Tom said:

Was it theft to purchase a Padre from Walmart for $3.97 when you "knew" Walmart was charging $7.97 for Deluxes?

You're comparing apples to oranges. Walmart had that price entered into their system; Target doesn't have anything close to $6.99 in their system for the 4-packs.

bobbyjack said:

He still paid $7 for only 1 car that he wanted. Mattel putting an exclusive in a box set with 3 cars that most collectors have already isn t very ethical, moral, honest, or trustworthy either. Basically, it is the same as taking advantage of us.

OMG, we have a Wall Street Occupier among us!

bobbyjack said:

He still paid $7 for only 1 car that he wanted.  Mattel putting an exclusive in a box set with 3 cars that most collectors have already isn't very ethical, moral, honest, or trustworthy either.  Basically, it is the same as taking advantage of us.  Target's mistake for putting product out that is not in the system yet and the Target "team members" too lazy to go to the toy aisle to look at the price of a 4 pack. 

In this case if they're lazy who cares

John in Missouri said:

Tom you lost me when you misspelled / misused the word "judgment".

And you conveniently left out anything about ethics, morals, honesty, and general trustworthiness.

…man, living near D.C. must be contagious!

I respect you John. Judgment and judgement are alternative spellings, neither is incorrect. What did I leave out about ethics, morals, honesty, and general trustworthiness? 

For the sake of convenience, I do not think it is an unethical, immoral, dishonest, or generally untrustworthy act as a buyer to name what ever amount that buyer thinks is fair when a seller asks "Do you know how much this is?". If the question were "Do you know what you paid for an item that is similar to this in the past?" And the buyer answered anything other than either "No.", "I forgot.", or "Yes, it was $xxx." this would be deceptive.

There have been many occasions where I have purchased items where the scanned (paid) price was less than the shelf tag price for that item. In those cases I felt no moral compunction to address the discrepancy. This happened many times recently at Walmart, where the shelf tag prices for singles and two packs were $3.97 and $7.97 respectively, but the items scanned at $1.97 or $3.97. Now, was it immoral or dishonest for me to pay the scanned priced? I say absolutely not. Has anyone else been in this position? What did you do?

Anyone who considers it theft to pay less than the shelf tag price for an item when the buyer names the price, by logic, must also consider it theft to pay less than the shelf tag price for an item when it is the seller naming the price. It is outrageous, offensive and, dare I say, immoral and unethical to accuse a person of thievery because that person was asked to name a price for an item and they did so.

 If a seller wishes to set a fixed price for an item, and use a computer retrieval system to ring that price up at the POS, the onus is on the seller  to insure the system is functioning correctly. The buyer is not compelled, in any case, to negotiate on behalf of the seller. In other words, it is not the buyer's ethical, legal, or moral duty to insure that the seller gets any price in particular, especially a price the buyer thinks is unfair.

I misspoke earlier, I thought about it as soon as I posted. I should not have said "Not sure under what authority you guys are making these judgements?" What I should have said is "Not sure under what authority you, PCC,  are making these judgements?" I apologize, John. In no way did I want to communicate that you were making any judgement. 

I like the T5 group and certainly find the website a refreshing alternative to the too-common drudgery of this type of discussion. But, at the same time, I will offer my views when I see comments made that are both judgemental and offensive. If a person wants to call another person a thief, let them be prepared to defend that position. 

We are the 99%

John in Missouri said:

  OMG, we have a Wall Street Occupier among us!

John in Missouri said:

Thanks Tom, I've always respected you as well.

I just don't understand how someone can not only rip off a retailer but then go around bragging about it too. They must have this site confused with TakeFiveaDayAsLongAsNoOneIsLooking.com

I agree, and it is good that this has come up because talking about these things with others helps (me at least) see different ways about thinking of things. Maybe I will think about it some more, but I think that if a seller asks you the price of something it is morally and ethically acceptable to name a price you think is fair. The reason I say that is because my understanding of that question "How much is this?" is an open invitation to make an offer on the item. We all know that mass-retailers, with a few exceptions, have established fixed, non-negotiable prices for every item in their stores. By the same token, if they, for what ever reason, cannot take the time to verify their asking price of an item that doesn't ring up, I think there should be no expectation that the buyer is responsible for doing so. 

bobbyjack said:

We are the 99%

 

John in Missouri said:

  OMG, we have a Wall Street Occupier among us!

Wblaze said:

OK – so you think I was bragging about it?  I consider the group at T5 here a "brotherhood," and my goal was to inform the board so that they too could score the Bruno 4-pack at the discounted price.  Outside of our T5 world you will see sites like slick deals and retailmenot that make their existence based on these sorts of situations.  They even call then "OPs."  The goal here is to share our interest of cars, and in this folder specifically – talk about what we see at different retailers.  I hope that everyone on the board goes to Target, gets a Bruno 4-pack, and names their price.  If you want to pay $18.99 then pay that.  But I was not bragging.  They asked me how much and I told them what I thought I should pay.  If they said no, I would have either paid more or left.  If you want to talk about morals and right and wrong, I know a few good political / religious boards you can post on.  If you want to talk about cars and how to score the missing pieces in our collection at Target then carry on here.  But bragging that I paid $6.99? NO!  Bragging that my 3-year old was syked about Bruno – Yes!

The $1.97/$3.97 sale is a discount price, but in no way is lying to a cashier that $6.99 was the price for something that was much more a 'discount'. Sure it would be totally OK if the item actually WAS discounted to $6.99, and you wanted to let us know so we could go looking for it because the sale was only for a week or so (which is actually what I thought when you first mentioned you got it for $6.99 haha )

I totally understand that you were just pointing it out for us, and it's surprising how one comment can set numerous people off. Congrats on your 'steal!' (literally haha) No hard feelings? 

Sweet!!

Mariela said:

BTW I found the new Take Flights at Target, with no Walmart sticker on it!!

sweet…let's let this board move on…

We found an Aviator Mater today at Kmart without the sticker. Mariella and I are both in Southern California, could be the stickered ones are already used up and/or they went to the east coast?