Jump to content

raptor-22

Members
  • Posts

    1982
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by raptor-22

  1. Name a sponsor that has left the sport but wasn't already in process of leaving when a rider carrying their name got bust.
  2. More reason to buy Campag or SRAM. That's what it means to me. For a small shop in the US it probably means better pricing. For a small shop in SA it means stuffall.
  3. Nice!! good luck and have some fun in the European sun!
  4. Its hypocritical to expect athletes to be held to different standards based on level of professionalism. in the corporate world the mail boy is held to the same ethical standards as the CEO. Why do I always get the impression that cycling lynch mobs are made up of overweight unhappy people who talk a good ride but seldom have one?
  5. I agree it's not fair to buy from CRC and ask ccs to warranty an item. But CCS hand over to local shops is competitive enough for local retail pricing to be attractive enough to prevent me from wanting to buy SRAM from CRC. I only buy shimano from CRC because the local pricing is just stupidly expensive and out of line with international trend. So why would I support an entity that prices handover high so retailers sell high and then engages in anti competitive behavior with those retailers? For me that's a loose loose situation. The stink of this situation has driven my purchase decisions since it broke in 2008. People who sit together to plan how to hurt people who are also trying to make a living are the lowest of the low.
  6. Nope the official distributor doesn't loose out because the stock they use to replace a warranty item is returned by the brand owner. Nobody loses. That's why I like SRAM. They replace parts under warranty regardless where you bought t and local prices are more competitive than CRC to encourage sales through the official distributor. That's competitive behavior
  7. The two distributors implicated in this saga are culprits of not honouring warranty on items purchased outside of SA, despite many of their brands having a global warranty. the practice is not to look after the brand but to look after their sales. Also google anti-competitive claims against Shimano and you'll see a string a cases lodged by SRAM against them. When I wanted to import a Ducati 748 many years ago as part of my goods when moving back from Europe, I had no problem with the local supplier honouring warranty. No problem with Campagnolo , Dell, Yamaha, Pioneer no problem wit any of the global brands. But the local distributors of some especially the Shimano distributor......... I buy all my Shimano from CRC. Will never spend a dime on their kit in SA while the distributor remains.
  8. Harmonized pricing is an interesting one. I don't think anyone has really challenged it but it's a bit like RRP which is not strictly a legal practice. Pretty much like auto pricing they get away with it because some degree of price control is needed and authorities recognize this. When it becomes illegal is when a franchisee decides to discount stock to clear old stock and that lands them in jetway we with the franchise owner. The idea of the legislation is to ensure that retailers aligned with large franchises don't gain an unfair advantage from that relationship .
  9. Margins are actually in line with where they have been. SOme brands insist on a retailer to mark up no less than 35% on bikes but not more than 50%. The guy on 35% won't discount unless you buy kit, bike computer etc from thm as well. The 50% guys will discount the price by 10-15%. But some distributors still send their reps around to check on retailers prices to ensure they're not over discounting because other retailer moan if they do. So I got my two bikes shops who I use because 1 went and didn;t agree with the suggestions and left. The other didn't bother to even go to the meetings. Said outright it was wrong and got victimised for it. The cycle ttrade in SA has been a cartel for many years.
  10. see there's the CSA okey blabbering in there as well. Funny little world neh?
  11. My pal cracked the screen of his 705. Navworld replaced it with a 2nd hand out cover free of charge.
  12. Pretty damning evidence if I ever saw any. One of our legal council just walked past my desk and ask if I knew about this! He reckons a clearer case of cartel behavior he's never seen. And to run salt into the wound they reckon what they did wasn't illegal. Lol
  13. Yes I agree on those points but it is what it is. Regulated pricing on pharmaceuticals and petrochemicals us largely a relic to protect industries and jobs that would otherwise flow offshore where productivity is higher. Rightly or wrongly maintaining regulation to a certain degree does help the consumer even it is not immediately apparent. Diesel is only partially regulated and if we look at the big price difference between rural and urban areas for 50ppm we can see that without protection the consumer will ripped a new hole beyond the zone differential. Petrochemical companies have only gotten off when legacy processes have been found to be anti competitive . Even then 1% of turnover for a global company is a massive amount of money they does not get paid to shareholders and then hurts more . Like many things in life the competition commission is not perfect but is rather have it than not.
  14. Problem is you can't feel you've done nothing wrong while acknowledging that just meeting to discuss the industry and price structures was on the wrong side of the law. I recall those minutes being circulated on other blogs and my first impression was "these guys are in beeeeeg sh*t". And here we are. The commission is what it is. It operates under a similar mandate to that of similar bodies in other countries where free enterprise is governed. Therefore it is not the bad guy here. This defending of these robbers is like junkies defending their dealers. Too scared that their fix will cust more so rather let them continue to abuse their position. Those who ratted and kissed arse (interesting term) surely knew that defending the indefensible was a no win situation. That's smart and not a bad behavior as you are trying to imply. I empathise with Omnico and Coolheat however since they were not the ring leaders. That little bafoon should be the one paying the price here but instead has crawled between the skirting boards. But they did chose to defend the indefensible.
  15. Not quite. You can talk to competitors about the weather, how hot their secretaries are. Basically you can shoot the breeze, even about another competitor or each other but you cannot talk about business information, supply constraints, production capacity ETC. You also cannot talk to each other about who should be in business or not and cannot agree to hurt a competitor through offering different pricing structures. As it stands a lot of the retail sector in South Africa operates in an uncompetitive manner or bordering on it . It's a culture but there's a lot of focus on this at the moment because the behavior is a huge barrier to new entrants into markets. There's a whole list of simplified do's and don'ts. I can post what I have if you like. It's quite extensive
  16. Nope that's not correct. Just because the stores are part of a franchise they are independently owned and therefore should be free to adjust their pricing to align with their market conditions. All the brand owner can do is what is termed "price coaching". This is where the brand owner can provide appropriate price analysis and this has to be conducted independently of walking into competitors stores to see what they are selling similar items for.
  17. Ask specialised. They do it all the time . Just ask that oke in durbanville what his reward for selling below the rrp was.
  18. its typically 10% of turnover. that's a massive cash outflow that's not going to salaries or stock. I can see why they want to appeal but they are also only digging a bigger hole. With so many parties having admitted guilt there is no way out of this rabbit hole except through redemption via 4milion hail Mary's and a sprinkling of Wholey Water
  19. Well they also planned to prevent other people using the intersection and mugging anyone using it for the first time. If you still ok with that then I guess you don't have a problem with crime in South Africa
  20. A fine for annoying the state? Isnt that what any punishment is dished out by a court? Yes its a deterent that would not be needed if fair business practice was followed
  21. that's why retailers feel miffed when not considered by Specialised to be a dealer because that's a significantly higher mark up on the products than other brands offer. And they can't be discounted due to contractual obligations.
  22. Ratings agency decision is only due Friday. Inidcations are that we will not be reduced to junk. one indicator is the ZAR strengthened
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout