# I have just lost confidence with Canon Rumors & B&H



## DCM1024 (Apr 17, 2013)

I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.


----------



## wickidwombat (Apr 17, 2013)

over reacting much?


----------



## DCM1024 (Apr 17, 2013)

wickidwombat said:


> over reacting much?



No I don't think I'm over reacting. I got the lower price and my lens is in transit. I find it offensive that a new "better deal" is being hyped, that is not a better deal, and when I point this out, my post is blocked. Do you understand that logic?


----------



## gary samples (Apr 17, 2013)

just got a 85mm II 1.2 for 1949.00 today last week they sent me a quote 1989.00 big saving LOL


----------



## pierceography (Apr 17, 2013)

wickidwombat said:


> over reacting much?



+1

Those are pretty reasonable deals from arguably the most reputable dealer in the US. I don't see the harm in reporting decent (albeit not great) deals. Especially when many of us are always on the lookout for our next piece of glass.


----------



## DCM1024 (Apr 17, 2013)

pierceography said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > over reacting much?
> ...



Again, I got the lower price. That is not what this is about.


----------



## pierceography (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> pierceography said:
> 
> 
> > wickidwombat said:
> ...



Good for you. I got the 85mm f/1.2L II for $1,799 earlier this year, and you don't see me griping about losing confidence in this forum or B&H. It's economics 101... Prices change on a daily basis.

Again, those are fairly reasonable prices, and I'm glad they were posted. Be glad you already got a good deal and leave it at that.


----------



## DCM1024 (Apr 17, 2013)

pierceography said:


> DCM1024 said:
> 
> 
> > pierceography said:
> ...



Not one single person is listening to what I am saying. I GOT the lower price. My lens was paid for at the lower price & will arrive Thursday. I found it offensive that the price was marked up, hyped as lower, my post pointing this out was blocked. Do you all work for cr rumors & B&H? Or is there someone else that finds raising prices and advertising it as the best deal offensive?


----------



## eml58 (Apr 17, 2013)

UUUmmm, OOOOk, doesn't seem to be blocked now  

Take a Panadol, then your new 24-70f/2.8 L IS II and head out & take some Images, you'll feel a lot better then, it's a great Lens & you got it for about $500 less than I did, well done.

I dont work for CR or B&H, otherwise I'de have got a better deal when I bought my 24-70.


----------



## hsbn (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.


BH Photo guarantee price 30 days after purchase. You just need to contact customer service and they'll refund the different for you.
I bought the 6D and it drops $100 the next day. BHphoto gave me the refund $100. Then 3 days later, it drops another $50. I contact BH again, and they gave me back $50. No question ask.


----------



## expatinasia (Apr 17, 2013)

I do not think anybody is getting the point the OP is trying to make.

He bought it on X for US$ 2049

Then a couple of days later CR runs a campaign promoting savings at B&H for the same lens at US$ 2099.

He is questioning the integrity of the promotion.


----------



## 9VIII (Apr 17, 2013)

Given that the lens in question is no longer listed I'm betting it was just a typo.


----------



## sanj (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > over reacting much?
> ...



I totally see your point. I would question this also.


----------



## dizeaz (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.



Wow, 50$ is a high price to lose your confidence over something.


----------



## GaryJ (Apr 17, 2013)

expatinasia said:


> I do not think anybody is getting the point the OP is trying to make.
> 
> He bought it on X for US$ 2049
> 
> ...


 It appears you folk from Nth America are spoilt for choice,we in Aus would love to have a chain that sells for such low prices and pays you the difference in sales prices,don't think CR is to blame for B&H pricing though,


----------



## marinien (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.



It's "bigger rebates on select lenses". Are you sure that the 24-70II is on the list ?


----------



## bholliman (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.



I see your point. I've been watching prices and hoped to see a price below $2,049 for the 24-70 f2.8 II when I read today's headline. But, the 24-70 isn't on today's list of discounted lenses. That said, $2,099 is still a decent price. 

Congrats on a great price for a great lens! Enjoy.


----------



## cr316892 (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> pierceography said:
> 
> 
> > DCM1024 said:
> ...


It's also possible that, since the prices change daily, the price was higher than $2099--say $2149--between the time you bought your lens and when you saw the ad for it.

I do understand your point, though. If it were true that a merchant purposely tries to fool you into thinking you were getting a better price than their regular price, I find that to be deceptive.

There's a mattress store, Sleepy's, that says (or used to say), "We'll beat our competitor's price, or your mattress is free!" Just think about that for about 0.1 seconds.

It's insulting that they would even try to lure in customers that way.


----------



## Albi86 (Apr 17, 2013)

Raising prices before going on sales is unfortunately a very common phenomenon. It happens all the time with clothes, for example.


----------



## cr316892 (Apr 17, 2013)

Albi86 said:


> Raising prices before going on sales is unfortunately a very common phenomenon. It happens all the time with clothes, for example.


I'm not even insinuating that the price was marked up before it was marked down.

I'm saying it could be natural price fluctuation upwards, followed by a markdown.

Here's one simple scenario: a lot of these retailers have web crawlers that are constantly keeping track of what competitors' prices are. It could be that they saw a competitor had slashed their price on this lens, so they followed suit.


----------



## bbb34 (Apr 17, 2013)

*Open your eyes*

You better get used to the fact that CR is not a private hobby anymore. It is a business that wants to make profit. 15k visitors per day according to http://digsitevalue.org/s/canonrumors.com . Advertising is the way to fund such a website. As long as the site can still inform and/or entertain you, it is fine. Just don't be naive and expect somebody else's altruism funding it for you. And yes, it is still you who has to compare prices before you buy.


----------



## infared (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > over reacting much?
> ...



The point is this: Every time someone clicks on that lens promotion for B&H from this website and then actually make a purchase from B&H money is made by the owner of the website. Since B&H is the largest reputable dealer in camera equipment, many links will be listed on this site and many others as it brings in income. This is not going to stop.
Buyer beware.....as always...but as someone pointed out, that lens is not in the promo.
Be happy...I bought the lens several months back for $2300!  It's a great lens and I have been using it a lot so, oh well!


----------



## pwp (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.



Yes this sometimes happens. But why sweat the small stuff? You can paint yourself into a corner....

-PW


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 17, 2013)

*Re: I have just lost confidence with DCM1024's ability to read*



marinien said:


> DCM1024 said:
> 
> 
> > I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.
> ...



+1

@DCM1024, read much? The 24-70L II is *not* on that list of bigger rebates. When the rebates went into effect, pricing became subject to Canon's Minimum Advertised Price policy - if vendors fail to honor that policy, Canon can refuse to reimburse them for the rebate amounts. With the MAP, prices on lots of lenses actually went up from where they were before the 'rebate' went into effect. The point of CR's post is that on some lenses, _not including the 24-70L II_, B&H is now charging less than Canon's MAP, which is why you have to add one of those lenses to the cart to see the reduced price. 

So, B&H decides to offer a better deal than Canon's 'rebates' on some lenses, not the lens you bought, by circumventing *Canon's* pricing policy, CR informs people about that, and you are complaining that you got a better deal by ordering the lens before the rebates started. 

Since it seems your poor reading comprehension skills and oddly skewed sense of entitlement have caused you to lose confidence in B&H and Canon Rumors, I suggest you return the lens you bought to B&H, perhaps order it from Adorama (maybe you failed to notice that someone posted here on CR a while back a coupon code for Adorama that gave a price of $1929 for the 24-70L II, a far better deal than you got) and pay the $2099 current price, delete your CR Forums account, and move on with your life. 

Thanks, and have a good day. :


----------



## bycostello (Apr 17, 2013)

maybe it applied to other stuff?


----------



## bycostello (Apr 17, 2013)

why canon rumors by the way...


----------



## crasher8 (Apr 17, 2013)

I see her point, it is misleading. However it takes a bit of reading, watching and retail detective work (let alone knowledge of how this historically is played out most seasons/years) to get a grip on what's being done by B&H in regards to MAP and Rebates. 

It's like reading headlines vs the body of an article. 

I do however think she is overreacting.


----------



## Northstar (Apr 17, 2013)

Two things:

1. As others have said, the 24-70 is not included on that list of "New Bigger Savings"...which makes your point moot.

2. The current "in the cart price" for that lens at BH is 2049, not 2099 as you stated. You do know that you have to add it to your cart to se the actual price right?


----------



## kyamon (Apr 17, 2013)

It seems to me that the OP was under the impression that Canon Rumors was some magic blog that financed itself from thin air and colourful pixels, and could thus operate completely independently from the rest of the (economic) world. Too bad it is not. But on the other hand, CR makes no secret that BH is financially involved in this undertaking - there are ads all over the site, and every review or article has a link to the according site from B&H. It is pretty clear what is happening here, isn't it?

Is that a problem? No, of course not. The blog is about Canon (rumors), not about Canon distributors and sales companies. The support from BH does not lead to any bias at all, since BH is not the only place selling Canon, and it is also selling things other than Canon. And I don't think CR ever claimed that the deals you are getting at BH are the best you can get. And most of the times that is probably also not the case - you will always find someone on eBay or Craigslist who sells you an 800 mm lens for $1200, supposedly in perfect condition. BH will not do that, I hope, nor is CR claiming that BH is the only place to buy. People who do buy there know why they do so, I presume (being in Europe I have no experience), and might even be willing to pay a few bucks extra because at BH they seem to know what they are getting. If you want the absolute cheapest you have to do the research yourself.

As many others said before, you got a better price, be happy. Maybe some moderator blocked your post because he had not yet had his morning coffee, maybe he accidentally clicked the wrong button, maybe you were using indecent language, whatever. The fact is that you have it here now, and that you seem to have idealised expectations from our world, where - unfortunately or not - money plays a certain role and is necessary to run businesses.


----------



## EchoLocation (Apr 17, 2013)

I get what you're saying OP.
I also think you're overreacting quite a bit. 
If you have lost your confidence in this site, especially about something that isn't even a rumor, then that is your problem. This site is here to make a profit(at least I was under the impression that it was,) and if you cant handle the fact that sometimes they link you to "good deals" that aren't always the "best deals" then you probably shouldn't come around here anymore.
I for one, would like to thank the CR team for having such an awesome website and always keeping us up to date on Canon news. I think the CR team is great and I love all the work they do to give us interesting subjects to talk about.
I understand that sometimes they post things because of business decisions, and I'm ok with it. if you aren't ok with it, then keep making whining posts, or leave.


----------



## billnelson75 (Apr 17, 2013)

I think the OP is holding CR and B&H to a higher standard than just about any website or business. Their job is to make money, not always give you the best deal, or always have the best price on everything. That is your job as a consumer to ensure you are getting the best deal. 

What are they supposed to say, "New Price! Only slightly more expensive than we sold it for last week!" LOL, every website/business out there makes it always seem like the time to buy is NOW!!!


----------



## drolo61 (Apr 17, 2013)

@neuro

Well said 1+


----------



## ashmadux (Apr 17, 2013)

Seems like there are a ton of apologists on here.

It doesn't seem to be a popular move to mention in the forums that rebate prices are horsesh*t (but it's the truth, isnt it?).

I track camera prices daily, as im sure some other folks do. _Its always the same "deal" with canon rebates_ ;D- prices go through the roof , add a rebate to it ???, and you are generally still paying more than you would have the week before. :-[ Many other stores do it with various goods, but how does that make this 'acceptable'? Some of you posters are better off just saying"deal with it", as that's where your rationale is going anyways.

Im a bit off put when i see deals headlines, then look at the prices and wince. Im not going to have a cow about it, but call a spade a spade. These deals are not deals by any stretch of the imagination.

I could care less about canon's MAP, that shouldn't be legal. It is deceptive, as most customers are not privy to the shenanigans and deals between manufacturers and retail. So that argument falls on its face. Sure, we can all be from the informed consumers set, but that still doesn't make it fair nor reasonable to the CONSUMER. And as a consumer, who the f cares how the prices got lower- we should always be looking for that lower price.

So, um, yeah, these rebates...um, yeah...great....  :

PS- I like this site too


----------



## Maui5150 (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> pierceography said:
> 
> 
> > DCM1024 said:
> ...



Run out of Summer's Eve?

Whoop De Doo. So you got a better price... And you didn't. 

Secondly, I don't see the 24-70 listed in the lower price list posted on CR. And here is a hint... Sometimes companies only put a FEW items on sale... I just put the lens in my cart and saw $2049. Funny... That is the same price and not more expensive. 

The Fish Eye for example is $100 less than other posted prices, and heck that is almost an 8% drop compared to the 2% you are bitching about. 

What about the 50 1.2?

Heck, even with the rebate, B&H is $100 less than Canon.

oh year... there is also a 2% reward and free shipping.


----------



## wjm (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.



And your previous attempt was probably blocked because some words you used in a very specific way. It happens automatically (the forum moderator doesn't and cannot read all posts). This is to prevent spam and offensive posts. If such post slips through this automatic detection forum members have to report it manually to the moderator (with the link: "report to moderator" which is under each post).

If you used words like "Bigger saving", "B&H" and named various prices in the 'wrong way' it might be flaged as spam. Try make a post with words like "onisac" of "nrop" (but then backwards of course: it will probably blocked right away).


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 17, 2013)

Mountain out of a mole hill.


----------



## rumorzmonger (Apr 17, 2013)

We get these same pricing scams from the same dealer every time there's a Canon rebate. Most of us know better, but the OP is obviously new to this...


----------



## rumorzmonger (Apr 17, 2013)

*Re: Open your eyes*



bbb34 said:


> You better get used to the fact that CR is not a private hobby anymore. It is a business that wants to make profit. 15k visitors per day according to http://digsitevalue.org/s/canonrumors.com . Advertising is the way to fund such a website. As long as the site can still inform and/or entertain you, it is fine. Just don't be naive and expect somebody else's altruism funding it for you. And yes, it is still you who has to compare prices before you buy.



I hope CR is not making any income from this site, because I couldn't find a copy of their US FTC Disclosure statement anywhere...


----------



## Deals Wiz (Apr 17, 2013)

I appreciate what Canon Rumors does and all in keeping us updated on Canon happenings, and while I appreciate that CR does need to make money (look at all the ads plastered all over), I have to say that *it is your responsibility to check for yourself whenever CR says something "is a deal"*, especially with Canon and its devious rebate practices.

Just think of it as advertising not unlike the banner ads. If you're okay with the banner ads you should be okay with the paid B&H links. Now it is in CR's right to add these to make his business profitable, but it is in our right to choose to ignore them if we want 

If you want to do your deal research and watching I suggest you use a real deal website like www.CanonPriceWatch.com (which will show price history including price increases and drops) or www.Slickdeals.net or use the POTN Market Watch forums.


----------



## Random Orbits (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.



There is an ebb and flow to prices. Prices tend to be lowest near Thanksgiving/Christmas/New Year's but there are multiple rebates throughout the year. Take a look at canonpricewatch and you can see the price histories. Know the rules of the game and play accordingly. You can't guarantee getting the lowest price with a given rebate, but at least you'll know how the current price compares with its historical prices. I got my 24-70 II for 1999 by negotiating with an authorized dealer through an Ebay listing through "make an offer" -- go figure!


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 17, 2013)

*Re: Open your eyes*



rumorzmonger said:


> bbb34 said:
> 
> 
> > You better get used to the fact that CR is not a private hobby anymore. It is a business that wants to make profit. 15k visitors per day according to http://digsitevalue.org/s/canonrumors.com . Advertising is the way to fund such a website. As long as the site can still inform and/or entertain you, it is fine. Just don't be naive and expect somebody else's altruism funding it for you. And yes, it is still you who has to compare prices before you buy.
> ...



possiblly because they are not a US site........


----------



## distant.star (Apr 17, 2013)

.
Dreaming of Otis Redding....


Oh she may be weary
And young girls they do get wearied
Wearing that same old shaggy dress
Yeah yeah
But when she gets weary
Try a little tenderness, yeah yeah


----------



## Barrfly (Apr 17, 2013)

On the bright side, because of this thread I was prompted to compare prices on a purchase of a 70-200 2.8 L II I made on 3/17 .
Thanks to B&H 's policies I just got a $30.00 kickback. 
The customer service as always to my experience at B&H was great. The guy gave me a choice of a refund or store credit, I chose the later as I know I'll be a return customer many times in the future .


----------



## rumorzmonger (Apr 17, 2013)

*Re: Open your eyes*



Don Haines said:


> rumorzmonger said:
> 
> 
> > bbb34 said:
> ...



This site is hosted by a US company, so it is a _de facto_ a US site and as such, are required by US law to disclose any financial consideration they receive for reviewing or recommending gear or stores.

Just sayin'...


----------



## pierceography (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> pierceography said:
> 
> 
> > DCM1024 said:
> ...



I'm listening to your point entirely, and as I've already asserted, you're overreacting. In checking B&H's website, the 24-70mm f/2.8 II is $2,049. Exactly what it was three weeks ago when I purchased it and exactly what you claim to have paid. But according to your logic, I should be insulted by CR posting a price that isn't lower. Oh wait, *CR didn't post the price for the 24-70mm f/2.8L II*. So what exactly is your complaint?

But I get it... you're one of those entitled folk that thinks CR owes you something for visiting this site. As neuro has already stated, it would be better for all of us if you would just delete your account instead of whining about marginal (or in this case, non existent) lens sale price differences.

I suggest you do what I did with my 24-70mm ii when I got it: Go out and use it, and quit your complaining.


----------



## Sporgon (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.



5.41


----------



## David Hull (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > over reacting much?
> ...



Wow... you saved 2.3% woop-de-do. Hardly a big deal.


----------



## SwampYankee (Apr 17, 2013)

I just picked up a 100MM 2.8L Macro for $869 plus free shipping from B&H. I feel it was a good deal, no?


----------



## ChilledXpress (Apr 17, 2013)

"caveat emptor"

The only surprise I had was that she didn't also state... "I'm jumping ship and buying Nikon..."


----------



## PilotJoe (Apr 17, 2013)

I think im a pretty nice guy. But what a tongue lashing she got. But i enjoyed it.


----------



## kyamon (Apr 17, 2013)

PilotJoe said:


> I think im a pretty nice guy. But what a tongue lashing she got. But i enjoyed it.




Best reply so far...


----------



## jcollett (Apr 17, 2013)

So I'm guessing that the OP was a big fan of JCPenny's everyday low pricing as the business of sales and special deals for anyone including repeat customers and bulk orders is offensive to all humankind, eh Comrade? :

Guess I'm just used to the pricing games as I'm used to online pricing for electronic and consumer goods ever since the idea of Black Friday was first invented by places like CompUSA. Really people, it is a game. Go play it and get your best price.

BTW, CAPITALISM WON!


----------



## unfocused (Apr 17, 2013)

rumorzmonger said:


> This site is hosted by a US company, so it is a _de facto_ a US site and as such, are required by US law to disclose any financial consideration they receive for reviewing or recommending gear or stores.
> 
> Just sayin'...



It's an advertisement. That's why it says "Ad Post." Your point doesn't apply.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 17, 2013)

unfocused said:


> rumorzmonger said:
> 
> 
> > This site is hosted by a US company, so it is a _de facto_ a US site and as such, are required by US law to disclose any financial consideration they receive for reviewing or recommending gear or stores.
> ...



First time I noticed it ... but it does say "Ad Post" ... well spotted


----------



## Krob78 (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.


The individual that wrote the second ad was likely not the same individual that wrote the first ad. It's a big company, they probably had no idea that what it said countered the 1st ad... 

They honored the price for you, so I'd give them the benefit of the doubt and move on... Peace...


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 17, 2013)

Krob78 said:


> DCM1024 said:
> 
> 
> > I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.
> ...


+1


----------



## Krob78 (Apr 17, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> Krob78 said:
> 
> 
> > DCM1024 said:
> ...


Oh, don't leave the forum, I've enjoyed some of your posts quite a bit and you've had plenty of good imput in quite a few subjects...


----------



## RMC33 (Apr 17, 2013)

Quote from: rumorzmonger on Today at 09:38:45 AM


> This site is hosted by a US company, so it is a de facto a US site and as such, are required by US law to disclose any financial consideration they receive for reviewing or recommending gear or stores.
> 
> Just sayin'...



That is just SOOO not true. If the company is setup in say, Canada, and registered there as a corporation it does not magically "become" a US company when it uses hosting services in the US. Also, it would most likely not be a publicly traded company due to the size so again, not having to disclose anything other then on it's tax forms. Privately held corporations, LLCs etc. don't have to disclose anything to the public about where they make a profit or income.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 17, 2013)

In defnce of the OP, it is true that prices go up for certain items covered by Canons MSRP policy as related to Rebates.

It is not the fault of Canon Rumors, and some prices also go down.

I've written to the New York State Attorney General's office to complain about deceptive pricing, but its fallen on deaf ears, and now with Canon's new MAP policy, the rebates tend to be real for most of the camera stores in the country. The smaller ones, in particular, benefit greatly from the rebate deals.


----------



## Krob78 (Apr 17, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> In defnce of the OP, it is true that prices go up for certain items covered by Canons MSRP policy as related to Rebates.
> 
> It is not the fault of Canon Rumors, and some prices also go down.
> 
> I've written to the New York State Attorney General's office to complain about deceptive pricing, but its fallen on deaf ears, and now with Canon's new MAP policy, the rebates tend to be real for most of the camera stores in the country. The smaller ones, in particular, benefit greatly from the rebate deals.


+1


----------



## EOBeav (Apr 17, 2013)

I'm with the OP on this one. Yes, prices fluctuate. However, I used to have a wedding anniversary that was the last week of January. I could get a dozen red roses for about $12. Two weeks later, around Valentine's Day, those same roses were advertised for $18, "on sale" from their regular price of $22. I called the florist out on it. She explained that as demand goes up, so does the price of their flowers. Understood, but it's deceptive to call the regular price $22, when I was buying them two weeks ago for $12!

So yeah, I get what the OP is saying.


----------



## pierceography (Apr 17, 2013)

EOBeav said:


> I'm with the OP on this one. Yes, prices fluctuate. However, I used to have a wedding anniversary that was the last week of January. I could get a dozen red roses for about $12. Two weeks later, around Valentine's Day, those same roses were advertised for $18, "on sale" from their regular price of $22. I called the florist out on it. She explained that as demand goes up, so does the price of their flowers. Understood, but it's deceptive to call the regular price $22, when I was buying them two weeks ago for $12!
> 
> So yeah, I get what the OP is saying.



Then in that sense, I might as well create a thread complaining about the sky being blue. Advertising that an item is "on sale" is basic marketing strategy. If the consumer feels like they're getting a "deal" they're more likely to buy an item. (Hence why JC Penny just fired their CEO for his single price strategy, and their sales dropping by an enormous amount)

I fail to see why marketing strategies and basic economics are such hard concepts to grasp -- or more importantly, why people (OP) feel the need to complain about them or place blame on others.

And as for the roses on Valentine's Day comparison -- while you may find that practice deceptive, I almost appreciate it. If I'm going to buy flowers on Valentine's Day, it's an unwritten rule that they will cost more. But if I somehow feel (in this case, based on the holiday markup) that I'm getting a better deal, then I walk away a bit happier with a purchase I needed to make.

So if you feel taken advantage of for buying a camera lens when it's first introduced, or an air conditioner in the middle of July, or paper clips during a paper clip shortage, perhaps you should analyze your buying strategy before blaming "the system" of capitalism. It's functioning just fine.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 17, 2013)

infared said:


> DCM1024 said:
> 
> 
> > wickidwombat said:
> ...



Ok now, this is true, anyone can join it actually --- its the affiliate program - http://www.bhphotovideo.com/find/affiliates.jsp

Many websites do this but

"We’ll Pay...
Monthly commission begins at 2% with the possibility for increased percentage based upon performance." 

So it's really not that much "income" unless we were all buying 1dx's in droves from b&h by clicking on the link here.


----------



## jcollett (Apr 17, 2013)

I remember back in the day in San Francisco, there were these independent electronic stores along Market Street. They were generally rip off stores designed to get tourists. One of the stores had a large sign out that said...

GOING OUT for BUSINESS!

The capitalized letters would be like 3 feet tall and the for was a tiny word easily mistaken for the word "of". They wanted to make it look like they were liquidating their merchandise when that is their everyday strategy.

Another business type that does permanent going out of business sales seems to be the Persian Rug market. Great deals...every day!


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Apr 17, 2013)

jcollett said:


> I remember back in the day in San Francisco, there were these independent electronic stores along Market Street. They were generally rip off stores designed to get tourists. One of the stores had a large sign out that said...
> 
> GOING OUT for BUSINESS!
> 
> ...



Haha, most of them are along fisherman's wharf now right? Reminds me of my trip to HK, I'd walk around in Central with my DSLR around my neck and I'd get approached with something like "Come in, we have cheap lens... CHEAP LENS!!".


----------



## Vivid Color (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> I saw the headline "new bigger savings from B&H". The lens I purchased yesterday, the 24-70 f2.8 ii is now $2099 vs $2049 I paid yesterday. How is this better??? My attempt at posting this earlier was blocked.



I do get what you are saying. Yes, pricing and marketing practices are annoying. But, its not just B&H. And, it's not confined to cameras and lens. Each week, Macy's has its Best Sale of the Year (or something to that effect). These types of practices are widespread. What is means is that you absolutely can't take the wording of an advertisement to tell you the truth about the price of a product relative to what its prices were in the past. The advertisement is merely a tool a firm uses to entice people to buy. And, as long as the merchant doesn't cross over into deceptive trade practices, the merchant has a lot of leeway in how it words its ads. And, I'm sure you already know all of this. So I'm just going to say that this is a situation in which going to resignation right away can be helpful. And, taking comfort in that you bought your lens at a lower price.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Apr 17, 2013)

DCM1024 said:


> I found it offensive that the price was marked up, hyped as lower,...



Retail 101.


----------



## lilmsmaggie (Apr 17, 2013)

I'm gonna preface this response with a few assumptions:

1. We're all adults 
2. As consumers, we don't always know or have access to actual cost data.

Cameras, automobiles, computers, software, roses, audio equipment, clothing, etc. They all have a markup by which a retailer can recover costs and hopefully make a profit. The markup depends on many variables, including any pricing restrictions levied by the OEM. 

Many years ago, I took a business math class at a local community college. The first lecture asked the question: "How do you know if the sales price reflects a good deal?" 

The answer: It depends.

If a retailer advertises an item as 20%, 30% or 50% off. The first thing you need to determine is: 20%, 30% or 50% off of what? 

If you don't know what the retailer or dealer paid for the item, etc. then you don't know. Only when you know what the retailer or dealer "actually paid" for an item can you know whether you're getting a good deal or really saving any money. A fair price is in the eyes of the consumer.

On a different note, there are products and services available in the marketplace that never go on sale.

You ever see Harvard, Stanford or any college for that matter advertising: "This month only 25% off Tuition!" How often do you see Apple offering a sale? Ever tried getting a reduced sales price from your doctor, dentist, attorney? How about gas prices? Ever see a gas station advertise a sale?

There's a reason we have marketplace principles such as "Caveat Emptor," and "Whatever the market will bear." Supply and Demand drive prices in the marketplace. We know these factors are at play but somehow there is a disconnect. It never fails to amaze me how many people will camp out 2-3 or more days in front of a Walmart, Bestbuy or other retailer waiting to buy that BIG SALE item !!!! 

As far as Canon's MAP is concerned, they are not the only manufacturer that imposes this type of requirement on its "authorized dealers." Most auto manufactures do the same thing with their dealer networks. 

I have a friend that sells high-end audio equipment. One of the lines he sells is Audio Note.
Audio Note has a price floor that ALL its authorized dealers cannot go below; otherwise, they won't receive any more product from Audio Note.

I may be wrong but do we really know what B&H, Adorama, Calumet, or any other retailer selling cameras and other photographic gear are paying for these products wholesale? I'm not so sure. We always see MSRP prices advertised for cameras but I for one have never seen data on what the retailer is actually paying for these items.

I don't see CR or B&H Photo being necessarily deceptive. It's up to us as consumers to educate ourselves and do as much research is possible before making a purchase. Sometimes it just comes down to asking ourselves: "Does this purchase represent a good value for me at this time?" The rule "Caveat Emptor - Let the buyer beware" is just as true today as it was when the Supreme Court first applied the rule in 1817.

Be willing to live with the purchase whatever it may be. If you're satisfied with a purchase and you know you weren't jilted or taken advantage of, then be happy. That's the important thing.


----------



## art_d (Apr 17, 2013)

EOBeav said:


> I'm with the OP on this one. Yes, prices fluctuate. However, I used to have a wedding anniversary that was the last week of January. I could get a dozen red roses for about $12. Two weeks later, around Valentine's Day, those same roses were advertised for $18, "on sale" from their regular price of $22. I called the florist out on it. She explained that as demand goes up, so does the price of their flowers. Understood, but it's deceptive to call the regular price $22, when I was buying them two weeks ago for $12!


It's simple pyschology. People are more inclined to buy something if they think they are getting a deal on it. 

Remember how JCPenny's not too long ago decided to go to a strategy where they would offer low prices all the time, but wouldn't have sales? There were no more "fake prices" that were inflated so that markdowns seemed like deals . Supposedly this sort of clear and non-decpetive pricing strategy would be something that consumers would appreciate, right? Well, unfortunately, that non-deceptive pricing strategy failed miserably. Sales went down something like 20%.

It turns out that us consumers are (as a collective) not very smart. Marketing folks know this. That's why inflated prices + "discounts" = more sales.

I can't say I like the practice. But I understand why it goes on.


----------



## thedman (Apr 17, 2013)

The most confusing things about this thread are A) This particular lens is _not_ listed in the latest rebate announcement, and B) both Amazon and B&H are still showing this lens at $2049. So I have no idea what the OP is talking about.


----------



## infared (Apr 17, 2013)

The point is this: Every time someone clicks on that lens promotion for B&H from this website and then actually make a purchase from B&H money is made by the owner of the website. Since B&H is the largest reputable dealer in camera equipment, many links will be listed on this site and many others as it brings in income. This is not going to stop.
Buyer beware.....as always...but as someone pointed out, that lens is not in the promo.
Be happy...I bought the lens several months back for $2300!  It's a great lens and I have been using it a lot so, oh well!
[/quote]

Ok now, this is true, anyone can join it actually --- its the affiliate program - http://www.bhphotovideo.com/find/affiliates.jsp

Many websites do this but

"We’ll Pay...
Monthly commission begins at 2% with the possibility for increased percentage based upon performance." 

So it's really not that much "income" unless we were all buying 1dx's in droves from b&h by clicking on the link here.
[/quote]
*
Chuck..I am not saying there is ANYTHING wrong with getting compensated for all the great stuff that is put together for all of us on this website...my point was that that reality figures into anything that gets posted here. It's basic commerce 101! *


----------



## preppyak (Apr 17, 2013)

thedman said:


> The most confusing things about this thread are A) This particular lens is _not_ listed in the latest rebate announcement, and B) both Amazon and B&H are still showing this lens at $2049. So I have no idea what the OP is talking about.


Perhaps he meant the 70-200? Not sure. Either way, it's a silly thing to get upset about, especially when those posts are very specifically tagged as ad posts.

It's on the lens buyer to find the best price.


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 17, 2013)

Bottom line is: you the "BUYER" needs to consider the final price. It's your decision, buy it or not. I don't understand why the OP started this thread, when he/she bought it at lower price?

All dealers need to make profits to stay alive.


----------



## EOBeav (Apr 17, 2013)

art_d said:


> It's simple pyschology. People are more inclined to buy something if they think they are getting a deal on it.
> 
> ...
> 
> I can't say I like the practice. But I understand why it goes on.



And that was the point I was trying to make. No question, it's a part of our fabric; it goes on all the time. I guess I'm not in sales for a reason.


----------



## EOBeav (Apr 17, 2013)

pierceography said:


> EOBeav said:
> 
> 
> > I'm with the OP on this one. Yes, prices fluctuate. However, I used to have a wedding anniversary that was the last week of January. I could get a dozen red roses for about $12. Two weeks later, around Valentine's Day, those same roses were advertised for $18, "on sale" from their regular price of $22. I called the florist out on it. She explained that as demand goes up, so does the price of their flowers. Understood, but it's deceptive to call the regular price $22, when I was buying them two weeks ago for $12!
> ...



The reality is that it happens all the time. We fall for it all the time. However, seeing a higher price advertised as a 'sale' price seems deceitful. Our local Safeway does it all the time. Nobody is "blaming capitalism," (I'm not even sure where you got that) we're just calling out vendors for this practice. This isn't a capitalism vs. {insert other world economy here}.


----------



## Krob78 (Apr 17, 2013)

I think it's time to let this thread die a peaceful death...


----------

