$259 24" Samsung PLS LED S24A850DWk 1920x1200 5ms at CPL

Related Stores

CPL Online

• 

  jv on 16/06/2012 - 00:34

  +9

  RRP $699

  Why are you even mentioning this ficticious price of $699
  when your normal selling price for this monitor is $389

  http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:IE85Itz…

  The is very misleading and deceptive to consumers…
  Are you familiar with the ACCC laws ???

  http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/815334

  Read the section titled

  "Comparisons with the recommended retail price (RRP)"

  You are trying to imply we would be saving $440 when in reality, it is nowhere near that…

  • 

    ibfragalot on 16/06/2012 - 00:38

    -1

    ^^ Never mind him rep, he does that to everyone ;) He only means well!

    Great price for a better than average monitor.

    • 

      jv on 16/06/2012 - 00:39

      +4

      So you reckon it's fine to try and con people into thinking they are saving $440 when they are not…

      That's why we have consumer laws…

      • 

        ibfragalot on 16/06/2012 - 00:49

        But of course - personally I try to con at least 1 person per day. Especially ones that believe everything a retailer tells them.

      • 

        jv on 16/06/2012 - 00:51

        So you wont get too upset if you order one then, and they send you a refurb?

      • 

        Dan_ on 16/06/2012 - 00:52

        He never said you would save 63% or $440, he merely stated the RRP.

      • 

        jv on 16/06/2012 - 00:54

        +2

        he merely stated the RRP.

        yes, as a misleading price comparison… which is against the law…

        why else would he want to mention a RRP of $699 ??? To increase his word count ???

      • 

        ibfragalot on 16/06/2012 - 01:00

        +4

        I think he did it just for you ;)

    • 

      jv on 16/06/2012 - 00:40

      Never mind him rep

      For your reference…

      The Rep logged off 30 seconds after posting this, so they're not too interested in feedback…

      • 

        ibfragalot on 16/06/2012 - 00:51

        The Rep logged off 30 seconds after posting this as he wanted it to be somewhere near the top of the list in the morning, without him having to get up at 7am to post it then ;)

  • 

    revo on 16/06/2012 - 00:40

    I think it would be fair to compare it with the large retail chains that stock this, rather than quote this 699 rrp which barely anyone sells at

    • 

      jv on 16/06/2012 - 00:41

      i think it would be fairer just to state what they normally sold it at (ie. $389) and how much it's been discounted now to justify posting it as a bargain…

  • 

    donkeyhokey on 16/06/2012 - 01:04

    +3

    He already says "$100 cheaper than any other store in Australia). So that makes it 359.

    I don't see any problem here.

    • 

      jv on 16/06/2012 - 01:14

      +2

      I don't see any problem here.

      then read this…

      http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/815334

      why would they mention a price they've never sold it for, if not to mislead people ????

      • 

        jv on 16/06/2012 - 01:29

        I didn't say it's a scam…

        but it is misleading… It's more likely they will sell more if they make it look like you are saving 60%, instead of 30%…

        i didn't say it was a bad price, just a very dishonest way of advertising it…

      • 

        Dan_ on 16/06/2012 - 01:29

        The rep mentioned the RRP just like every other major electronics retailer, that's acceptable (to the ACCC at least, otherwise they'd be handing out a lot more fines). In fact, he doesn't even go as far as major retailers in advertising a saving against the RRP.

      • 

        jv on 16/06/2012 - 01:32

        -1

        just like every other major electronics retailer

        they can only legally do that if they normally sell at the RRP…

      • 

        Dan_ on 16/06/2012 - 01:39

        So why would they always see the need to mention in small print, the fact that it is a saving against the RRP, if it is their normal price?

      • 

        jv on 16/06/2012 - 01:41

        http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/815334

      • 

        Joober on 16/06/2012 - 02:49

        +1

        This is correct: the rep is comparing with rrp, which they don't historically sell at (and not many people do). This brings them in conflict with this part of the ACCC act

        Comparisons with the recommended retail price (RRP)

        Advertising or promotions of 'savings' or 'discounts' on the RRP of goods and services are designed to convince you that you are getting a good deal because the price is less than the RRP.

        If traders do not normally price their goods at the RRP, it may be misleading to give you the impression that they do.

      • 

        Dan_ on 16/06/2012 - 16:28

        That section suggests that the situations in which it "may be misleading" is when they advertise or promote it as a 'saving' or 'discount' against the RRP, as these terms imply that the RRP is the normal ticketed price and you are paying less. I don't think that simply stating the RRP is enough to make such a representation, it's more like product information. Furthermore, the only figure represented here as a 'saving' is the amount of $100 which is compared against the cheapest competitor.

        If you have a look at all the cases with the ACCC regarding comparative pricing using RRP, you will see that the offending ads all include words that represent the RRP as the normal ticketed price.

  • 

    Joober on 16/06/2012 - 02:08

    cpl are advertising this in their current catalogue:

    24" Samsung S24A850DWK 1920*1200 5ms 3XUSB3.0 2DVI Pivot Swivel $379.00

    http://www.cplonline.com.au/pdf/pricelist.pdf

    This is the same price they were offering it on 8 June (I downloaded their PDF then).

    Is this the same gear? If so, on the surface, this is cheaper than shopbot, staticice (high 300s) and their previous price of a week ago. If I've got the model wrong, please carry on :-)

    [edit: misread the OP, corrected my summary]

  • 

    Store Repcplonline @ CPL Online on 16/06/2012 - 08:50

    +6

    Sorry if you thought we were trying to mislead! It was just a comparison with the manufacturers RRP from their website.

    Surely if we where trying to convince you its a $440 saving we would have left out the link to static ice or the line only '$100 cheaper than ANY other stores in Australia!'

    Never the less its been removed and we'l steer clear of using it on future posts.

    Thanks for all the feedback!

• 

  Store Repcplonline @ CPL Online on 16/06/2012 - 08:39

  double post, sorry guys, still getting used to this thing! feel free to delete this comment,

• 

  effgee on 16/06/2012 - 11:36

  +1

  I've got a strong preference to 16:10 monitors like this, which seem harder & harder to get.
  I don't know how one this compares, but I've got a Samsung 2493 monitor from about 3 years ago that has been great, think I paid about $400 at the time.