So a 61% price hike over 5 years, of which 24% was just inflation. If the total price really went up 200% in your country, that's exceptional and probably caused by policies unique to your country.
btw you can't compare prices without shipping because there was never an option to buy 100 at $15 each and amortize shipping. Retailers treated it as a loss leader with a limit of one per purchase, often forcing you to buy some extra junk to meet the order minimum.
Yeah, for those with a Micro Center, the Pi pricing is in line with MSRPs. A lot of people buy from vendors on Amazon or eBay, which do not have to stick to MSRPs, and they use those prices as "gospel". Sadly, for some people, those prices are the best they can find for a shipped product in their location, so I don't blame them.
Can you buy out their inventory, sell them for $36 online, and help everyone save a dollar, or is this the same old "Retailers treated it as a loss leader"?
Amazon/eBay prices are indeed gospel. You can ship something like this across the country for <$5 so location doesn't matter unless you're talking tariffs
I'm sure Microcenter is not selling Pi Zeroes at a loss. They're an authorized retailer selling at the part's MSRP. They do sometimes make these available only in store, not online, once they sell out online and I don't think it's a mystery why a retail business would do that.
Why are you so confident? Raspberry Pi's prospectus says "unit gross profit margin of 20 per cent. for us and 10 per cent. for our ARs" and they give an example: "sell it to our ARs for $90, which in turn would sell it to the end user for $100". AR=Approved Resellers and delivery costs are paid by the reseller.
Is 10%/$1.50 enough to pay for the retailer's freight, ~3% fee to accept credit cards, inventory carrying, rent, payroll, shrinkage, support/RMA, and fraud?
Meh, the real profit margin is in scalping. RPi's retail price requirements ensure that scalpers make a profit while it stays out of stock in official channels
Hm? McDonalds is one of the best for customization. Everything is removable and the software knows the calorie count of each ingredient so the total that shows up next to each item in the cart is accurate
The kiosk ordering at McDonalds is made to adjust the defaults which is slower than the mode I described: if automated, that would be a screen to choose the item, and then add things into it from a list — fewer screens, faster ordering.
Everybody would go through this workflow built for customization, and at McD they do not. This to me means they are not building for this usecase.
Dude these are incredibly oversimplified models of real components. How are you getting 1ppm when basic shit like tempco and self heating are missing from pretty much every vendor provided spice model?
USA. In USA your chargeback initially is usually taken on face. They'll usually reverse the charge within a week or so. But after that they let the merchant appeal it.
Most merchants won't. But if they do, your bank isn't going to bat for you. If it looks like it's going to take them much time or effort to deal with it they're liable to just throw up their hands and let you duke it out in small claims court.
In my case they had a megacorp ready to fight it on one side, and little old me on the other. So some lady on the phone just insinuated I was a lying scammer and told me my case had been reversed. There was some sort of appeal process I tossed my hat into but it went straight to radio silence and I've not heard from them in years. I would have taken them to court but I moved cross country around the same time and it would cost me $2000 or so for airfare and hotel rooms to show up to the right courts to get $1000 in judgements.
I am a bit confused about your situation. Did you have a stolen card used to make a purchase at ebay that was not under your account? Or did you make a purchase at ebay and have an issue with the product you received?
Scammer created two e-bay accounts. One with my name but e-mail address "pirate" something. A second one, a scammer merchant account to wash the money.
They stole my credit card and used the bogus "me" ebay account to generate invoices (to my real address) and payments for goods from the second scammer merchant account. Then they found tracking numbers to my zip code. They bought the (fake) items from their scammer merchant account using their scammer "me" account. They used those tracking numbers to show the items were shipped and received to someone in my zip code (which is the only publicly available data from the tracking number). Of course, at no point were any of the goods "purchased" by "me" even real, but rather just ways to wash the credit card returns.
When I discovered what happened, I requested ebay refund it. Ebay claimed that since the accounts weren't actually mine (only in my name) I had no right to request a refund. So I could claim they were mine and then be ineligible for a refund because the underlying reason would be vaporized, or not claim them as mine and then be unable to ask for a refund because it's not actually my account -- a catch 22. The tracking numbers, again, since they weren't actually to me, the shipping companies refused to reveal the underlying data to me and I couldn't get any of the evidence showing it wasn't me.
At that point, I had my bank do a chargeback. Which they initially granted. I thought it was a done deal at that point.
Ebay sent all these invoices matching my name, with tracking numbers to my zip code, with my credit card being billed, etc to my bank along with a bunch of pages of banking mumbo jumbo about how the chargeback was wrong. At that point my bank turned face, called me a liar, and reinstated the charges. Not long after this, I noticed e-bay shut down the scammer account but they never refunded me the money. I assume the scammer had sucked out the money faster than e-bay could act to claw it back and when e-bay realized they'd be holding the bag they decided to dump it on the fraud victims.
You didn't provide any evidence that the charge was fraudulent. If they have a tracking number you gotta provide something, at least a police report.
Also you likely filed "merchandise/services not received" when you should have filed "unauthorized transaction". Even if you really did get the item, you don't have to pay for it if it was ordered by someone else using your card.
Honestly the only thing I had was one tracking number was generated an entire day before the supposed purchase, the 'pirate' email address (they were taunting me), that the religious items purchased were not of my religion, and that ebay had closed the scammer account. But my bank was not interested in taking on ebay. To the scammers credit, by creating both the buyer and seller account they made their scam a lot more resistant.
Also it was charged back as fraud. I had other fraud transactions that day and my bank reversed them. They were too scared to fight ebay or something.
I've learned proving a negative of "prove you didnt buy this" is pretty hard and thus fraud protection is more of a facade that only kind of works.
> If it looks like it's going to take them much time or effort to deal with it they're liable to just throw up their hands and let you duke it out in small claims court.
In the US, couldn't you just make it their problem by not paying the disputed portion of your bill? (I haven't tried this myself and don't know how hard it is to dispute a negative credit report without going to small claims court in the end.)
In theory yes, Reg Z forces them to prove that it was you that borrowed the money. In practice this is a weird situation to be in since chargebacks almost always favor the buyer so I have no idea how this shakes out and if it's worth temporarily screwing up your credit score
>The most common fare I’ve paid on Empower over the last six months is $7.65. For a recent trip from downtown to the airport, Uber wanted $32. Empower wanted $17.25.
>DC is trying to shut Empower down, primarily over liability insurance. DC law requires $1 million in coverage per ride.
>The $1 million requirement isn’t sized to typical accidents. When $100,000 is the limit available for an insurance claim, 96% of personal auto claims settle below $100,000.
>The high ceiling shifts incentives: plaintiffs' attorneys have reason to pursue cases they'd otherwise drop and push for larger settlements. Fraud rings have emerged to exploit these policies.
> insurance is around 30% of fares, particularly in states like California, New Jersey, and New York which also require additional $1 million uninsured motorist coverage and/or no-fault insurance
So a 61% price hike over 5 years, of which 24% was just inflation. If the total price really went up 200% in your country, that's exceptional and probably caused by policies unique to your country.
btw you can't compare prices without shipping because there was never an option to buy 100 at $15 each and amortize shipping. Retailers treated it as a loss leader with a limit of one per purchase, often forcing you to buy some extra junk to meet the order minimum.
reply