Thread: Tikka t1X - Beretta NZ sales policy

Originally Posted by ChrisW

7x64 - Beretta does not deal directly with the public hence being directed to a dealer. Sounds like you didn't follow through and contact a dealer, and instead chose to sort the problem yourself - which is cool if that's what you want to do. This is the same as a car part or other item that only comes as a part of an "assembly". Often in life you need to purchase an "assembly" when you only need a specific part from it. Happens all the time. Car parts for example. We need to purchase an "assembly" ourselves.

Yup, totally understand that. All I’m saying is this isn’t true for all local agents, which as an end user represents different levels of support at a practical level. Saying “this is how we do it” is fair enough, but you can’t blame the customer for then perceiving they are receiving better support elsewhere, which ultimately may make up part of their purchasing decision.

Originally Posted by 7x64

Yup, totally understand that. All I’m saying is this isn’t true for all local agents, which as an end user represents different levels of support at a practical level. Saying “this is how we do it” is fair enough, but you can’t blame the customer for then perceiving they are receiving better support elsewhere, which ultimately may make up part of their purchasing decision.

Fair call. I assume your call or email was answered promptly though - even if it was not what you wanted to hear?
Unfortunately we have no facilities to deal with the end user on a purchasing basis. We will however do our best to provide a good answer and give them what info they need - part numbers, availability, who in their area can order it for you etc

Hi Chris.

I have dealt with Beretta before. And yes, it was resolved (only after I kicked up a fuss). It took 5 months for the rifle to be fixed. Are you assuming that people's bitter experiences are skewed/unjustified?

I never said anything about a store which ONLY sells Beretta products, but I think it would be a fair statement that they make up the bulk of the stock belonging to some of the larger chain stores. Which is understandable - supply vs demand. My question is - what's stopping a smaller retailer maintaining an account, if they only stock a few of your rifles at a time? Is there a requirement for dealers to sell X number of rifles and invest X amount of time in endorsing the Beretta brand? And if so, what incentive(s) does Beretta offer dealers to do so?

Unfortunately impressions/assumptions are everything if you expect return customers.

I think there is two sides to every story.

Its not about turn over, stock held on the shelf or endorsing any one brand.
Its about what representation is already in the area - and the fact you don't want your own products competing against themselves and starting a price war.

For example it could be detrimental if a smaller shop (who can operate on slimmer margins) was given an account in an area that was already well represented -then proceeded to simply undercut the larger stores in the area who require a higher margin to stay afloat.
It would drive the price and profile of our own products down, due to our own products competing against themselves - and its all a downward spiral from there.

Originally Posted by ChrisW

I think there is two sides to every story.

Its not about turn over, stock held on the shelf or endorsing any one brand.
Its about what representation is already in the area - and the fact you don't want your own products competing against themselves and starting a price war.

For example it could be detrimental if a smaller shop (who can operate on slimmer margins) was given an account in an area that was already well represented -then proceeded to simply undercut the larger stores in the area who require a higher margin to stay afloat.
It would drive the price and profile of our own products down, due to our own products competing against themselves - and its all a downward spiral from there.

True.

Originally Posted by ChrisW

Its not about turn over, stock held on the shelf or endorsing any one brand.
Its about what representation is already in the area - and the fact you don't want your own products competing against themselves and starting a price war.

For example it could be detrimental if a smaller shop (who can operate on slimmer margins) was given an account in an area that was already well represented -then proceeded to simply undercut the larger stores in the area who require a higher margin to stay afloat.

And yet the bigger shops tell us they are giving us better deals by having supply arrangements and buying bulk etc...

Originally Posted by GravelBen

And yet the bigger shops tell us they are giving us better deals by having supply arrangements and buying bulk etc...

Dont you go believing everything you are told now. Pinnochio would look like a pug compared to the stuff I have been told over the years by people both big chain sales people and independents

Originally Posted by Marty Henry

Dont you go believing everything you are told now. Pinnochio would look like a pug compared to the stuff I have been told over the years by people both big chain sales people and independents

Very true, maybe I should have made it clearer that my comment was a bit tongue in cheek!

Originally Posted by ChrisW

For example it could be detrimental if a smaller shop (who can operate on slimmer margins) was given an account in an area that was already well represented -then proceeded to simply undercut the larger stores in the area who require a higher margin to stay afloat.
It would drive the price and profile of our own products down, due to our own products competing against themselves - and its all a downward spiral from there.

That is extremely borderline behaviour.

Agreements that substantially lessen competition | Commerce Commission

Originally Posted by gadgetman

That is extremely borderline behaviour.

Agreements that substantially lessen competition | Commerce Commission

This thread is getting very frustrating. You have no idea. There are no such agreements in place.
An organisation is under no obligation to supply anyone and can strategically choose whom they supply. As mentioned everyone gets the same price, and we are more than entitled to choose whom we supply.

Maybe you should go and attempt become a Ferrari dealer and then complain when they choose not to supply you as you are just some guy trying to sell Ferrari's out of his garage and undercut everyone when there is a dealership next door.

Now slandering a person or company with untrue remarks as is all through this thread. That is a no no.

I joined this forum to give you guys info. Not to argue business politics with idiots.

Originally Posted by ChrisW

This thread is getting very frustrating. You have no idea. There are no such agreements in place.
An organisation is under no obligation to supply anyone and can strategically choose whom they supply. As mentioned everyone gets the same price, and we are more than entitled to choose whom we supply.

Maybe you should go and attempt become a Ferrari dealer and then complain when they choose not to supply you as you are just some guy trying to sell Ferrari's out of his garage and undercut everyone when there is a dealership next door.

Now slandering a person or company with untrue remarks as is all through this thread. That is a no no.

I joined this forum to give you guys info. Not to argue business politics with idiots.

Note that I have not resorted to name calling, nor making allegations. I chose my wording very carefully. You may wish to read the link below that was referenced in the earlier link.

The Southern Ophthalmologists | Commerce Commission

Originally Posted by gadgetman

Note that I have not resorted to name calling, nor making allegations. I chose my wording very carefully. You may wish to read the link below that was referenced in the earlier link.

The Southern Ophthalmologists | Commerce Commission

That link has zero relevance to this thread. The ophthalmologists in the above example colluded to price fix, sometimes called a cartel. That is a million miles away from what ChrisW took the time to try and explain.

It’s painfully obvious that most of you guys have zero idea what you are talking about with regards to business strategy and even less when it comes to any sort of legislation, criminal or commercial.

ChrisW - you need to give up. Most involved in this thread lack the capacity, capability or desire to try and understand.

Ps - I still hate tikkas ��

My 2 pence worth Large chain stores and we are not just talking gun shops exploit their size and wide coverage in the market where they can with suppliers by amongst other things getting goods on consignment, or 120 day terms often with right of return as well. They will also comitt there membership to a certain no of units in return for more advantageous terms, extra free stock, or both, buy 10 get one free. Prime store space is also "auctioned" to suppliers.
In return the supplier generally gets central billing no worry of individual stores defaulting and reduced admin costs.
Ive left out staff incentives, promotions and a whole heap of other things that make up the push sell business model that firms feel they need to follow in order to succeed now a days

You can compare prices and make your own decision as to if bulk savings are being passed onto the customer, or not

Originally Posted by ChrisW

You can compare prices and make your own decision as to if bulk savings are being passed onto the customer, or not

Absolutely, thats what I do... quite happy with my local independent's pricing