Talk:Loss leader/Archives/2012

Latest comment: 13 years ago by Quasihuman in topic Legality


"Fruitshop-style"

The following sentence in the article makes no sense:

In these situations, it can be harder for dealers who use "fruitshop"-style trading methods of purchasing to negotiate buying larger quantities of consumables at cheaper cost price in order to sell them off cheaper.

Games consoles listed as Loss Leaders AND low margin products?

Games consoles are listed as Loss Leaders AND low margin products. Which is it? --Irrevenant 12:37, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

depends on the console. indeed, some consoles may start as loss leaders, then become low margin, or switch between the 2. they have a lot of 3rd parties involved in their manufacture so it varies.--80.169.130.30 14:51, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Generic cartridges voiding warranties

In the US, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act prohibits voiding a warranty for using generic parts. Most auto parts stores couldn't exist without something like that, which leads me to believe that there are similar laws in other countries, anyone know anything else so I can make an intelligent edit? 24.24.40.70 15:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Nintendo at a loss?

"Nintendo was able to profit on the sales of its Gamecube console for a short time before selling it at a loss. "

As far as I know, Nintendo never sold a console at a loss and was always profitable (except for one quarter in about 100 years). Besides, how in the world can the article say that the Gamecube was sold at a profit and then, as time went on, started to lose money? Electronic parts almost always decrease in cost - plus they had a redesign that eliminated some video components. I'm deleting that sentence.

Oh please. “Nintendo never sold a console at a loss”? So you're saying the all their consoles actually cost under $200 to build on launch? I find that impossible to believe without mountains of evidence.76.126.134.152 (talk) 06:48, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually, if you compare the relative hardware specs of the Wii and other hardware from the same generation, it's not all that difficult to believe. (Read: the Wii's graphics suck.) It just so happens they figured out "fun" consists of more than watching pretty pictures onscreen. J.M. Archer (talk) 16:05, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm not talking about the Wii. It was hilariously outdated on launch, made largely from parts Nintendo was already buying for the gamecube, and thus less like a new console than a cost-saving redesign of the gamecube (I.E.: NES 2, IQue Player, PSOne, etc…) in many ways. I'm complaining about the claim that Nintendo has never sold other consoles at a loss, a ludicrous claim to swallow since all of their previous systems were leading edge. 72.235.10.209 (talk) 06:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Apple iTunes

I don't think the iTunes example is quite right here. Although the margins on songs purchased through iTunes is small, Apple relies on the fact that they sell many many of them, and they actually do make profit on those songs. The costs to Apple of digital storage, maintenance, support, etc. are amortized across the huge volume of individual songs that are sold. iPods are indeed related products (that Apple makes profit on, as well), but one can buy an iPod without purchasing songs through iTunes, and vice versa.

Please sign your posts. Whether or not you think the iTMS is a loss leader is irrelevant Steve Jobs himself says it is. 76.126.134.152 (talk) 06:48, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

avoid repeat visits to shop

this line: "Items offered as loss leaders are often bulky or perishable, making it difficult for the customer to buy in bulk so as to encourage repeat visits to the shop." is easily interpreted the wrong way around: it can be interpreted as if the shop wants to avoid the repeat visits. this happened to me. Bewareircd 18:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC) it must have been a very difficult time for you. if you wish to talk about it, im always available as a shoulder to cry on. 212.64.106.232 (talk) 11:54, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Style edit completed

I have done a general clean-up and I tried to take all the existing comments here into account and clarified to the best of my ability. Canadiana 18:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I also did a minor style cleanup to improve the article, trying to make it sound more like an article and less like a blog or editorial. --Shruti14 t c s 02:08, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Playstation 2 failed to make any money?

“(It should be noted however that the Xbox, Xbox360, Playstation 2 and 3 all failed to make money so far.[citation needed])”

Firstly, is this statement referring to the physical consoles/hardware themselves or does it include revenue generated by third parties, game mark-ups, etc? Either way, the Playstation 2 definitely needs to be taken away – it’s the most successful console ever made, and was up to a point helping Sony cover the huge losses it’s now making on the PS3. Evidence is here (first paragraph), and here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.36.79.206 (talk) 13:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

That entire section is nothing but blatant pro-Nintendo FUD. The Wii is an abberation, as basically all other consoles, past and future, Nintendo or otherwise, launch as loss leaders and stay that way for most of their time on the market. The statement also entirely misses the point of loss leader pricing, since consoles are NOT supposed to be profitable, but merely act as bait to snare customers for accessories (software, hardware, services) which have a tax hidden in their price through licensing deals. I'm pulling the whole thing. 72.235.10.209 (talk) 06:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Confused wording

Sometimes leader is now used as a synonym for loss leader and means any popular article, in other words one sold at a normal price.[3]

Does the writer mean:

1. The word "leader" is often used to refer to popular items, but at the normal price.

2. The word "leader" is a shorthand for "loss leader". So "leader" is used to refer to popular items, at a heavy discount.

It is just not clear.

I would have started the sentence with "Sometimes leader is used ...".


—Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.193.93.109 (talk) 18:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Alcohol

Here in the UK, Alcohol is generally refered to as a 'loss-leader' for our big Supermarkets.. (24 cans of beer for £10 say) just to get people to shop in the store. It's suprising there is zero mention of this here, and I'm considering adding it.. Especially seeing as it's faced heavy criticism for binge drinking, and killing pub-culture. Any thoughts? Dvmedis (talk) 07:16, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Personally I have no objecton to doing so, adding references to some news sources (suggest BBC and The Grocer magazine). But I wonder then if we are on a slippery slope where we add every product ever sold as a leader. SimonTrew (talk)


I think that sounds like a good way to internationalize an article that is very focused on the United States. --JeremiahJohnson (talk) 18:40, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Why does the Wii Matter if it's not a loss leader

In the final paragraph in specific examples of loss leaders, the Wii is cited as not being a loss leader. Why does this matter? How is this relevant? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.30.138.126 (talk) 03:37, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

References broken

The links for refererences 1 and 2 point to unrelated content @bartleby.com 87.79.90.65 (talk) 13:07, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Loss Leaders and price wars

Worth mentioning how sometimes one retailer advertising a loss-leader can lead to other retailers copying them and to a price war. An example from about 15 years back now is when UK supermarkets were selling value-range baked beans for as low as 3 pence a tin: http://www.thegrocer.co.uk/articles.aspx?page=articles&ID=23844 M0ffx (talk) 02:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Legality

Would it be a good idea to have a section about the legality of selling below cost? I haven't done much research, but in Ireland between 1987 and 2005, it was illegal to sell certain groceries below cost.[1] I wonder are there other examples in other jurisdictions. Quasihuman | Talk 11:20, 1 August 2011 (UTC)