MSY Now Owned by a Graphite Mining Explorer

chumlee on 05/07/2019 - 19:09

5 July 2019
ASX Announcement
Agreement to Acquire Retail E-Commerce Growth Story

The Board of Lanka Graphite Ltd (ASX:LGR) (“Company”) refers to its ASX
announcement dated 3 August 2018 regarding execution of a binding conditional term sheet to acquire 100% of the MSY group of companies (collectively referred to as “MSY”), which retail consumer electronics throughout Australia. MSY sells computers, computer parts and software online and across 28 retail sites nationally and generates
revenues of approximately $100 million per year.

Computing

Related Stores

MSY Technology
MSY Technology

Comments

  • Hybroid on 05/07/2019 - 19:22
    +126

    Maybe they'll finally get a proper post-1998 website.

    • theHMASfriendship on 05/07/2019 - 19:31
      +60

      They may explore this possiblity.

    • fishball on 05/07/2019 - 19:48
      +115

      Nothing will ever beat PARTS.pdf :D

      • montorola on 05/07/2019 - 20:34
        +14

        So true, I always look at that and nothing else!!

      • Munki on 08/07/2019 - 14:35
        +1

        Best system. Ever.

    • subywagon on 05/07/2019 - 20:19
      +15

      haha I even offered to develop one free for them once as their website was so damn annoying, but I never heard back lol

      • montorola on 05/07/2019 - 20:35
        +47

        I reckon they keep that crappy website on purpose to deter the noobs that would otherwise show up and be like "What's a RAM?" lol

        • p1 ama on 05/07/2019 - 23:59
          +36

          They're much nicer now. Back when I first started shopping at MSY, it was like some underground drug operation in some warehouse.

          • Kenb0 on 06/07/2019 - 00:48
            +5

            @p1 ama: Warehouse? That was a step up from when I first buying things off them in 95. They used to operate out of a residential house in mt Waverley before they first had a shop in east Malvern. I remember seeing the inside of that house, thinking about how much $$ of inventory they had stored in that house….

            • Zachary on 08/07/2019 - 05:26

              @Kenb0: What really?! Shit someone could come in rob their place!

              • Kenb0 on 08/07/2019 - 08:30

                @Zachary: Exactly what I was thinking. They had piles of stock just stacked up everywhere in every room they had spare. If I remember right, they used one of the bedrooms as the room from where they did business from, but you could see how much inventory they were carrying in all the rooms you could see from there and it was a shit ton.

                • Bargain80 on 08/07/2019 - 10:13
                  +4

                  @Kenb0: imagine their location system. Motherboard A location is in Bedroom 1, inside night drawer, bottom shelf.

                • Zachary on 09/07/2019 - 05:20
                  +1

                  @Kenb0: I'm assuming they had the house locked down pretty good, no? Like steel bars on windows, smash proof mesh underneath those steel bars, roofs non-tiled, solid steel door at the front and I guess anywhere else that is a point of entry into the house with strong locks…..

                  But I suppose a portable angle grinder of some sort would probably make short work of all these measures…..don't they have like them plasma cutters that can cut through any solid objects with precision? Or do they not come in portables? Just cut a door shape out on the wall and in you go….alarm system might trip but you'd be gone with all the loot before the cops arrive, assuming you came prepared with a trailer or something….

                  • Kenb0 on 09/07/2019 - 08:24
                    +1

                    @Zachary: It didn't look particularly secure to be honest, just looked like your typical suburban house. They had cameras and an alarm system but that was it as far as I could see in regards to extra protection.

            • mochariffic on 09/07/2019 - 21:06
              +1

              @Kenb0: Scorptec was the same - little house in burwood, so dodgey but good times :-)

        • GaryG on 06/07/2019 - 22:28
          +9

          It's a male sheep isn't? :D

          Not that hard to answer!

        • p1 ama on 08/07/2019 - 17:48
          +7

          The famous PARTS.pdf from MSY back in 2003 for those nostalgic nerds like myself.

          https://web.archive.org/web/20031023034610/msy.com.au/Parts/…

          • montorola on 08/07/2019 - 19:03

            @p1 ama: Ahh man that brings back memories

            Lol @ the CRT monitors back then

        • Melong on 09/07/2019 - 09:05

          Dedicated wham?

          https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wsO-Td0hqXo

      • Shaun R on 06/07/2019 - 13:04
        +1

        I literally did make one for them…

    • Fuzor on 05/07/2019 - 21:45
      +1

      I enjoy using websites that an 8 year old could design…

      • Geoff-bargain on 06/07/2019 - 12:20
        +8

        That's pretty insulting, to 8 year olds.

    • deanylev on 06/07/2019 - 23:53
      +4

      They already have one! https://beta.msy.com.au/

      • twocsies on 07/07/2019 - 07:08
        +1

        Whoever they hired to make that website used the same database. Maybe they should consider fixing that while they are at it.

      • [Deactivated] on 08/07/2019 - 18:06
        +1

        I love that they have retained the PDFs - even has it's own section now. They are really refusing to let 1998 go!

    • nickxau on 07/07/2019 - 15:54
      +1

      Maybe they'll finally get a proper post-1998 website.

      Joke's on you! HA!

      Edit: Damn someone beat me to it!

    • mousie on 08/07/2019 - 12:19

      Keeping Frontpage alive!

    • frostman on 08/07/2019 - 13:23

      The website isn't the issue - it's the robots that work there.
      Discussion with them is binary:

      • Sorry sir, we dont have the ASUS ABCX Gaming ABX-G Motherboard
      • > Ok, do you have or recommend something similar (performance) in stock?
      • No sir
      • > OK do you know if this has a water pump connector?
      • I am not sure sir
      • > Is the Z390 Mobos out yet instead?
      • No
      • rambao9 on 08/07/2019 - 20:47
        +4

        To be fair, I think they are shying away from giving advice as it can be taken as recommendations and can potentially be misleading and wrong. Therefore to minimize the mistakes, binary.

      • HighAndDry on 17/07/2019 - 13:42

        This is part of their business model that keeps prices down - honestly if you need this kind of advice, MSY is not for you.

    • diddy50 on 08/07/2019 - 16:49

      I seriously love being able to search 'msy parts pricelist' and get all the prices I need.
      I don't even need to type that in, It pre-fills in!

    • nightshaide on 09/07/2019 - 11:58
      -2

      you mean like this one?
      https://beta.msy.com.au/

      • Hybroid on 09/07/2019 - 12:35
        -1

        No, that's just a standard template reskin.

  • kahn on 05/07/2019 - 19:30
    +53

    In typical MSY fashion, this purchase involved a "no returns accepted" clause.

    • Wystri Warrick on 05/07/2019 - 19:42
      +4

      Lol. Remember the ACCC 🤣.

      • [Deactivated] on 07/07/2019 - 17:10

        have they paid back their taxes?

  • blitz on 05/07/2019 - 19:59
    +1

    revenues of approximately $100 million per year.

    Wow. Wonder what profit is.

    • theHMASfriendship on 05/07/2019 - 20:33
      +58

      Profit is a financial gain, especially the difference between the amount earned and the amount spent in buying, operating, or producing something.

      • twocsies on 07/07/2019 - 07:09

        Is that gross profit though? Gross profit is the amount earned minus the cost of the products. Not net profit.

    • cloudy on 05/07/2019 - 21:07
      +3

      A reasonable estimate would be around 3-9% of revenue. So 3-9 mill, given the sale price of 17.5m, but 1m is a loan from MSY to vendee I’d say it’s profit is in the lower end of my range, so approx 3-4 mill in profit.

        • Presence on 05/07/2019 - 22:12
          +41

          You know profit is after paying staff right?

        • [Deactivated] on 17/07/2019 - 15:14

          They’re not selling the business. This is a reverse takeover so that MSY can acquire Lanka’s listing on the ASX without having to meet ASX listing rules. The next step is for Lanka Graphite to rename itself MSY Technology and change its ticker symbol to MSY.

      • gromit on 07/07/2019 - 13:37
        +1

        at 17.5m I doubt the profit would even be as high as 3-4 million, that is simply too high a return on investment unless the owners of MSY wanted out and didn't care about maximising price.

        • cloudy on 07/07/2019 - 20:07

          yea that was before I saw the sale price. I agree it could be even lower.

        • porkupine888 on 08/07/2019 - 12:46
          +1

          you're forgetting drop shipped and fell off the back of the truck items ;)

    • mousie on 08/07/2019 - 12:34

      Revenue < Net Profit.

      There is a hell of a lot of risk with MSY, unless they have consignment inventory from Vendors.. I don't think that they do. They also have such a wide range (and tail) of product. No one sells a profitable business that's easy!!

      • Mallard on 09/07/2019 - 07:32
        +1

        Revenue IS LESS THAN net profit? How does that work?

        • mousie on 09/07/2019 - 12:00
          +1

          Lol oops I made a boo boo

  • mbck on 05/07/2019 - 19:59

    What graphite company and msy? That's an interesting acquisition….wut

    • cloudy on 05/07/2019 - 21:08
      +9

      The graphite comoamny is a shell company, it’s by name only.

      • outlander on 08/07/2019 - 10:19

        Specific enough that you think you know what it is just by looking at it, boring enough that you don't want more, and general enough that if questioned they can deny its misleading nature
        ('We named the company graphite because we thought it sounded cool!')

      • SporadicUser on 08/07/2019 - 11:01

        Did you just spell "company" "comoamny"? How the hell did you do that.

      • sghetti on 08/07/2019 - 15:45
        +1

        I hope others appreciate this comment as much as I did. :)

        • ntt on 08/07/2019 - 16:18
          +2

          I guess they acquired MSY for 3.6, because it's not great, not terrible

  • p1 ama on 05/07/2019 - 20:17
    +11

    MSY hasn't been doing so well over the past two or three years. Every time I go to my local MSY, it's always empty, there used to be queues out the front door during busy times, BBQ's for the Sandy Bridge launch back in the day with a good number of people and by far the best prices on the market. Their prices aren't that great anymore and aren't any better (on average) than other chain computer stores.

    • Hybroid on 05/07/2019 - 20:50
      +4

      Well you can't expect to compete with online prices. As Amazon as others gain further stronghold onto the market here and offer far more competitive pricing on products, expect them and other store retailers to start shutting up shop.

      • p1 ama on 05/07/2019 - 23:52
        +6

        Not really, I don't buy any of my computer parts from Amazon, it's just from other retailers apart from MSY. I used to only shop at MSY because their prices are better than their competitors (e.g. PCCG, Scorptec, CPL…etc. other local stores). Now, they tend to be on the more expensive end.

        Look at the 9900K - $799 at MSY, $749 at PCCG. Even more ridiculous, 2080 Ti Windforce OC is $1809 at MSY, only $1599 at Computer Alliance (before the 10% off eBay discount). There are plenty of examples.

      • [Deactivated] on 06/07/2019 - 07:41
        +2

        The main reason Amazon is a player is the AusPost gives them a sweet heart deal at the expense of Australian companies.

        • coin saver on 06/07/2019 - 16:17

          So how do you work that out??

          • [Deactivated] on 06/07/2019 - 18:11
            +3

            @coin saver: Postage costs for parcels are not a level playing field.

            Small retailers like MSY can't compete with Amazon primarily because AusPost charges 100%-1000% more to deliver the same package.

          • cloudy on 06/07/2019 - 20:52
            +3

            @coin saver: isn't it obvious that Amazon can post you a few packs of tim tams for less than me posting a large letter to my neighbour.

            • Thefong on 07/07/2019 - 04:27
              +12

              @cloudy: Well, if you starting sending 20k parcels a week as well, I bet they'll do you a pretty sweet deal too

              • cloudy on 07/07/2019 - 20:55
                -2

                @Thefong: If you look at my prior posts I am not without knowledge in areas of business.

                From a man who knows a bit about distribution to a man who probably doesn't have the same inside knowledge, I can assure you it's not simply economies of scale.

                Amazon started a little over a year ago, it doesn't sell and send as much as some more established online players. But it pays amongst the lowest rates.

                Next thing you know, you might have you city council paying amazon to come set up.

                The market power to push establishments is unprecedented, mostly at the cost and subsidy of the tax payer.

                • Thefong on 07/07/2019 - 21:30
                  +6

                  @cloudy: I mean, I literally work for Aus Post, in their corporate offices, so I know a fair bit about how it works, but I'm sure you as an outsider knows more than me right?

                  • cloudy on 09/07/2019 - 16:57
                    -4

                    @Thefong: I like the my thang is bigger than yours comment.

                    So if you are so deep in knowledge why don’t you share, some solid information other than “hey they post a lot so they get a discount”

                    • Thefong on 09/07/2019 - 17:36

                      @cloudy: Sure, I'll violate their account privacy and tell you their parcel costs per unit. That's a fantastic idea. Got any others?

                      • cloudy on 09/07/2019 - 20:16

                        @Thefong: Did I ask for that?

                        you're the ones that makes a statement without any attempts to back it up.

                        • cloudy on 10/07/2019 - 22:16

                          @cloudy: As I thought, nothing.

                          Amazon reported just over 100mill in retail sales in 2018. catch group or Kogan individually pulled close to triple that.

                          Neither can offer shipping rates amazon does. Many during investment conferences note the disparity between shipping offers made by services like AP and others to align with amazon.

                          Bring on the negs guys. I'm happy to collect them if you believe sending 20k parcels a week (as per Fong) is some sorta answer to cheap shipping.

                    • HighAndDry on 17/07/2019 - 13:50

                      @cloudy:

                      I like the my thang is bigger than yours comment.

                      You LITERALLY said this:

                      From a man who knows a bit about distribution to a man who probably doesn't have the same inside knowledge

                      And now you're complaining because someone else actually has more inside knowledge? Hahaha.

                      • cloudy on 17/07/2019 - 17:13

                        @HighAndDry: I wasn’t complaining, I said I like it, don’t know why you think it’s a compliant :s.

                        I’ve read thru his comments made previously, nothing suggests he is what he says he is.

                        Look at what he said, he says amazon posts 20,000 parcels a week, he is BS if he is being truthful. They would be sending heaps more than that.

                        So do you believe him? Shrugs.

                        • HighAndDry on 17/07/2019 - 17:19

                          @cloudy: Ah. Mistakenly assumed sarcasm, my bad.

                          Eh - volume-based/bulk discounts are nothing new. The 20k parcels is obviously a rough number but the underlying point is plausible.

                          • cloudy on 17/07/2019 - 22:48

                            @HighAndDry: yea, no doubt I believe the underlying point, in fact I know it to be true. My point, which I see is unclear, is that there is a perception out there Amazon uses its giant status and market power to "entice" subsidise from goverments (plus agencies), no limited to, but including auspost.

                            For example, I've never in my corporate life, heard a company open a tender process for cities to competitively provide tax payer subsidise to open their second headquarters. Basically, saying, how much support(direct financial, or indirect tax relief) will City ABC offer me to locate there. FT headline "Amazon has received 238 applications from cities across North America to host its new headquarters"

                            Now back to Fong, has happily said he works for AP, but cant even provide some basics non-commercial info like average postage cost of AP, typical discounts, volume discounts possible, etc.

                            I didn't ask for anything Amazon specific, yet he seems to be very quick to point to what he cant provide yet providing nothing to support his claim that he works there.

                            Also, I say 20k is BS, coz as a rough number its not even close. You can find and work out Kogans sales, and COTD, which are smaller than Amazon. And my conservative guess is its bigger than 20k per week.
                            Hence why I call Fong BS. I could very well be wrong.

                            • HighAndDry on 18/07/2019 - 11:41

                              @cloudy:

                              For example, I've never in my corporate life, heard a company open a tender process for cities to competitively provide tax payer subsidise to open their second headquarters.

                              There aren't a lot of companies with the ability to create jobs and drive business that Amazon does. No one forced those cities to participate in the process, so they obviously think there's something in it for them.

                              • cloudy on 18/07/2019 - 22:40

                                @HighAndDry: Correct me if im wrong, but doesn't every business create jobs. I mean, even if you self employ, its a job. :S
                                If you're trying to say the scale of amazon. Well, that's just saying every big business deserve tax breaks/subsidise due to being big :S…

                                Of course there is something in it for civilisation to conduct commerce, to just say no one was forced doesn't mean what's done is good or right. No one forces anyone to use FB or google, but why is there such debate about rights of users data. Seems like such shallow arguments if you don't mind me saying.

                                • HighAndDry on 19/07/2019 - 10:06

                                  @cloudy:

                                  Well, that's just saying every big business deserve tax breaks/subsidise due to being big

                                  They don't deserve it - Amazon doesn't "deserve" it either. But it's basically a competition for who gets the jobs and cashflow created by having Amazon, the same way as shops compete for your business. None of them "deserve" your business, but it's still up to you to choose where you shop at.

                                  Same here - Amazon is just choosing where to set up their HQ, and the various states are, because they think they'll benefit, giving Amazon reasons. Subsidies/tax breaks are like one shop giving you a discount to shop with them.

              • resisting the urge on 17/07/2019 - 16:32

                @Thefong: True that.

                But no matter who you are, AusPost charge about a billion times more than China post (to post to a local AU address), so small business in Oz cannot compete with even small business in China, let alone Taiwan,HK and even Malaysia. Not sure about Indonesia/Thailand/Vietnam etc.

                There is some kind of International postal services agreement that allows postal services to charge whatever they find acceptable, and overseas ones (that receive it must accept and deliver, no matter what rate was charged).

                That's why even large packages sent from China incur less postage than the smallest parcel here in Oz. It's amazing, but I've never seen an item from anywhere other than the PRC purchased and delivered by international airmail for less than one AU dollar. Are the postal services in other SE Asian countries, and India, charging that much more than Chinapost?

                • Thefong on 17/07/2019 - 18:23

                  @resisting the urge: That's nothing to do with Aus Post, and a whole lot to do with international free trade agreements. I believe that's meant to be the crux of the Dorito Overlord of America's current bitch with China, their trade agreements are putting local stores out of business

                  • resisting the urge on 21/07/2019 - 13:09

                    @Thefong: @TheFong and @coin saver

                    The amount AusPost charge for local delivery is everything to do with them.

                    It's like Telstra charging more to call next door as you could call overseas for 20 years ago when VoIP started. (And no, this was not because of the Internet, Telstra still charge multiples more for overseas calls than other providers).

                    Note that the int'l post agreements haven't changed. But AusPost charges have increased numerous year after year. The volume of deliveries has gone up, so costs should have come down.

                    Instead they continue to increase the cost of local postage. They are making it harder for local vendors, and easier for overseas vendors. Doing this has single-handedly created the market you see today.

                    Not sure? Think how local post prices have ramped. Now think how Int'l post deliveries have ramped. The connection is clear as day.

                    AusPost is just charging local vendors for the cost of delivering Int'l vendors parcels.

                    This has sent local vendors to the wall before they can even get a foothold in eCommerce. Great for Chief executive bonuses, but also in line with the design America (Silicon Valley) uses to conquer world trade. China benefits only because it is the lowest cost source. It is not breaking any Int'l postal rules.

                    And as soon as its cheaper to source in other places, the whole wretched business will gradually move there too.

                    And you guys blame China and FTAs! This is not a matter of chicken and egg. China is only providing the cheapest goods, and selling them to everyone as best it can. Who loses and who wins is not AusPost (so far) or Int'l post agreements, but local business, and local consumers.

                    All the while Amazon and eBay win. Sure it'll end in tears, but where would OzB be without a $1 joyride to the wall like this?

            • coin saver on 07/07/2019 - 07:17

              @cloudy: Very obvious however international postage cost is out of AustPost's hands.For postage within Australia as Thefong says "Well, if you starting sending 20k parcels a week as well, I bet they'll do you a pretty sweet deal too"

              • Hybroid on 07/07/2019 - 14:29
                +1

                @coin saver: Of course economies of scale play a large factor but this will only be temporary until Amazon start their own distribution network here (like other countries) and no longer rely on AusPost.

              • resisting the urge on 21/07/2019 - 13:26

                @coin saver: Can you suggest an example?

                E.g.

                Q. Dear AusPost, how much to ship 20,000 parcels within Au every week?
                A. No less than 5-10X what it costs to ship them from China to Aus.

                Example;
                It costs less than $1 to buy a small component from China inc delivery
                Inc. Item cost, packing, time to pack, time to post, time to do customs declaration.
                Same thing shipped within Au? At present, Avg is about $10

                Q. Dear AusPost, how much to ship 20,000 parcels to China every week?
                A. No less than 10-20X what it costs to ship them from China to Aus.

                Example;
                It costs less than $1 to buy a small component from China inc delivery
                Inc. Item cost, packing, time to pack, time to post, time to do customs declaration.
                Same thing sent to China? At present, Avg must be about $15

                • coin saver on 21/07/2019 - 18:35

                  @resisting the urge: Your point ??

                  • resisting the urge on 22/07/2019 - 11:15

                    @coin saver: Oh, just that we all (or at least I) want to know what this 'sweet deal' you talk of is. Plenty of people comment similarly, it is like you all seem to think AusPost will come to the party and help a local business compete, so long as it does volume.

                    But in reality we all pay the >10X prices which so far have prevented the development of any competing eCommerce retail site, or vendor, in Australia that remains a competitor to eBay and Amazon.

                    I posit there are no sweet deals, that any volume discount is less than 50% of retail, which at best is a better worse deal. 10X means local business is unable to compete. Paying 5X is makes it half as bad, but still bad. This is a structural pricing problem- eg by design, and is well understood by AusPost and other delivery businesses, not just Amazon and friends. AusPost have been bleating they are only increaing prices due to the cost of local deliveries for decades and it seems noone has called them to account for it.

                    The only local competitor is/was Gumtree, which was unable to grow further (and had grown to a size where it was worth the attention of eBay's acquisition group). If AusPost prices enabled Gumtree vendors to compete with overseas vendors, Gumtree could have continued to grow (would have grown faster too), as would local ecommerce vendors along with it, (because all of them are effectively absorbing increases in local freight costs (which should have been reducing as local volumes increase), which are primarily set and controlled by AusPost, and which AusPost blatantly continues to use/abuse to subsidise the delivery of the competition's product.

                    Not to mention all the local retailers using eBay and their own eCommerce sites.

                    • coin saver on 22/07/2019 - 12:40

                      @resisting the urge: So who in Australia is going to subsidise all of the Australian postage? If you think you can do it cheaper even without the added burden of the o/seas items go ahead.By the way Aust Post gives discounts for over 300 items."If AusPost prices enabled Gumtree vendors to compete with overseas vendors, Gumtree could have continued to grow" Wrong Ebay would have closed it down.

                      • resisting the urge on 23/07/2019 - 09:50

                        @coin saver: @coin saver; "Aust Post gives discounts for over 300 items."

                        Sure, but what discount? 50% is not much help

                        "Wrong Ebay would have closed it down."

                        You are too absolute; eBay doesn't control Gumtree or governments (that much), so it could not close gumtree down. OK it might have tried to send gumtree broke, but that is what it had been doing for a very a long time- without any success.

                        The moment Gumtree could link user accounts to new forms of bank-bank payments and get real time verification, like is now possible, they wouldn't need PayPal. Then eventually when accepting things like crypto and libra, and eBay model would have begun to shake hard.

                        Plenty of investors would have driven a global disruption, keen to get a slice of eBay/PayPal pie. Now eCommerce is a duopoly (in english speaking and most other countries at least), and people think the war is done move on. The war is on because of some pretty serious failings that we need to learn from.

                        The postal service was setup to grow the country, not make money. Is the imperative any different since 2000, when local business and the entire economy faced began facing existential competitive threats? If subsidising local deliveries (say instead of 10% less tax-free diesel for mining companies) kept them trading, let alone enabled them to compete globally, would it not be infinitely better than having eBay and Amazon taxing every purchase we make from now until eternity?

                        Let alone get rid of the problem of zero cost local deliveries under the International post agreement presenting an existential threat to AusPost, who now are just continuing to increase charges to pay for the problem, but at some point (already?) this will no longer be a viable stop-gap and it will collapse at another enormous cost to the community

                        • coin saver on 23/07/2019 - 10:12

                          @resisting the urge: Cant be bothered replying to most of your rant but i will to this "eBay doesn't control Gumtree" they own it so i would think they have some control.

                          • resisting the urge on 23/07/2019 - 10:44

                            @coin saver: eBay only acquired gumtree because they couldn't get rid of it any other way- oh sorry it was a little TL/DR?; What lead gumtree to sell out was the cost of local deliveries. Sorry I offended by not getting across all that inside 140 chars, it is just what happened to the future of local ecommerce, inc. MSY and its competitors.

                            • coin saver on 23/07/2019 - 12:53

                              @resisting the urge: As i said you are just rambling on you say " eBay doesn't control Gumtree or governments (that much), so it could not close gumtree down." and then you say "eBay only acquired gumtree" normally when myself and others acquire something we take control of it.."What lead gumtree to sell out was the cost of local deliveries" Gumtree was not even an Australian company in fact Australia is/was only a small part of the site.

                              • resisting the urge on 23/07/2019 - 20:26

                                @coin saver: I see they sold in 2005, I imagined a lot later. And indeed, not local. My main point is that you can't get local eCommerce moving if its cheaper for overseas vendors to ship here because the local postal service just ratchets up your charges to cover their effort in doing your competitions deliveries. And you commented AusPost does 'sweet deals' or the like…

                                We still don't know how sweet the deals are, or if in fact, they are bittersweet, or just plain sour.

            • DogGunn on 08/07/2019 - 12:32

              @cloudy: And yet they're probably still doing it at a loss.

              There's a reason why they started requiring minimum for low value products.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join