Zamels in hot water...They should have checked ozbargain first!!

Anyone see this article? http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/retailer-zamels-f…

To quote a few bits:

The punishment follows a decision last year that the company breached the Trade Practices Act by using misleading "dual pricing" in catalogue and flyer sales promotions promoting huge savings.

Dozens of items including pendants, chains, bracelets and earrings were advertised with statements such as "was $275, now $149" and "was $139, now $69" or featured a "strike through" price with a line drawn through it.

But the court found Zamel's regularly discounted and did not sell, or rarely sold, the goods at the higher price before the sale."

I thought that would be pretty standard - not just among jewellers, but:

  • Computer stores
  • Car yards
  • Clothes stores
  • And the list goes on!!

Then they give a good warning (and a good ad) for all good ozbargainers:

University of Melbourne consumer psychologist Dr Brent Coker said people often were suspicious of sales but still let themselves be duped into buying anyway.

"Humans are not logical from a psychological perspective, the accuracy of our decisions are never as accurate as we think they are," Dr Coker said.

"It is not really the price that matters it is the the price gap. The bigger the gap the more likely we are to buy.

"It is also the scarcity thing, we have all been bitten by wanting to buy something but we left it and then we go back and it is gone, it is a bad feeling and we don't want to feel it again."

Dr Coker said the sale sign helped us override any logical thinking.

He recommended purchasers should wait longer before purchasing or check the real price on their smart phone before we buy."

Related Stores

zamels.com.au
zamels.com.au

Comments

  • +1

    Meow

  • Fashion reflection better see.

  • +1

    cheers to the accc.

    • -1

      Yes, cheers to the ACCC. Because they're making Zamels refund all the customers. Oh wait. It goes into government coffers. And the retailers will have to find a way to make up for that penalty. Yey, we all get stung even more.

      The ACCC's new powers to fine retailers for a range of things is basically a new form of taxation.

      The retailer should be forced to issue refunds to customers instead.

      • +1

        Fine in theory, but impossible in practice.

        Assuming it is a tax, you do realise that tax goes to the benefit of all Australians yes? Would you rather we had no tax (/government)?

      • +1

        but customers could argue they were mislead by the advertising and ask for a refund or reduction, especially if the accc prevail after appeals. part of their settlement might include such conditions.

        ultimately it's going to benefit all consumers. other jewellers and retailers are certainly going to take notice.

  • Jeez these retailers should follow Coles and Woolworths

    they have a tag saying we last sold xx product for x on this date
    and this is our new lower price

    • I haven't read all the tags in detail, but I have definately seen one of those 'new low price' tags on a product which had been the same price for years. I assume they upped the price for a short while before applying the tag and I missed that.

    • i remember coles/woolies advertising moro oil was $49 now $2x up to a year after the price dropped.

  • is it just me or has anyone else noticed that Spotlight seem to do the same thing?

  • "Jeez these retailers should follow Coles and Woolworths

    they have a tag saying we last sold xx product for x on this date
    and this is our new lower price"

    Yes but i suspect on some items that woolies might have sold that item for that price say for 1 week in october 2011 in Bundaberg but maybe i am in vic park in WA.

    They dont actually say "in this store for the last 2 years"

    So they are not telling lies, just pushing a friendship.

    suspect!

Login or Join to leave a comment