Quote:
Originally Posted by TimW
Earlier you mentioned "items" and here you refer to "things." The law and the amendment were specifically about books. I got the impression you thought otherwise. If the law says "no discounts more than 5% on books" and the amendment prohibits piggybacking free shipping with the 5% discount, I would think it would be fairly easy to identify selling at a loss. I wouldn't think it's possible to run a loss with a product that can't be discounted more than 5%, is it?
http://m.france24.com/en/20140711-am...1-cent-charge/ |
I'm no lawyer, or anything related to the courts, so please don't read anything special into my use of "items" and "things" in different places. I meant them to mean the same thing.
You have a good point about my argument about selling at a loss being inconsistent with the stance of the French government. If you have enough profit from not being able to discount the books much, you can put that towards reducing the shipping costs by my arguments. Okay, I won't speak for the French government anymore, since I don't seem to be able to articulate their stance properly.
