Target to stop carrying Amazon Kindle

[ApK]

Originally Posted by BeccaPrice

The trouble is, you can usually find *similar* models on line, but never the exact model you saw in the store. I found this to be true with Consumer Reports reviews - they'll rate something very highly, but I can never find that exact model in the store.

Although I was aware of it many years ago with mattresses, it seems to be more prevalent in the Walmart era. Manufactures will produce a SKU just for a particular retailer. Sometimes it's an exclusive color, or special packaging, but other times it's just the identical thing with a different number on the label. There may be some non-evil reasons behind this in many cases, but it sure seems like it is strictly for the purpose of defeating comparison shopping and price matching.

[morriss003]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

But Amazon doesn't sell the Kindle Fire for $199 w/ a free $50 gift card. Nor do the sell the Kindle NT for $79 w/ a free $30 gift card. But Walmart sure does. Therefore, I buy from them.

I picked up a kindle with a $30 gc this weekend. $52 total after the gc and I spend at least $30 at Walmart almost every two weeks.

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by RainingLemur

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Targe...coming_id29719

I did a quick search, and that was the first one I stumbled into. Doesn't say definitively, but I guess what they speculate makes some sense, what with there being mini-Apple stores in Target.

Thanks for the article! I can see the point...but it seems more inflammatory than researched. The writer said "assuming."

Originally Posted by Sydney's Mom

How can they do this?

By telling you to stop cause they don't allow it. I've only had one or two people stop me (the most recent when looking for grills). Most people just ignore it.

[Sydney's Mom]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

By telling you to stop cause they don't allow it. I've only had one or two people stop me (the most recent when looking for grills). Most people just ignore it.

OMG, if someone ever stuck their nose into what I was typing on my phone . . . but then I have never done that. I usually do my research on the computer before I go shopping. If I have decided I need to have something right away, or I don't care if I can get it $5 cheaper, I might get it locally, but otherwise, I will order it.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Sydney's Mom

OMG, if someone ever stuck their nose into what I was typing on my phone . . .

F'in-A, Bubba.

Target is doing what they reasonably can, choosing not to do business with a company who appears to be encouraging that, but to treat a CUSTOMER that way? Dot dot dot is right.

ApK

[luismonkey]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

By telling you to stop cause they don't allow it. I've only had one or two people stop me (the most recent when looking for grills). Most people just ignore it.

I wonder if we'll see signs posted one day saying not to do it.

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by Sydney's Mom

OMG, if someone ever stuck their nose into what I was typing on my phone . . . but then I have never done that. I usually do my research on the computer before I go shopping. If I have decided I need to have something right away, or I don't care if I can get it $5 cheaper, I might get it locally, but otherwise, I will order it.

It's the scan app.

[lostmymarbles]

I have a gut feeling Apple is behind this.
No more Amazon at Target... That's gotta hurt.

[twowheels]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

I think I saw this mentioned in a different thread...

I can imagine a lot of stores hate that Amazon does this. In my local Lowes & Home Depot they match all prices except Amazon and some of the more diligent staff will stop you from price checking. (Some, but not a great deal, lol).

I often use my scan app in the store, not to price check, but to read reviews on Amazon. If they don't like it, too bad. They can ask me to leave, it's their private property, but they risk losing actual sales.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by twowheels

They can ask me to leave, it's their private property, but they risk losing actual sales.

I think it would also be considered a public accommodation, so they might be exposing themselves to more than just lost sales and disgruntled customers.

[yoho]

Originally Posted by taming

From The Verge: http://www.theverge.com/2012/5/2/299...ct-of-interest



In another thread, someone noticed that at least one other Target no longer had Kobo devices. Could be a trend...

why is so? i think kindle e-book series could definitely be profitable. more and more people are doing their readings via kindle e-books. a huge market, right?

[heeby]

Originally Posted by JonathanH

The New York Times quotes a Target exec from January:

“What we aren’t willing to do is let online-only retailers use our brick-and-mortar stores as a showroom for their products and undercut our prices,” Target executives wrote in a letter to vendors, asking them to think of new pricing and inventory strategies, according to a note that Deborah Weinswig, a Citi analyst, sent to clients.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/03/bu...g-kindles.html

They aren't going to sell anything if they remove all items people can buy online cheaper. Sounds like a bunch of whining to me. And they can't stop people from checking something out in their store and choosing to buy elsewhere if their price is too high. This won't save them...it will hurt them.

I take all factors into consideration when deciding to buy. I make that decision after seeing the item and comparing prices. If there isn't a significant difference I buy locally but I will not pay 25% more etc. If Target doesn't like that then they can suck it.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by heeby

They aren't going to sell anything if they remove all items people can buy online cheaper. Sounds like a bunch of whining to me. And they can't stop people from checking something out in their store and choosing to buy elsewhere if their price is too high. This won't save them...it will hurt them.

I take all factors into consideration when deciding to buy. I make that decision after seeing the item and comparing prices. If there isn't a significant difference I buy locally but I will not pay 25% more etc. If Target doesn't like that then they can suck it.

I does seem somewhat unethical to go and look at products at a physical retailer, whose prices have to be higher because their costs are higher, and then buy the equivalent item at an online seller. If you persist in that, don't be surprised if, in a year or two, there are no more retail outlets.

[taming]

Wal-Mart has been advertising that they will meet bricks and mortar competitor's prices at the till. I wonder if that includes prices discovered in an app?

[ApK]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I does seem somewhat unethical to go and look at products at a physical retailer, whose prices have to be higher because their costs are higher, and then buy the equivalent item at an online seller. If you persist in that, don't be surprised if, in a year or two, there are no more retail outlets.

It's true that it could be the demise of the outlet (I used to work at an AT&T Phone Center...next to a Sears...there are no more Phone Centers.....) but I don't see it as unethical in any way.
They want you in the store, they run loss leaders to get you in the store, they merchandise to get you in the store. If you are not in the store you cannot buy anything, and if you are in the store you might see a sale, or a special deal, or an impulse item or something else you want to buy that you were not shopping for, and even if you are in there with the intention of buying somewhere else, they now have the opportunity to turn you into a customer.
This is how stores survive, and why they are all not just nondescript storefronts with a only a small order counter inside...that would be much more cost-effective on real estate and fixtures, but they would only sell to people who have already decided to buy from them.
It is not unethical to shop in a store with no intention of buying.
If stores close because of it, the market has spoken, it's not an ethical failure.