Talk:Suggested retail price
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Removed text because there's no citation that indicates it's accurate:
- Manipulation of retail price is common in the U.S., where companies often inflate these numbers, then give greater supposed "discounts" to create false value. This is especially common at retail chains which act as their own distributors and outsource manufacturing, thereby allowing them to set their own retail prices.
Removed text, what is "Chemist" and "Newsagent"?:
- SRP is therefore usually only allowed in markets where special circumstances justify it. For example, Chemist and Newsagent might be allow SRP, so that they can afford to spread out and serve small communtites.
Left this in, but I'd like to know what ruling it's referring to:
- These were determined to be in restraint of free trade.
This sentence is gibberish. What's it trying to convey?
- A common use is due to statutory requirements regarding automobile sales in the United States.
--170.171.1.5 14:09, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
I've seen numerous examples, most especially with new technology and computer products, where the "list price" differs from the manufacturer's suggested retail price. Here's my take: MSRP is the manufacturer's prediction of the product's price before it is released on the market. Obviously, this price prediction may be unreasonably low skewed by the manufacturer's need for good press and investor optimism to drive their shares higher. List price, on the other hand, is claimed by the retailer to be the highest price that it could find a supplier selling the product to it, regardless of whether the retailer is actually purchasing from that supplier (?). Anyway, customers should not trust comparisons to the "list price" and should instead demand comparisons to the MSRP. Better yet, a customer should be looking at a sampling of the market to get an idea of the product's "real" price. - Maybe someone with expertise on the subject can substantiate this with some references and add this concept to the main entry.
[edit] MSRP?
Doesn't MSRP actually stand for Monroney Sticker Price? CoolGuy 23:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
On the line "Suggested prices can also be manipulated to be unreasonably high, allowing retailers to use deceptive advertising by showing the excessive price and then their actual selling price, implying to customers that they are somehow getting a "discount" or a "great deal"[citation needed].", I don't see why a citation is needed on the logical discussion of what can or cannot happen, as the writer does not actually attempt to make claims on the frequency of what can or cannot happen (nor does the writer make claim about what actually does or doesn't happen- at least with respect to this sentence). I believe that this sentence is meaningful analysis of what could happen - even though it is a logical opinion, since the writer is not attempting to make any significant claim (i.e., about what does or doesn't happen, or is or isn't true; rather, the writer probes on possibility by using the word "can" to imply that: it is within the realm of possibility). Furthermore, I have found that line of analysis to be a logical continuance of fact, and I have also found that line of analysis to be insightful and reasonable. I believe that when a reader comes to read analysis, that reader, however persuaded, is still free to form independent analysis. I also believe that overzealousness with the issue of citations and verifiability or credibility can cause great harm, and that the use of citations is misapplied when placed on non-expert analysis (the writer does not attempt to bolster their analysis with professional credentials). In sum, I don't think this sentence possesses enough factual spirit to warrant a need for citations; further, I think that this sentence possesses enough meaningful analysis as would further a reader's insight on this matter, and should consequentially not be removed. JudasIscariot (talk) 20:39, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
