Accommodation pricing for the industry reviewer's ...your opinion?

mep said:

Steve-how can a manufacturer whose business model allows no sales directly to consumers claim a loss when selling a piece of gear to a reviewer for the same price they would have received from a dealer? It's all a wash unless the manufacturer sweetens the pot by selling it at his true cost with no profit added.

Click to expand...

metaphacts said:

Accomodation pricing and dealer cost are rarely the same.

Click to expand...

metaphacts said:

No and. Simply the fallacy that they are the same has been perpetuated throughout the thread.

Click to expand...

mep said:

So I'm asking you what is the truth if you know it? Is the accomodation price the actual price of labor, materials, overhead, but no profit? Or is it something considerably less?

Click to expand...

metaphacts said:

It varies by manufacturer and distributor. Some consider accommodation a straight marketing cost and price accordingly. Others take reduced margins. Still others sell at finished goods cost. There is no set formula by which everyone abides.

Click to expand...

Jeff Fritz said:

I agree that it varies. But my experience is that 40-50% off is overwhelmingly the norm.

Are in the industry? It sounds like you might be . . .

Click to expand...

amirm said:

Guys, is there more to be said here? I don't think it is fair to keep beating up our members from publishing industry over and over again with the same issue . We all have ethics issues of various types and some amount is always tolerated. Tell me you never send a personal email with your work computer. Tell me you don't eat a more expensive meal when on company account than yours. We can't expect others to be saints when we ourselves are not in our own day jobs .

If there is a new point to be made, let's make it. Otherwise, let's not keep repeating that accommodation pricing is bad six different ways. We are just grinding people without anything constructive coming out of it at this point.

Click to expand...

metaphacts said:

Don't believe I said anything good bad or indifferent about the recipients of accommodation pricing.

I simply clarified what it is and what it is not relative to normal dealer cost.

Click to expand...

amirm said:

Sorry, my post had nothing to do with your remarks. It was an assessment of the entire thread which is at page 16 now. You are fine.

Click to expand...

amirm said:

Guys, is there more to be said here? I don't think it is fair to keep beating up our members from publishing industry over and over again with the same issue . We all have ethics issues of various types and some amount is always tolerated. Tell me you never send a personal email with your work computer. Tell me you don't eat a more expensive meal when on company account than yours. We can't expect others to be saints when we ourselves are not in our own day jobs .

If there is a new point to be made, let's make it. Otherwise, let's not keep repeating that accommodation pricing is bad six different ways. We are just grinding people without anything constructive coming out of it at this point.

Click to expand...

Jeff Fritz said:

Thank you for your post, Amir. And with that said Randall and I will back out of this one completely.

Click to expand...

caesar said:

A famous quote by Justice Lewis Brandeis comes to mind that can help clear up some of the suspicions due to this practice: Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

So is it too much to ask for complete transparency from both magazines and manufacturers? Which reviewers did they sell to? How much did the reviewer pay? How long did the reviewer hold on to the piece of gear? How much did he sell it for?

Of course, there could be kick-backs and such, but this will be a great start.

Click to expand...

mep said:

Caesar-You might as well start believing in the Tooth Fairy again if you think this is going to happen. I think this thread is dead. If not, it should be.

Click to expand...