3 ms·
> And the fact that the 60cm zipper costs 10$ and the 70cm one costs 12$ tells me that the local stores (or whatever intermediate responsible for the price) are
by mschuster91 1y ago
> And the fact that the 60cm zipper costs 10$ and the 70cm one costs 12$ tells me that the local stores (or whatever intermediate responsible for the price) are simply abusing.
Again: stock keeping costs money. That is what you primarily pay for. Real estate isn't cheap, especially not in urban areas, so a lot of products just get dropped outright and the products that move very slowly but can't be dropped (what would a sewing store be if it didn't carry a few zippers?) get marked up to pay for the space they consume in storage.
- palata 1y agoAre you serious? The 70cm zipper takes pretty much exactly the same space as the 60cm one. It's not like they store 2 millions of them: all of them are on the rack. The 70cm just go 10cm lower on the ground. Same space. You'll have to do better if you want to justify that those 10cm are worth 2$.
- palata 1y agoJust to be clear: I am for regulations, and I do favour the local merchants (e.g. by almost not using Amazon). I just chose a specific example (the zipper) where I think the local merchant clearly abuses, to say that it goes both ways. I'm fine paying more if it helps the local merchant, but I am not fine getting screwed by them. I won't buy a bottle of water for 200$, even if it's sold at a local store.