Comments on: Charging Outrageous Prices Because We Can

By: John

John — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:25:52 +0000

When is the last time anyone paid the asking price for a car. I can ask what ever I want for whatever I want. People will only pay what they think the car is worth. This sticker is to keep people like you from even looking at this car. You dont deserve to own it. That is why you don’t have one. Keep drooling buddy.

By: Michael

Michael — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 13:22:22 +0000

63,000 for the mustang,,,, What a joke.

By: car tuning

car tuning — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:07:50 +0000

For service professionals, hikes can come if they are of limited number or exceptional ability.

I am all for the market handling itself with the exception of basic needs providers and unlawful business practices

By: Leroy Brown

Leroy Brown — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 02:19:12 +0000

It’s not gouging, it’s charging with the market can bear. As long as we’re not talking about necessary day-to-day items like food and water, I saw more power to them. Boo-hoo to the folks who can’t buy their non-essential 500 HP muscle car because the dealer is asking too much. If the dealer can get $20k over sticker then he should. By selling at sticker, he would be making an extremely poor business decision. Anyone in the business world is nodding their heads for sure.

By: Chris Young - Ticket Pepper

Chris Young - Ticket Pepper — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 06:54:20 +0000

Nothing surprises me in this world… although my capitalistic side actually is impressed that the dealer was able to get away with it

By: Katie Konrath

Katie Konrath — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 16:38:25 +0000

Personally, I would say that a $20,000 price increase is not an ethical decision. Yes, the same house would cost vastly different amounts in different locations, but a car is a mobile product that can be bought from anywhere.

Also, people who have the money to spend on $60,000 are likely to have the money to buy very nice cars much more frequently than the regular car buyer. Despite having the extra money, however, I doubt that they would be thrilled to find out how much they had overpaid.

The whole point of paying a lot of money for something is being able to show off the expensive thing. If they’re willing to drop $60,000 on a car, they want a car that lives up to the purchase price. Beautiful as the above car is, it’s still only a $40,000 car to many people.

I recently had a similar situation happen to me (although with a slightly cheaper product). I was about to sign-up for German classes on the school’s website, but decided to go into the school to ask them some questions in person. Once there, I found out that they had 2 sets of prices for the same class: $680 for an 8 week class when booked on the internet, but only $440/8 weeks when booked at the school.

Needless to say, I was furious. The school was gouging non-local students just it could. Luckily, I hadn’t paid yet and was able to get the cheaper price, but my trust and opinion of the school plummeted.

It turns out that the classes are decent, but I would never recommend the school to anyone. They sent a very strong message to me that they weren’t interested in helping me learn–they were only interested in getting as much money out of my pocket as possible.

I can’t imagine anyone feeling positive about a company that cheats them.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:31:03 +0000

And I like having friends that help me out (or I can help) when there’s a need.

By: Marti

Marti — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 19:51:07 +0000

Hmmm…

I still think it’s gouging to up the price of a $100 a night room, to $500. Often in a crisis situation like this, the hotels will ask folks to double up or share.
If I checked into a hotel during a natural disaster, I’d be more willing to extend a helping hand to a stranger if I hadn’t just been put in a bad mood by being gouged by the hotelier.

Regarding staff, they might stay put without additional pay, for their own safety or a sense of community/responsibility to the guests.

But I’m an old hippie who likes to see the world through utopian eyes – LOL

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 19:08:56 +0000

But the public animosity consideration is a completely separate issue, isn’t Marti? Then it becomes a business decision weighing out which is better, the short term windfall profit, or the long term good will.

If I’m running to high ground from a hurricane (something I’ve done a few times here in the Southeast) an exorbitantly high priced hotel might be a good thing.

For example I might be more inclined to drive an extra couple hours up the road to a friends house if the hotels are charging $500/night. Whereas at the normal $100/night I might take that room and not leave it for someone who doesn’t have a friend to stay with.

Or a family of 4 might decide to share 1 room at $500 instead of taking up 2 or 3 rooms at $100, leaving more rooms for other people who have no where else to go.

Then there are the extra staff costs that the hotel is going to have to pay to keep their employees at work instead of off taking care of their personal affairs during a disaster. Perhaps the hotel would be operating at a big loss if they didn’t charge significantly higher than their normal rates.

Is it still gouging then?

By: Marti

Marti — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:15:33 +0000

I think it becomes gouging when the situation is a crisis, like a natural disaster. If the hotel operator in NYC gets a sudden influx due to a smash show or huge convention traffic, raising the price makes good economic sense. The hotel operator who raises prices to hurricane victims is perhaps making more in the short term, but I think it is unethical and will create antagonism with the public. I certainly wouldn’t patronize in the future (and in fact would probably bad-mouth to the heavens – lol) someone who gouged me during a crisis like a natural disaster. Is the short term profit worth the long-term hostility?