Overseas Purchasing - GST Threshold about to be reduced

Forums › Off topic › Overseas Purchasing - GST Threshold about to be reduced

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11

3262 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1358065 3-Aug-2015 18:04

frankv:
Geektastic:

So in essence, it is because Kiwi shop owners feel entitled to rip off their customers?

NO! It's because *Nike* feels entitled to rip off their NZ customers. Nike boosts the price in NZ to whatever they can get away with. Hence parallel imported Nikes are much cheaper.

Yep when we were last overseas we stocked up on shoes, and when we head off overseas again we will be buying more.

richms

28187 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1358072 3-Aug-2015 18:09

Friends seem to be accumulating suitcases from their overseas trips. Leave with none come back with 3 sometimes.

Richard rich.ms

mattwnz

20163 posts

Uber Geek

#1358106 3-Aug-2015 18:53

sir1963:
frankv:
Geektastic:

So in essence, it is because Kiwi shop owners feel entitled to rip off their customers?

NO! It's because *Nike* feels entitled to rip off their NZ customers. Nike boosts the price in NZ to whatever they can get away with. Hence parallel imported Nikes are much cheaper.

Yep when we were last overseas we stocked up on shoes, and when we head off overseas again we will be buying more.

Prior to parallel importing, shoes like nike in NZ were incredibly expensive locally. I recall back in the 90's, nikes were well north of $200 for a good pair. It was very rare to find any good brands for under $100. But prices have come down a lot considering inflation, as a good pair today is less than $200, and many good brands are under $100. So I put that down to the competitive nature of parallel importing. Infact I recall hearing one of the CEOs of one of the large sportwear stores saying the same thing.

Dreal

417 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1358161 3-Aug-2015 20:05

mattwnz:
sir1963:
frankv:
Geektastic:

So in essence, it is because Kiwi shop owners feel entitled to rip off their customers?

NO! It's because *Nike* feels entitled to rip off their NZ customers. Nike boosts the price in NZ to whatever they can get away with. Hence parallel imported Nikes are much cheaper.

Yep when we were last overseas we stocked up on shoes, and when we head off overseas again we will be buying more.

Prior to parallel importing, shoes like nike in NZ were incredibly expensive locally. I recall back in the 90's, nikes were well north of $200 for a good pair. It was very rare to find any good brands for under $100. But prices have come down a lot considering inflation, as a good pair today is less than $200, and many good brands are under $100. So I put that down to the competitive nature of parallel importing. Infact I recall hearing one of the CEOs of one of the large sportwear stores saying the same thing.

Well yeah, but thats because Nike are 'a brand'. That is, like Samsung, or Apple or whatever else people are paying more for them, than they actually should because they know the name, they know the advertising and 'the image' etc.

That is basically the whole point of brands like Nike. It's a rip off under the guise of not proportional image and quality.

Tap That - Great cheap tablets and tablet accessories. Windows and Android, NZ based

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1358261 3-Aug-2015 23:09

frankv:
Paracetamol is long off-patent - the TPP wouldn't affect availability or price of branded or generic common drugs like that. Some drugs are even cheaper than the subsidised prescription charge - cheaper to buy over the counter if not restricted than at the set price.

Bear in mind that the US has been constantly increasing patent times, to the extent that they're now 70 years after the inventor's death.

So any new drug will NOT be available patent-free until well after it is obsolete.

I don't suppose it occurred to anyone to create a drugs company in NZ to benefit from that?

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1358262 3-Aug-2015 23:11

richms: Friends seem to be accumulating suitcases from their overseas trips. Leave with none come back with 3 sometimes.

Yes this I can well understand.

Rimowa luggage (German - very high quality) is not sold in NZ at all as far as I can detect. It is sold in Australia for about twice what it costs in German department stores! Guess what I will be doing one weekend next time I visit my mother? Yes! Bratwurst and Hofbrau, followed by luggage shopping.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1358263 3-Aug-2015 23:14

mattwnz:
sir1963:
frankv:
Geektastic:

So in essence, it is because Kiwi shop owners feel entitled to rip off their customers?

NO! It's because *Nike* feels entitled to rip off their NZ customers. Nike boosts the price in NZ to whatever they can get away with. Hence parallel imported Nikes are much cheaper.

Yep when we were last overseas we stocked up on shoes, and when we head off overseas again we will be buying more.

Prior to parallel importing, shoes like nike in NZ were incredibly expensive locally. I recall back in the 90's, nikes were well north of $200 for a good pair. It was very rare to find any good brands for under $100. But prices have come down a lot considering inflation, as a good pair today is less than $200, and many good brands are under $100. So I put that down to the competitive nature of parallel importing. Infact I recall hearing one of the CEOs of one of the large sportwear stores saying the same thing.

I was in Shoe Clinic a few weeks ago. None of their high quality running shoes (as opposed to fashion junk) were less than $200 and some as much as $270.

My brother in California can get Levis for $25/pair that cost ten times that here. There is no logic behind that.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1358265 3-Aug-2015 23:21

wasabi2k:

There are two ways to do it.

The NZ way seems to be to sell 1 item for $100.

The U.S. Way us is to sell 10 for $10.

It is disingenuous to choose the first option then complain when potential customers seek cheaper sources.

Except in NZ there probably won't be enough people for your bulk volume model to work.

For some things. Ferraris perhaps.

For shoes, t shirts etc not so much.

How many shoe boxes fit in a 40ft container? 1000? 2000? We are closer to China, Vietnam, Thailand etc where most of the modern leisure footwear comes from, so shipping ought to be less than it would be to the Eastern US or EU for example by some margin.

Don't make excuses for the rip off merchants...it's their old systems, outmoded business practices and unwillingness to trim margin by deleting distributors from the retail chain.

If you have to save up for 6 months to buy a pair of $200 shoes, you'll probably buy one pair every 2 years. If the price suddenly falls by 50% consumers will suddenly be able to afford more stuff more often...

mattwnz

20163 posts

Uber Geek

#1358266 3-Aug-2015 23:24

Geektastic:
mattwnz:
sir1963:
frankv:
Geektastic:

So in essence, it is because Kiwi shop owners feel entitled to rip off their customers?

NO! It's because *Nike* feels entitled to rip off their NZ customers. Nike boosts the price in NZ to whatever they can get away with. Hence parallel imported Nikes are much cheaper.

Yep when we were last overseas we stocked up on shoes, and when we head off overseas again we will be buying more.

Prior to parallel importing, shoes like nike in NZ were incredibly expensive locally. I recall back in the 90's, nikes were well north of $200 for a good pair. It was very rare to find any good brands for under $100. But prices have come down a lot considering inflation, as a good pair today is less than $200, and many good brands are under $100. So I put that down to the competitive nature of parallel importing. Infact I recall hearing one of the CEOs of one of the large sportwear stores saying the same thing.

I was in Shoe Clinic a few weeks ago. None of their high quality running shoes (as opposed to fashion junk) were less than $200 and some as much as $270.

My brother in California can get Levis for $25/pair that cost ten times that here. There is no logic behind that.

I was talking about a big shoe retailer like rebel sports (Bricoes owned), where you can get some good deals when they have their sale rotation thing.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1358269 3-Aug-2015 23:31

mattwnz:
Geektastic:
mattwnz:
sir1963:
frankv:
Geektastic:

So in essence, it is because Kiwi shop owners feel entitled to rip off their customers?

NO! It's because *Nike* feels entitled to rip off their NZ customers. Nike boosts the price in NZ to whatever they can get away with. Hence parallel imported Nikes are much cheaper.

Yep when we were last overseas we stocked up on shoes, and when we head off overseas again we will be buying more.

Prior to parallel importing, shoes like nike in NZ were incredibly expensive locally. I recall back in the 90's, nikes were well north of $200 for a good pair. It was very rare to find any good brands for under $100. But prices have come down a lot considering inflation, as a good pair today is less than $200, and many good brands are under $100. So I put that down to the competitive nature of parallel importing. Infact I recall hearing one of the CEOs of one of the large sportwear stores saying the same thing.

I was in Shoe Clinic a few weeks ago. None of their high quality running shoes (as opposed to fashion junk) were less than $200 and some as much as $270.

My brother in California can get Levis for $25/pair that cost ten times that here. There is no logic behind that.

I was talking about a big shoe retailer like rebel sports (Bricoes owned), where you can get some good deals when they have their sale rotation thing.

Oh OK. I'd have to make a 200km round trip to visit one of those so don't tend to include them in my thinking much!

itxtme

2102 posts

Uber Geek

#1358275 4-Aug-2015 00:02

Geektastic:
frankv:
Paracetamol is long off-patent - the TPP wouldn't affect availability or price of branded or generic common drugs like that. Some drugs are even cheaper than the subsidised prescription charge - cheaper to buy over the counter if not restricted than at the set price.

Bear in mind that the US has been constantly increasing patent times, to the extent that they're now 70 years after the inventor's death.

So any new drug will NOT be available patent-free until well after it is obsolete.

I don't suppose it occurred to anyone to create a drugs company in NZ to benefit from that?

Huh? Who would have thought drug manufacturing was so easy! One good example is the new age hepatitis treatment drugs. They are insanely expensive, as in prohibitively so, however the evidence for them is very strong. By increasing patents effectively more people will die, and more people will live with horrific disease complications as NZ cant afford to fund them. We are not talking about a drug price increasing by $100. In some cases we are talking tens of thousands of dollars per patient. And increasing access time for suffers by a further decade (or more maybe, its all a big secret). To top that off here is a nice article on the sky high profits of drug companys to enjoy. Phizer for example (biggest US drug company) had a 42% profit margin in 2013!!!

graemeh

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#1358361 4-Aug-2015 09:27

frankv:
Paracetamol is long off-patent - the TPP wouldn't affect availability or price of branded or generic common drugs like that. Some drugs are even cheaper than the subsidised prescription charge - cheaper to buy over the counter if not restricted than at the set price.

Bear in mind that the US has been constantly increasing patent times, to the extent that they're now 70 years after the inventor's death.

So any new drug will NOT be available patent-free until well after it is obsolete.

You are thinking of copyright.

The current patent term on drugs is actually quite short due to the many years of trials that have to occur before a drug can be openly sold. In extreme cases patents have expired before the drug even reaches the market.

wasabi2k

2096 posts

Uber Geek

#1358386 4-Aug-2015 09:46

Geektastic:
For some things. Ferraris perhaps.

For shoes, t shirts etc not so much.

How many shoe boxes fit in a 40ft container? 1000? 2000? We are closer to China, Vietnam, Thailand etc where most of the modern leisure footwear comes from, so shipping ought to be less than it would be to the Eastern US or EU for example by some margin.

Don't make excuses for the rip off merchants...it's their old systems, outmoded business practices and unwillingness to trim margin by deleting distributors from the retail chain.

If you have to save up for 6 months to buy a pair of $200 shoes, you'll probably buy one pair every 2 years. If the price suddenly falls by 50% consumers will suddenly be able to afford more stuff more often...

I am not intending to make excuses, only offer what I consider logical reasoning. If you don't agree that's fine - everyone is entitled to their opinion.

If these "rip off merchants" are unwilling to change their business models, then why hasn't someone else? Surely if your model is sound a disruptive startup could come in, undercut everyone by buying directly from suppliers, then make all the money and push the others out of business?

I would be really interested to find out what sort of profit margins can be had on particular items like shoes, clothes etc. I'm guessing not a lot by the time it hits the stores.

We are all vastly simplifying what I can only guess is a complicated issue, we haven't even considered things like import duties and tariffs, or exchange rates.

richms

28187 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1358425 4-Aug-2015 10:34

In order to get the whole pallet price for things you have to get a whole pallet of one thing. One style one size one colour etc. Otherwise you are getting pallets of them and paying to ship and store those around china and getting them consolidated into a container is not cheap.

Large retailers have there own logistics operations to make that way cheaper.

Richard rich.ms

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1358467 4-Aug-2015 10:58

wasabi2k:
Geektastic:
For some things. Ferraris perhaps.

For shoes, t shirts etc not so much.

How many shoe boxes fit in a 40ft container? 1000? 2000? We are closer to China, Vietnam, Thailand etc where most of the modern leisure footwear comes from, so shipping ought to be less than it would be to the Eastern US or EU for example by some margin.

Don't make excuses for the rip off merchants...it's their old systems, outmoded business practices and unwillingness to trim margin by deleting distributors from the retail chain.

If you have to save up for 6 months to buy a pair of $200 shoes, you'll probably buy one pair every 2 years. If the price suddenly falls by 50% consumers will suddenly be able to afford more stuff more often...

I am not intending to make excuses, only offer what I consider logical reasoning. If you don't agree that's fine - everyone is entitled to their opinion.

If these "rip off merchants" are unwilling to change their business models, then why hasn't someone else? Surely if your model is sound a disruptive startup could come in, undercut everyone by buying directly from suppliers, then make all the money and push the others out of business?

I would be really interested to find out what sort of profit margins can be had on particular items like shoes, clothes etc. I'm guessing not a lot by the time it hits the stores.

We are all vastly simplifying what I can only guess is a complicated issue, we haven't even considered things like import duties and tariffs, or exchange rates.

We've certainly considered import duty - if you flick back a few pages you'll find that I posted a letter from Trade Minister Tim Groser "explaining" why we are charged a random 10% simply to import shoes and clothes.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11