PDA

View Full Version : PC Company



Chris Randal
03-12-2002, 08:22 AM
Hey Robo

Seems like the censored post was true after all

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/latestnewsstory.cfm?storyID=3007379&thesection=business&thesubsection=latest

Mike
03-12-2002, 06:06 PM
Don't see any similarity between that news item and the censored post...

Mike.

Baldy
03-12-2002, 06:26 PM
PC Company are advertising a computer on TV for less than $1000 - as its hook line.

Adverts like that annoy me, as we have had GST for many years, and most people have no choice but to pay the GST.

BALDY:-)

Baldy
03-12-2002, 06:27 PM
Sorry, missed out that it was $999 + GST

Graham L
04-12-2002, 02:25 PM
You will see that lots of them do that. The argument is that some people buy computers for business purposes so can reclaim GST. So they have big type for the price, and a little "Prices do not include GST" in the bottom corner of all the retail advertising.

One company which has been consistent and shown GST inclusive prices is the Computer Broker in Christchurch (now computerfutures).

TiMę:*)
04-12-2002, 03:47 PM
Whats GST ?

TiMę:*)

duckyduck
04-12-2002, 03:53 PM
> Whats GST ?
>

Come come.................GST = Goods and Services Tax.

honeylaser
04-12-2002, 03:53 PM
> Whats GST ?
>
> TiMę:*)
>

Goods and Services Tax. Normally 12.5%

crozier
04-12-2002, 03:54 PM
>Whats GST ?

General Sales Tax, introduced c.1987. It's not actually permitted to advertise products or services exclusive of GST to the general public. Because computer related products have tradionally been targeted mailly at the business sector they have been able to advertise GST exclusive because businesses are able to claim the tax back, therefore only paying the advertised price in real terms.

I, for one, find this type of advertising to be shonky and won't buy from these companies as a matter of principle. Unless, of course, the price is just too good to miss ;)

andy
04-12-2002, 04:23 PM
The airline industry is currently being taken to task for this type of advertising - isn't it time the computer industry was given the message as well? It is really confusing when you get some outfits giving the inclusive price and others excluding the grab and snatch tax.
andy

Baldy
04-12-2002, 06:19 PM
HP have been doing the same type of advertising as well.

Chris Randal
05-12-2002, 08:41 AM
Hi Mike

From memory (I stress) the censored post was about the downsizing of the PC company - there is, therefore, an exact correlation

Mike
05-12-2002, 11:51 AM
>>>From memory (I stress) the censored post was about the downsizing
>>> of the PC company - there is, therefore, an exact correlation

You could be right - I recall it saying something about PC Company about to go under, and if that's what it was, then the news item definitely doesn't say that :) in fact downsizing usually doesn't mean a company is in trouble - take Fonterra for example.

Mike.

Biggles
05-12-2002, 11:56 AM
The post in question claimed the company was about to go under and asked whether you wanted to buy from a company that was going under. It was unsubstantiated, malicious and not acceptable here. There is a big difference between a company cutting jobs and "being about to go under", and either way unsubstantiated and anonymous rumours of that type are not acceptable. Reporting already published information is acceptable.

Chris Randal
05-12-2002, 12:22 PM
Sorry Bruce.

I admit that my post was a little tongue in cheek......

mejobloggs
05-12-2002, 12:35 PM
Hahaha.
Dont any of you know what GST stands for?
Isnt it obviose?
GST= Government Spending Tax

Its for their pies and icecream, and coke for lunch, for new cars etc.

crozier
05-12-2002, 12:49 PM
Perhaps there's a lesson to be learned. The duscussion was censored and completley removed rather than just locked. Because of this people will remember what was said in their own way - when they retell the story it will become distorted. A rumour has begun and because the original was removed nobody remembers exactly what was said.

FWIW I think it was wrong to remove the discussion, we still have free speech here in NZ and it should have been locked, perhaps with a disclaimer. People would make up their own minds about the author and whether his claims were malicious or not... I know I did.

Biggles
05-12-2002, 01:24 PM
Crozier - it is not you who will get sued if it remains on the site. We have, do date, been very firm on NOT removing threads (there have been requests from vendors, no I aint saying who) because in all previous cases posters have been expressing valid opinons and relating personal experiences. In this case, a poster gave NO information that could in anyway be independantly verified. There a line between free speech and slander, and that post crossed it.

rayonline
05-12-2002, 02:13 PM
the question is, is NZ Media published information really information that is unbiased?? I would of thought its biased from the media'a point of view. Surely NZ Media is not a indpendent unbiased source of information. then what is the difference between info that goes on on forums and on NZ Media.

Chris Randal
05-12-2002, 02:23 PM
Bruce - I apologise for stirring the pot but I tend to agree with Crozier that if the post had not been removed, I wouldn't have been tempted to indulge in a little devilment.

I won't do it again.

Kind regards

Graham L
05-12-2002, 02:33 PM
IDG is a big enough target to be sued. Statements made with no justification ("lies", "gossip") which damage a person or company are classed as defamation. Defamation can make lawyers rich and the publisher poor.

Some people have been locked away in the US for making false statements on sharemarket forums to influence share prices.

If your "right" to "free" speech is limited by not being allowed to make defamatory statements in a forum, you are "free" to pay for your own forum to be hosted. But you might find that those who are defamed have the right to extract damages from you. Free speech can be expensive.

Biggles
05-12-2002, 03:59 PM
>the question is, is NZ Media published information really information that is unbiased?? I would of thought its biased from the media'a point of view. Surely NZ Media is not a indpendent unbiased source of information. then what is the difference between info that goes on on forums and on NZ Media.

The Herald published some facts about downsizing in jobs. That's all. No issue of bias comes into it.

rayonline
05-12-2002, 06:43 PM
thanks Bruce. What was Graham talking about ?:l

robo
05-12-2002, 06:50 PM
Um, Goods and Services Tax, enacted in October 1985. (sorry, beancounter at large)

Explain to me why they can charge GST on parking fines and speeding tickets. They aren't good and they aren't a service.

Anyway, as for the post that started all this, a couple of redundancies do not end a companies life. My own company has made two people redundant, on separate occasions, the last one was four years ago. Company still going. If we hadn't, we might not be.

robo.

robo
05-12-2002, 06:52 PM
I think we did the responsible thing. If we had edited it heavily it would have been pointless. As it was, most replies disagreed with the first posting, but it was felt that didn't mitigate the potential for unnecessary harm or risk.
robo.