Comments on: Sugar not so simple http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/09/28/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups-89/ now with extra source Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:48:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Wayne.P http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/09/28/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups-89/#comment-39118 Wayne.P Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:16:54 +0000 http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/09/28/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups-89/#comment-39118 What I find 'reprehensible' about the campaign run by the so called 'Coalition For cheaper Books' is the clear and blatent misrepresentation of the facts about PIR's. Earlier this year Mr Grover blamed PIR's for Tim Wintons award winning novel 'Breath' being over priced in Australia. He quoted a UK website price for Breath as equivalent to A$14.70, including delivery, and compares this with an Australian recommended retail price of $25 and an 'unattributed' discounted price of $19, What he fails to mention is that the same title was, and still is for sale in Australia at BigW, another member of the 'Coalition', for $16.21, which minus GST (there is no consumption tax on books in the UK), is a few cents more than the UK website price and you don't have to wait 2 weeks for it to arrive. If Dymocks wanted to, it could sell the same book for the same price. In fact, it is selling the book online for $24.95, plus $5.50 delivery. My question to Mr Grover is 'why would you deliberately compare the cheapest price from the UK to the dearest price in Australia, knowing full well that the book could be purchased at a comparitive price locally? Isn't that a tad misleading?' Around the same time, Dymocks board member Mr Carr was quoted as saying that because of PIR's, Australians were paying too much for the best selling Twilight' from US author Stephenie Meyer. What he neglected to mention was that the sale of this particular book is in fact not restricted by PIR's because the Australian publishers did not release an Australian version within 30 days of it being released in the US. (30/90 rule). Any Australian bookseller can source this book from any international supplier and sell it for whatever price they like. So has the fact that there are no import restrictions on this series reduced the Australian retail price? Not that I can see. So therefore Australian retailers are either still sourcing this series from Australian publishers or taking bigger profits right? Maybe the Australian price is already a reflection of the cost of doing business in Australia regardless of PIR's. If the evidence that PIR's are forcing Australians to pay too much for their books is so compelling, why would these two major proponents for the removal of PIR's use incorect or misleading information to promote their argument? What I find ‘reprehensible’ about the campaign run by the so called ‘Coalition For cheaper Books’ is the clear and blatent misrepresentation of the facts about PIR’s.

Earlier this year Mr Grover blamed PIR’s for Tim Wintons award winning novel ‘Breath’ being over priced in Australia. He quoted a UK website price for Breath as equivalent to A$14.70, including delivery, and compares this with an Australian recommended retail price of $25 and an ‘unattributed’ discounted price of $19, What he fails to mention is that the same title was, and still is for sale in Australia at BigW, another member of the ‘Coalition’, for $16.21, which minus GST (there is no consumption tax on books in the UK), is a few cents more than the UK website price and you don’t have to wait 2 weeks for it to arrive. If Dymocks wanted to, it could sell the same book for the same price. In fact, it is selling the book online for $24.95, plus $5.50 delivery.

My question to Mr Grover is ‘why would you deliberately compare the cheapest price from the UK to the dearest price in Australia, knowing full well that the book could be purchased at a comparitive price locally? Isn’t that a tad misleading?’

Around the same time, Dymocks board member Mr Carr was quoted as saying that because of PIR’s, Australians were paying too much for the best selling Twilight’ from US author Stephenie Meyer. What he neglected to mention was that the sale of this particular book is in fact not restricted by PIR’s because the Australian publishers did not release an Australian version within 30 days of it being released in the US. (30/90 rule). Any Australian bookseller can source this book from any international supplier and sell it for whatever price they like. So has the fact that there are no import restrictions on this series reduced the Australian retail price? Not that I can see. So therefore Australian retailers are either still sourcing this series from Australian publishers or taking bigger profits right? Maybe the Australian price is already a reflection of the cost of doing business in Australia regardless of PIR’s.

If the evidence that PIR’s are forcing Australians to pay too much for their books is so compelling, why would these two major proponents for the removal of PIR’s use incorect or misleading information to promote their argument?

]]> By: Heathdon McGregor http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/09/28/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups-89/#comment-38994 Heathdon McGregor Mon, 28 Sep 2009 04:13:09 +0000 http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/09/28/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups-89/#comment-38994 Could Crikey sign up the "outspoken Courier-Mail subeditor" from tips and rumours for a column? Rightard-loved it Dymocks a small business-HA! Could Crikey sign up the “outspoken Courier-Mail subeditor” from tips and rumours for a column? Rightard-loved it

Dymocks a small business-HA!

]]> By: deccles http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/09/28/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups-89/#comment-38985 deccles Mon, 28 Sep 2009 03:54:03 +0000 http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/09/28/comments-corrections-clarifications-and-cckups-89/#comment-38985 Don Grover, you couldn't be bothered letting former NSW premier Bob Carr off the chain to do your fighting for you this time? It's all about fattening your profits (and one assumer your renumeration), and everything else you say is misdirection and pr nonsense. So before you throw the word 'reprehensible' around too much take a good hard look in the mirror. Don Grover, you couldn’t be bothered letting former NSW premier Bob Carr off the chain to do your fighting for you this time? It’s all about fattening your profits (and one assumer your renumeration), and everything else you say is misdirection and pr nonsense. So before you throw the word ‘reprehensible’ around too much take a good hard look in the mirror.

]]>