Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Demogerg wrote:
I disagree, the indirect cost of running a mail order business remains the same weather you order $1000 worth of product or $10, to increase the cost of the product to cover the static overhead cost of the business would be a foolish move, insted they offer a shipping price based on their cost, and offer FREE shipping if you order over a certain amount, because the profit margin of the product then covers the cost of shipping.

@Demogerg, no I don't think that makes anysense, given the fact that the CRS specifically mentions coming to the "Grand opening" of the FW store to recieve products wihout the 14GBP Cost associated. If the indirect costs are static and they are compensated in the price of shipping, then they are effectively losing money on every purchase made in there upcoming FW Store. Also, thats not calculating at ALL the price of retail space, store associate salary, and all the same "indirect costs" that will be added come this new store...

Also, its the actual SHIPPING cost and not the cost of the product at question. I am saying "They have these indirect costs, these costs ARE ALREADY incorperated into the price of the product and should not be justification for charing more for shipping then the actual act and costs therein of SHIPPING the product." and the opposing arguement is "Clearly FW has no idea how to appropriate revenue properly and therefor should be associating building and labor costs into a corperate shipping environment in the form of an inflated shipping fee."

jbunny wrote:Daemon@

Where did you get your accounting degree from? Just wonderign where your expertise on Cost Accounting comes from. Personally, I graduated from the Number 15 school for accounting according to US News and Reports. I have been doing accounting for several years, most of which as a cost account. While not an expert, I know what I am talking about.

This is a pissing contest you do not want to start, what I will say is that my current position for the DoD requires an SCI for Business Sensitive and Classified Information in the RDA side of the govenment. (Basically, we handle lots and lots of money), and my neighbor/ride into work is the Comptroller (Clearly your experience in accounting tells you of what that position entails)

jbunny wrote:
As far as shipping, it is a common practice for manufactoring companies to portion of thier shipping done after normal business hours because it gives the plants time to complete orders. Otherwise you might have shipping just standing around waiting on orders to be completed. I worked 4 years in the shipping /Receiving for a large manufactoring company while in college.

What?!?! Name one company that does this as a "best practice". The amount of overtime and costs ensued for violation of contract with utility companies as well as labor codes and standards would NEVER be worth the risk of such a petty order of even an amount totaling over 9,000$.... Unless your business is so small scale that the President, Accountant, Legal Team, Laborer, and primary POC for Sales and Marketing is the same person (aka Mom & Pop shop) you would have to be out of your mind to incur such risks for such a small payout...

jbunny wrote:
While I do not know how GW allocates cost for shipping, I do know how other companies allocate indirect cost. If shipping is a major (in terms of energy not money) section of the business, then you allocate a portion of indirect and fixed cost to it. I don't think Forge World has to many POS locations where you can walk up and buy direct, so shipping is a major Cost center.

See the above regarding Cost of Shipping and the CSRs own words and reccomendation on having TSS attending the FW Grand Opening to buy models "shipping free"...

jbunny wrote:
Just to give you another leason, Forge World should have equipment that is only used in the shipping process. Things like Packing Stations, Pick Trucks for reasching items on high shelves*, scales, Tape dispensors. The cost of those items could be broken down on a per package shipped basis,and is therefor a cost to ship.

* Not sure have never been to their warehouse before, but this would be used in a lot of operatings.

Again, now you are just trying to pull a bunny out of a hat (pardon my pun). There is no magic costs associated into shipping thats on a per package basis. The crane costs the same if GW/FW ships one Titan or 1,000,000 Titans. The Stockroom crew gets paid by the hour, not commissioned on how many Medusa kits they sell. To even assume that costs such as these are distributed on a "per order" basis is naive with best of intentions, purposefully ignorant with the worst.

Its a clear case of deception on FWs end, plain and simple.

Daemon-Archon wrote:
Its a clear case of deception on FWs end, plain and simple.

They told you how much it would cost YOU to have their package shipped out to you, you paid that cost.

now you flame and rave about deception, when you agreed to pay the shipping cost they presented to you.

I fail to see how there is any deception at all going on here, just some guy, on the internet, complaining about high shipping costs.

I think we can all move along, nothing to see here.

Well have your neighbor chime in and we can talk.

The company I use to work for had us Shipping/Receiving guys start at 3 in the afternoon and then work an 8 hour day. Not sure how that even comes close to violating labor laws, or contacts with utilites, and it was not for one order. It was for all orders shipped that day. So I don't know what "risk" are being incurred.
Another company I worked for had two shipping shifts, a day crew and a night crew. Both of these companies had Gross sales in the $25-$35 Million range so they were no Mom and Pop stores.

The email said to come to their "Open Day" which is like a Forge World version of Games day. It is not a Grand Opening. But it is a way of buying direct with no shipping cost.

I will give you another quick leason on accounting for indirect cost. Lets say your total fixed cost for shipping is $100. You will then forcast how much in shipping sales you will have and then allocate on that bases. So if you plan to have shipping sales of $1000 then you would allocate 1/10th of the cost to every dollar shipped. So if you shipped $900 you would allocate $90 of cost to that order.

Of course I used simple numbers to show the concept. One thing I would hope is that FW does a very good job of forcasting their cost, as well as the amount they ship. The allocation of shipping cost is only applied to ordered ship, so selling at Games Day does not cause them to lose money.

You are right in that a crane cost the same if they ship 1 item or 1000 items. However, FW should have a good forcast of how much they are going to ship for a given year and allocate based on that projection. Some times they are under and they "lose" money, and sometimes they are over and they make money. By lose I mean they do not fully recoup all cost for shipping.

It is a clear case of you not understanding proper allocation of cost in an industry that focuses on Shipped goods rather than POS. (Point of Sale ie retail stores)

And you never answered my question of where did you get your degree. you might work with lots of money but that does not mean you understand Cost accounting. I have had bosses that did not fully understand my job. Of course they understood cost allocation, but they deferred to me on a lot of issues.

jbunny wrote:
Of course I used simple numbers to show the concept.

The example is too simple to be of use. Determining shipping rates is an art as well as science - and shipping people who understand this are worth their weight in gold.

There is absolutely no way that somewhere around GDP10 represents overhead.


p.s don't be that guy that brags about where you got your degree from. I am met way to many educated idiots in my 21 years as an accountant to put faith in a degree or MBA - Knowledge supported by extensive experience is the only thing I trust. When I employ someone I don't care where the degree comes from as long as it had accounting classes in it and they have several years relevent experience. I am more interested in their thoughts and abilties to tie their experience + education into what I am looking for.

fullheadofhair wrote:

jbunny wrote:
Of course I used simple numbers to show the concept.

The example is too simple to be of use. Determining shipping rates is an art as well as science - and shipping people who understand this are worth their weight in gold.

There is absolutely no way that somewhere around GDP10 represents overhead.


p.s don't be that guy that brags about where you got your degree from. I am met way to many educated idiots in my 21 years as an accountant to put faith in a degree or MBA - Knowledge supported by extensive experience is the only thing I trust. When I employ someone I don't care where the degree comes from as long as it had accounting classes in it and they have several years relevent experience. I am more interested in their thoughts and abilties to tie their experience + education into what I am looking for.

I was not bragging, simply stating I am knowledgeable on the subject matter at hand. I get tired of the "Experts who know everything about running a Multi-national company, yet never took one business course. And tell people with a business degree in accounting that we don't know what we are talking about. I am also aware that it is not easy to estimate shipping cost. I showed the concept of allocating cost since he did not comprehend the idea of it. Thats all.

Daemon-Archon wrote:...would NEVER be worth the risk of such a petty order of even an amount totaling over 9,000$....

I see what you did there!

Demogerg wrote:

Daemon-Archon wrote:
Its a clear case of deception on FWs end, plain and simple.

They told you how much it would cost YOU to have their package shipped out to you, you paid that cost.

now you flame and rave about deception, when you agreed to pay the shipping cost they presented to you.

I fail to see how there is any deception at all going on here, just some guy, on the internet, complaining about high shipping costs.

I think we can all move along, nothing to see here.

Please read my original Post. I initally did not complain about their shipping costs, I sugessted that it doesn't cost the amount FW were charging me. I've since proven this to be correct because.....

Other than the Royal Mail charge, I see no other additional cost to send this parcel out to me in the UK. All the 'other' costs people are banding about here, like packaging, labour, warehousing etc etc etc, MUST be included in the cost of the product, because if its not, then every order picked up in store is loosing money. The only additional cost is someone who picks it up, puts it on the scales, and the Franking machine spits out a postage label. EVERY other cost people have mentioned here, is incurred regardless and therefore cost of product.

FW started this debate with me, they contacted me, not the other way round and then claimed they do not profit from P&P, its at cost. They have yet to convince me otherwise. I have arranged to meet them later in the year to discuss. IF there is anything different or my opinion is changed, I'll post it here.

And no where have i "flamed and raved about deception".

Present your facts and case correctly, or its a case of people see your post, and simply "move along, nothing to see" in it.

And I never meant for this post to become a debate on who has the more qualifications. Lets face it, we could all be 12yr olds pretending to be 'Internet Tough Guys', which is why I don't post my Qualifications or Job on here. But keep up the posting, its an interesting read.

i would just order forgeworld products through a gw store. im gonna order my stuff through baltimore totally worth a 2 hour drive to not pay shipping

So basically this thread boils down to.. forgeworld overcharges for just about everything it does?

This is not very new and honestly it is NOTHING compared to this!!!!!!!! (Not enough exclamation points)

LASGUNS X4

Ref: IA-IAC-A-003.

Price: £5.00

I dont care, nothing will ever top 4 LASGUNS for 5 pounds.. (If you actually paid 5 pounds for them, please flog yourself in private because you get MORE THAN 4 in any IG boxset)

Kirasu wrote:I dont care, nothing will ever top 4 LASGUNS for 5 pounds.. (If you actually paid 5 pounds for them, please flog yourself in private because you get MORE THAN 4 in any IG boxset)

But its FW high quality resin Lasguns though.

Sorry , my point is Warhammer itself is already exuberant in pricing compared to a bag of green plastic soldiers for $1

Woah, I never thought of it that way luna, but your totally right. If they gave free shipping on all models, they would just add it to the cost of the oiginal model anyways so it wouldnt make a difference... makes complaining almost seem pointless, although its also true that overall they probably charge more to cover their already free shiping... Ill just continue to order stuff through stores where its free anyways lol.

LunaHound wrote:A few things to think about. Say if they do charge the "appropriate" price for shipping , where do you suggest they
take the amount to cover for the free shipping on large orders?
Do you want:

a) Everyone pay for appropriate shipping , no more Free Shippings.

b) Keep free shipping on large order , charge appropriate shipping on small order , raise price on product to cover for free shipping.

Im sure FW and like most of companies prefer large batch per order to ship , then having to deal with small $15 purchases.

If shipping was at cost, regardless of order size, I'd have to imagine most people would have no issue with it whatsoever. In the more specific sense of where does the 'free shipping' come from still on larger models? Well free shipping, much like free advice, is seldom free. In short the cost of shipping is already built into their profit margins for whatever I'm being sold, and considering the exorbitant prices of Forge World models I don't see how this isn't the case or the intent.

Kirasu wrote:So basically this thread boils down to.. forgeworld overcharges for just about everything it does?

This is not very new and honestly it is NOTHING compared to this!!!!!!!! (Not enough exclamation points)

LASGUNS X4

Ref: IA-IAC-A-003.

Price: £5.00

I dont care, nothing will ever top 4 LASGUNS for 5 pounds.. (If you actually paid 5 pounds for them, please flog yourself in private because you get MORE THAN 4 in any IG boxset)

Erm, Kirasu--you realize that when those Lasguns came out(ages and ages ago.)--there was no box sets that had spares that could be used to jazz up your Chimeras, or for stowage, right?

The models are ancient, and actually older than my youngest brother.

LunaHound wrote:

Kirasu wrote:I dont care, nothing will ever top 4 LASGUNS for 5 pounds.. (If you actually paid 5 pounds for them, please flog yourself in private because you get MORE THAN 4 in any IG boxset)

But its FW high quality resin Lasguns though.

And the pope is a Catholic.

Kanluwen wrote:

Kirasu wrote:So basically this thread boils down to.. forgeworld overcharges for just about everything it does?

This is not very new and honestly it is NOTHING compared to this!!!!!!!! (Not enough exclamation points)

LASGUNS X4

Ref: IA-IAC-A-003.

Price: £5.00

I dont care, nothing will ever top 4 LASGUNS for 5 pounds.. (If you actually paid 5 pounds for them, please flog yourself in private because you get MORE THAN 4 in any IG boxset)

Erm, Kirasu--you realize that when those Lasguns came out(ages and ages ago.)--there was no box sets that had spares that could be used to jazz up your Chimeras, or for stowage, right?

The models are ancient, and actually older than my youngest brother.

So what youre saying is you want to pay full cost for obsolete products older than your brother? Should have told me this a few years ago, I had a 1987 corolla I could have sold ya!

The accountant death match in this thread would amuse me...if their choice of words didn't trigger Vietnam style flashbacks to the accounting classes I was forced to take. It's accrual world.

However, I do find it amusing that people are referring to FW as a business. My history with them....has left struck me more as a large group of mid 20 year olds working out of their garage.

Kirasu wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Kirasu wrote:So basically this thread boils down to.. forgeworld overcharges for just about everything it does?

This is not very new and honestly it is NOTHING compared to this!!!!!!!! (Not enough exclamation points)

LASGUNS X4

Ref: IA-IAC-A-003.

Price: £5.00

I dont care, nothing will ever top 4 LASGUNS for 5 pounds.. (If you actually paid 5 pounds for them, please flog yourself in private because you get MORE THAN 4 in any IG boxset)

Erm, Kirasu--you realize that when those Lasguns came out(ages and ages ago.)--there was no box sets that had spares that could be used to jazz up your Chimeras, or for stowage, right?

The models are ancient, and actually older than my youngest brother.

So what youre saying is you want to pay full cost for obsolete products older than your brother? Should have told me this a few years ago, I had a 1987 corolla I could have sold ya!

No, smarty-britches, the point was that they're older models that--at one time--had a reason to justify the cost.

And by the by, the 2004 Forge World catalog had them listed as a 10 pack for $10. They weren't always what you were referring to as a "gigantic ripoff".
They had a place and it's over now. The only reason, if I had to guess, they're still for sale is for the people who don't like the crummy lascarbine packaged on the vehicle sprue in addition to having a large backstock of the product since the release of the actual set and wanting to get the most of the mold.

jbunny wrote:

Indirect cost - Cost of building, power to the building, Cost of insurnace on building.

Now I don't know how they allocate cost to shipping, but I assure you it is not just the cost the RM chrages. So until you can give me a complete break out of all of there charges and then tell me they are over charging, you arejust speculating.

So...you guessed at how they allocate cost to shipping, but you're going to tell me that I'm speculating?

Having any of the above reliant on the money they make from the shipping charge seems like a fail of a plan. All of that should be taken into account with the actual cost of the item, as should their other operating expenditures. However, I'm done arguing the point. Your opinion is one thing, mine is another, and honestly I could give a frak what you think. Until you can prove that the OP paid COST as the CSR assured them he was, then my opinion that he was overcharged is just as valid as yours that he wasn't.

I looked through the terms on the Forgeworld website, trying to find information on VAT and other taxes. They refer to a tax addendum that is allegedly available on the website, however I haven't been able to locate it. It just seems shady to charge the price with VAT on orders that aren't subject to it.

OK you go on your uneducated personal opinion, and I will use my personal work experience, my education, and GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principals, you know the accounting rules that every major company has to follow if they are an audited company. I did not guess how they allocate cost, I assumed how they would do it according to those same accounting principals.

Just because you cannot comprehend a concept please do not assume it's a fail.

FIRST:

STOP the personal attacks.

Here we are at the signpost stage of the thread again.

Next person to ignore this warning gets a PM from a Mod.

SECOND:

How did all of you let this one go unnoticed?

AgeOfEgos wrote:The accountant death match in this thread would amuse me...if their choice of words didn't trigger Vietnam style flashbacks to the accounting classes I was forced to take. It's accrual world.

However, I do find it amusing that people are referring to FW as a business. My history with them....has left struck me more as a large group of mid 20 year olds working out of their garage.

And, I'd have to agree with his assessment of FW's business acumen too...

jbunny wrote:OK you go on your uneducated personal opinion, and I will use my personal work experience, my education, and GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principals, you know the accounting rules that every major company has to follow if they are an audited company. I did not guess how they allocate cost, I assumed how they would do it according to those same accounting principals.

Just because you cannot comprehend a concept please do not assume it's a fail.

GAAP - there is no GAAP principle for allocating postage costs. That's management accounting, GAAP is geared to how things appear in financial statements not BoM's or pricing structures. Pricing is usually determined by a marketing strategy, and we all know marketeers cannot add 2+2 with a calculator - they do however understand extremely well how to convince people to pay a lot more money for products than an accountant says they cost to build.

Anyhoo, GAAP in a thread about toy soldiers reminds me of the old joke: What do accountants use as a contraceptive - their personality. Shoot that maybe why I haven't managed to knock my wife up yet.

Sorry for the delayed response, I was without Dakka this weekend (it hurt me inside... )

Addressing your points...
((TSS = TheSecretSquig))

jbunny wrote:Well have your neighbor chime in and we can talk.

Personal attack, pardon my ignoring...

jbunny wrote:
The company I use to work for had us Shipping/Receiving guys start at 3 in the afternoon and then work an 8 hour day. Not sure how that even comes close to violating labor laws, or contacts with utilites, and it was not for one order. It was for all orders shipped that day.

Your inital point (correct me if I am mistaken) was that the cost of shipping reflected the cost of extending business hours past that of standard operating hours (and thus, hours that should be allocated by initial capitol and revenue margins from the product itself). If the intended shift of the employee is that past standard business hours, then the costs associated with building maitainence and staff wages would be regardless of any potential additional shipments and as such, seems irrational to assume that such costs should be allocated to the shipping fees therein (again, back to the point of, "The staff gets paid if there is 1 shipment a night or 1000" I take it while you worked there for however long you did, you were paid hourly, not by-the-package)

jbunny wrote:
So I don't know what "risk" are being incurred.
Another company I worked for had two shipping shifts, a day crew and a night crew. Both of these companies had Gross sales in the $25-$35 Million range so they were no Mom and Pop stores.

Again same as above, if the shift was mandated regardless of shipment demand, then the costs should be on the product revenue itself, not the shipping. The risks would be for instance, if you had not premandated overnight shifts and had to have day-shift warehouse crews work 16-20 hour shifts through the night in a facility not normally inclined to work nights, that was assumed when you said there were "additional costs incurred by the demand to create the shipments" giving the illusion of the need for a prompt and urgent deadline. Haste makes risk...

jbunny wrote:
The email said to come to their "Open Day" which is like a Forge World version of Games day. It is not a Grand Opening. But it is a way of buying direct with no shipping cost.

This still does not account for the horrible losses they should be suffering on every purchase made if their 14GBP shipping rate is mitigating cost damages such as Building Insurance and staff wages.... And also ignore where the revenue is comeing from for the physical staff that will be required to run the event (not to mention the actual space)

jbunny wrote:
I will give you another quick leason on accounting for indirect cost. Lets say your total fixed cost for shipping is $100. You will then forcast how much in shipping sales you will have and then allocate on that bases. So if you plan to have shipping sales of $1000 then you would allocate 1/10th of the cost to every dollar shipped. So if you shipped $900 you would allocate $90 of cost to that order.

Of course I used simple numbers to show the concept. One thing I would hope is that FW does a very good job of forcasting their cost, as well as the amount they ship. The allocation of shipping cost is only applied to ordered ship, so selling at Games Day does not cause them to lose money.

The problem with this is that while most industries (especially those who deal heavily with shipping their orders) have contracts with shipping companies, those costs of those contracts are generally speaking meant to be incurred by the product revenue itself, and typically pay for themselves within the first Fiscal Quarter of a FY(If not MUCH sooner). For instance, where I work, I can ship any package under 100$ and not of Confidential or Hazardous material for approximately 10Cents a pound (up to 15 pounds, then 5Cents up to 100) meanig a 10 pound package costs me at work 1$ to ship anywhere in the US, 3.50 is the additional cost for worldwide (to almost any country, at least, any country FW/GW will ship to) so that 10lb package costs 4.50 to ship to FW, due to the contract the Federal Government has with FedEx. (Normally, that package would run me around 7$). Federal Government aside, while working at Bestbuy, it was virtually FREE for us to ship any package anywhere in the US. International rates varied but due to the DHL contract, were also negligible.... now are you honestly going to tell me that a business so reliant on shipping also does not hold any such contracts with shipping companies?

The other issue with the Fixed cost is that what happened if you have 2 orders at 900 dollars? Do you refund the first guy you charged 90$ to make both costs 50? Do you keep the additional 80$ and continue to PROFIT off of future shipping orders? How does this work out exactally? Also, what if the rate for Get fuel skyrockets to such a height that it litreally costs 5X it did at year-end for P-FY... do you raise the shipping without telling? Do you overcharge the current pending transactions? Do you suffer the red and simply hope it levels out from base profit off the product? (Something I am very sure FW could afford to do)? There are too many unknowns to simplify shippin in such a matter that it can be solely budgeted at the beginning of a year...

jbunny wrote:
You are right in that a crane cost the same if they ship 1 item or 1000 items. However, FW should have a good forcast of how much they are going to ship for a given year and allocate based on that projection. Some times they are under and they "lose" money, and sometimes they are over and they make money. By lose I mean they do not fully recoup all cost for shipping.

See above, however I did want to point out that most manufactures lease their equipment as opposed to buying the equipment. Especially with such high standards and the high salaries it would cost to hire a local service techinician for such equipment as opposed to simply haveing a service maintenence agreement with the company that owns it... but again, this cost SHOULD be reflected in the product revenue, not shipping fee.

jbunny wrote:
It is a clear case of you not understanding proper allocation of cost in an industry that focuses on Shipped goods rather than POS. (Point of Sale ie retail stores)

Actually, its a clear case of sorry, couldn't help myself... If by the above you mean that the Shipped Goods insdustry is relying on its Shipping fee's to account for its costs and profit margins then I suggest you reread the initial post. the FW rep openly admitted that the shipping cost is NOT intended to grant any sort of profits and reflects ONLY what FW pays to ship the product. If they are incorperating business costs in their shipping fee of 14GBP (which TSS proved it only would cost around 3GBP to ship) then the statement by the FW CSR was a bold-faced lie!

Also, if you're primary POS is online, then thats where your cost allocation goes to. POS is not only in a retail store, sometimes it isn't even only on a Website Shopping Cart (Thus GWs banning of placing items in a "Shopping Cart Point-of-sale" format at a reduced price as to NOT create competition for their own website... thus sites like The War Store having to operate with such complexicity.) POSs can be in a store, over the phone, online, via normal mail, or basically anywhere you make the Sale. The POINT is the SALE...

jbunny wrote:
And you never answered my question of where did you get your degree. you might work with lots of money but that does not mean you understand Cost accounting.

Again, this should not matter. And seeing how you mentioned that I "work with lots of money" instead of "Balancing UFRs YEBs and Congressional Plus-Ups. YACs, YMCs, QCRs, Quarterly Sweeps, RAR, CBRs, and god knows how many other acronyms* associated with even the most BASIC of the accounting realm, I would be asking for you're resume before you ask me for mine.

*UFR: Unfunded Request
YEB: Year end Budget
YAC: Yearly allocated costs
YMC: Yealy Mainainence Costs
QCR: Quad-Chart Review
RAR: Risk Associated Revenue
CBR: Continuity Budget Review

jbunny wrote: I have had bosses that did not fully understand my job. Of course they understood cost allocation, but they deferred to me on a lot of issues.

And I've had geese that laid golden eggs... just because someone says something, doesn't make it true (Or relevant to the thread in the least bit)

Case and point, to everyone else who may seem confused.

TSS(the OP) said on the first page that he Questioned FW about their price of shipping. Before placing the order, the FW CSR stated that none of the Shipping Fee went towards profit and that whatever it cost them to ship the product to him, was what he would have to pay. TSS then paid the 14GBP to ship his product.

Apon receiving his product, TSS took the box back to the Postal Office and inquired as to the cost it would be to mail the EXACT PACKAGE back to FW (aka, assuming what FW paid to ship it to him) and he was quoted the price of ~3GBP which he quickly responded to the same FW CSR that told him they only charged him what they were charged.

The FW CSR then avoids the allegations that they Misinformed TSS abount the price of his shipment, denied accountability, and went on to mention that not only does the site charge 0$ for any order over 150GBP but that if he made an IDENTICAL order as to the one he was CHARGED 14GBP to ship (in which no part of that 14GBP was reportely profit) during their "Opening Day" event, he would recieve his product completely "Shipping" free.

So the question that was arisen (actually, there was no real "Question" about it at all") was why FW CSRs feel the need to lie to their consumers and that it shouldn't be "okay" for them to get away with it....

Unless someone can legitimately defend the additional ~11GBP I really don't see why a debate is occuring here, as opposed to merely other users responses to TSS's story and if they have had any similar negative experiences with FW or GW... (Which I believe was the OPs initial intention.)

But thats just my take on it...

-DAR

Modquisition on. I am closing this thread. If you let accountant rage can get out of hand, the next thing you know there will be flying ledger books, GAAP duels to the death in the hallway, and they will start impugning each others' mothers' dignity with certain accelerated depreciation methods of lesser repute. At the end of the day it will just lead to an Enronesque meltdown of no controlling legal authority proportions...