Finally! Price gouging laws used. In TX no less

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

wild cat mccane

New member
https://www.statesman.com/story/news/2020/12/16/gun-website-price-gouging-pandemic/3932523001/

There have been only a few companies that haven't gone HIGHER than Federal sells online. Everyone knows manufacturers sell higher than retail elsewhere. Again. Federal is selling their ammo cheaper online than almost all stores. (Looking at your Target Sport/Outdoor Limited/CTD/SGAmmo)

List of good sellers:
-Bass Pro/Cabela's took the handgun market after Walmart. Only one that has been consistent with low prices.
-Brownells
-Midway was doing well but seems to have gone high recently.
-Kinda good has been sportsmansoutdoorsuperstore
-Acedemy-though they stopped selling online basically.

List of sellers HIGHER than Federal's own retail website (Naughty list):
-SGAmmo
-Target Sport USA
-Outdoors Limited
-
 
Last edited:
So the free market shouldn't be?

I get that CTD is shady, and don't buy from them. Switching prices when stuff is in your cart and similar tricks are not OK.

But pricing something? If you don't like the price, don't buy it. Why should the government have a say in what you ask for a product?

Freedom, REAL freedom, means tolerating people, ideas, speech and things you disagree with just as fervently as you demand others respect your right to those things. I don't like CTD, but don't see why they can't ask whatever they want for whatever they sell.

Larry
 
The US world described above does not exist. Price gouging laws have been in existence longer than anyone on this forums has been on this earth.
 
What gouging? Did they hold a gun to your head and force you to buy something from them at an inflated price? if no, then there was no gouging. If you do not like their business model, do not do business with them.
 
The US world described above does not exist. Price gouging laws have been in existence longer than anyone on this forums has been on this earth.
Click to expand...

Doesn't make them correct or logical; politicians are known for knee-jerk reactionary laws that never solve anything - Sandy Hook and other examples prove that.
 
Too Soon to Celebrate

The story uses the word "accuses", in the law that is a non-term, means nothing. Wait until he opens an investigation, convenes a Grand Jury, or indicts Cheaper Than Dirt before you start to celebrate.

The Texas AG has demonstrated a pretty flimsy grasp on how the law works, e.g. the Trump lawsuit that went directly to the Supreme Court (I'm not trying to criticize the politics of the thing here, only his lousy grasp of how the law works).

But he should know how an indictment works since he has already been indicted once by a Texas Grand Jury and is under investigation by the Feds.:D

Mail order vendors traditionally sell for less than retail since they do not have the overhead of a brick and mortar retail store, but they may be having trouble keeping their doors open right now like so many others. In times of scarcity sellers often raise prices or otherwise restrict the amount of goods you can purchase.
 
Last edited:
darkroommike said:
The Texas AG has demonstrated a pretty flimsy grasp on how the law works, e.g. the Trump lawsuit that went directly to the Supreme Court (I'm not trying to criticize the politics of the thing here, only his lousy grasp of how the law works).
Click to expand...
In regard to the suit relating to the election, the Texas AG was entirely correct. Texas was suing four other states. In cases between the states, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction. It was the proper (and only) place for that lawsuit to have been filed. That's directly from the Constitution.

https://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A3Sec2.html

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
Click to expand...
 
That TX AG also was served a federal subpoena by the FBI 4 days ago after months long whistle blower complaints and firing all his staff over their complaints of his bribery.

He probably filed the lawsuit to gain a pardon for the federal jail sentence he is probably going to get.

True story.

To the price gouging. This is a good thing for shooters. It's not really even a question...
 
wild cat mccane said:
That TX AG also was served a federal subpoena by the FBI 4 days ago after months long whistle blower complaints and firing all his staff over their complaints of his bribery.

He probably filed the lawsuit to gain a pardon for the federal jail sentence he is probably going to get.

True story.

To the price gouging. This is a good thing for shooters. It's not really even a question...
Click to expand...
Imagine how 'good for shooters' it would be if they put a $5/50 price limit on a box of 9MM.

We'd all be rolling in cheap ammo. I wonder why 'they' don't?


Larry
 
Funny how people who would take up arms to keep the Gov. from dictating magazine capacity are happy that the same Gov. will dictate what somebody else can charge for some product. Maybe they will decide that you are overcharging your employer.....
 
List price is not relevant if they don't have any for sale.
Click to expand...

Buddy of mine tells a story about his father, who was always bargaining for a better price. The father went to a drugstore for some medication. The druggist told him the price. The dad said that the store down the street listed it for a lower price. Druggist said "Go buy it there." Dad said "I can't. They're out of it."

The druggist said "I could sell for that price too, if I was out of it."
 
Quote:
List price is not relevant if they don't have any for sale.
Buddy of mine tells a story about his father, who was always bargaining for a better price. The father went to a drugstore for some medication. The druggist told him the price. The dad said that the store down the street listed it for a lower price. Druggist said "Go buy it there." Dad said "I can't. They're out of it."

The druggist said "I could sell for that price too, if I was out of it."
Click to expand...

I heard the same story, except the characters were a butcher and an old lady about chickens. Better to have really high prices ensuring a steady - even if low - supply than to have artificially low prices and nothing available.
 
Personally, I'm a strict capitalist, supply/demand kinda guy. I believe a company has the right to place whatever price they believe will make a sale. The buyer has every right to buy or NOT buy.

In the case they present that ammo is a necessity: Is it? And, if so, why? It's a non-perishable item. It isn't gasoline. It isn't a piece of fresh meat. With rights come responsibilities. It is the individual's responsibility to assure they have whatever necessities they need to survive. That includes making the proper preparations. If someone chose to sit on their duff last year and cry about 9mm ammo being $10/box and not stock up then, it's their own fault they have to buy a now at $35/box. There has been reloading equipment for sale since the day components were available. I have zero empathy for those crying about high prices on stuff, now...gouging or otherwise. It's people like that that causes the gouging in the first place. If most everyone would have bought what they needed a long damn time ago, nobody would be buying now at the ridiculous prices and retailers would have no choice but to keep the prices down in order to move product. The few exceptions I have empathy for are young people just now legal to buy ammo and such and competitive shooters that rely on shooting as their profession and don't have sponsors for ammo.

I hate CTD. They pulled a fast one on us when Sandy Hook happened. However, at the time, they were within their right to make those business decisions and should have had no legal recourse. I refused to purchase anything from them, since. But I supported their rights to do whatever they wanted to do as long as they were honest.

That lawsuit today has one, major argument I feel is illegal and is against proper practice in capitalism. Their claim is consumers were placing items in their online cart with the understanding of the price they clicked on. When they went to checkout, the price climbed. This is going to be very difficult to prove unless there's some IT guru that knows how to find some kind of timestamps of the accused process. If they can prove this tactic in fact happened, CTD should be held accountable. Capitalism only works when BOTH parties agreed to a specific price and the transaction takes place in a reasonable timeframe. I can see CTD win this case if someone stuck a box of ammo for $10 in their cart and let it sit there for several days. Other than that, shame on CTD.
 
To a point I'm all for free market pricing. But there are times where limits should be placed on businesses selling essentials during real emergencies. The ammo situation doesn't qualify IMO.

The gun store where I try to give as much of my gun and ammo business as possible has built a reputation for selling at very good prices and making their profits on volume of sales instead of high markup. I've been able to buy guns and scopes from these guys as much as $100 cheaper than they were available anywhere else.

But the last few months have been hard on them. They have bills to pay too and can't get their hands on any merchandise to sell. They recently had some cheap FMJ 9mm ammo priced at $32/box of 50 rounds. I have a few thousand rounds of the same stuff that I paid $8/box for.

I don't blame them at all for asking $32/box for it. That price serves 2 purposes.

#1 It helps keep the store from going out of business. Their business is way down and if they have to go to higher markups on what they do sell so be it. I haven't forgotten the good deals and prices they've given me from years ago.

#2 I'd rather see them get the profits and actually have some ammo in stock for those who don't have any. They could sell at a lower price more in line with their past markup's, but then the hoarders would just buy it up and make the profit. Hoarders won't pay those prices. $32/box is hard for me to justify, but if I were a new gun owner I'd have to do what I have to do.
 
To a point I'm all for free market pricing. But there are times where limits should be placed on businesses selling essentials during real emergencies.
Click to expand...
Then you are not for free market pricing. High prices means some will be left for those truly in need and it also encourages others from outside the emergency area to bring in supplies.

If I live in an area without an emergency and one hits in Florida like a hurricane, under your scenario, I have ZERO incentive to go get and bring more generators or whatever to that area. Supply/demand works well when left alone.
Now, if CTD did do some bait and switch with showing a low price and then cancelling orders only to immediately raise them, that is something altogether different.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top