What else happened at Disneyland last Sunday?

[mousepod]

Y'know, as I re-read this thread, it occurs to me that Kevy and NA seem to think that LP and MS are providing a service that is otherwise unavailable. Other than showing pictures of the merchandise, that's simply not true. Just pick up the phone and call WDW. They'll send your antenna balls anywhere you want. And they'll be cheaper.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by mousepod

Y'know, as I re-read this thread, it occurs to me that Kevy and NA seem to think that LP and MS are providing a service that is otherwise unavailable. Other than showing pictures of the merchandise, that's simply not true. Just pick up the phone and call WDW. They'll send your antenna balls anywhere you want. And they'll be cheaper.

The showing of pictures is a HUGE service (as compared to not having that critical part of the service available). People are willing to pay more for better service (I do it all the time!).

To inform the public how to cheat by utilizing the service portion of a web site (at no cost) and then buying the item they like from another source just so they can save a couple of dollars does not sound too ethical to me.

On the flip side (in other words, I do not blindly support either of the two businesses in question), if MS an LPS are getting unfair purchasing advantages (which I know MS has specifically said they don't, but Michael Jaclson says there is a conspiracy against him), then I DO have a problem with that

[mousepod]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

To inform the public how to cheat by utilizing the service portion of a web site (at no cost) and then buying the item they like from another source just so they can save a couple of dollars does not sound too ethical to me.

You haven't heard my show yet, so you have absolutely no idea how I'm going to frame it for the audience. Truth is never unethical. What I think is unethical, is LP performing a "service" and not telling their audience that they're charging more than 35% for the service. If they simply stated that they were marking the prices up that much and why their service was better and easier than DeliverEARS, no sweat. They don't. Instead, they rely on the ignorance of their readers to turn a profit.
I don't doubt that they're doing a service by showing fans pictures of what's available. However, I learned of the "Art of Disneyland" book from a message board. I knew about the EPCOT DVD from a CM in Florida. I saved $40 (not just "a couple of dollars") over LPs price by making a call to Florida. I'm not an insider, I'm informed.

This relates to Jim Hill because it's about someone taking money by "adding value" to something that is already available by the parent company.
IMHO, Jim screwed up by starting the tour where people who expected the official tour might get confused and join his.

Kevy, would it be more ethical if I started a thread and posted pictures of park product that I got from places other than LP and MS and told people to call Disney and avoid rip-off artists?

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by mousepod

You haven't heard my show yet, so you have absolutely no idea how I'm going to frame it for the audience.

Other than:

Originally Posted by mousepod

Starting with the next MousePod, I'm going to suggest that all of my listeners who are interested in buying Park merchandise go to lp, check out what they want, and call Disney mail-order. Simple as that.

That's all the framework I need to believe that it is unethical. Take advantage of one service at no cost then buy elsewhere. In the grand sceme of things, not all *that* unethical, but unethical none-the-less.

Originally Posted by mousepod

Truth is never unethical.

Now this is an interesting statement. If I were to find out you home address, phone number, etc. and published it here, would that be unethical? I think it would be and therefore would not do it.

For my job, I work for a print broker. That means we "buy" printing services from companies and "sell" it to our customers. If my vendors approached my clients and told them for how much and where I was purchasing this from, not only would this be unethical, there would probably be basis for a lawsuit.

To make this more specific...

Originally Posted by mousepod

What I think is unethical, is LP performing a "service" and not telling their audience that they're charging more than 35% for the service. If they simply stated that they were marking the prices up that much and why their service was better and easier than DeliverEARS, no sweat. They don't. Instead, they rely on the ignorance of their readers to turn a profit.

Okay, if you think that the business practices of LP and MS are unethical, are you going to stand outside your local 7-11 to tell people they can buy most of the merchandise in the store much less expensively? And then go to that supermarket and tell them they can now get a lot of that merchandise even less expensively at Costco, Walmart, etc.?

Heck, for that matter, once you find the cheapest possible place to buy something, should that place be required to show how much they purchased said item for?

Should the local gas station be required to post where in the area you can purchase the same brand cheaper? Should employers be required to tell employees where they can get paid more for the same job (and employees be required to tell their employers how much less somebody is geting paid for doing the same job elsewhere?). Should Disney ticket sellers be required to tell the guests how much it costs to get into Knotts? Shall I go on?

You are perfectly entitled to inform people that they can purchase items they want for less at another place - happens all the time and is perfectly legit. This is a wonderful component of the free enterprise system: caveat emptor. but to 1) believe that what LP and MS are doing is "unethical" is ludicris, and 2) tell people how to usurp a system as has been inferred is unethical and hypocritical. You are perfectly entitled to do it, I just don't agree with it.

I don't really give a rip about MS and LP. I purchased one item from MS last year only because a friend told me they had it and I never saw it in the park (a Mickey trailer hitch cover). I didn't have to pay S/H because I made a local pickup. Other than that, I have never gone to either of these sites.

[mousepod]

You're missing my point.

1 - I have no intention of telling people to go to LP or MS and then call Disney. What I will tell people is that park merchandise can be bought at places other than theme parks. One place to get that stuff is through shopping services like LP or MS, where you have the benefit of internet shopping with pictures, but know that you'll pay a 35% markup. The other place is to call Disney direct. If people want to draw conclusions on how to shop, all the power to them. I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear earlier.

2 - The difference between all of your examples and the one at hand is the question of "common knowledge". Most consumers know that shopping clubs like Costco are cheap, and quickie-marts like 7-Eleven are expensive. LP calls itself "The #1 Site For Disney" - setting itself up as an authority on all things Disney, especially parks. In this case, a lie of omission costs you, the consumer, 35%.

As far as me standing outside the 7-Eleven and telling people to shop at Costco, that's silly. However, if I had an internet radio show that focused on electronics, for example, I would probably have no problem to tell my listeners to shop around and check out all of the digital cameras anywhere they could, and if they decided on a specific brand, make sure to check CostCo or onecall.com for the cheapest prices.

I would imagine that your company offers something to your customers that they couldn't get elsewhere. Whether that be the ability to run small orders or simply better customer service. If not, and you just take advantage of the fact that most people don't want to spend the energy to go to the Yellow Pages, well, that's an interesting ethics question in itself.