Page 3 of 3
Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2014 2:31 pm
by Belgian
Craig wrote:Yeah, except they didn't manage the profit part of the profit tactics. They passed the profits on to the suppliers.
Even if they aren't taking full advantage - isn't a final higher price stil more money to the LC?
(ie. is the 'set markup' in their formula a predetermined dollar amount or a linear percentage.)
Can't see how a higher final price does not give at least some more tax revenue, if not also more dollars net profit. Paying the supplier more or not.
Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2014 2:51 pm
by Craig
Belgian wrote:Craig wrote:Yeah, except they didn't manage the profit part of the profit tactics. They passed the profits on to the suppliers.
Even if they aren't taking full advantage - isn't a final higher price stil more money to the LC?
(ie. is the 'set markup' in their formula a predetermined dollar amount or a linear percentage.)
Can't see how a higher final price does not give at least some more tax revenue, if not also more dollars net profit. Paying the supplier more or not.
Sure, so they're passing 85% of the markup back to the supplier and keeping 15 for themselves. But at the same time, every time they sent things back asking them to be cheaper, they were hurting their profits and both scenarios happened. They were more interested in having products that spanned the price spectrum than they were with, well, basic accounting and caring about who gets how much money.