warehouse club warning

"Crownfield" wrote in message ...
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

If I buy a Toyota from a Toyota dealer, then I buy from from Walmart, I
expect to get a Toyota. It's labeled a Toyota, has the same window
sticker, etc.

I do not expect to get a Ford engine and cheaper seats for the
IDENTICALLY LABELED Toyota.

Ilford wrapped materially different paper inside the same wrapper as
what they use for their dealer stuff. That's just plain WRONG.

When you label them identically, the consumer has every expectation that
the same stuff is inside.

did the wrappers look similar,
or were the product numbers the same?

many products come in multiple flavors for different buyers.

The FULL ENTIRE NINE WORD name is the same. The packaging is very similar but
not identical, but as we all know, packaging is updated all the time.

I contend that if you are going to call it the same thing -- to that level of
sameness -- it had better BE the same thing [try this trick with prescription
drugs, I dare you...]

Go to the Sams Club website -- look up Ilford. Then open a second window on
Ilford's website.

As Ilford only lists one "Ilford Galerie Professional Inkjet Photo Range Smooth
Pearl Paper" and Sams Club only lists one "Ilford Galerie Professional Inkjet
Photo Range Smooth Pearl Paper", what am I supposed to expect?

"Crownfield" wrote in message ...
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

If I buy a Toyota from a Toyota dealer, then I buy from from Walmart, I
expect to get a Toyota. It's labeled a Toyota, has the same window
sticker, etc.

I do not expect to get a Ford engine and cheaper seats for the
IDENTICALLY LABELED Toyota.

Ilford wrapped materially different paper inside the same wrapper as
what they use for their dealer stuff. That's just plain WRONG.

When you label them identically, the consumer has every expectation that
the same stuff is inside.

did the wrappers look similar,
or were the product numbers the same?

many products come in multiple flavors for different buyers.

The FULL ENTIRE NINE WORD name is the same. The packaging is very similar but
not identical, but as we all know, packaging is updated all the time.

I contend that if you are going to call it the same thing -- to that level of
sameness -- it had better BE the same thing [try this trick with prescription
drugs, I dare you...]

Go to the Sams Club website -- look up Ilford. Then open a second window on
Ilford's website.

As Ilford only lists one "Ilford Galerie Professional Inkjet Photo Range Smooth
Pearl Paper" and Sams Club only lists one "Ilford Galerie Professional Inkjet
Photo Range Smooth Pearl Paper", what am I supposed to expect?

On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 15:00:46 -0500, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

Ilford did not pull tricks. They just sold a reduced quality product
based on a customers specifications and packaged it differently.
Hopefully they gave it a different name. The tricks are from Walmart.

Nope. The tricks aren't from Walmart. They're from the paper
manufacturer.

You (and we) don't really know who pulled the tricks, but we can
guess. Do you remember the many deaths caused by Fords using
Firestone tires? According to some investigative reports I saw,
Firestone balked at producing tires to Ford's spec's, but gave in
eventually because of Ford's "If you don't produce them, we'll get
someone else that will" ultimatum. Walmart has the ability to exert
even greater pressure on most of its suppliers, and Ilford was
probably in the weakest bargaining position in its history. And
speaking of history, given Walmart's, they're much more likely to
have been involved in specifying the deceptive packaging. If you
ever shop for groceries at Walmart, if you ever buy hot dogs or some
other beef product, you might want to consider that just because you
see a familiar label, to keep costs down Walmart may have pressured
producers to use cheaper, less well BSE inspected beef sources.

--
"Caveat Muncher"

On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 15:00:46 -0500, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

Ilford did not pull tricks. They just sold a reduced quality product
based on a customers specifications and packaged it differently.
Hopefully they gave it a different name. The tricks are from Walmart.

Nope. The tricks aren't from Walmart. They're from the paper
manufacturer.

You (and we) don't really know who pulled the tricks, but we can
guess. Do you remember the many deaths caused by Fords using
Firestone tires? According to some investigative reports I saw,
Firestone balked at producing tires to Ford's spec's, but gave in
eventually because of Ford's "If you don't produce them, we'll get
someone else that will" ultimatum. Walmart has the ability to exert
even greater pressure on most of its suppliers, and Ilford was
probably in the weakest bargaining position in its history. And
speaking of history, given Walmart's, they're much more likely to
have been involved in specifying the deceptive packaging. If you
ever shop for groceries at Walmart, if you ever buy hot dogs or some
other beef product, you might want to consider that just because you
see a familiar label, to keep costs down Walmart may have pressured
producers to use cheaper, less well BSE inspected beef sources.

--
"Caveat Muncher"

Don't know about the USA but in Australia and most other civilised countries
there are laws to protect consumers from such deception. If I were you, I'd
start at the better business bureau and go from there. If you have described
the events faithfully here then Wal-Mart have engaged in deceptive and
misleading advertising. If you were in Australia, you could get some help to
expose this practice and get the companies involved into court.

Like I said at the start, the US might allow this sort of behaviour. They
allow plenty of questionable business activities that are illegal in
civalised countries. I recall a similar incident in 1968 where a bread maker
got a contract to supply sliced bread to the Australian Army at a regional
barracks. To save changing the wrapping machine and resetting it, the
American owned baker wrapped the Army's bread in a wrapper from the last run
which was for a lighter loaf.

The wrapper said one weight but the bread was actually heavier. This
encouraged the delivery driver to substitute day old returns of (light
weight) bread for the fresh army bread. The upshot was the American owned
baker claimed they could package their product anyway they wanted. Not so
said an Australian court. The baker tried to get the case moved to the US
where they claimed the practice was not illegal. It didn't work but the
moral of the story is that you might get away with substitution packing in
the Good old US of A.

God bless America,
land of the free,
home of the brave and you better not say otherwise or they'll bomb you off
the face of the Earth!

Don't know about the USA but in Australia and most other civilised countries
there are laws to protect consumers from such deception. If I were you, I'd
start at the better business bureau and go from there. If you have described
the events faithfully here then Wal-Mart have engaged in deceptive and
misleading advertising. If you were in Australia, you could get some help to
expose this practice and get the companies involved into court.

Like I said at the start, the US might allow this sort of behaviour. They
allow plenty of questionable business activities that are illegal in
civalised countries. I recall a similar incident in 1968 where a bread maker
got a contract to supply sliced bread to the Australian Army at a regional
barracks. To save changing the wrapping machine and resetting it, the
American owned baker wrapped the Army's bread in a wrapper from the last run
which was for a lighter loaf.

The wrapper said one weight but the bread was actually heavier. This
encouraged the delivery driver to substitute day old returns of (light
weight) bread for the fresh army bread. The upshot was the American owned
baker claimed they could package their product anyway they wanted. Not so
said an Australian court. The baker tried to get the case moved to the US
where they claimed the practice was not illegal. It didn't work but the
moral of the story is that you might get away with substitution packing in
the Good old US of A.

God bless America,
land of the free,
home of the brave and you better not say otherwise or they'll bomb you off
the face of the Earth!

Don't know about the USA but in Australia and most other civilised countries
there are laws to protect consumers from such deception. If I were you, I'd
start at the better business bureau and go from there. If you have described
the events faithfully here then Wal-Mart have engaged in deceptive and
misleading advertising. If you were in Australia, you could get some help to
expose this practice and get the companies involved into court.

Like I said at the start, the US might allow this sort of behaviour. They
allow plenty of questionable business activities that are illegal in
civalised countries. I recall a similar incident in 1968 where a bread maker
got a contract to supply sliced bread to the Australian Army at a regional
barracks. To save changing the wrapping machine and resetting it, the
American owned baker wrapped the Army's bread in a wrapper from the last run
which was for a lighter loaf.

The wrapper said one weight but the bread was actually heavier. This
encouraged the delivery driver to substitute day old returns of (light
weight) bread for the fresh army bread. The upshot was the American owned
baker claimed they could package their product anyway they wanted. Not so
said an Australian court. The baker tried to get the case moved to the US
where they claimed the practice was not illegal. It didn't work but the
moral of the story is that you might get away with substitution packing in
the Good old US of A.

God bless America,
land of the free,
home of the brave and you better not say otherwise or they'll bomb you off
the face of the Earth!

SamSez wrote:
"measekite" wrote in message
news

Pete wrote:


On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 15:29:28 GMT, SamSez wrote:




I recently noticed that Sams Club was carrying "Ilford Galerie Professional
Inkjet Photo Range Smooth Gloss Paper" [sic] in 100 sheet boxes, and through
their web site you could also order "Ilford Galerie Professional Inkjet

Photo

Range Smooth Pearl Paper" [sic], so I bought two boxes of the gloss and one

of

the pearl.

Only when I went to make a print on the pearl, I saw immediately that it was
different than the "Ilford Galerie Professional Inkjet Photo Range Smooth

Pearl

Paper" that I had used previously. It had a lower base brightness, a duller
finish and felt thinner despite the box being apparently the same size.

Here's Ilford's response:

"Many thanks for your email. We are sorry thqat you are dissapointed. the

Sam`s

Club version of our media is NOT the same as the general brand found in Pro
dealers and is NOT covered in the sample pack. The description of the media

in

the sample pack at 280gsm is correct for the media supplied via our dealer
channels where the sample pack was purchased. The packaging is very

different

for the Sam`s media and sorry to say that you should have purchased the

media

via the same dealer route as the sample pack. Your comments will be passed

over

to our marketing group, but the Sam`s media although to the same standards

is

very different and is why the media is cheaper. We do not include the Sam`s
version in our sample packs as this is the only outlet for this version
generally. "

Kind of interesting that the name on the box is exactly the same for two

"very

different" products.

Sigh....



Any company that pulls tricks like this deserves to go bankrupt. Ooops...
Ilford IS bankrupt. Justice?



Ilford did not pull tricks. They just sold a reduced quality product
based on a customers specifications and packaged it differently.
Hopefully they gave it a different name. The tricks are from Walmart.


Pete




In case I didn't make it clear enough in my original post, they did NOT give it
a different name. That is my point.


All merchants do that kinds of things. However, intentionally using the
same name, just different packaging, with lower quality materials, is
certainly a foul play. It's mostly Iiford's mistake (I prefer to call it
a mistake, rather than trick) by not using a different name. I doubt the
purchasing people (and customers) in Sams' Club really know any
difference between different papper as long as it's from a brand name
manufacturer.

"leo" wrote in message
nk.net...


I doubt the purchasing people (and customers) in Sams' Club really know
any difference between different papper as long as it's from a brand name
manufacturer.

Well at least one knows the difference!

SamSez wrote:

"Crownfield" wrote in message ...
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

If I buy a Toyota from a Toyota dealer, then I buy from from Walmart, I
expect to get a Toyota. It's labeled a Toyota, has the same window
sticker, etc.

I do not expect to get a Ford engine and cheaper seats for the
IDENTICALLY LABELED Toyota.

Ilford wrapped materially different paper inside the same wrapper as
what they use for their dealer stuff. That's just plain WRONG.

When you label them identically, the consumer has every expectation that
the same stuff is inside.

did the wrappers look similar,
or were the product numbers the same?

many products come in multiple flavors for different buyers.

The FULL ENTIRE NINE WORD name is the same. The packaging is very similar but
not identical, but as we all know, packaging is updated all the time.

I contend that if you are going to call it the same thing -- to that level of
sameness -- it had better BE the same thing [try this trick with prescription
drugs, I dare you...]

Go to the Sams Club website -- look up Ilford. Then open a second window on
Ilford's website.

As Ilford only lists one "Ilford Galerie Professional Inkjet Photo Range Smooth
Pearl Paper" and Sams Club only lists one "Ilford Galerie Professional Inkjet
Photo Range Smooth Pearl Paper", what am I supposed to expect?

the same.
ask sams why they mislabeled an ilford product.
note that both are 250/260 g/m weight
sams does not define brightness.
ilford does.