[GARETH197901]

Originally Posted by Simon Rodgers

What are you talking about? If they are different companies then they should have different names. Simple. I don't confuse the two as such, they must have some sort of connection otherwise the same name use (and logo) would just not be allowed!

But when you have trouble online, the stores just don't want to know. Clever little get out clause but I think that's just downright sneaky. NOT customer friendly in the least. Why don't YOU get that?



Could have fooled me. I've seen supermarkets seldom sell stuff cheap to entice me to be honest. And if they want GOOD loss leaders, why not do it on bread and milk? Would work on me.

Because they dont,it tends to be DVD's,Blu Ray's,Games,Drink etc because those are the type of things that draw people in

saying that there always seems to be an offer on Milk at one supermarket or another most of the time

[Kodaz]

Originally Posted by Simon Rodgers

If they want GOOD loss leaders, why not do it on bread and milk?

Er, probably because those are the things they want to make money on once they've enticed you in. Especially the milk(!)...

[Kayleigh2010]

Originally Posted by linkinpark875

Do you expect companies to sell DVD's at a loss? Maybe you can get somebody on eBay to take a hit on a second hand DVD they don't want but retailers don't operate that way.

always one

[Simon Rodgers]

Originally Posted by GARETH197901

Because they dont,it tends to be DVD's,Blu Ray's,Games,Drink etc because those are the type of things that draw people in

saying that there always seems to be an offer on Milk at one supermarket or another most of the time

Cheap milk and bread would draw me in and I'm sure I'm not alone.

[GARETH197901]

Originally Posted by Simon Rodgers

Cheap milk and bread would draw me in and I'm sure I'm not alone.

most supermarkets already sell bread and milk cheap(to the point where the dairy farmers are struggling to keep afloat)

[Straker]

Originally Posted by Simon Rodgers

What are you talking about? If they are different companies then they should have different names. Simple. I don't confuse the two as such, they must have some sort of connection otherwise the same name use (and logo) would just not be allowed!

I refer you again to my earlier Amazon example. Try and absorb it this time.

And HMV high street and HMV online do/did have different names: HMV and HMV.com. I refer you to the Compare The Market ad currently on telly - “Diffferent names, spelt and pronounced differently. See?”

Originally Posted by Simon Rodgers

But when you have trouble online, the stores just don't want to know. Clever little get out clause but I think that's just downright sneaky. NOT customer friendly in the least. Why don't YOU get that?

See above - Bricks and mortar store is seperate entity to online etc, etc, etc,,,,,,

Originally Posted by Simon Rodgers

Could have fooled me. I've seen supermarkets seldom sell stuff cheap.....

And yet they do.

Originally Posted by Simon Rodgers

And if they want GOOD loss leaders, why not do it on bread and milk? Would work on me.

Bread and milk IS cheap. In every supermarket in fact. Milk is so cheap that farmers are losing money on it having to sell it to supermarkets at such a low price.

[linnylou]

Originally Posted by Syntax Error

Spot on.

I was nearly tempted to buy the Primeval Box Set from HMV for £35 minus 25%, but then realised that Amazon were selling the same thing for £21 anyway.

The Blux Cross sale is just a ruse IMO.

I get your point about the pricing, but the sale will have been put into place by the administrators.

[Simon Rodgers]

Originally Posted by Straker

I refer you again to my earlier Amazon example. Try and absorb it this time.

And HMV high street and HMV online do/did have different names: HMV and HMV.com. I refer you to the Compare The Market ad currently on telly - “Diffferent names, spelt and pronounced differently. See?”

There is no need to be sarcastic. HMV and HMV.com may indeed be different in that sense but that doesn't mean anything. Many companies have such websites in addition to their shops but they work together. HMV.com also use the same logo as well. If HMV happened to be your initials, you may want to run a business called HMV and have a website, but you sure wouldn't use their logo because that WOULD be misleading, yet HMV.com still use it which would lead people to think they WERE connected!

[Matt D]

Originally Posted by Simon Rodgers

Many companies have such websites in addition to their shops but they work together.

Indeed.

e.g. Waterstones, Argos, and Currys/PCWorld let you reserve something online but collect it in your local store.

[Straker]

Originally Posted by Simon Rodgers

There is no need to be sarcastic. HMV and HMV.com may indeed be different in that sense but that doesn't mean anything. Many companies have such websites in addition to their shops but they work together.

So? Your expectation of the business practices of one store based on how some others run theirs is your error, not HMV’s. The T&Cs of both operations made it fullsomely clear they operate as seperate businesses with different pricing structures and no crossover between them. Your desire to conflate the two into one homogenous whole is not their problem.

[cyril-furr]

Originally Posted by blueisthecolour

It's a classic scam. There's not much British people love more than a bargain and these sort of 'panic sales' usually get people rushing through the doors (anyone remember the Woolworths closing down sale?). However, like with Woolworths, DVD/CD stock is very easy to resell back to trade so there's no point in HMV taking any kind of serious hit on the price, even if they are about to go into administration.

Higher speed broadband and larger hard drives means that HMV's death is inevitable. We're a pirate nation now . . .

Yes, made Pirates bay greedy fuel, gas & electicity firms running a cartel & the Government, out of control of this greed - in fact setting a greedy example themselves, by their own expence claims.
The UK is going to the dogs, & no one cares!

[GARETH197901]

Originally Posted by Matt D

Indeed.

e.g. Waterstones, Argos, and Currys/PCWorld let you reserve something online but collect it in your local store.

so did HMV.com towards the end(and pay the online price too),but as not many people knew about it,it fell on deaf ears

[Kodaz]

Originally Posted by Straker

So? Your expectation of the business practices of one store based on how some others run theirs is your error, not HMV’s. The T&Cs of both operations made it fullsomely clear they operate as seperate businesses with different pricing structures and no crossover between them. Your desire to conflate the two into one homogenous whole is not their problem.

Oh, please. Spare us your sanctimonious lecturing.

Branding is how businesses identify themselves. If I start trading using someone else's brand without permission, I get in trouble because I'm implying a connection where there isn't one. HMV and HMV.com use the same branding.

And since you previously said...

Originally Posted by Straker

HMV high street and HMV online do/did have different names: HMV and HMV.com. I refer you to the Compare The Market ad currently on telly - “Diffferent names, spelt and pronounced differently. See?”

...one only gets the right to be as smugly condescensing as this if it's a universally-accepted rule of differentiation. It isn't.

Firstly, some companies have their online and retail operations connected far more closely. In many, they're just different facets of the exact same operation.

Secondly, I work for a company called "Placeholder Name Ltd.". (*) The website is at placeholdername.co.uk. That's not the name of the company, that's our website. Even "hmv.com" at the top of the page could reasonably be construed as a signifier that "this is the online outlet of HMV" and nothing more.

Even if the old page had said "Copyright hmv.com 2013" in tiny letters at the bottom, that wouldn't make it immediately clear that it's an entirely separate business.

I entirely agree that HMV are entitled to run two different operations- I've nothing against that in principle, provided they explain this in their terms and conditions. But if they're going to use versions of the same branding on both, it's unreasonable to blame members of the public for any initial confusion.

Yes, we know that *you* find out every detail of a business as soon as you visit its website. However, most ordinary people identify things by brand- and given that this is the whole point of branding, it's unreasonable for you to blame them for not meeting your obsessive standards.

(*) Obviously not its actual name

[Straker]

Originally Posted by Kodaz

Oh, please. Spare us your sanctimonious lecturing.

Touch a nerve did I? Did I use too many long words? Apologies for that......

And far from “sanctimonious lecturing” (insulting really which shows you have no argument) it’s a simple statement of the facts. Even now when they’re in administration and the website is shut down, some people seem pathologically incapable of seeing the online and the bricks and mortar as wholly seperate businesses.

Originally Posted by Kodaz

one only gets the right to be as smugly condescensing as this if it's a universally-accepted rule of differentiation. It isn't.

“smugly condescending” (more insults - noted). And no, I get to say I’m right if I am right as is the case with HMV and HMV.com. Some other businesses operate differently.....so what? I don’t bring my unreasonable expectations to bear when I’m dealing with other companies or even other people and I certainly don’t expect to force them upon anyone or anything, unlike some....

Originally Posted by Kodaz

I entirely agree that HMV are entitled to run two different operations- I've nothing against that in principle, provided they explain this in their terms and conditions.

And they DO just that so you’ve negated your entire post. Well done you! A spectacular own goal.

Originally Posted by Kodaz

Yes, we know that *you* find out every detail of a business as soon as you visit its website. However, most ordinary people identify things by brand- and given that this is the whole point of branding, it's unreasonable for you to blame them for not meeting your obsessive standards.

I’ve known since I started using them that one is NOT interchangeable with the other because I took all of...ooh...10 seconds to check. Hardly “obsessive” but it suits your attempt to polarise I suppose. And I would suggest that this far down the line most people are aware that HMV and HMV.com were/are two seperate businesses as seems to be illustrated by the fact that newspapers and forums aren’t constantly filled with stories from irate buyers bemoaning not being able to return an online purchase to a store and vice versa.

[Kodaz]

Originally Posted by Straker

Touch a nerve did I? Did I use too many long words?

Er, no... let me explain. You addressed the person you were replying to in a sanctimonious, lecturing manner. Hence, "sanctimonious lecturing".

Originally Posted by Straker

(insulting really which shows you have no argument)

It's your choice if you want to feel insulted by that. However, if you actually *had* replied in that manner (which you had!), you don't have much ground for complaint when you're called out on it.

As for that pat "shows you have no argument" bit... well, I made the point I was arguing quite clear. Hence:-

Originally Posted by Straker

Even now when they’re in administration and the website is shut down, some people seem pathologically incapable of seeing the online and the bricks and mortar as wholly seperate businesses.

Owned by the same parent company and using the same "HMV" branding.

I note that you didn't actually respond to what I said about the purpose of branding being that of identification and association, nor that by using the same branding across both operations, HMV *were* implying a connection.

Yes, once it's explained, people should know, but by using consistent branding across both, it's quite understandable that this isn't immediately obvious.

Originally Posted by Kodaz

I entirely agree that HMV are entitled to run two different operations- I've nothing against that in principle, provided they explain this in their terms and conditions.

Originally Posted by Straker

And they DO just that so you’ve negated your entire post. Well done you! A spectacular own goal.

Ooh.... you're so clever. You caught me out there!

Oh... wait.... no, you didn't. You misrepresented the point I had made and selectively quoted. What was actually said in full was...

Originally Posted by Kodaz

I entirely agree that HMV are entitled to run two different operations- I've nothing against that in principle, provided they explain this in their terms and conditions. But if they're going to use versions of the same branding on both, it's unreasonable to blame members of the public for any initial confusion.

In short, making clear that my criticism wasn't of companies having separate retail/online operations, but specifically of what *you* were implying, i.e. that the difference should be immediately obvious from the (same!) names alone.

Originally Posted by Straker

“smugly condescending” (more insults - noted).

Are you noting them in a little book? Or (more likely) are you trying to paint yourself as the guy taking the "high road" here? Despite the fact that you *had* made a comment that was quite clearly intended to be condescending towards the original poster...

Originally Posted by Straker

And no, I get to say I’m right if I am right as is the case with HMV and HMV.com. Some other businesses operate differently.....so what?

That was the whole point, that's "what"(!)

Your argument was that people were stupid for not knowing that "HMV" (stores) and "HMV.com" were entirely separate businesses from the "different" names. Despite the fact that (as you just admitted) this isn't a consistent rule across all businesses, and hence one can't draw this conclusion from that alone.

Of course, it *is* obvious from the name that the two HMVs are separate businesses... if one already knows that they're entirely separate businesses. Er... that's what they call "circular reasoning" though.

Originally Posted by Straker

Hardly “obsessive” but it suits your attempt to polarise I suppose.

Ha ha... that's ironic. I made clear that I had nothing against separate onine operations because I *wasn't* arguing against that point (see above) or making some pointlessly polarised stance.

*You* were the one who selectively quoted it to make it appear I was contradicting myself.

Originally Posted by Straker

And I would suggest that this far down the line most people are aware that HMV and HMV.com were/are two seperate businesses

Indeed, hence

Originally Posted by Kodaz

If they're going to use versions of the same branding on both, it's unreasonable to blame members of the public for any initial confusion.

Once it's explained, or one has read the small print, this is clear. From the branding, it isn't.

[Simon Rodgers]

Originally Posted by Straker

So? Your expectation of the business practices of one store based on how some others run theirs is your error, not HMV’s. The T&Cs of both operations made it fullsomely clear they operate as seperate businesses with different pricing structures and no crossover between them. Your desire to conflate the two into one homogenous whole is not their problem.

Maybe not, but it is still a poor concept on their part. Using the same logo and a very similar name is always sneaky.

[rfonzo]

Does anyone think that HMV will survive and remain in the high street in the long term?

[daveycrocket222]

Originally Posted by Muttley76

and when they are gone, watch all the other retailers (online or otherwise) putting their prices up because they can....

Not really. I wont miss HMV when they are gone. I only really used the store to see what was avaliable and then go online and buy it through amazon as with online shops its not easy to browse.

Online shops still have ebay to compete with.