Showrooming

[electracoyote]

Don't use the store to try the instrument if your intent is strictly trying it and and buying elsewhere.

So, If I'm shopping for a Subaru, and I test drive one at Dealership 1 and like it, but I see on-line that Dealership 2 (or another resource) has the same car for $2,000.00 less, you're telling me I'm "unethical" if I buy from Dealership 2/other resource? I am somehow morally bound to support Dealership 1's massive overhead?

So much for the free market dictating the prices of things.

Furthermore, what significant harm have I done to Dealership 1 by driving their Subaru around the block a couple of times?

 

[96tbird]

My local small guy will usually match prices to online.

When I have bought new, I've made it clear that I prefer to buy from him, coz I like to support local. So I find what I want, factor in shipping if any, print it out for proof and show it to him. He hasn't let me down yet.

Sure, he might not make as much but he still makes money. Some money is better than zero money. One occasion he told me he couldn't go that low, and quoted me his need. It was $10 more. I gave him the $10 because he tried and was honest about it.

 

[blue4]

lol

I have at least six basses that dispel this little internet myth.

It's a persistent myth. The fact is there are some internet stores with customer service that is just as professional, reasonable and timely as a regular store. I buy just about every bass, set of strings, cable, etc on line now and pretty much for the last 3 years or so. Never once a problem. Things that needed returning no questions asked. Questions about special order strings, they know more than the guy who doesn't know there is more than one gauge of bass string manufactured. Once you've got enough 34" scale 4 string Fenders there isn't much to look at in most stores anyway.

Repair and resell shops, whole other story. They're worth building relationships with. IMO of course.

 

[blue4]

My local small guy will usually match prices to online.

When I have bought new, I've made it clear that I prefer to buy from him, coz I like to support local. So I find what I want, factor in shipping if any, print it out for proof and show it to him. He hasn't let me down yet.

Sure, he might not make as much but he still makes money. Some money is better than zero money. One occasion he told me he couldn't go that low, and quoted me his need. It was $10 more. I gave him the $10 because he tried and was honest about it.

I don't have a guy like that in my area. Most site GC and Amazon and go to the next customer.

 

[electracoyote]

It's a persistent myth. The fact is there are some internet stores with customer service that is just as professional, reasonable and timely as a regular store. I buy just about every bass, set of strings, cable, etc on line now and pretty much for the last 3 years or so. Never once a problem. Things that needed returning no questions asked. Questions about special order strings, they know more than the guy who doesn't know there is more than one gauge of bass string manufactured. Once you've got enough 34" scale 4 string Fenders there isn't much to look at in most stores anyway.

Repair and resell shops, whole other story. They're worth building relationships with. IMO of course.

I will admit it's not for everyone; you need a little experience and a strategy to have success on-line. When buying a guitar or bass, I have a list of questions. If I get any resistance or even one red flag in the process, I usually pass on the deal. But if the seller is friendly and helpful, offers a return policy, and answers all my questions with checkered flags, that's a go in my book and I seal the deal. I never get burned on-line.

 

[mellowinman]

I consider it highly unethical. A shop has more overhead, you use his services, you should pay for that right.

If you know what you want, buy it the cheapest place.

That is a completely messed up point of view.

Twin Tone Guitars, here in Minneapolis has for sale a Fender Standard Jazz Bass for $600.00 Guitar Center, Reverb.com and pretty much any other online presence I see has it for almost exactly that price. Twin Tone is COMPETING with the online sellers, and they are a full-service music store that will buy and sell used gear, and will pay a lot more for your used gear than Guitar Center. They are managing to support their overhead, while COMPETING. If I buy there, I don't have to pay shipping, so they may actually be BEATING some online stores.

In buying any product, you will shop around. You may try it in several stores, and find "the one." When that happens, you will support that store's overhead. When it doesn't, you will try other stores, or buy online. No ethics are involved here at all. If you are trying to say it is up to ME to keep local businesses viable, you are simply as wrong as anyone could possibly be in a capitalist system.

If they can't price in a manner that is competitive, they should not be in business. Period. That is the cold hard reality of our system.

Any store that has "local mom and pop flavor," but has prices that are consistently higher than the market is a bad business, and needs to adjust their sales model, or go under.

If you ever open up a guitar store in the Twin Cities, I will make sure that when I come in, I will tell you, "now I'm going to try some guitars, but that doesn't mean I will necessarily buy one," and then ask, "do you still want my business?" and if you say "no," I will move on.

Fair enough?

 

[buldog5151bass]

So, If I'm shopping for a Subaru, and I test drive one at Dealership 1 and like it, but I see on-line that Dealership 2 (or another resource) has the same car for $2,000.00 less, you're telling me I'm "unethical" if I buy from Dealership 2/other resource? I am somehow morally bound to support Dealership 1's massive overhead?

So much for the free market dictating the prices of things.

Furthermore, what significant harm have I done to Dealership 1 by driving their Subaru around the block a couple of times?

There is a difference between cars and guitars (I figured someone would bring this up):

- every dealer pays the same for a car,
- every dealer had retail space.

MF buys a lot more, so is paying a lot less. They are not leasing retail space - a lot more expensive than warehouse space.

Buying from a store is part service (having instruments to try, having a place to try them. Buying a pack of strings (where they make a few bucks) there, and buying the axe (where they make a lot more) elsewhere is hardly justification.

 

[buldog5151bass]

That is a completely messed up point of view.

Twin Tone Guitars, here in Minneapolis has for sale a Fender Standard Jazz Bass for $600.00 Guitar Center, Reverb.com and pretty much any other online presence I see has it for almost exactly that price. Twin Tone is COMPETING with the online sellers, and they are a full-service music store that will buy and sell used gear, and will pay a lot more for your used gear than Guitar Center. They are managing to support their overhead, while COMPETING. If I buy there, I don't have to pay shipping, so they may actually be BEATING some online stores.

In buying any product, you will shop around. You may try it in several stores, and find "the one." When that happens, you will support that store's overhead. When it doesn't, you will try other stores, or buy online. No ethics are involved here at all. If you are trying to say it is up to ME to keep local businesses viable, you are simply as wrong as anyone could possibly be in a capitalist system.

If they can't price in a manner that is competitive, they should not be in business. Period. That is the cold hard reality of our system.

Any store that has "local mom and pop flavor," but has prices that are consistently higher than the market is a bad business, and needs to adjust their sales model, or go under.

If you ever open up a guitar store in the Twin Cities, I will make sure that when I come in, I will tell you, "now I'm going to try some guitars, but that doesn't mean I will necessarily buy one," and then ask, "do you still want my business?" and if you say "no," I will move on.

Fair enough?

Big difference between giving them a shot, and knowing you won't buy from them, but using them to try out the instrument. No different than when a person "buys" an expensive piece of clothing to wear to a party, wears it to the party with the tags on, then returns it the next day.

 

[mellowinman]

Big difference between giving them a shot, and knowing you won't buy from them, but using them to try out the instrument. No different than when a person "buys" an expensive piece of clothing to wear to a party, wears it to the party with the tags on, then returns it the next day.

Fair enough, although that "buy and return" thing is actually past unethical; I think it may be illegal.

 

[pravus]

To answer the question of ethics: what harm comes to a shop owner when you do not purchase his goods? Are you saying that you, personally, have a moral responsibility to support the lifestyle of a proprietor?

If the shop owner doesn't want people fondling their instruments, they should take them off the walls. The local shops could also, you know, do that ol' thing called competition and sell on-line as well. Are you morally responsible for a shop owner's business decisions?

Since I also offer services, is it unethical for the shop owner to not pay me for them? I also have a lifestyle to maintain. A trade deficit is created when I only purchase things in a store, but the store owner never purchases things from me. It's funny that I never see that mentioned.

People talk about all this money going back into the community, but I've never been hired by my neighbor to program anything. I'd starve to death if I had to rely on local people only for my lifestyle. People need to start waking up to the fact that the world is more accessible.

 

[pravus]

Fair enough, although that "buy and return" thing is actually past unethical; I think it may be illegal.

Are you implying that laws are above ethics? Laws are supposed to be derived from ethics. Laws are just words, after all.

 

[buldog5151bass]

To answer the question of ethics: what harm comes to a shop owner when you do not purchase his goods? Are you saying that you, personally, have a moral responsibility to support the lifestyle of a proprietor?

If the shop owner doesn't want people fondling their instruments, they should take them off the walls. The local shops could also, you know, do that ol' thing called competition and sell on-line as well. Are you morally responsible for a shop owner's business decisions?

Since I also offer services, is it unethical for the shop owner to not pay me for them? I also have a lifestyle to maintain. A trade deficit is created when I only purchase things in a store, but the store owner never purchases things from me. It's funny that I never see that mentioned.

People talk about all this money going back into the community, but I've never been hired by my neighbor to program anything. I'd starve to death if I had to rely on local people only for my lifestyle. People need to start waking up to the fact that the world is more accessible.

IMO, if you take advantage of those services, knowing fully well you are not going to buy from him, that is wrong.

Most retailers DO sell on line, but still have the added expenses.

What services of yours is the owner using?

 

[pravus]

IMO, if you take advantage of those services, knowing fully well you are not going to buy from him, that is wrong.

Most retailers DO sell on line, but still have the added expenses.

What services of yours is the owner using?

How is it wrong? No contract was signed that stated that I would buy from him. Like I said, if the shop owner doesn't want me fondling his wares, he can put them up. He chooses to risk not making a sale and apparently he's ok with that.

 

[wmhill]

I've been on both sides of this debate- I ran a mom & pop music store in the 90s. It would on occasion happen that they would use me for the test drive- and purchase elsewhere. It was super frustrating when you'd actually let something out the door for a gig demo, then get it back to find out they ordered it online. Obviously these folks went on the no favors list. I went to extremes to offer the best service pre AND post sale. It was always sweet to have them come in with an issue after they bought it from a catalog, pay handsomely for a repair/setup( things that would be included if purchased at my shop) or (whatever) or send it back the catalog retailer. As a musician, I get the idea of savings, but I also look for customer service as a priority. Conversely, the one formerly great music store recently folded after 40 odd years, mainly because under new management- customer service was non-existent and prices where not even in the ballpark with on line. At that point there was no reason to shop there...so they started to carry less/lesser quality products, at even higher prices, still with no service- so the spiral flush begins.

 

[electracoyote]

There is a difference between cars and guitars (I figured someone would bring this up):

- every dealer pays the same for a car,
- every dealer had retail space.

MF buys a lot more, so is paying a lot less. They are not leasing retail space - a lot more expensive than warehouse space.

Buying from a store is part service (having instruments to try, having a place to try them. Buying a pack of strings (where they make a few bucks) there, and buying the axe (where they make a lot more) elsewhere is hardly justification.

I appreciate the elaboration, but I think the comparison is close enough to make a valid point about consumers and the free market, and I won't engage in a hair-splitting debate. I certainly do not feel unethical or immoral if I see a bass hanging at a local store, I gently audition it, but I know I could get it significantly cheaper elsewhere. I do not feel bad because I didn't needlessly donate money to Guitar Center or Mom and Pop, and people who feel compelled to charitably support GC and Mom and Pop do not have any sort of moral or ethical high ground here. In a competitive industry, the fit survive. Adapt or die. As a consumer, that is not my burden. As a working stiff with responsibilities to myself and others, my duty is to my wallet and financial obligations.

 

[electracoyote]

To answer the question of ethics: what harm comes to a shop owner when you do not purchase his goods? Are you saying that you, personally, have a moral responsibility to support the lifestyle of a proprietor?

Exactly.

So you go in and try his bass. You know it's priced much higher than elsewhere. You hang it back up exactly as it was. You buy the bass elsewhere and save money, the proprietor waits for someone else to come buy his bass. I fail to see the harm, and again, I fail to see where I am morally obligated to support his mark-up and overhead expense.

The only problem that I, the consumer, can see is the proprietor is not competitive and lost my business as a result. And that is not my problem.

 

[FlatwoundFunk]

Here's a true-life scenario of mine…one that I'd like to see where it falls in people's minds on the murky scale of "Ethics". This is not to say I regret the series of events. I just want to see what people reading this think and get their perspective.

I went into a local chain (at the time, three stores) to see that particular location for the first time and perhaps buy a set of strings. For the first time ever, I got to try out a Blacktop Jazz. Man-oh-man, was I impressed! (See that? That was my face at that first pluck of the E-string!) I didn't buy it on the spot for a few reasons; I didn't have the money at that time, I didn't want that color and I had one too many basses at home. However, I did buy the strings I was looking for.

Six months later, Guitar Center was having one of their "Used Gear Expos" where you can get 15% off new gear with an acceptable trade-in. I had a Squier P-Bass Special that I wasn't loving and was debating what to do with it. When I saw the Expo's notice, I remembered the Blacktop and how awesome it was.

I brought in my bass, asked if they'd take it, what I could get for it and could it go towards a new Blacktop. They gave me a fair quote, I accepted, they did the math for the discount+trade-in value, called Fender to place a special order and I paid for said instrument.

I guess you could say I unintentionally "Showroomed" the instrument. When I first demo'd it, I didn't think I would be buying it anytime soon. But an opportunity to turn one mediocre-at-best instrument into something fantastic popped up a whole half-a-year later. I'm certain some would call what I did "unethical" and others not. For the former, I'd like to hear why.

In the meantime, let's look at some other posts I'd like to respond to…



Not to be argumentative, but aren't those two principles mutually exclusive? You say it's unethical to simply try out an item at one store without buying something, then you suggest buying the cheapest from wherever it's available. What if the only place to test something is not the cheapest place to get it? If I'm misreading you, please elaborate.



If you never pick up an instrument that's within easy reach for a test-drive, how do you plan out future purchases?

I, for one, don't see any problem trying out a new-to-me model for basic ergonomic compatibility, even if I'm just coming in to buy a cable or strings. These trial-runs help me determine if a make or model is even worth my future consideration. Then, when the cash is in-hand, I can make an informed and responsible decision.

Opinions, impressions and feedback online (here and elsewhere) can only go so far in building that informed decision, especially in the realm of ergonomics. If my actual career has taught me anything, it's just how unique everyone's physicality is grossly/minutely different. So even if "BASS-X" is comfortably built for nine out of ten people, I certainly don't want to be Number Ten. And if I had the chance to spare myself the whole "buy, try and return" (assuming returning is even possible) rigamarole, but knowingly didn't take that opportunity, then shame on me. I deserve the hassle.

I get where your coming from but If a person knows that they can not realistically afford or plan to buy a said product, they should not waste a company's time nor put wear on an instrument that is trying to be presented as new. I have a bass that I witnessed being pulled from the box to be put on display. I fell for the looks instantly. The store owner insisted that I play it for he could see I desired it. I refused. I told him, I don't touch what I can't afford. And he said with sincerity, "I really respect that". Two years later, when I was in a better financial position I asked if I could play the bass. It sounded and played better than I could have imagined. Even better was the deal he was willing to make on it.

Stores are not there for our convenience to get acquainted with products or build future shopping lists. They are there to provide goods and services that they can hopefully make available to consumers at an profit. For a store to put up basses just for us to try, is an ongoing expense that forces them to raise prices and puts them at an large disadvantage with it's NEW major competition. The internet. That's one of the reasons I'm not really fond of ebay, Craigslist and even TB classifieds. (Yeah I said it). Everybody thinks they are entitled to get the same price as an retailer now. I remember when used prices where based off of the Blue Book and smaller stores would base their prices off of the largest retailer (Guitar Center). Now Guitar Center looks to ebay's sold price (which isn't fair because of the reasons they may have sold) and Blue Book standard is a thing off the past. All of this hurts the smaller stores.
FF

 

[FlatwoundFunk]

So, If I'm shopping for a Subaru, and I test drive one at Dealership 1 and like it, but I see on-line that Dealership 2 (or another resource) has the same car for $2,000.00 less, you're telling me I'm "unethical" if I buy from Dealership 2/other resource? I am somehow morally bound to support Dealership 1's massive overhead?

So much for the free market dictating the prices of things.

Furthermore, what significant harm have I done to Dealership 1 by driving their Subaru around the block a couple of times?

Fuel, employee wage, insurance and added mileage. All cost Dealership owner 1. As a consumer, we should check prices first and then check.
FF

 

[ashtray]

Its sometimes tough to avoid.

When I'm bass shopping, I either know which bass I want or I'm trying out new brands/models I haven't played yet. I rarely know which bass I want to buy without any hands on time, and then drive out to the store and buy it.

Now, each instrument will play differently - so if you find one locally that feels and sounds great, probably just buy it there - bc going online and finding one for less might get you a bass that doesn't feel like the one in the shop.

I don't showroom on purpose. Sometimes I go in for strings, see the latest xyz and try it out. Might be a year later when I have funds and see one for sale on TB or Ebay and decide to buy it, remembering how it was at the shop.

What I won't do is go play a ton of stuff at a local shop, decide which I like best, then go online and find one for a few bucks less. Not on purpose.

 

[Mvilmany]

I buy local. There's a Guitar Center: I'd showroom there and wouldn't care much, because: Guitar Center. They rarely have anything I'd want anyway. But the main store where I live: Parkway Music, Clifton Park NY, is a great store, lots of good stuff and good prices (especially their used gear) and I would NOT want them going out of business. I had them order a pickguaurd for my P Bass (yes, Tort, of course!) and could have gotten it from Amazon for a few bucks less and probably would've gotten it delivered free sooner, but it's important to support local businesses, especially the ones that support us.