[quote=“Rocko”]Overly simplistic? That’s a funny way to explain away a gross inaccuracy.
You said “I don’t know any IBEC member creaming in the profits while trimming their wage cost base- if you can show me one I’d be interested to see it.”
Changing that to cash flow is a massive difference. And for a company like Intel cash is not king. Profits don’t mean shag all, profits mean everything. Intel for example don’t generate cash in Ireland, it’s not a retail operation. Diageo do take cash in Ireland. They are taking in plenty of it. They don’t have a cash shortfall. Still they lay people off. Don’t ignore the facts just because they don’t suit you.
There is zero justification for Intel cutting 300 jobs in Ireland when they’re rolling in profits. That’s greed whatever way you want to dress it up. The government supports this strategy of encouraging investment from these corporations who are here to take every available economic advantage from this country and repatriate their profits back to the US. They provide employment when it suits for as long as it suits but when there’s a sniff of an opportunity to drive down wages or cut jobs they’re fierce quick to do it.
Frankly I do have problems with any company that makes profits and lays off workers at the same time. They’re taking advantage of the recession to implement drastic cuts in employment that they wouldn’t get away with at other times. It’s socially reckless but our government (and many others) sold their souls a long time ago.
It’s like another sentence you had in that post:
“You’re right Rocko in that you need to compare apples with apples but GSH’s tenet still stands- we are still getting ridden down here with regard to pricing.”
The reality is that GSH’s tenet was 100% false. There are plenty of cases of Irish companies being uncompetitive compared to Britain - mattress.ie is not one of them as evidenced by the fact that they sell into the UK also.[/QUOTE]
Blow it out your arse Rocko!
My position is that we are getting ripped off.
My position in this thread related to Mattresses shows that I’m 100% correct.
If you want to bring specifics (mattress.ie) into it then lets go toe to toe and compare prices (if you can even find them to compare against)
If you did as much checking as I did then you would have the facts instead of talking out your hole when you have a small knowledge of a fact.
so, in summary, my position is that we are getting ripped off,a dn that is 100% correct. Everyone else in the country bar yourself seems to think so and for you to say it’s 100% incorrect is arse talk. I would say I expected more but your shiting on about public sector pay and how great they are makes me think that you really do believe that we are 100% not getting ripped off as you stated above.
Yours in seeing rocko proving that a small bit of knowledge is dangerous,
GSH.
[quote=“Garda Sean Horgan”]Blow it out your arse Rocko!
My position is that we are getting ripped off.
My position in this thread related to Mattresses shows that I’m 100% correct.
If you want to bring specifics (mattress.ie) into it then lets go toe to toe and compare prices (if you can even find them to compare against)
If you did as much checking as I did then you would have the facts instead of talking out your hole when you have a small knowledge of a fact.
so, in summary, my position is that we are getting ripped off,a dn that is 100% correct. Everyone else in the country bar yourself seems to think so and for you to say it’s 100% incorrect is arse talk. I would say I expected more but your shiting on about public sector pay and how great they are makes me think that you really do believe that we are 100% not getting ripped off as you stated above.
Yours in seeing rocko proving that a small bit of knowledge is dangerous,
GSH.[/QUOTE]
Ah that’s just unadulterated nonsense GSH.
I’m no defender of business (big or small) in this country, I just think you picked the wrong example. There are plenty of examples of rip off merchants here like Harvey’s and other places but mattress.ie is not one of them.
You happened to pick one of the places that does compete with the UK on prices, so much so that you chose them (inadvertently) as an example of how competitive the UK is.
When you find a mattress on mattress.ie that is priced significantly differently than one on mattress.co.uk then let me know, I’ll save you the energy though and let you know not to bother looking. There are very small local variations for warehousing and delivery costs but these are tiny and the price difference that you see relates to exchange and VAT differences.
You made a mistake that’s all. I’m sure I’ll make one sometime.
Ikea are claiming this morning that they’re price matching between Dublin and Belfast so fair fucks to them if they’re doing that. Funny how the minimum wage isn’t an issue for them - though they pay fairly shit anyway I think.
He did all of this, there are still differences. Sometimes its not possible to compare like with like, due to ever so slightly different ranges or different names for the same products. This is quite a deliberate ploy by Irish retailers. It is sufficient to compare “like with like” not identical with identical. I am prepared to pay more in the Republic to support our economy, but there is a limit and it is not Carte Blanche to be exploited.
The unions don’t have any point, period. They have long since forgotten why they exist and have come to think they have a right to tell companies how to run their business and the Government how to run the country. As prime players in the runaway Public Sector pay bill they should be receiving the same rebukes that are being delivered (deservedly) to the Banks.
But blowing one’s savings when job security is very shakey is not an intuitive move. I have actually increased my savings slightly and will cut spending before saving. What is the point of us spending all our savings, then losing our jobs and be dependent on the Dole for every penny? Oh, wait a minute, thats the advice from union leaders who seem to be pretty secure, representing a lot of public sector workser who cannot lose their jobs.
The bottom line is that IBECs members are business men whose job is to make money. Making money means economic activity and taxes. If their companies go bust then they have no income, and probably no dole either as they are likely self-employed. Which costs are falling? Labour costs are falling because of wage freezes, cutbacks and even redundancies so you cannot say that falling costs are a reason not to do these things, you’re getting the cart before the horse. On The Business on RTE recently a survey of some business operating in the North West showed that the biggest problem costs were the likes of Energy and Services. These are areas heavily influenced by Government costs and Taxes.
It’s pretty basic really. The provate sector will adjust istelf as the natural laws of Supply and Demand take their inevitable toll but the Government, encouraged/cajoled/threatened by the unions, continue to ignore reality and spend at a whopping rate more than they can raise in taxes.
As Alan Dukes said recently, we can have as generous a State as we are willing to pay for, but the reality is that we are not willing to pay the 60% ot 70% income tax that it would take to continue to support an overweight and wasteful public sector.
[quote=“The Runt”]60% of the men who shop in River Island are funboys.
(I was in there last week for the sale as it’s a good time to pick work trousers, and there were 5 people shoppers there including myself and 3 of them were definitely funboys)[/QUOTE]
So, 5 shoppers and 3 definitely funboys. You pointedly didn’t exclude yourself from the 3 which means there is a 60% chance that The Runt is infact a funboy.
There were no differences. The same products have the same price. I’ve provided a specific example to prove this. GSH hasn’t been able to provide any proof to the contrary.
I’m not saying other businesses don’t have dodgy practices, of course they do. Just mattress.ie aren’t a very good example.
The unions don’t have any point, period. They have long since forgotten why they exist and have come to think they have a right to tell companies how to run their business and the Government how to run the country. As prime players in the runaway Public Sector pay bill they should be receiving the same rebukes that are being delivered (deservedly) to the Banks.
Here we go again with more unsubstantiated claims fo public service finances and the “runaway Public Sector pay bill.” I’ve provided examples on here numerous times in the past few weeks of how competitive Irish public sector expenditure is compared to other OECD countries. Statements like the above are grossly inaccurate but they’re helpful in that they show just how much research you’ve done on this topic, i.e. none.
And the Unions have always been about a social agenda, so that is their business.
But blowing one’s savings when job security is very shakey is not an intuitive move. I have actually increased my savings slightly and will cut spending before saving. What is the point of us spending all our savings, then losing our jobs and be dependent on the Dole for every penny? Oh, wait a minute, thats the advice from union leaders who seem to be pretty secure, representing a lot of public sector workser who cannot lose their jobs.
That makes no sense. That’s just bizarre, no idea what you’re even trying to say there.
The bottom line is that IBECs members are business men whose job is to make money. Making money means economic activity and taxes. If their companies go bust then they have no income, and probably no dole either as they are likely self-employed. Which costs are falling? Labour costs are falling because of wage freezes, cutbacks and even redundancies so you cannot say that falling costs are a reason not to do these things, you’re getting the cart before the horse. On The Business on RTE recently a survey of some business operating in the North West showed that the biggest problem costs were the likes of Energy and Services. These are areas heavily influenced by Government costs and Taxes.
More profits doesn’t result in more taxes. More jobs does. Profits pay at 12.5%, jobs pay at least 20%. There’s a huge difference between making more profits and going bust. Dell, Intel, Proctor and Gamble, Cadburys have all made millions of pounds in the last year and they’ve all cut wages and/or jobs. That’s nothing to do with avoiding going bust. That’s simple greed.
Funny how you mention energy and services just after you asked what costs are falling. There’s two right there.
It’s pretty basic really. The provate sector will adjust istelf as the natural laws of Supply and Demand take their inevitable toll but the Government, encouraged/cajoled/threatened by the unions, continue to ignore reality and spend at a whopping rate more than they can raise in taxes.
As Alan Dukes said recently, we can have as generous a State as we are willing to pay for, but the reality is that we are not willing to pay the 60% ot 70% income tax that it would take to continue to support an overweight and wasteful public sector.
Reasonable analysis of the problems in Ireland’s economy will tell you that the problem for the government isn’t overspending but a shortfall in tax revenue. That was caused by horrific planning which placed a massive reliance on the construction sector ably supported by artificial lending practices in the banks.
Public sector reform is a positive thing and nobody is disagreeing with that. But it won’t solve the problems that caused this economic mess and it won’t get us out of the mess. That will only be helped by fundamental changes to taxation (something the Unions have long been asking for) and a realistic attitude to attracting revenue from FDI. Because we can’t compete as a lowest cost country, nor should we. We need to have a far more progressive attitude to science and technology but that’s not likely to happen in a government intent on ripping apart the education budget.
Until the people of this country wake up to the need to avoid short-term thinking and convenient scapegoating then we won’t improve our finances. Structural economic problems are solved by radical structural changes, not budget cuts.
[quote=“Rocko”]There were no differences. The same products have the same price. I’ve provided a specific example to prove this. GSH hasn’t been able to provide any proof to the contrary.
I’m not saying other businesses don’t have dodgy practices, of course they do. Just mattress.ie aren’t a very good example.
Here we go again with more unsubstantiated claims fo public service finances and the “runaway Public Sector pay bill.” I’ve provided examples on here numerous times in the past few weeks of how competitive Irish public sector expenditure is compared to other OECD countries. Statements like the above are grossly inaccurate but they’re helpful in that they show just how much research you’ve done on this topic, i.e. none.
And the Unions have always been about a social agenda, so that is their business.
That makes no sense. That’s just bizarre, no idea what you’re even trying to say there.
More profits doesn’t result in more taxes. More jobs does. Profits pay at 12.5%, jobs pay at least 20%. There’s a huge difference between making more profits and going bust. Dell, Intel, Proctor and Gamble, Cadburys have all made millions of pounds in the last year and they’ve all cut wages and/or jobs. That’s nothing to do with avoiding going bust. That’s simple greed.
Funny how you mention energy and services just after you asked what costs are falling. There’s two right there.
Reasonable analysis of the problems in Ireland’s economy will tell you that the problem for the government isn’t overspending but a shortfall in tax revenue. That was caused by horrific planning which placed a massive reliance on the construction sector ably supported by artificial lending practices in the banks.
Public sector reform is a positive thing and nobody is disagreeing with that. But it won’t solve the problems that caused this economic mess and it won’t get us out of the mess. That will only be helped by fundamental changes to taxation (something the Unions have long been asking for) and a realistic attitude to attracting revenue from FDI. Because we can’t compete as a lowest cost country, nor should we. We need to have a far more progressive attitude to science and technology but that’s not likely to happen in a government intent on ripping apart the education budget.
Until the people of this country wake up to the need to avoid short-term thinking and convenient scapegoating then we won’t improve our finances. Structural economic problems are solved by radical structural changes, not budget cuts.[/QUOTE]
Dont agree with your simple greed thesis though. Greed is capitalism, businesses exists to make money, everything else is secondary. That aint going to change anytime soon. I reckon its when businesses start to focus less on profit its when they start to struggle.
Dell have been in trouble for a long time, studied them for a good while in college. Basically their business model of direct sales provided huge growth initially but their downfall was shocking customer service which in a direct sales model needs to be spot on. Not sure how much they have turned it around but up to a couple of years ago HP and Sun had passed them out. The low skill jobs in Dell were always going to be seen as expendable, it was only a matter of time.
[quote=“Rocko”]There were no differences. The same products have the same price. I’ve provided a specific example to prove this. GSH hasn’t been able to provide any proof to the contrary.
I’m not saying other businesses don’t have dodgy practices, of course they do. Just mattress.ie aren’t a very good example.
[/QUOTE]
Firsly, I called these guys.
Secondly, the different companies use different names for the same mattress than bang on about them being different.
However, just to prove the point, you say that there were no differences and the same products have the same price.
So here are 2. 1 from mattress.ie and 1 from mattress.co.uk.
Same mattress. One is 382 sterling.
Using XE:
Live rates at 2009.07.27 12:45:54 UTC
382.00 GBP = 442.050 EUR
United Kingdom Pounds Euro
1 GBP = 1.15720 EUR 1 EUR = 0.864155 GBP
So the bed on mattress.co.uk is 442 euro and the EXACT SAME one on mattress.ie is 540 euro.
A difference of a ton, same bed, same company.
There’s your proof. I will hope you have the good grace to apologise.
Wesbites attached so you don’t need to look too hard:
Yours in finding this within a minute of looking even though Rocko said not to bother cos I won’t find them (badly found out - praying I wouldn’t look),
GSH.
[quote=“Rocko”]There were no differences. The same products have the same price. I’ve provided a specific example to prove this. GSH hasn’t been able to provide any proof to the contrary.
I’m not saying other businesses don’t have dodgy practices, of course they do. Just mattress.ie aren’t a very good example.[/QUOTE]
Erm, no. He did provide examples. If you were to take you’re identical-for-identical rule then we’d rarely be able to chose a better option. Vodafone vs O2, Dell vs Acer, etc., companies often don’t produce identical products, so we compare similar products and GSH’s research identified similar products at grossly different prices.
So your personal research rubbishes the research of the many economists who have repeatedly highlighted that Public Spending needs to be cut. But then who are they, it’s only their professional opinion.
The HSE was created to streamline the many regional Health Boards to improve efficiency, but when the dust had settled the HSE actually had 1,500 more administrative staff than the combined regional boards had! I’m all for more doctors, nurses, Garda, etc but we’ve way too many pen-pushers. I worked with Civil Servants in my first job and while most were decent sorts the culture was not one of efficiency or effort. I’ve also heard stories about private contractors becoming concerned at the detrimental effect that working onsite in Government Departments was having on their employees.
I’m not saying that Public Servants are inherently wasteful rather that a system where you have 100% guaranteed job security unless you commit a crime, guaranteed pay increments and a pension that you should have to pay most of your salary to fund, doesn’t lend itself to encouraging the best and eliminating the worst. An honest, conscientious and hardworking civil servant will get exactly the same reward as a waster in the same position. In the private sector, in most cases, the waster can be fired while the grafter can be rewarded without having to reward everyone else.
But you will no doubt reiterate your efficiency claim. Bottom line is it doesn’t matter, we don’t have the money to pay for it.
Social Agenda doesn’t equate to telling businesses how to run themselves. Seeking disturbance money because you’re asked to take your teabreak in a different location is nothing to do with a Social Agenda. Ambulance men being forced to join one union rather than another has nothing to do with a Social Agenda. Fatcat unions gobbling up a greedy slice of former semi-states like Aer Lingus and Eircom is just Greed, nothing to do with a Social Agenda.
When the workers run everything either everything fails or some workers become businessmen while the others remain as the workers.
Unions should be about a Social Agenda but they are more about feathering the nests of their executives and grabbing as much of the pie for their members. Workers are entitled to a fair reward for their contribution, they are not entitled to a say in how the company is run. If they wanted that they should start their own company.
Let me restate it then, see if it becomes clearer. Didn’t anyone ever tell you that you should save for a rainy day? OK then, as one of those fortunate private sector workers still in employment, I am concerned that I may lose my job. So I’ll save some cash in case that should occur. I won’t take a vacation or I’ll hold my current car for a couple more years because if I lose my job then I’ll need the cash.
How difficult a concept is that?
If however I was a civil servant, safe in the knowledge that I couldn’t lose my job, then there’s no reason not to buy that new car as I know I won’t need to live off my savings anytime soon.
[quote=“Rocko”]More profits doesn’t result in more taxes. More jobs does. Profits pay at 12.5%, jobs pay at least 20%. There’s a huge difference between making more profits and going bust. Dell, Intel, Proctor and Gamble, Cadburys have all made millions of pounds in the last year and they’ve all cut wages and/or jobs. That’s nothing to do with avoiding going bust. That’s simple greed.
Funny how you mention energy and services just after you asked what costs are falling. There’s two right there.[/QUOTE]
I never said more profits = more jobs. But less profit does usually mean less jobs. And 12.5% of something is better than 100% of nothing.
Energy prices may be falling, but for business they are still amongst the higest in Europe. And oil is on the increase again.
Economists (who by and large are reasonable) tell us that overspending is an issue. If Money Out > Money In then we have a problem. What you are saying is that Money Out is fine but that we all need to pay a lot more tax. Reading the Snip Nua report, one table that stood out for me was the increase in numbers in the department of Health (and Education). Add to that the increase in pay and we see a huge increase in cost for no noticeable benefit. Think not? Ask the patients on trollies today what they think.
Amen to that. But more numbers in the Department of Education doesn’t necessarily mean more or even better teachers. The Celtic tiger was built on people educated with higher pupil/teacher ratios but they got a perfectly decent education.
[quote=“Rocko”]Ah that’s just unadulterated nonsense GSH. When you find a mattress on mattress.ie that is priced significantly differently than one on mattress.co.uk then let me know, I’ll save you the energy though and let you know not to bother looking. [/QUOTE]
Don’t go banging on now about how 98 euro is a “tiny” difference.
98 euro on a grand is still a nice saving.
98 euro saved on 500 is alot.
Glad I botherd to look. Next time maybe do some checking yourself before attampting to bluff.
I’m sure there are more there too but they seem to sell different stock in the Ireland one to the UK one for the most part.
Don’t go banging on now about how 98 euro is a “tiny” difference.
98 euro on a grand is still a nice saving.
98 euro saved on 500 is alot.
Glad I botherd to look. Next time maybe do some checking yourself before attampting to bluff.
I’m sure there are more there too but they seem to sell different stock in the Ireland one to the UK one for the most part.
Yours etc,
GSH.[/QUOTE]
Ah come off it, you’re distorting the issue by comparing a sale price with a non sale price. Compare the list prices for a like for like comparison and you’ll see that they are equitable.
I think what’s lost in this is that I actually agree with you on ripoffs in Ireland. I’m merely pointing out that mattress.ie are very competitive with UK prices (because they sell at the same price in the UK) whereas the bricks and mortar stores are guilty of jacking up the prices significantly.
The answer doesn’t have to be to just blame business. Mattress.ie for example deserve praise for their pricing policy which is streets ahead of other retailers (be they Irish, English or Australian) who have physical shops here. You picked the wrong company to highlight is all I’m saying.
[quote=“Rocko”]Ah come off it, you’re distorting the issue by comparing a sale price with a non sale price. Compare the list prices for a like for like comparison and you’ll see that they are equitable.
[/QUOTE]
The price they have an item up for sale is the price of the item.
If the .ie site had a sale price different to the one they advertise then I would not have used the example.
As it is the exact same mattress is much dearer here than in the UK from the same company and using the “sale price” won’t wash.
This reminds me of a quote from “Liar Liar”.
Fletcher: Your honor, I object!
Judge: Why?
Fletcher: Because it’s devastating to my case!
Judge: Overruled.
Fletcher: Good call!
Having said that I’m glad we agree that there is a rip-off culture still alive and well.
Ikea seem fair enough (8% more expensive but they put that down to VAT. Argos are a whole different story).
Some shocking differences.
Yours etc,
GSH.
By Jason O’Brien
Monday August 17 2009
A SURVEY of more than 12,000 goods on sale through the Argos catalogue has found that Irish customers pay more than British customers for a staggering 99pc of them.
The study was carried out by a professor of Computer Sciences at University College Dublin using a computer programme he had devised to compare Ikea prices.
Prof Barry Smyth admitted he was surprised that the price difference between Ikea in Belfast and Dublin was “only” 8pc on average, as he had expected customers in the so-called “rip-off Republic” to be paying even more.
However, he was surprised in a different way when he discovered that Irish customers are paying an average of 24pc more than those across the water when shopping at Argos.
“These averages disguise a multitude of savings, and there are literally hundreds of products that are 40pc to 200pc more expensive in Irish Argos stores compared to UK stores,” Prof Smyth said.
He said that a three-in-one canopy for babies in prams, for example, costs less than 12 in Belfast. The same product in Dublin costs 35.99, a mark-up of more than 220pc.
But it is on the ‘big ticket’ items that cash savings are most pronounced.
“If you are interested in a flat screen TV then Argos will charge you, on average, an extra 400 for the privilege of shopping in the Republic,” Prof Smyth said.
“In fact, the biggest price difference that I have found so far is 1,124, which you pocket by purchasing a 52 inch high-definition Sony LCD TV up north. This product is listed as 3,339.99 on the Irish site but comes in at only 2,213 (1,899.99) on the UK site.”
Prof Smyth said he found almost 500 products – mainly in consumer electronics, furniture and leisure equipment – which are at least 100 cheaper in Argos Belfast than Argos in the south.
Expensive
When studying Ikea, Prof Smyth admitted that the 8pc price difference could largely be explained by the difference between our 21.5pc VAT rate and the 15pc rate in the North.
However, he said that Argos could not fall back on the same excuse.
“Even after adjusting for this [by calculating the price before VAT is applied] the average Irish product is still 17pc more expensive than its UK equivalent,” he said.
An Argos representative could not be contacted last night.
