Originally Posted by spike60
The folks at Baileys are indeed reputable people, who are well liked by their customers. But just because they are good guys doesn't mean that they aren't a major part of this problem.
Whose problem?
For me, Bailey's was the solution.
My local saw shop doesn't even have the right size fuel line and charges $6 to sharpen a chain.
Even if it isn't THE solution, it is A solution. Options, that is to say competition, only serves to improve the efficiency in the market, to reward efficient operations that provide a valuable product or service. If we, the consumer, lose the option to buy our saws online or by mail-order, WE are the ones who lose in this scenario.
Sure, I know Stihl has had this in-store-only policy forever. But it operated with the consumer aware that if he wanted to NOT be stuck having to transact all transactions through a dealer, he could simply choose another brand of equivilent quality that he could get online, by mail-order, or on eBay.
They shouldn't Ben, your right. However you know what male loins do to cubs don't you, they kill them, thats the problem. Look at Baileys as the big male lion and the rest of the dealers as the cubs getting killed off. Male lion is soon on his own and gone. I don't think Bailey's can support the Husqvarna on its sales alone. I have seen they're catalog, website and heard nothing but good things about them though. In fact they actually cost me a bar sale few weeks ago. The man tells me I can get a Oregon bar for 11.00 less at Baileys. I guess he ordered it too because I refuse to drop one penny after he said that. He left, I sold several bars throughout the day, no skin off my back....
Come on, it is too skin off your back and you're mad as hell. You are so mad as to be blinded to the hypocracy of your statement: you don't like the fact that there is competition to your business model, so you want it stamped out so your model can continue to thrive. How is that fair? You complain about Bailey's being able to out-compete with you on price, so you want their ability to sell products outside of their own backyard removed so you don't have to compete with them. I understand how it may help your bottom line, but I don't see how it is a logically defensible position to adopt.
Listen, online sales and the local dealer compete on different strengths. When I need a part, or a whole saw, RIGHT NOW, the dealer has the edge and there is no way that the online retailer can compete. But when I'm sitting at my desk on a Tuesday afternoon and want to buy some saw stuff that I don't need immediately, I like being able to order it online, content to konw that in a couple days it will be sitting on my front porch when I get home from work.
This is especially true if the dealer has to order the item I want. In that case, having to work through a dealer is a total waste - I have to drive down (or call, if the dealer accepts phone orders) to order the item, and then I have to drive down again to pick it up. In this scenario, the dealer hasn't provided me any benefit whatsoever. Yet the pro-dealer-only crowd thinks that I should have to do it this way, even when it is NOT in my interest to.
So, please explain this to me: why the hell shouldn't I be able to have the item just show up at my door if that is how I want to handle the transaction? Why should someone else - Husqvarna, the local dealer, whomever - feel tha they should have the right to make that choice for me?
