The problem is that the way you said it made it sound like maybe we're socialists for saying we don't like Apple's pricing, or that you don't like the fact that we're voicing our opinion on the subject.
Agreed.
I'm not really getting Zinfella's endless hand-waving on this subject. For someone who claims to 'not care' that some are complaining about a particular Apple practice (RAM gouging), he sure is expending a lot of time and energy trying to dissuade ppl from complaining or convince them not to complain.
Gotta luv AI. Hot- and cold-running Apple Apologistas™ on tap, whenever you want 'em.
Who have I prevented from complaining? As long as my remarks don't agree with yours, and you misinterpreted them anyway, then I'm a prick?
Not so much in this thread, where you've confined yourself to arm-waving, but in other recent ones, you've called other posters who were complaining or disagreeing with Apple in some manner "whiners", multiple times. To me, that sounds like you're trying to shut them down and make them be quiet, though of course you have no direct power to do so. Whether or not that rises to the level of being a "prick" is for others to decide.
I haven't suggested that anyone not complain about Apple's RAM pricing. But, since nobody has to buy their RAM their, I don't see it a a big issue.
Yes, we gathered that from your many, many posts on the subject. But others apparently do see it as an issue, wish to talk about it, and don't really need you interjecting for the umpteenth time that you personally don't think it's a big deal. We already got that from your many, many posts stating exactly that.
So unless you personally just don't like the conversation, and are attempting to disrupt it, there really isn't much point in you re-stating your position for the umpteenth time. Not that you don't have the freedom to repeat yourself as often as your free time allows.
Quote:
As for loan sharking, it's illegal, Apple's pricing isn't, so that 's not a suitable analogy.
How so? Shouldn't "let the buyer beware" cover loan sharking, since the borrower obviously can try to get a loan somewhere else? What's the problem? Let Guido do his thing, he's just meeting a need, that's the free market in action, ba-bee. Don't be a socialist.
Quote:
The ONLY way we have to lower Apple's RAM pricing is by not buying it. Complaining isn't going to change anything, not that we can't bitch about it if we want to, but it's pretty pointless.
That's your opinion, and you're certainly welcome to it, but some others do not feel the same.
Also... wasn't complaining about the iPhone price drop last year supposed to be "pointless"? Hmm.
Quote:
Apple is hugely successful, their pricing is right where they want it, and backed by the ever increasing sales, no matter what anyone thinks about it.
Apple's doing well, and as a Mac user since the SE/30 days that gladdens me, but nobody's perfect and I think they could be even more successful if they tweaked some of their priorities a bit. After all, even Steve-o doesn't bat a thousand, though he certainly beats Michael Dell there.
Quote:
Now if you see this as some sort of moral issue, then let me know, because I don't buy that at all.
Unfortunately, Californians have to deal with a line item disclosure on their state return designed to ensure a conviction for tax evasion if they do not declare their on-line purchases out of state. Talk about police state!
Oops. I had best look into that pronto, as I definitely am affected.
The Education Store in apple.com, for instance, does not seem to offer such double-dipping. The only option seems to be to click on the "Shop Now" under "TODAY ONLY" and that takes one to their regular BF sales!?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirokitsune
Don't know if this has been reported anywhere but you can apply the Black Friday Discount to the EPP store as well at Apple.
The price drops the base EPP price to:
Macbook 2.0Ghz $1120
Macbook 2.4Ghz $1402
iMac 20in. 2.4Ghz $1,076.00 \t
iMac 20in. 2.66Ghz $1,308.00 \t
iMac 24in. 2.8Ghz $1,590.00 \t
iMac 24in. 3.06Ghz $1,966.00
I can attest to the $1120 for a plain vanilla MacBook since I bought one under EPP.
Further I was able to pick this up at the mall rather than wait for the shipping, albeit free.
Thing is, when I brought the printout, per suggestion of Apple Retail, they said it
was a "software bug" to allow combining the $80 EPP discount with a $100 Black Friday
one, but they let it slide. This, together with the "free" printer, the $30 discount
on .Mac renewal, made it worth it. Now, for the wags who say that a native
Californian could avoid the considerable tax by doing mailorder from Amazon, etc.,
this wouldn't have saved me, because the $100 discount by purchasing it all
Not so much in this thread, where you've confined yourself to arm-waving, but in other recent ones, you've called other posters who were complaining or disagreeing with Apple in some manner "whiners", multiple times. To me, that sounds like you're trying to shut them down and make them be quiet, though of course you have no direct power to do so. Whether or not that rises to the level of being a "prick" is for others to decide.
...
Have I called you a whiner? Have I complained about anyone else posting in this thread? Your problem is that you don't like anyone pointing out the flaw in your logic, so far in this thread. In fact you're getting testy about it.
Arm waving? Is that defined as any opinion other than yours? The truth is quite the opposite, some here only want their own opinions echoed, like you for instance. Now, you're putting words in my mouth, I've not defended Apple, I don't need to, they can do whatever they like, AFAIC. YOU are the one that's unhappy about what Apple does, not me. You must be a liberal, they're in a constant state of unhappiness.
So, it's cool for you to complain about Apple's pricing, but not cool if someone else has a way around at least some of it, and points that out, even if you do the same thing yourself! How dare they mention that some of Apple's pricing is irrelevant, you have a right not to like it, and you're sticking to it!
It's been in effect for years, but they only created a line item on Form 540 in 2006 I think. As far as getting caught... I'm wondering whether getting caught requires the cooperation of both States PLUS the cooperation of the firm. I'm no lawyer, but California can't usually enforce California law on residents of other States and audits would have to be carried out by the franchise tax board in the businesses' state, right? So, does that State hand over personal info to California or does the company? Are there any States, counties etc. that do not have a use tax at all?... if so, there would be no use tax "law" and therefore no violation of that State's law for not collecting it and no reason for companies to violate Federal Privacy laws by handing over personal info, right? You can't force a company to divulge information when they haven't committed any violations in their own State, surely it hasn't come that far in this republic that's beginning to look more like the USSR every day with all this nationalization!
I live in Illinois and Amazon (among many others) doesn't charge sales tax. I don't think online retailers are required to charge your state's sales tax unless they have a retail presence or other business in your state.
However, you as the purchaser are required to pay the tax even if the retailer doesn't collect it.
It's called use tax. Sure, many states are pretty lax in enforcing/persecuting those who don't pay, but it's tax liability all the same. With the economy in the toilet and other tax revenues down I wouldn't be surprised if states don't start enforcing it more.
Have I called you a whiner? Have I complained about anyone else posting in this thread?
Folks, note that at no time did Zin deny calling other posters "whiners" multiple times in other threads, apparently for expressing opinions that he personally didn't agree with.
The rest is just him jingling car keys and shouting, "Look, shiny object!"
Quote:
You must be a liberal, they're in a constant state of unhappiness.
Folks, note that at no time did Zin deny calling other posters "whiners" multiple times in other threads, apparently for expressing opinions that he personally didn't agree with.
The rest is just him jingling car keys and shouting, "Look, shiny object!"
...
To avoid the question, obfuscate with your "do you still beat your wife?" tangent. Nobody called you a whiner, but you're complaining about it anyway. Isn't that the definition of whining?
To avoid the question, obfuscate with your "do you still beat your wife?" tangent. Nobody called you a whiner, but you're complaining about it anyway. Isn't that the definition of whining?
However, you as the purchaser are required to pay the tax even if the retailer doesn't collect it.
It's called use tax. Sure, many states are pretty lax in enforcing/persecuting those who don't pay, but it's tax liability all the same. With the economy in the toilet and other tax revenues down I wouldn't be surprised if states don't start enforcing it more.
Yup. In fact, almost every state that this affects has laws requiring you to report and pay sales/use tax on out of state purchases that were not taxed at the time of purchase. But pretty much the only way they could enforce it is either by auditing everyone (too expensive and time consuming) or getting sales records from the out-of-state store (but if the store has no in-state operating location, the state has little leverage to get that information and even then, obtaining it would be legally questionable).
NY is one state which is trying to force Amazon to collect sales tax based on the delivery address based on the fact that some of the resellers on Amazon reside in NY (several major electronics stores come to mind). I believe (?) NY passed a law saying that this, by extension, means that ALL purchases made on Amazon and shipped to a NY address are taxable. If that law holds up in court, expect other states to quickly follow suit and the free ride will be over.
Retailers would offer more off if the markup was bigger on apple computers. I know for a fact that the macbook that sells for $1299 doesn't even have a $100 markup on it.
I live in Illinois and Amazon (among many others) doesn't charge sales tax. I don't think online retailers are required to charge your state's sales tax unless they have a retail presence or other business in your state. At least that's how it used to be. Maybe certain states now require sales tax to be charged on items shipped to other states but clearly not all do.
I live in Cali and just ordered a prev. generation macbook pro from Mac Connection. No sales tax.
Retailers would offer more off if the markup was bigger on apple computers. I know for a fact that the macbook that sells for $1299 doesn't even have a $100 markup on it.
Possibly, but that argument wouldn't apply to Apple Stores. Apple's margins are around 30 percent (or more).
Comments
The problem is that the way you said it made it sound like maybe we're socialists for saying we don't like Apple's pricing, or that you don't like the fact that we're voicing our opinion on the subject.
Agreed.
I'm not really getting Zinfella's endless hand-waving on this subject. For someone who claims to 'not care' that some are complaining about a particular Apple practice (RAM gouging), he sure is expending a lot of time and energy trying to dissuade ppl from complaining or convince them not to complain.
Gotta luv AI. Hot- and cold-running Apple Apologistas™ on tap, whenever you want 'em.
...
Who have I prevented from complaining? As long as my remarks don't agree with yours, and you misinterpreted them anyway, then I'm a prick?
Not so much in this thread, where you've confined yourself to arm-waving, but in other recent ones, you've called other posters who were complaining or disagreeing with Apple in some manner "whiners", multiple times. To me, that sounds like you're trying to shut them down and make them be quiet, though of course you have no direct power to do so. Whether or not that rises to the level of being a "prick" is for others to decide.
...
I haven't suggested that anyone not complain about Apple's RAM pricing. But, since nobody has to buy their RAM their, I don't see it a a big issue.
Yes, we gathered that from your many, many posts on the subject. But others apparently do see it as an issue, wish to talk about it, and don't really need you interjecting for the umpteenth time that you personally don't think it's a big deal. We already got that from your many, many posts stating exactly that.
So unless you personally just don't like the conversation, and are attempting to disrupt it, there really isn't much point in you re-stating your position for the umpteenth time. Not that you don't have the freedom to repeat yourself as often as your free time allows.
As for loan sharking, it's illegal, Apple's pricing isn't, so that 's not a suitable analogy.
How so? Shouldn't "let the buyer beware" cover loan sharking, since the borrower obviously can try to get a loan somewhere else? What's the problem? Let Guido do his thing, he's just meeting a need, that's the free market in action, ba-bee. Don't be a socialist.
The ONLY way we have to lower Apple's RAM pricing is by not buying it. Complaining isn't going to change anything, not that we can't bitch about it if we want to, but it's pretty pointless.
That's your opinion, and you're certainly welcome to it, but some others do not feel the same.
Also... wasn't complaining about the iPhone price drop last year supposed to be "pointless"? Hmm.
Apple is hugely successful, their pricing is right where they want it, and backed by the ever increasing sales, no matter what anyone thinks about it.
Apple's doing well, and as a Mac user since the SE/30 days that gladdens me, but nobody's perfect and I think they could be even more successful if they tweaked some of their priorities a bit. After all, even Steve-o doesn't bat a thousand, though he certainly beats Michael Dell there.
Now if you see this as some sort of moral issue, then let me know, because I don't buy that at all.
I don't. See my comments about Guido above.
...
Unfortunately, Californians have to deal with a line item disclosure on their state return designed to ensure a conviction for tax evasion if they do not declare their on-line purchases out of state. Talk about police state!
Oops. I had best look into that pronto, as I definitely am affected.
...
Can you point to some links?
The Education Store in apple.com, for instance, does not seem to offer such double-dipping. The only option seems to be to click on the "Shop Now" under "TODAY ONLY" and that takes one to their regular BF sales!?
Don't know if this has been reported anywhere but you can apply the Black Friday Discount to the EPP store as well at Apple.
The price drops the base EPP price to:
I can attest to the $1120 for a plain vanilla MacBook since I bought one under EPP.
Further I was able to pick this up at the mall rather than wait for the shipping, albeit free.
Thing is, when I brought the printout, per suggestion of Apple Retail, they said it
was a "software bug" to allow combining the $80 EPP discount with a $100 Black Friday
one, but they let it slide. This, together with the "free" printer, the $30 discount
on .Mac renewal, made it worth it. Now, for the wags who say that a native
Californian could avoid the considerable tax by doing mailorder from Amazon, etc.,
this wouldn't have saved me, because the $100 discount by purchasing it all
on a Discover card essentially covered the tax.
So, the $410 off:
$80 (EPP) + $100 (Black Friday) + $100 (printer) + $30 (renewal) + $100 (Discover)
got me to bite!
Not so much in this thread, where you've confined yourself to arm-waving, but in other recent ones, you've called other posters who were complaining or disagreeing with Apple in some manner "whiners", multiple times. To me, that sounds like you're trying to shut them down and make them be quiet, though of course you have no direct power to do so. Whether or not that rises to the level of being a "prick" is for others to decide.
...
Have I called you a whiner? Have I complained about anyone else posting in this thread? Your problem is that you don't like anyone pointing out the flaw in your logic, so far in this thread. In fact you're getting testy about it.
Arm waving? Is that defined as any opinion other than yours? The truth is quite the opposite, some here only want their own opinions echoed, like you for instance. Now, you're putting words in my mouth, I've not defended Apple, I don't need to, they can do whatever they like, AFAIC. YOU are the one that's unhappy about what Apple does, not me. You must be a liberal, they're in a constant state of unhappiness.
So, it's cool for you to complain about Apple's pricing, but not cool if someone else has a way around at least some of it, and points that out, even if you do the same thing yourself! How dare they mention that some of Apple's pricing is irrelevant, you have a right not to like it, and you're sticking to it!
Oops. I had best look into that pronto, as I definitely am affected.
...
This is the first I had heard of it too. See:http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/pub79b.pdf
I wonder when it took effect and how likely some hypothetical person might get caught
Here is another informative link:http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar...ss/fi-perfin18
This is the first I had heard of it too. See:http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/pub79b.pdf
I wonder when it took effect and how likely some hypothetical person might get caught
Here is another informative link:http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar...ss/fi-perfin18
It's been in effect for years, but they only created a line item on Form 540 in 2006 I think. As far as getting caught... I'm wondering whether getting caught requires the cooperation of both States PLUS the cooperation of the firm. I'm no lawyer, but California can't usually enforce California law on residents of other States and audits would have to be carried out by the franchise tax board in the businesses' state, right? So, does that State hand over personal info to California or does the company? Are there any States, counties etc. that do not have a use tax at all?... if so, there would be no use tax "law" and therefore no violation of that State's law for not collecting it and no reason for companies to violate Federal Privacy laws by handing over personal info, right? You can't force a company to divulge information when they haven't committed any violations in their own State, surely it hasn't come that far in this republic that's beginning to look more like the USSR every day with all this nationalization!
I live in Illinois and Amazon (among many others) doesn't charge sales tax. I don't think online retailers are required to charge your state's sales tax unless they have a retail presence or other business in your state.
However, you as the purchaser are required to pay the tax even if the retailer doesn't collect it.
It's called use tax. Sure, many states are pretty lax in enforcing/persecuting those who don't pay, but it's tax liability all the same. With the economy in the toilet and other tax revenues down I wouldn't be surprised if states don't start enforcing it more.
Have I called you a whiner? Have I complained about anyone else posting in this thread?
Folks, note that at no time did Zin deny calling other posters "whiners" multiple times in other threads, apparently for expressing opinions that he personally didn't agree with.
The rest is just him jingling car keys and shouting, "Look, shiny object!"
You must be a liberal, they're in a constant state of unhappiness.
Not since November 4th.
...
This is the first I had heard of it too. See:http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/pub79b.pdf
I wonder when it took effect and how likely some hypothetical person might get caught
Here is another informative link:http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar...ss/fi-perfin18
Many thanks for the info, Quin. I'll have to be on the lookout for that.
...
Folks, note that at no time did Zin deny calling other posters "whiners" multiple times in other threads, apparently for expressing opinions that he personally didn't agree with.
The rest is just him jingling car keys and shouting, "Look, shiny object!"
...
To avoid the question, obfuscate with your "do you still beat your wife?" tangent. Nobody called you a whiner, but you're complaining about it anyway. Isn't that the definition of whining?
To avoid the question, obfuscate with your "do you still beat your wife?" tangent. Nobody called you a whiner, but you're complaining about it anyway. Isn't that the definition of whining?
So you don't deny doing it. Cool, 'nuff said.
...
However, you as the purchaser are required to pay the tax even if the retailer doesn't collect it.
It's called use tax. Sure, many states are pretty lax in enforcing/persecuting those who don't pay, but it's tax liability all the same. With the economy in the toilet and other tax revenues down I wouldn't be surprised if states don't start enforcing it more.
Yup. In fact, almost every state that this affects has laws requiring you to report and pay sales/use tax on out of state purchases that were not taxed at the time of purchase. But pretty much the only way they could enforce it is either by auditing everyone (too expensive and time consuming) or getting sales records from the out-of-state store (but if the store has no in-state operating location, the state has little leverage to get that information and even then, obtaining it would be legally questionable).
NY is one state which is trying to force Amazon to collect sales tax based on the delivery address based on the fact that some of the resellers on Amazon reside in NY (several major electronics stores come to mind). I believe (?) NY passed a law saying that this, by extension, means that ALL purchases made on Amazon and shipped to a NY address are taxable. If that law holds up in court, expect other states to quickly follow suit and the free ride will be over.
I live in Illinois and Amazon (among many others) doesn't charge sales tax. I don't think online retailers are required to charge your state's sales tax unless they have a retail presence or other business in your state. At least that's how it used to be. Maybe certain states now require sales tax to be charged on items shipped to other states but clearly not all do.
I live in Cali and just ordered a prev. generation macbook pro from Mac Connection. No sales tax.
Retailers would offer more off if the markup was bigger on apple computers. I know for a fact that the macbook that sells for $1299 doesn't even have a $100 markup on it.
Possibly, but that argument wouldn't apply to Apple Stores. Apple's margins are around 30 percent (or more).
...