El Sueno De La Razon Produce Monstrous

[pricescope]

Imagine a person in the diamond industry who hates everything that associated with Pricescope.

Imagine they twist facts, tell lies, blame Pricescope for all the problems in the industry, and try to spread a fear among consumers and other jewelers who already are fearful about the web.

Imagine they say that Pricescope' local jeweler search is illegal because it uses jewelers' names without asking permission. And imagine this person claims Pricescope is showing slightly higher prices at jewelers than Internet listings for one purpose – to drive business to DirtCheapDiamonds.

Imagine how many of the 5,000 listed local jewelers want to be removed from local diamond search "because they haven't gave Pricescope permission to use it". Only half a dozen.

Imagine them discussing on Polygon whether they can sue Pricescope? Imagine the PR for Pricescope? "XYZ jewelers fear price competition and sues internet company for giving consumers diamonds price and quality information".

What really make me feel blue is that these people do not want to see another side of the coin. And why would they not welcome any potential new clients who find them from Pricescope?

Don't they know that majority of consumers including those who visit Pricescope are still frightened of buying on the web? And that of the 70% who research on the web only about 5% buy on the web? Of course they are not happy that some consumers will ask to match internet prices, but most consumers know internet prices anyway and yet prefer to pay more but dealing with a person from their own town.

No they do not want to analyze anything; they prefer to stay fearful and loathsome. What ever.

I'm bored with all this negativity so I have decided to navigate the results to Local Yahoo and Local Google listings. They do not need special permissions from jewelers to list public information.

"The sleep of reason produces monsters". Francisco de Goya. 1799.

 

[valeria101]

Sorry to hear this, Leonid. It must be frustrating... promoting any kind of new ideas is

Can't hold back a thought though. Database listings do look as if promoting competition on price alone.

Did any of these jewelers actually took up PS as a consumer survey tool to see what exactly drives demand on this side of online diamond sales ? I must doubt it after reading most of what has been on the forum for the past year or so. Pretty sad, if not 'monstruous' as you say.

 

[Hest88]

The local diamond search flack is ludicrous, since it''s so obviously like a White Pages service. Pricescope does not get paid for listing local jewelers and the jewelers get free publicity.

I also find it hypocritical that a jeweler who has benefited greatly from the Internet turns around and attacks the very same medium, painting himself as a traditional B&M when that is so obviously not the case. I hope people will delve deeper into the question of his motivation, which makes so little sense once you realize what lies behind the aggrieved smokescreen.

 

[pricescope]

Date: 11/14/2004 1:53:51 PM
Author: Feydakin

Leo,

We discussed the price setting issue long and hard.. This was one of the reasons I was so against this from the start.. Especially since we can beat most internet vendors on price and compete equally on quality.. It''s ''similar'' to me taking out an ad in the paper for Wal-Mart and setting thier prices for them.. Sure, Wal-Mart can refuse to honor those prices, but the potential for PR damage is still there..

You stated also that 6 jewelers have asked to be removed out of 5000.. Out of that 5000, how many asked to be there at all?? (we are one that I know of for sure And how many have no clue that this is even here??

And yes, I am sure that there has been, will be, and possible may actualy be, a legal question over this raised.. Personally, I view it as a white pages listing.. I am sure you had no ill intent, but we all know that is not how all things are viewed..

Steve

If you have diamonds that are competitively priced and available at your store, why not to list them for both internet and local shoppers? The diamonds that are listed for the local search right are not in jewelers possession but listed by wholesalers. When talking to retailers they were concerned that they cannot offer goods at low internet margins so suggest price was derived accordingly. There is also a note that the prices are just estimation and can vary for each particular jeweler.

There is nothing worth long and hard discussion: if you want to list different prices (lower or higher) - be my guest.

 

[strmrdr]

leonid,
Hang in there no matter what you do your going to take heat from someone or other.
Some ideas work out some dont.
Time will tell if this one does.
A friend of mine has a saying.
"If im taking fire from certain people then I know im on target"

I think it fits this situation very well.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Leonid,

I fully understand that you sometimes get frustrated for the continuous attacks, often containing lies and slander.

The only way to react, I think, is not to react. After all, the momentum is on your side, and all these against you still cannot stop the sun from rising every day.

On the other hand, I do not know whether I am so happy about the last novelty of having listed goods sent to independent B&M-stores.

Like most diamond cutters and dealers, I am very sensitive as to who is holding or selling the goods that I own. When selling a branded product, this sensitivity even increases. For that reason, we do not work with every retailer, that asks for goods. We check their credentials, their knowledge, how they work with their customers, and only after we feel comfortable with that, we will sell to them and through them.

I do not know about the U.S., but technically, in Belgium, you can walk into a Ford-dealership, and ask them to order a Honda for you. You may find it weird, but virtually nobody does that. I see no reason why diamonds would be different, and I personally wonder whether it is not better to stop this initiative.

Live long,

 

[hoorray]

I applaud your efforts to try something new. We know there are two facts:

1. some people want to see multiple stones and buy "live" rather then over the internet.

2.B&M jewelers are having to reinvent their business models due to the internet pricing, education, and availability of quality stones.

You attempted a scheme to solve the two and make it a win-win. Shame on you!

Was it perfect? maybe not, but it certainly didn''t do harm.

Some people just can''t handle change. In this instance, I think key people are stirring the pot and making it an issue for secondary reasons, and that''s really sleezy. I assume those afraid of change have jumped on the bandwagon. It''s always easier to find reasons why something won''t work rather than taking a chance, trying something new and figuring out how to make it work.

 

[pricescope]

Thank you Strmrdr and Paul for support and understanding. For now I''ll let it go. Let them talk to Google and Yahoo why their names are listed for Local Search on both search engines without their permissions. (both Yahoo and Google local searches are composed automatically by crawling public information in the web).

Paul, I understand exactly what you are saying and it was meant to be quite sophisticated system to avoid problems you mentioned.

 

[pricescope]

Date: 11/14/2004 3:12:14 PM
Author: Feydakin

... Personally, I'd love to see you get rid of the JBT listing and just list those of us that chose to be here..

It's gone. Only those who signed up will be shown. In addition links to the local Yahoo and Google searches for specified area are provided.

Maybe then we might see some sales from it..

Doubt it. As well as that intelligent life exists in this corner of our small galaxy.

The point is that consumers should be aware about thousands of diamonds available across the Nation and most of the local jewelers can get them or offer an equal substitute.

The prices are for indication only and actually might be a bit low for regular B&M stores but again it is up to the store to work it out with Pricescope and the customers.

If "Huh" is the only thing they are capable to say when a customer calling them, then I shall retire because I hoped that professionals do still exist.

 

[Hest88]

I''m sorry, Leonid. I know you put your heart into it. Perhaps someday they''ll be ready for it.

 

[AGBF]

OK..here is a question from a simpleton. I am the only one here who does not understand the basics, let alone all the numerous angles under discussion!!

I never gave *any* thought to where Leonid got the prices he had listed in his price engine. Where *did* they come from? Also (just to show thorough stupidity) is this change to Yahoo and Google going to mean one cannot check prices on Pricescope anymore? Or does it mean that we can only check prices of people who sign up as being willing to let Pricescope list their prices?

Where do yahoo and Google get their information on prices? Is it the same place Leonid did?

If I don't understand this after all my years reading diamond fora, believe me, lots of other consumers don't either! After all, I have bought diamonds off the 'net, which shows *some* faith in how the selling works. Many consumers, as Leonid says, are afraid even to buy a diamond off the 'net.

So would someone please explain this simply, as if to a child?

Also: I want to provide a link from the two threads involving DBOF to this thread because otherwise consumers will never find it. It doesn't have a title that exactly shouts what the contents of the thread is, and yet the content of this thread is very important!!!

(Yeah...I know. If I don't understand it, how can I know its important? Let's just say, as Bush might, that I know it in my gut.)

Deb

 

[oldminer]

I personally applaud the thinking and huge effort Leonid has put into Pricescope. Knowing the general retailer mentality I thought arbitrarily listing any stores in the search was going to be problematic. Now, may retailers would be unaware of it for an extended period, some would be okay with it and others would wish to have never been listed. I preferred an opt-in method, but really that is not a viable choice, either.

The listing with search engines or Google type search is probably safer and will be more welcomed, but not potentially as beneficial to the overall trade. Many non-Internet stores would have made new customers under the old plan. Now, less of that will take place.

The Internet is a different way to do business, but not everyone is ready for it. In time, retailers will clamour for more Internet action in diamond sales. This is a business still in its infancy.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 11/15/2004 7:47

6 AM
Author: oldminer

The listing with search engines or Google type search is probably safer and will be more welcomed, but not potentially as beneficial to the overall trade. Many non-Internet stores would have made new customers under the old plan. Now, less of that will take place.

The 4 stores that were listed before for my area out of 15-20 or so are the same ones that google and yahoo bring up.
They probably got there information the same place Leonid did.
A relisting of a business directory.

A few of the ones listed for my area dont even have websites and some of the ones that didnt get listed do.
Therfore my conclusion is that they didnt get the list by crawling the net....

 

[valeria101]

I liked the idea allot...

Let's see it I got it right:
#1. Leonid sets up the "B&M Stores" button. The results of the search come as list diamonds that are NOT in B&M posession (the straight thing not being feasible), but could upon customers' request.

#2. Al is not well received: the service is powered by customer's action, but gives B&M's little control on how and with whom they are competing - scary if one has never been on the web yet. It's everyone's guess that one thing customers will surely always do is bid for the lowest price - the service sounds like Dutch Auction, hammer sale of shop's inventory without their knowing. B&M acquire new competitors before even seeing a new customer.

#3. Leonid's solution: do not list jewelers directly but set a search on a restraint domain, on the basis that the "right" of search engines to quote stores is already recognized.



The problem:

But there were more. As was, three things were simmultaneously "inflicted" upon unsuspecting B&Ms

: web presence with the threat of direct price competition and remote customers to handle, diamond lists and a suggested price. Sounds like allot.

The current solution gives respite from the first issue - aparently no inadverted "web presence" is still inflicted. However, there is no "opt out" from Google either. Problem ?
IMO, lots and lots of jewelers have already gained a web presence of sorts without opening a webpage. How many are in White Pages and phone books or chamber of commerce and BBB listings ? All those are on the web. This would be not allot different-a dedicated White Pages where both shops and merchandise are listed at the two ends in the hope that somehow, stock and distribution service will come together.
Is it painless enough to give those guys a recorded opt in ? Then, all "B&M vs E-tailer" threads around here make a pretty good invitation for a trial period...


Now... How about the prices? Somehow, I think this was the marrow of the dispute: that a "suggested retail price" was attached to the diamond listings that PS browsers were invited to inquire locally about. So a potential customer may not only ask "how about this diamond" but "how about this diamond at this suggested price".

Would it work to list diamonds on "B&M Stores" search with that ennerving "Call for Price" mention.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 11/15/2004 8:33:19 AM
Author: valeria101



Would it work to list diamonds on 'B&M Stores' search with that ennerving 'Call for Price' mention.

No in my opinion it would make it next to useless.
If anything having higher prices for the b&m category is giving credence to the notion that people should pay higher prices at a b&m.
Ideally they shouldn't.

 

[suzannecallison]

HI, I''m tiptoeing back in..

How is this differrent than consumer reports on buying a car? Why can''t Leonid just show the wholesale price for the diamond and let the B&M deal with it? I am sure the auto industry kicked and squealed when consumer reports first came out, but now it is a staple for anything you want to buy.

I buy a car knowing exactly what I will pay. The consumer reports page "suggests" the markup range that you should pay. I pick the dealership that provides the best service. I negotiate, knowing that they MUST make some profit to stay in business. I either buy or walk away, knowing that I can get that exact same car somewhere else. Is there some reason that he has to provide a markup?

The automobile industry has adapted. A percentage of their buyers are educated, and the rest are not. They adjust their markup accordingly.

I know that cars are all the same, and each diamond is an individual. Still, if one store can pull in the diamond, then so can another. Or find a similar one.

Of course, this gives me the chills, because buying a car is so stressful. But them, so is buying a diamond for most people. Maybe I''m on the wrong track. Or most probably there are nuances that I don''t understand.

Suzanne

 

[pricescope]

Date: 11/15/2004 10:28:14 AM
Author: suzanne1
HI, I'm tiptoeing back in..

How is this differrent than consumer reports on buying a car? Why can't Leonid just show the wholesale price for the diamond and let the B&M deal with it? I am sure the auto industry kicked and squealed when consumer reports first came out, but now it is a staple for anything you want to buy.

Suzanne

Suzanne, this is very interesting point of view and I think consumers are entitled to know this information. There are a few small problems we should solve before.

1. diamonds aren't commodity and very similar diamonds can have different prices just because they bought from different suppliers.

2. diamonds with similar grading reports can still have different inclusions, colors, and cut properties. Grading report is rather an opinion, not exact data.

3. Right now wholesalers are under the pressure from local jewelers not to list their diamonds in the web because then jewelers cannot make high enough profit on them. (The person I mentioned above running a campaign in the trade supported by some other jewelers) to boycott wholesalers who allow their goods to be listed in the web).

Actually that was the reason why we have to show some estimated prices for the wholesale diamonds available at to local jewelers because otherwise wholesalers won't allow list their goods in order not to jeopardize their relationship with their retail clients.

All this doesn't smell right from the fair trade point of view.

 

[bar01]

Why do some in the industry think that consumers like me who use Pricescope are ONLY concerned with price? Yes price is very important, but I spent as much time looking at posts and information about the service, quality, buying policies, and reputation of various vendors. And you know what I did first? Check to see if any of these recommended internet vendors had a B&M store in my area. If GOG or Winkjones was in Chicago - they would have probably gotten my business - even if their diamond prices listed for a little more. B&M is not dead it is just evolving.

The prices on PS (and other sites) were more of a help from a "fair price range" (say plus or minus 5%) standpoint. Also to know how as I changed parameters (4C's) to see how the price changed and what was the best value for me. I also learned the value of independent appraisers, got to see many pictures of wonderful jewelry, and talked with other consumers and experts. I got educated and made an educated decision and purchase.

But as I mentioned to Leonid in a PM about the beta local jeweler store search - "why so many?". I say let them opt in after “wanting to be listed” or recommended by PS consumer members. Pricescope doesn't need to confuse its members with 5000 listings. In fact PS probably doesn’t need to provide listings/links (with prices) to more than - 100 vendors or local jeweler stores across the country. This site should provide links to the "best of the best", those providing great service, competitive pricing lists, and lots and lots of information. These stores should realize that the internet is here and will transform everything. Evolve or die. You can maintain both a local store and an internet presence. Information rules, and complete information rules completely. People can make good decisions if they have all the information.

Also – about the car buying analogies – I wonder if someone got home and looked up the price on the internet and found that they paid $1000, or even $2000 over Edmonds "suggested fair retail price" if the reaction would be different. People will pay for a good experience – to a point. We should all be able to determine what that “point” is for ourselves.

 

[pricescope]

Thank you, Bar01. Great post.

>>Why do some in the industry think that consumers like me who use Pricescope are ONLY concerned with price?

For many jewelry stores bridal diamonds were bread and butter of the business. Today margins are getting slimmer, diamonds are more commoditized. Internet is one of the reasons. That’s why many jewelers do not like the internet, internet savvy customers and Pricescope in particularly.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 11/15/2004 11:28:3 AM
Author: Feydakin
The paintball industry has taken this to the furthest extreme... They [] happen to own several of the most popular websites for selling directly to the consumer.. And they sell on their website at less than what they would sell to me ''wholesale'' when I ran a field..

Well, maybe there is a point to sell the same product to intermediaries and final users as long as anyone can use their paintpall things. But loose diamonds shipped directly to the public are not very wearable unless they get turned into jewelry.

There must be bench jeweler and a designer somewhere on the way. One may forego seeing a bunch of diamonds offline before making a purchase. Not that many do, but obtaining a comparably wide range of choices on the ground is next to imposible.

Not trying on rings does not look reasonable - everyone knows what to look for swapping rings in a jewelry shop. The opportunity of some substitute online is definitely not there yet.

There seems to be some clear gain from buying jewelry over the counter rather than the net.

What am I missing ?

 

[pricescope]

Date: 11/15/2004 11:28

3 AM
Author: Feydakin
...The anti-web group is trying to restrict the wholesalers options by simply refusing to buy from them..

FTC: Illegal Business Practices

Boycotts. A group boycott -- an agreement among competitors not to deal with another person or business -- violates the law if it is used to force another party to pay higher prices.

Boycotts to prevent a firm from entering a market or to disadvantage a competitor also are illegal. Recent cases involved a group of physicians charged with using a boycott to prevent a managed care organization from establishing a competing health care facility in Virginia and retailers who used a boycott to force manufacturers to limit sales through a competing catalog vendor.

Are boycotts for other purposes illegal? It depends on their effect on competition and possible justifications. A group of California auto dealers used a boycott to prevent a newspaper from telling consumers how to use wholesale price information when shopping for cars. The FTC proved that the boycott affected price competition and had no reasonable justification.

It is one thing, Steve, for one retailer to chose where to buy the diamonds. It is absolutely another situation to run an organized boycott by a group of retailers. As in the quote above, FTC considers how these actions affect prices and competition. Since it hurts competition and consumers, such practice should be considered illigal.

 

[pricescope]

Steve, you're switching the subject. Are you aware about the letter sent by Brad to retailers suggesting not to buy from suppliers who allow their diamonds to be listed in the internet?

Do you know that some suppliers had to withdraw their diamonds from the web because of that?

Do you think it is in consumers’ interests to have limited availability of diamonds listed in the web?

Now, you are talking about suggested price at Pricescope. This is a common thing elsewhere. It is not a rule and it is properly disclosed. Why do you think it is illegal? Please come to your senses

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 11/15/2004 9:12:59 AM
Author: Feydakin
I can understand the frustration of some by having them told, here is your inventory list and what we are telling people you are selling it for.. Yes, there are disclaimers that this may or may not be the price.. But, when you have people like the guy that wanted to stick Blue Nile with a certain price, even though it was mismarked, you can see the concern over the potential PR nightmare..

I can also foresee the potential problem with "suggested" pricing, regardless of the disclaimer. Steve makes an excellent point on this one. The consumer comes with an expectation to get *around* that price (regardless of what the disclaimer says), and when he doesn''t get it, he leaves unsatisfied. After he leaves, he probably tells 10 of his friends over the next several months about the bum jeweler who tried to screw him (which wasn''t true). If I were the jeweler, I''d rather lose opportunity for that potential client than risk poisoning the entire local community clientele pool through bad word of mouth. That person may still come in on his own, and if he does, it will be without the feeling that I''m trying to cheat him or high-price him.

Date: 11/15/2004 9:12:59 AM
Author: Feydakin

The fear that some had was that since Pricescope appears to be pro online and anti B&M (again, I don''t think this is totally true, but you see a lot of it here) and that by listing the exact same stones that online vendors can get at a 10% to 20% higher price in the B&M search, Leonid has some sinister plan to ruin the image of all B&Ms and paint them all with the price gouging brush..

I have to say that I''ve NEVER seen Leonid (and this site IS Leonid) present as "pro-online". I''ll grant that many of the consumers--the largest bulk of participants here--don''t have the best opinion of B&M stores, but those are personally expressed opinions and shouldn''t be interpreted as the opinions of Leonid.

Anyone who actually believes that Leonid is trying to single-handedly destroy B&Ms and portray them as price-gougers......well, those folks are probably the same ones sitting out waiting for the Great Pumpkin to come....or wearing their Nikes and track suits waiting for the mothership to come reclaim them during the Hale-Bopp pass.

I know you don''t believe he''s sinister, Fed, but these other paranoid folks need to realize that Leonid is NOT public enemy #1, and he''s not jeweler''s enemy #1. He''s trying to be part of the solution....a solution that helps *everyone*. Unfortunately, it''s easier for some to sit and point condemning fingers at him instead of getting on the wagon to help themselves, and that''s a crying shame.

 

[pricescope]

Thank you, Al.

I have to disagree, however, on this

>>I can also foresee the potential problem with "suggested" pricing, regardless of the disclaimer.

Please keep in mind that these diamonds do not belong to any jeweler. It is not like I''m saying at what prices they should sell something from their stock.

Jewelers could get those diamonds if they wish. If they are not interested, they can pass.

Without listing suggested retail price most of these diamonds cannot even be shown in the web and consumers won''t be aware they exist.

 

[Hest88]

Date: 11/15/2004 5:49:56 PM
Author: leonid

Please keep in mind that these diamonds do not belong to any jeweler. It is not like I''m saying at what prices they should sell something from their stock.

Leonid, that''s the logical reaction, but that''s really not how most people will react. When most consumers see "suggested retail price" anywhere they think they will either get it at that price or less, and they''ll expect that the jeweler whose name is attached to it to oblige them.

We can''t expect them to understand the nuances of the jewelry business.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 11/15/2004 5:59:19 PM
Author: Hest88

When most consumers see ''suggested retail price'' anywhere they think they will either get it at that price or less, and they''ll expect that the jeweler whose name is attached to it to oblige them.

In fact, by other business models, manufacturer''s "suggested retail price" is NEVER the price you should pay....it''s the price you negotiate DOWN from. I don''t honestly think diamond consumers will make that distinction.

 

[WinkHPD]

Leonid,

I read one of Brad''s posts on Polygon several months ago, did a search found my name on your listing and noticed that some had their email addresses listed with their listing. I emailed you to ask how to get one too.

You were kind and generous with your time and as a result I started posting here, only a few days before I was thrown off of Diamond Talk for the egregious "Sin" of being an EightStar dealer.

I do not know if I have officially ever asked to be on your list, but PLEASE keep me on your list. I love this place and the service that you have provided. I love the people I have met here, especially the ones that ask me hard questions and that keep me on my toes. Partially due to you I have become so busy that I rarely have time to play here much, but I still come by when I can and I sincerely appreciate what you have done for all of us here, both consumer and vendor.

If Brad does not want to come and share his knowledge here, that is his priveledge, but there are many many of us here who do. If you do something well, there will always be those who hate you for it. Please do not let them blind you to the many who love and respect you for what you have done.

Sincerely

Wink Jones

 

[AGBF]

Hmmm...an Eightstar dealer *and* the person who made cflutist''s bracelet. I won''t hijack this thread, but the wheels are turning!

Deb

 

[fire&ice]

I can also foresee the potential problem with ''suggested'' pricing, regardless of the disclaimer. Steve makes an excellent point on this one. The consumer comes with an expectation to get *around* that price (regardless of what the disclaimer says), and when he doesn''t get it, he leaves unsatisfied. After he leaves, he probably tells 10 of his friends over the next several months about the bum jeweler who tried to screw him (which wasn''t true). If I were the jeweler, I''d rather lose opportunity for that potential client than risk poisoning the entire local community clientele pool through bad word of mouth. That person may still come in on his own, and if he does, it will be without the feeling that I''m trying to cheat him or high-price him.

I''ve come around to see Steve''s point on pricing....but......

I maintain that the diamond sale isn''t the end goal. The end goal is to get people in the door. The goal is to attract a new customer who may buy the wedding band, setting (which we all know are somewhat keystone), wedding gifts, etc.

Also, I think Barb has a good point. Pricing is not the end issue with many consumers. It''s perceived "value". Value includes customer service, turn key service, not having to sweat a diamond shipment, not having to deal with sending it back, not to mention Mano to Mano dealing. I know my life would have been much easier if I bought the diamond & the setting from the same individuals.

One other thought.....we did buy my setting, our wedding bands (diamond one for me - nice one for hubby), had my pearls restrung, had a watch repaired & hubby bought a second diamond band for our one year anniversary. My dad even bought a present for my mom. All these purchases in one year. All this because I walked into a jewelry store that I didn''t know existed & if I didn''t have a recommendation never would have visited or bought from.

I do think it should be an opt-in thing though. But, how do you prevent a unreputable jeweler from opting in. They *do* exist.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

As much as I may agree that Leonid is really taking care to arrange things in the best way possible for everyone, without wanting to hurt anyone''s business,

and as much as I agree that Brad is foolishly mislead by his own perceptions and carried away by them up to the extent that it becomes dangerous,

I do have to agree with one point of Brad in this particular regard.

For me, there is no logical way to defend putting a price (even an indicative price, with all clarifiying clauses added) on a stone, which might be available to call in somewhere, implying that this is a B&M-price, close to a B&M-price or any other description that contains the letters B&M. However laudable the goal of the whole concept is, by doing that, I think that one is crossing the line of acceptability.

In the end, this might reflect badly upon the rest of Pricescope, the forum, its contributors and the sound advice given to all asking and lurking.

Personally, I would prefer the Pricescope without this ''B&M-vendor-option''. One is either a vendor, who wants to be listed here, or one is not, and the distinction between ''e-vendor'' and ''B&M'' looks immaterial to me, and the pricing-distinction (even indicative) offers unclear and confusing information.

Just my 2 cents,