Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Apologies For The Confusion.
Comments
-
Seems a pretty nice gesture if they set the price accidentally too high. I looked on their site yesterday out of interest and it was £55 on there.
0 -
That was a good thing about Hummel, the season end sales were always goodIanJRO said:
Ordered it at the weekend for £55 and currently with Hermes according to the tracking so should receive it some time in March when they will be on sale at £20!oohaahmortimer said:Anyone who has pre ordered , have you received the shirt or been given a date when you may get them by0 -
Isn’t the club shop sourced out to Castore or have we taken it back under our wingSporadicAddick said:
based on the above, the indicative pricing on the website was £50, but the actual purchase price on the website was £55. Anyone that bought at £55 was willing to pay the "new" price, even if they thought it was too much. Normally in those circumstances a £5 gesture to anyone that bought at £55 before the price was "reduced" to £50 is quite a good outcome for the consumer..SporadicAddick said:
If they stated a price and then charged you more, then they should give a refund.Covered End said:Yes, it's called taking the piss.
If they stated a price and charged you that price, but subsequently decided to reduce the price, then a £5 credit is fair enough...
BUT, if they have admitted this was an error, having previously said that it should have been £50, then I agree that it would have been appropriate to give a refund.
From a process point of view, setting up and honouring a load of credits will be much more complex than simply providing a refund.
The actual "loss" to the club of providing a £5 refund would have been, in the scheme of things, small ((200 shirts?? £1,000??). Of course in reality it wouldn't have been a loss as it wasn't income that was anticipated.
So in the round, yes the club should have given a refund. The fact that they have driven a small degree of ill will (again!) simply smacks (I'm afraid) of poor leadership (not a dig at TS, but ultimately the buck stops with him...)0 -
How is not giving someone back their money a nice gesture?LegacyFan said:Seems a pretty nice gesture if they set the price accidentally too high. I looked on their site yesterday out of interest and it was £55 on there.
So still overcharging then?0 -
You are probably correct, the error might sit with a 3rd party...oohaahmortimer said:
Isn’t the club shop sourced out to Castore or have we taken it back under our wingSporadicAddick said:
based on the above, the indicative pricing on the website was £50, but the actual purchase price on the website was £55. Anyone that bought at £55 was willing to pay the "new" price, even if they thought it was too much. Normally in those circumstances a £5 gesture to anyone that bought at £55 before the price was "reduced" to £50 is quite a good outcome for the consumer..SporadicAddick said:
If they stated a price and then charged you more, then they should give a refund.Covered End said:Yes, it's called taking the piss.
If they stated a price and charged you that price, but subsequently decided to reduce the price, then a £5 credit is fair enough...
BUT, if they have admitted this was an error, having previously said that it should have been £50, then I agree that it would have been appropriate to give a refund.
From a process point of view, setting up and honouring a load of credits will be much more complex than simply providing a refund.
The actual "loss" to the club of providing a £5 refund would have been, in the scheme of things, small ((200 shirts?? £1,000??). Of course in reality it wouldn't have been a loss as it wasn't income that was anticipated.
So in the round, yes the club should have given a refund. The fact that they have driven a small degree of ill will (again!) simply smacks (I'm afraid) of poor leadership (not a dig at TS, but ultimately the buck stops with him...)
The challenge is that most fans (based on this thread) won't differentiate. If a 3rd party are impacting a licencee's brand, then the licensee has to manage it...1 -
I just mean if the price showed as £55 and someone paid that, then they don't have to do anything really do they. Unless Ive misunderstood that's what has happened isn't it?EugenesAxe said:
How is not giving someone back their money a nice gesture?LegacyFan said:Seems a pretty nice gesture if they set the price accidentally too high. I looked on their site yesterday out of interest and it was £55 on there.
So still overcharging then?
If the price showed as £50 and they charged £55 then you are being overcharged and the money should be refunded straight away.1 -
Ordered Friday, due for delivery today.oohaahmortimer said:Anyone who has pre ordered , have you received the shirt or been given a date when you may get them by1
