I Love Petsmart!

[Jules H-T]

And, again, just to be clear. I don't think that I trying to preach from a soapbox, or judge people, or lecture, or anything like that. I primarily wanted and still do want people to look at the original situation from both points of view.

As you will have noticed from each of my posts on this subject, I join you in your view that considering your actions is a good thing.

You cannot blame anyone for accusing you of lecturing, or judging, when you post such comments as

should have done this guy a great service by teaching him what proper fishkeeping is

you basically have stolen goods from a store

basically what you did here was take the price tag off of a cheaper item and place it over the price tag of a costlier item, so that -you get the costlier item at a cheaper price. In a word, this is stealing.

You should have paid what was a fair price.

I think that it is something to be ashamed of

you are the one who did something wrong

Why should you be so special as to be the only one who doesn't have to play by the rules?

calling you on something you did that was wrong

You're wrong Bignose, it is *not* stealing what Krib12 did. I don't believe he they did anything to be ashamed of either. I don't see what qualifies you to dictate to Krib what they 'should and shouldn't' have done either. What they might have done or could have done- fine- but they can do what they like within the law ultimately.

I have directly defended the position by pointing out that there is only one entity responsible for protecting the financial interests of the fish shop, and that's the fish shop. If a large multi national cannot be bothered to employ and train staff of a certain calibre, then they deserve everything they get AFAIAC. Do you think the shareholders of Petsmart give a damn about the interests of either their livestock or their customers? I don't, I think they give a damn about their profits only- and they do enough worrying about that for all of us I think.

Sorry, I think the critisism of Krib12 was harsh.

 

[Jules H-T]

Specifically, that is that if it is okay to willfully take advantage of a store's employee's ignorance, than it should be just as okay for the store to take advantage of its customer's ignorance by trying to overcharge for products if it think it can get away with it.

Well they do! You go and buy 25Kg of sand from your fish shop, and you go buy it from B&Q. Please explain the 800% price increase from hardware store to fish store.

Or, to put it another way, treat others the way you'd want to be treated. An awful lot of morality really boils down to that.

Agreed. The distinction here for me, and obviously not for you, is that I consider national and multinational companies to be greedy entities who do not need me to protect their finanical interests. Therefore, I treat them very differently to individuals and small businesses, and that's acceptable to me.

 

[linda1503]

Very interesting topic 'morally' I consider myself to be 'an honest person', don't speed, don't drop litter certainly never shoplifted! etc but a few weeks ago I wanted some more sand for my tank. Went into one shop and it was £1.99 a bag. I needed to go to another shop just down the road for something else and picked up 3 bags of sand from there. It was only after I'd paid that I realised I'd been charged £3.99 a bag. When I pointed this out to the shop and said it only cost £1,99 up the road it was a case of 'tough' you've paid so its your problem you should have bought it from the other shop!

A few weeks later I visited both shops again. In the lower priced 'sand' shop they had Sterbai cories for sale for 3 for £15 and in the highter priced 'sand' shop the same Sterbai cories were for sale for a couple of quid each. I did think at the time that maybe they had priced them wrong but I went ahead and bought 3 for £5.

This was probably morally the wrong thing to do but I didn't regard it as 'stealing' from them, they should have checked the price themselves and anyway I was still annoyed about the high price they charged me for the sand. They are both national stores, which I suppose doesn't excuse my actions but I always point out any mistakes in my local small shops.

Like someone else said I've walked out of a shop before now with a smile on my face when they have charged me a lower price than is on the shelf, or given me more change than they should. I understand where BN is coming from though just never thought of it that way before and in future will think before I 'bag' a unintentional bargain.

 

[Tobigara]

Personally i think Jules said it pretty spot on.

if i might add. i think you should pay the consequences for the mistakes and actions that you make. if you aren't paying attention to what the person at the counter is ringing up and he charges you more than he should with the intent to scam you...well you have now learned a lesson in reality. PAY ATTENTION!! People will try to scam you and hurt you. If it was an accident, it doesn't matter. it's still your fault for not protecting your interests. This doesn't mean i don't feel sympathy for the person that just got ripped off but life is what it is. i'm sorry. live and learn.

Vise versa. if the corperation doesn't protect it's own interests, why should we? just like other people on this topic have said, they don't care about anything but profit. i don't mean that we should steal but if they make a mistake and you take advntage of it, they weren't doing what they should to protect their interests. now they have to live with it.

 

[Bignose]

No, you guys are clouding the issue, again. The issue is NOT what a store charges for an item. The issue is preying on the inattention and ignorance of employees and customers. It is not about comparison shopping. If a fish store wants to charge 10 times as much for a bag of the exact same sand as the hardware store, that is the store's choice. Just as it is the customer's choice whether to buy it or not.

And when the customer chooses to buy an item at the price listed, they are agreeing to pay that price. They are not expecting to bring the item to the register and be asked to pay more if the store thinks that the customer isn't paying attention.

Again, you guys have NOT addressed my direct question:

Is it okay for a store to willfully and intentionally overcharge a customer if the store thinks that the customer is being inattentive or is bad at math or is being distracted? Not overcharge by pricing things on the shelves more expensive than at a different store -- but again, the example is the customer brings 10 items up to the register, costing $1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, respectively. If the customer doesn't know that these add up to $55, is it okay for the store to charge $60 for the whole lot?

In exactly the same way, if the store thinks that the customer can't figure out what charge they are owed, is it okay for a store to willfully short change the customer? That is, if the manager's policy is to always try to keep an extra dollar from the change unless the customer notices and asks for the correct change, is that right? I'd say it is very wrong. Can you really defend these practices?

-------------------

On the topic of the words I used, you have to be awfully careful about how you red those words. You can read those words in a torch-and-pitchfork mod mentality, or you can read then in a questioning/seeking/probing mentality. I am 100% on the latter. I am not trying to lecture, I am trying to point out a different point of view. From the point of view I was trying to get people to look at, taking advantage of employees is wrong. You can't write that without using words that say you are wrong -- or at least I don't know how to do that. But, if you think someone is doing or has done something wrong, I feel that there is a duty to stand up and state that belief. And the words I chose were chosen because they state that belief. Again, I did not want it to come off as being judgmental or lecturing. I put that specifically in my very first post. You can read those exact same words in many different tones, and I am telling you that I was not in nor am I in now, a judgmental or accusatory or lecturing frame of mind. I just want people to think about the issue from all points of view, and from the point of view I took, I was stating that what was done willfully and knowledgeably was wrong.

------------------

Finally, just because you disagree with the business practices of large companies, why does that make it okay for one to rip them off? Since when has two wrongs made a right? If you don't like the business practices, you are free to publish accounts of what they do, or turn them in the authorities if the business is doing something wrong. Convince people to stop doing business with them. If a company stops getting business, it will be gone soon enough, or it will change its business practices to attract customers back. But, it is never okay for you to steal from them if you think that they are stealing from someone else. Stop the initial stealing and everything will be right. There are many, many legally and morally right ways to express your protest and dislike for a business's practices. It sounds cliche, but resorting to stealing from them to "make it right" makes you no better than they are.

 

[kribensis12]

I didnt rip them off, they ripped themselves off! They priced and sexed it wrong, that isnt my fault.

 

[Tobigara]

i don't think anyone in here countenenced stealing but taking advantage of a mistake in not morally questionable or even wrong.

as far as willfully and intentionally overcharging or shortchanging a customer goes...to the people that got shortchanged it's wrong. to the people who did the shortchanging it's not wrong. each person has his own morals and values. if you feel that's it's wrong to shortchange someone...fine, but don't think your opinion matters to the people that steal for a living. they don't care what anyone thinks and that is their morals and values. everyone is the center of their own universe.

i'm not saying "you" to anyone in particular just so ya'll know. i'm just adding my 2 cents.

 

[stiffler69]

The shop probably payed 20p for the fish they have more than doubled there profits therefore they would never ever make a loss selling it at 1.25 as appose to £2.50

Its a sad and plain fact that the shop over price guppies and plattys and i know for a fact they only pay 20-40p for them and my understanding for a healthy buisness to run and pay its over heads is you take the price you payed for the item double it then add 17.5 % vat and you will have a profitable buisness double 40p then adding 40p is 80p add your 17.5% at a guess is around 0.95p therefore the shop is making more than a adequate profit at £1.25 since they probably sell hundreads maybe thousands a week i cant imagine the up bringing and keep of the fish would put much dent into this profit margin

Sorry for rant but this is how i see it

 

[Underwurlde]

Yikes! That is a very dim view of things Tobigara!

If that were indeed the case then we NEED people to educate. Difficult to say without sounding condescending though...

Andy

 

[Bignose]

... but taking advantage of a mistake in not morally questionable or even wrong.

I very strongly disagree. Taking advantage of people's ignorance or mistakes I think is very wrong. Where does it end? Is it okay for me to take advantage of someone accidentally leaving their door unlocked by doing into their house and taking what I want? Is it okay for me to cash a check that someone accidentally wrote $1000 on instead of $100? What if it was $101 instead of $100? Is there a dollar value where is goes from being okay to not okay?

Tell me where you think the border between okay to take advantage and not okay to take advantage lies.

edited to add: stiffler, the profit margin or loss really had very little to do with this discussion as I see it. I agree, the amount of money here is very small. However, it is the principle of whether or not it is okay to take advantage of mistakes/ignorance.

 

[Underwurlde]

Until recently, I would have deemed it OK if my actions were lawful (as is the case here). That is, regardless of foresight, I was not breaking the law / could not be prosecuted for my actions and thus my actions are deemed suitable for that of a modern society.

Now, BigNose, I thank you my friend. You have educated me. I will now question the morale of my actions now I understand the implications thereof.

Andy

 

[Bignose]

Just as an aside, Andy. Legal ethics and moral ethics don't always coincide. In a perfect, rational world, they could be identical, but when dealing with human beings, they don't always match, and sometimes are in direct opposition. The classic example is the man arrested for kidnapping. The man tells his lawyer, under the auspices of privilege, where the kidnap victim is. The lawyer is forbidden to tell the police and/or the victim's family where the victim is. The lawyer will be disbarred if he broke privilege. Certainly, morally, if one person can rescue another from danger, one should. But, the concept of legal privilege is a very important one as well: a person needs to be able to tell their lawyer anything so the lawyer can figure out how best to represent his client without fear that the the lawyer will be made to tell what his client said.

It's an imperfect world, but I don't think that that should stop each of us from trying to make it as close to perfect as each of us can.

 

[Tobigara]

... but taking advantage of a mistake in not morally questionable or even wrong.

I very strongly disagree. Taking advantage of people's ignorance or mistakes I think is very wrong. Where does it end? Is it okay for me to take advantage of someone accidentally leaving their door unlocked by doing into their house and taking what I want? Is it okay for me to cash a check that someone accidentally wrote $1000 on instead of $100? What if it was $101 instead of $100? Is there a dollar value where is goes from being okay to not okay?

Tell me where you think the border between okay to take advantage and not okay to take advantage lies.

edited to add: stiffler, the profit margin or loss really had very little to do with this discussion as I see it. I agree, the amount of money here is very small. However, it is the principle of whether or not it is okay to take advantage of mistakes/ignorance.

bignose...i happen to agree with you that stealing is wrong but it is a gray area.

have you ever found a dollar bill on the ide of the street and pocketed it? if you have and you didn't post a sign declaring that you found someone's dollar bill and want to return it, then you are taking advantage of someone's mistake/ignorance. i'll bet just about everyone on this forum has found money on the street and shoved it in their pocket. whether it was a penny or a sack of fifties it is still taking advantage. is that the same thing? is that stealing or ripping someone off? if you've ever lost money do you curse out the fortunate person who found it or do you curse yourself out for being careless with your money?

this is how i view things:

1. every situation is it's own situation. you can't say that any situation is the same because it's never the same. EVERYTHING is circumstantial and MUST be judged by it's instance.

2. there is no moral absolute right and wrong. if there were, "in a perfect world", there would be no war or stealing, etc. it would be good vs evil. black vs white. who is anyone to tell someone that they are morally wrong? we are all individuals and we each have our own morals and philosophy and we act according to them.

3. anything that a person does will have consequences. if i'm not paying attention to what is being wrung up, it's my fault if i got ripped off. i may hate the person for what they did but ultimately i let it happen. i should have protected my interests better. i will have to live with that. the same goes for any other person or business. petsmart didn't protect it's interests by educating their workers. the workers aren't at fault, petsmart is.

once again i'm not saying "you" to anyone in particular

i apologize for going this long

p.s. i'd like to add that unfortunately it's not a dim view but a real one. there ARE people out to "get" you. i agree the only thing we can do is to educate and protect our own interests. be they loved ones or money or both and pray that it's enough or hope for luck.

i'm done now

 

[Bignose]

...i happen to agree with you that stealing is wrong but it is a gray area.

Have you looked at the definition of steal? From webster.com: to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully <stole a car> b: to take away by force or unjust means <they've stolen our liberty> c: to take surreptitiously or without permission.

How can taking without permission or to take by unjust means or to take without right be a "gray area"?

Obviously, there are magnitudes of stealing, that's why there is a differentiation between petty theft and grand theft. But, both are wrong. Maybe that's what you meant by "gray area".

I agree that specific circumstance in each event determine what is right or wrong -- that's why I spelled out very specific circumstances. Can any of the specific circumstances I spelled out be defended? That's also why I asked how much is oksy to take advantage of.

Lastly, I acknowledge that there is some modicum of blame toward Petsmart for their poor training. However, again, in this specific circumstance, I was objecting to the willful and knowledgeful taking advantage of the poorly-trained employee by the OP. Again, if it was just an accident and unbeknownst to both parties, then I have no problem with the freebie. But, that wasn't the case. Like you said, the circumstances dictate the situation, and in this case, I object to the willful advantage taking. And again, I want to know what is the limit when it is too much? Obviously one guppy isn't much, but what if it was 10 guppies? A filter? A 5 foot tank? A free car?

And again, consider that Petsmart isn't just going to sit there and take that loss. It will pass those costs back to all of us. Net result... we all pay higher costs because a few got to take advantage. Is that fair to the rest of us that didn't get to take advantage? Why should we pay the higher costs because a few got things at an unfairly lower cost? Isn't it fair that everyone pay the same prices all the time, not a few lucky ones who get freebies while the rest of us make up for those freebies? Maybe again this comes down to personal beliefs, but I don't see that latter system as fair in any regard whatsoever.

 

[benniebru]

god petsmart petco god they are so terrible any corporate fish store is nothing but garbage. terrible advice, beat up animals, and expensive items, nothing beats a family owned fish store. i have two i go to one u would swear is a nudy bar b4 u walk in it is a guys basement and he has been in the fish business for 20 years amazing quality and low prices not to mention great advice