How to Properly Address Outrageous Overpricing

Cheaper, yes.

Easier? Ummm...no.

 

It wasnt about ignorance but about sarcasm.

Sarcasm is the exact opposite of ignorance, when done well.

 

Or dont think the OP gets to control the direction of the conversation.

You release a thread into the wild and it becomes ours, you dont own it.

[obvious exception for the Bros, who own them all]

 

You just described the situation with almost any business! Of course I know there are other factors besides raw ingredient costs. That doesn't nullify the fact that you can put out beer at a reasonable price point.

And yeah you even seem to concede to my point - absurd prices usually come from the stores not the people making the product, so we didn't even need to get into the first part of that discussion.

 

In less precise usage, it can refer either to prices obtained by practices inconsistent with a competitive free market.

Stop being so literal and economicier-than-thou, Trey

 

Communication fails when we are unable to use a common language. Why not just use appropriate terms? My response was also in regard to the OP quoting the definition and conveniently ignoring half of it to make an argument. It seems obvious, by quoting a definition, that the OP was referencing a precise definition, I believe the burden then falls on the OP to use it appropriate. Can't fault me for being literal in this instance.

My biggest issue with the use of the word gouging when it is related to beer is that it is too strong of a word, it comes off as overly dramatic. It is a voluntary transaction, no one is being victimized, we do not need to escalate it to that level. It is just beer.

 

^so its gouging if I pay for it and not if I dont? That's some terrible logic. Gouging exists outside of any transaction taking place.

 

IMO - no, it's not gouging in either case. You cannot price gouge on beer

 

My point is that even at inflated prices, those who choose to make the purchase are doing so willingly. If you choose to pay the price you are acknowledging you feel the price is fair and agree to the purchase price. There is no necessity to do so, you are doing so completely based on your own desires. You cannot "gouge" someone on a transaction such as this.

 

But then what are we going to argue about?

 

And it seems like only yesterday, Sculpin was $17.50 a sixpack. Now it's $17.99!

 

In direct response to OP, I go to this store sometimes and they overcharge on everything even a little but hyped. Expect their going rates for high brow collab beers to be insane. Devil Dancer was $10 a bottle too. Stupid. I try to avoid them now, Craft Beer Cellar just opened in Westford, go there instead.

 

I don't think the $30 I paid for BCBCS is fair, but I live in New Orleans and had no trading ammo at the time. I understand your point though. While it isn't gouging in the literal economic definition sense, it's messed up for stores to take advantage of people just because they know they can because they have the only quantity of product in the given region. When stores open like the poster above me mentioned, the other greedy stores will be forced to get realistic about prices or possibly (almost undoubtedly in time) lose a large customer base.

 

I wish consumers would use the Internet to empower themselves. I think it's beyond the scope of BA, but there ought to be a place where people can discuss retail pricing and name names to better inform consumers. The Internet could be a great tool for us to use to combat stores that charge too much.

 

Unfortunately I do not think this would solve anything. As long as there are those who are willing to pay inflated prices we will continue to see this issue. While we would like to think pointing out specific issue benefits our cause, often it just informs those willing to pay the prices where to look and ultimately acerbates the issue.

 

But you bought it right? And I assume you weren't under any sort of duress. Clearly you didn't think it was that unfair that the thought of dropping $30 outweighed your desire to try it.

Much as I try and convince myself otherwise at times (because I really love that beer), you don't need BCBCS in order to survive.

 

In what way has communication failed in this instance? The person using the term clearly means that, in their opinion, the beer is priced "much higher than is considered reasonable or fair." Clearly no one thinks that a crime has been committed. I didn't see anyone in 176 posts suggest calling the police. So what is the point in pointing out that "in precise, legal usage," the term doesn't apply? Most words have more than one definition.

 

Desire doesn't equal fair though. In certain situations all of us have overpaid for something that we really wanted. It sucks and I don't support it as a business practice, but I got 3 bombers of BCBCS so I put my values aside.

 

So the following is actually happening at the time of this post:
$4.99 for a SINGLE, 120z bottle of Zombie Dust. Gouging or fair pricing? and go

 

But my point is you did support it as a business practice, because you made the purchase, and the store saw that they were justified to price the beer where they did and will continue to do so. Not supporting it = not buying it. If every single beer geek stuck to their guns in this situation, then this would never be an issue. But they don't, which although is totally understandable, is also why this is so regularly a point of discussion. If BCBCS wasn't about to be released shortly, and I saw a bomber of last year's on the shelf for $30, I would probably buy it. But I wouldn't then claim that the store was overcharging. If you or someone else is willing to pay that much then they priced it correctly.