Canon rebates in the US (a bit of a rant)

<p>The good people at Canon USA have a new round of rebates (11/27/11 - 1/7/12) which come on the heels of the previous round of rebates that ended 11/23. Good thing, right? Trouble is that the new rebates are higher, significantly higher, like in 60% higher in some cases, than the previous round. How would you feel if you bought a Canon product on 11/23 with a - say - $150 rebate and the same product carried a $230 rebate a few days later..? Yeah, price movements are one thing but rebates, intended to spur sagging sales and/or get rid of outdated or soon-to-be-outdated marchandise, normally come once in a blue moon, unless of course you are Canon USA and want to really piss off your customers...</p>

<p>Opinions?</p>

 

<p>This kind of thing has just never bothered me. If I bought something on the basis of a price, that was a decision that I could afford. I'm happy for those who waited and got a better deal - you can spend your whole life looking for the best deal, or you can buy things and use them.</p>

<p>I'd be irritated, like you are.</p>

<p>I felt a bit bad when I realized that a product that I had purchased at a $100 discount was now available at $150 off... but I did save $100 and I could probably contact the vendor and get them to reduce the price retroactively. (Some of the bigger vendors will do this if the price goes down right after you make your purchase.)</p>

<p>On the other hand, the newer promotion is really a pretty special one. Not only does it include a much wider range of Canon lenses, but among them are a bunch of the best and most popular optics and products ranging from the least expensive (e.g. the 50mm f/1.8) to some of the most expensive (long zooms, tilt-shift lenses, L primes and zooms), and essentially all of the speedlites. If you have been holding off on a purchase of a Canon lens in hopes that you'd see a lower price, this may well be the lower price you have been waiting for.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>(I have posted a list of <a href="http://www.gdanmitchell.com/deals">eligible products</a> at my blog, if you are wondering what is included in this promotion.)</p>

<p>Try what G Dan suggests, it sometimes does work.</p>

<p>But even if it doesn't, trying to hit the lowest possible price is shooting at a moving target. It is a matter of luck. Who knows, maybe it will go down even farther as the world economy collapses? ;)</p>

<p>So we are suppose to be pissed at Canon for giving us better rebate deals?</p>

<p>If that is the case then I am really pissed at Adobe. I recently upgraded to Photoshop CS5. I saved about $50 because of a short term price break. I am so mad I may never use it. That will show them.</p>

<p>So what if you live in Canada, and get a rebate form from a US dealer for a piece of Canon gear you bought and find out the rebate is only good in the US? Screwed again!</p>

<p>Been there, did that.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I did exactly that... bought a new lens (on rebate) on 11/23 and the day before it arrived, saw a bigger discount. I wrote to the vendor and asked for the difference. As the new lens had not even arrived when I saw it, they agreed to discount the lens further.</p>

<p>First time I've seen a rant that the rebates were too high. If they lower the prices even more in late January, you'll be really pissed!</p>

<p>I sort if understand your point, but if you think about it, it's not very logical. It's equivalent to saying you're pissed at Canon for offering a rebate a week after you just bought a camera at full price.</p>

<p>I don't know Canon's marketing strategy, but I assume they are responding to market conditions. They know how much they sold at full price, how much they sold at rebate price #1 and have now decided that they can maximize profits via rebate strategy #2. Of course you could suspect that Canon are knowingly "milking" the market. Make as many sales as they can at price #1 before lowering the price and making even more sales.</p>

<p>Most reliable vendors allow returns within 14 days, and many will match the new rebate price rather than deal with the hassle of a return and repurchase. If you bought something recently (within 14 days), I'd just call the vendor and discuss it with them.</p>

<p>Some vendors may even have a "30 day price match" policy where if the price drops within 30 days of your purchase, they will refund the difference.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I looked at the rebates that ended 11/26. I wanted the 100mm F2.8L Macro. Decided to wait. It was I believe $70 off the retail price. On the 11/27 I got an email showing that it was now $110 off. Guess what, I ordered it on Monday and got it on Tuesday. When I went to check info on the lens (on Tues.) I found that the place I bought it (very well known store in NY) had raised price $53. Win some and Win some in my case. It could have gone the other way but it was the price I was willing to pay. And after using it I surely DO NOT regret the purchase.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I could probably contact the vendor and get them to reduce the price retroactively. (Some of the bigger vendors will do this if the price goes down right after you make your purchase.)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's possible to do this sometimes, but not in every instance. Retailers get part of the rebate amount back from the distributor usually, and it's usually closer to 80% than 100%, but if the distributor's being a stickler the only way the retailer can honor a request like this is to cover the difference on their own.</p>

<p>Henry Posner<br /><strong>B&H Photo-Video</strong></p>

<p>So Michael, <strong>you</strong> want <strong>everyone</strong> to pay higher prices just so <strong>you</strong> feel that <strong>you</strong> got the best deal in town. There are a lot of terms for people that think this way, but unfortunately I do not think that the moderators would approve of any of them... so I will let the matter drop. </p>

<p>But seriously, be thankful that you can afford any of this stuff at all and think of how pathetic you would look complaining about this sort of thing in front of 90% of the world's population. </p>

<p>C'mon guys, don't crucify me... ALL I have said it that I find it annoying that a new round of much higher rebates so closely follows the previous round, which I find not only unique (don't think it has ever happened before) but also counterproductive from the marketing perspective (i.e. annoyed customers who fell for the previous round.) The $80 difference I can swallow but being jerked around makes me goosey. And I'm very happy for all who can take advantage of these higher rebates. :-)<br>

I suppose Canon needs all the rebates/incentives they can muster to somehow make up for the holes in their current offerings (say, there is no "pro" camera on the menu and nothing in sight for another 4-5 months.)</p>

<p>hey -- now I find that I missed the free Pop Photo subscription for renewing P.net.</p>

<p>Should I be sore?</p>

<p>;)</p>

<p>JDM,</p>

<p>I once found 6 copies of the original Pop Photography for $30 on Ebay. They were from 1913. It was a 30 day Buy It Now auction. The ad was only posted some 45 minutes before I saw it. I pounced on the deal.</p>

<p>You win some you lose some.</p>

<p>I don't think a free Pop Photo subscription is a good deal. If they would pay storage fees I might reconsider.</p>

<p>I have to hand it to B&H, credit to the deserving..!<br>

Just after I had ordered one of the CA lenses <strong><em>of desire</em></strong>, the rebate got increased. As soon as I became aware of it I called the CS dept. of the store and, without any hassle, was credited the difference. Cost me (as well as B&H) time on the phone though. Kind of a waste or "<em>economic loss</em>". Or whatever...</p>

<p>I would still be happy and the reason is this: When I bought the lens initially, say for $1,000, I'm saying to myself that I value this lens (and what it can do) more than I value my $1,000. Otherwise, I wouldn't have bought it.</p>

<p>If the lens then drops to $900 tomorrow, sure I felt like I could have gotten a better deal, but it does not change the fact that I still value the lens more than I value $1,000! So I still got my deal. Unless, if I was in the business of buying and selling lenses, in which case I would have to be sensitive to how others value the same lens. </p>

<p>I'd definitely recommend reading Predictably Irrational by Dan Ariely.</p>

<p>Whenever I buy anything--anything--it's worth, to me, the price they are asking at the time; otherwise I wouldn't buy it. I get what I want at a price I think fair, the merchant makes his sale. What's wrong with this? If the price later goes down, that's the way cookie crumbles--I bought whatever it was at a price that I thought reasonable in the first place. I understand that D80's are much cheaper now than seven years ago when they were first available; should I be unhappy about this?<br>

Jim</p>

<p>Free enterprise, a beautiful thing -- the seller sets its price at wherever level it pleases (subject to regulatory limits); the buyer is free to purchase at that price or buy from another seller or not buy at all. Especially with non-essential goods, I don't see an unfair advantage on either side. Or in terms of what mom and dad taught us, "We make our decisions freely and accept the consequences." </p>

<p>I bought the EF135 F2 on Nov 22/23 and B&H promised to offer me the additional discount.</p>

<p>Well I have been picking up lots of old photomagazines -- the ads are more interesting as a rule than the stories (which, by the way, are pretty much the same stories that repeat from year to year today).</p>

<p>There were certainly some from the 1913 era, but <em>Popular Photography</em>'s first issue was May, 1937.</p>

<p>That was a great year for small-format camera magazines, as <em>Minicam Photography</em> (later to become <em>Modern Photography</em>) was founded in September of the same year.</p>

<p>Not that it matters....</p><div></div>

<p>JDM,</p>

<p>I was writing about the original version of Popular Photography. It was publish by Frank Fraprie of Boston. Not many people know about this magazine. He was also publisher of American Photography magazine.</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks for showing the cover.<br>

As far as I know, the coincidence of the name is the only connection to the later magazine<br>

:)</p>

<p>Change the words and that would make a great tattoo. Maybe to something like "Mongrel Avengers" instead of "Popular Photography".</p>

<p>The original Pop Photography was published from Sept 1912 to May 1916 when the rights were sold to American Photography. In 1953 Ziff-Davis acquired American Photography. Ziff-Davis, of course, was the publisher of Popular Photography as we know it today. A very roundabout connection and probably of interest to few.</p>