Canon 5D rebate coming

[alton]

I just returned from Ace Photo in Sterline, Virginia, and was told

on April 1 Canon will begin a $300 rebate on the Canon 5D. I tried

to put this on the Bob Atkins Canon rumors section but after

registering was told I still didn't have authority to post or reply.

[alton]

I meant "Sterling" Virginia.

[jon wilson]

that is old news

[alton]

oh

[bobatkins]

I think it is likely to happen, but at this point is just a rumor of course. There are discounts in many other Canon regions, so it makes sense that there will also be a USA discount sooner or later. April 1st seems to be a popular guess for when it may be announced.

[alton]

Thank you, Bob.

[atan]

after thinking about getting the 5D in the last few month, I pulled the trigger last week. Should I return the camera to B&H and order again when the rebate starts in april?

[les]

Of course you should ! Come to think about it, you would do even better waiting until 5D is "obsolete" and a new model is out, and buy it then - cause everyone will drop their prices even more to clear the stock.

 

Of course, in the meantime you will not be able to take pictures (yes, it is true !) but hey, a saving is a saving...

[les]

"Peter and Leszek does the words ignorant rude and dumb mean anything to you, because that is how you come across. "

 

David - actually they do, because they pretty much describe the post to which I had answered (with the exception of "rude", of course). I gather that you wholeheartedly support dumb and ignorant questions of the sort "should I or should I not spend my money" or "does it make sense for me to save some dollars based on hypothetical discounts which may or may not happen".

 

Having said that - I would advise you to spend some time with a dictionary and read the description of words you have used, since your understanding of them appears to be not quite up to date.

 

While at it - please take some time to read the description of the word "irony".

[david_thomas5]

Leszek, I forgot to add the word 'sarcastic' sorry if i hit a nerve; if the guys post annoyed you ,just ignore it, some people just need a little assurance:).

 

Cheers

 

Dave

[les]

No harm done. It (the post that started it) just hit me as being so totally irrelevant to this forum that I had to answer the way I answered.

It is fair enough to ask about prices, value for money, best deal etc. etc - after all we all want to get the biggest bang for our buck. But a done deal is a done deal. Again - fair enough if something is wrong with the equipment - one has every right to return it.

 

But what does returning a perfectly good camera have to do with photography - if the only reason is that the same camera is available a bit cheaper a month down the track ?! In which case you do not need to ask for advice - your camera, your money, your decision...

 

I will not mention that I consider it downright unethical.

[david_thomas5]

Leszek, on that i agree with you 100%, it is unetheical to return, just to save a few bucks I would hate to purchase a 'new' used camera, people should be educated to the point that it is just plain wrong.

 

Cheers

 

dave

[john_graham3]

Um, well April 1 is less than two weeks, definitely not the same thing as waiting for the 5D to be replaced. If I had just bought one and hadn't used it and could still return it and buy it back in 2 weeks for $300 less I'd do it in a heartbeat. If the store has a 14-day no-questions-asked return policy, the ethics ball is in their court as to whether they will re-sell it as new or demo.

[atan]

sorry if I started to ask the wrong question. however, just want to clarify that I have not received the camera that I ordered and I agree that it would be unethical to return something that I've used just to save a few bucks. I was just playing that scenario in my mind when I asked that question. Hope everything take that question with no offence. peace.

[rdkirk]

>>Um, well April 1 is less than two weeks, definitely not the same thing as waiting for the 5D to be replaced. If I had just bought one and hadn't used it and could still return it and buy it back in 2 weeks for $300 less I'd do it in a heartbeat. If the store has a 14-day no-questions-asked return policy, the ethics ball is in their court as to whether they will re-sell it as new or demo.<<

 

 

The deal was, "I give you x dollars and you give me a camera." Implicit--but certainly known--in the deal was that their return policy was to cover problems on their end of the deal. Inasmuch as they provided exactly what they advertised--the camera you ordered, operating properly, at the price agreed upon--means that returning it is a reneg of your part of the agreement. "Test drive" was not part of the agreement, and if that had been suggested, they would have not agreed to it.

 

The fact that it's easy to steal candy from a baby doesn't make it ethical to do so.

[dogbert]

"Leszek, on that i agree with you 100%, it is unetheical to return, just to save a few bucks I would hate to purchase a 'new' used camera, people should be educated to the point that it is just plain wrong."

 

On the other hand, the trick of Canon (and others) offering discounts and then removing them latter is basically a ploy to extract the more money from consumers. Sounds counterintuitive, I know. But Cameras are generally offered at a high price most of the time to get the maximum dollars out of those that are willing to pay more, then discounted occaisionally to tempt those that are willing to wait for a saving. By using this pricing strategy companies make more money than if they were to just offer their best price or an average price over the full year. They play on our psychology that tells us that if we got a discount we got a bargain, and if we paid full price we got a "fair" deal. The other way of looking at is is that Canon could still make profit by selling $300 dollars cheaper all the time, but they can make more profit by putting a $300 premium on the 5D for 9 months of the year. Of course Canon is within their right to do this. But I for one don't think Canon's discounts are due to it being generous. Rather they are part of a larger pricing scheme aiming to maximise its profits.

 

When one argues about the ethics or otherwise of consumers behaviour, I think it is also reasonable to think about what big multinationals are aiming to achieve with their various pricing schemes.

[rdkirk]

>>When one argues about the ethics or otherwise of consumers behaviour, I think it is also reasonable to think about what big multinationals are aiming to achieve with their various pricing schemes.<<

 

It always seems easy to justify anything as long as we categorize them as "multinationals" or "capitalist pigs" or "the Huns" whatever the current catch phrase is for "people we all agree are the enemy" --even when it's totally misplaced, as in this case. Such squishy moral values.

 

Returning a perfectly good camera to a store doesn't take a penny out of Canon's corporate pocket. It comes out of that store's pocket. And I suppose we expect always to get a camera from them that nobody else has ever examined and returned, too.

[dogbert]

B&H has its returns policy. Consumers are within their rights to use it, though I guess if it creates too much of a problem B&H may be forced to change. I won't comment on whether returning a perfectly good camera is ethical or not and did not mean to imply that that I had a view on that. Perosnally I think it would be more unethical for B&H to pass off a returned item as new, which seemed to be the main concern of a few posters.

 

I guess I was aiming to provide a counterpoint to the view that Canon's (or any other producer's) disacounts were done out of the goodness of thier hearts and to do a favour for their customers. That view comes through in many threads.

 

Canon is interested in making money and the rebate scheme is part of that strategy. That is fine by me and as it should be.