Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 39 of 39
Like Tree2Likes
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by modeerf View Post
    Actually this is HP not the retailers. They are selling the new batch of touchpads that were made after they were out of inventory. And they are doing it according to HP's direction and adhering to HP's rules which they established which include only one TP per person.

    This is a change in direction at HP to assist both their retail partners and their own bottom line in driving sales of other HP electronics. If you have any doubt, attempt to buy two even with two separate purchases of HP hardware. You will be told no, and you will be given an 800 number at HP to call and complain about the program.
    The retailers did NOT get any units from the new batch. All of the new batch was sold directly from hp. The retailers are limiting one just like the do for any low inventory/high demand item. Just like "black Friday"deals. Once again no retailers got any units from the last batch hp produced. If hp were forcing these deals to the retailers, then please explain how Tiger Direct djd not have to do the same.
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverickz View Post
    The retailers did NOT get any units from the new batch. All of the new batch was sold directly from hp.
    What are you basing this statement on? HP did not sell any of the new batch to consumers (are you referring to the Ebay Purchasing Program?). They notified everyone that signed up for the list that retailers were getting 'limited stock':
    HP Communities - UPDATE: Last Chance - HP Communities
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    What are you basing this statement on? HP did not sell any of the new batch to consumers (are you referring to the Ebay Purchasing Program?). They notified everyone that signed up for the list that retailers were getting 'limited stock':
    HP Communities - UPDATE: Last Chance - HP Communities
    That link does not mention retailers getting new inventory. It only mentions that they may have "limited stock". It also answers the FAQ of What if the retailers don't price match. In which case it clearly states that "Each retailer will manage their own policy and process regarding pricing and price matching." which means HP is NOT forcing these bundles.
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverickz View Post
    That link does not mention retailers getting new inventory. It only mentions that they may have "limited stock".
    That was the link that HP was providing for getting news on the availability of the newly manufactured TouchPads to deplete the parts supply that was still in the pipe. It is certainly a fair assumption that the limited stock referenced was that same manufacturing run.
    It also answers the FAQ of What if the retailers don't price match. In which case it clearly states that "Each retailer will manage their own policy and process regarding pricing and price matching." which means HP is NOT forcing these bundles.
    The FAQ you reference was part of the many sections which were struck out, which means it no longer applies as of Mark's last update.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    That was the link that HP was providing for getting news on the availability of the newly manufactured TouchPads to deplete the parts supply that was still in the pipe. It is certainly a fair assumption that the limited stock referenced was that same manufacturing run.

    The FAQ you reference was part of the many sections which were struck out, which means it no longer applies as of Mark's last update.
    At the $99/$149 price points hp was selling at a loss already, they only did it to liquidate inventory and recoup some of the cost. The last batch was made from components they already had on hand. They would not sell cheaper to retailers when they already knew they could sell all of the inventory direct in hours. The retailers are selling inventory they already had.
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverickz View Post
    At the $99/$149 price points hp was selling at a loss already,
    Yes, this is already common knowledge, and irrelevant.
    they only did it to liquidate inventory and recoup some of the cost.
    This actually supports the idea that HP is mandating the bundles even more. If they sold them directly unbundled, they would just eat the loss and inventory expense. If they push them on their big box retailers with conditions, they benefit more.
    The last batch was made from components they already had on hand.
    Um no. The last batch was made from components their manufacturing partners had on hand. You don't think HP manufactures these things themselves, do you?
    They would not sell cheaper to retailers when they already knew they could sell all of the inventory direct in hours.
    Why sell at a loss directly, when you could sell at the same loss on paper combined with a profit on a computer purchase?
    The retailers are selling inventory they already had.
    And you still haven't advanced why you think this. I've shown my work. You're just offering conjecture based on seemingly poor information. Are you considering the Ebay(Employee) Purchasing Program where that last batch was sold?
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Yes, this is already common knowledge, and irrelevant.

    This actually supports the idea that HP is mandating the bundles even more. If they sold them directly unbundled, they would just eat the loss and inventory expense. If they push them on their big box retailers with conditions, they benefit more.

    Um no. The last batch was made from components their manufacturing partners had on hand. You don't think HP manufactures these things themselves, do you?

    Why sell at a loss directly, when you could sell at the same loss on paper combined with a profit on a computer purchase?

    And you still haven't advanced why you think this. I've shown my work. You're just offering conjecture based on seemingly poor information. Are you considering the Ebay(Employee) Purchasing Program where that last batch was sold?
    You really think HP said "F' our customers, we are going to screw them over for a really thin profit margin"? If you think that way there is no proof in the world that is going to change your mind. Just go be as angry as you want.

    The parts were already paid for by hp, thus regardless of who assembled them or even if they were never assembled, hp already owned them which is the only reason they were made in the first place.
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverickz View Post
    You really think HP said "F' our customers, we are going to screw them over for a really thin profit margin"?
    I don't believe I ever said that. The most I said was that HP said "we're going to make a limited run of TouchPads to use up our partner parts supply; follow this blog/these twitter accounts to find out how to get one when they're ready" and the end result was that those TouchPads were never available for purchase direct from HP, but rather distributed to big box retailers to offset the loss with computer sales.
    If you think that way there is no proof in the world that is going to change your mind.
    I think like what I am, a person with a degree in Business that has worked in IT for 20ish years that currently works for a VAR that sells a lot of HP hardware. If you had proof for your assertion that the last run was sold directly to consumers by HP, I'd be very open to seeing it.
    Just go be as angry as you want.
    I'm not angry at all. I purchased one of the bundles this past weekend. I asked about getting a second TouchPad (figured it couldn't hurt even though I suspected the answer), and was told that the terms of the bundle were set by HP. Given the reasoning and evidence I've already presented, I believe them.
    The parts were already paid for by hp, thus regardless of who assembled them or even if they were never assembled, hp already owned them which is the only reason they were made in the first place.
    I don't think you know much about manufacturing. If HP already paid for the parts, there would have been no motivation for them to have any additional TouchPads manufactured. They'd just expense the raw materials, and be done with it.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    I don't believe I ever said that. The most I said was that HP said "we're going to make a limited run of TouchPads to use up our partner parts supply; follow this blog/these twitter accounts to find out how to get one when they're ready" and the end result was that those TouchPads were never available for purchase direct from HP, but rather distributed to big box retailers to offset the loss with computer sales.
    Actually they may have only been sold internally (Employee Purchase). I know they did this because this is how I got mine. I guess you also now know where I get some of my information from.

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    I'm not angry at all. I purchased one of the bundles this past weekend. I asked about getting a second TouchPad (figured it couldn't hurt even though I suspected the answer), and was told that the terms of the bundle were set by HP. Given the reasoning and evidence I've already presented, I believe them.
    If HP is dictating the bundles HOW is Tiger Direct selling them bundled with non-HP items?

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    I don't think you know much about manufacturing. If HP already paid for the parts, there would have been no motivation for them to have any additional TouchPads manufactured. They'd just expense the raw materials, and be done with it.
    So you think they bought extra parts and then had them assembled, just to sell at a loss? Expensing the raw materials and not using them cost more money than assembling them and selling them for the price they were selling at.

    The retailers are using the stock they had to help move additional inventory. That is a sound decision on their part. Even Tiger Direct saw this as well but chose a different bundling route that actually makes a little more sense (other than the USB drive).
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverickz View Post
    Actually they may have only been sold internally (Employee Purchase).
    If that were their original plan, why would they go through the time and effort to have Mark and Bryna posting and tweeting about it?
    I know they did this because this is how I got mine. I guess you also now know where I get some of my information from.
    And your defensiveness.
    If HP is dictating the bundles HOW is Tiger Direct selling them bundled with non-HP items?
    You're misdirecting. Where/when did they get their supply? How much did they pay for them? If they sell them for less than they paid for them (i.e. at fire sale prices), who absorbs the loss? I am not privy to the terms that HP set with each vendor for making up the difference, but it's not infeasible for HP to have set different terms for different retailers.
    So you think they bought extra parts and then had them assembled, just to sell at a loss?
    You seem to be having a tough time following. Do you work in HP tech support? I think they had manufacturing partners that had inventories of parts assuming some number of units would be produced (let's use K as a variable). They only produced Y units in initial run(s). HP said it was killing the line so they were going to be stuck with K-Y worth of inventory. If HP already paid for those parts, why would they care if they were ever assembled?
    Expensing the raw materials and not using them cost more money than assembling them and selling them for the price they were selling at.
    I can't be understanding what you're saying here.
    The retailers are using the stock they had to help move additional inventory. That is a sound decision on their part. Even Tiger Direct saw this as well but chose a different bundling route that actually makes a little more sense (other than the USB drive).
    So, you believe that Best Buy, Walmart, and Sams would "F their customers" (by not selling them TouchPads at fire sale prices and instead claiming they were out of stock) by holding on to inventory and waiting until the Christmas season to bundle them with HP computers, but you don't believe HP capable of making that same "sound decision"? You sure you're not on the Board?
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    I think they had manufacturing partners that had inventories of parts assuming some number of units would be produced (let's use K as a variable). They only produced Y units in initial run(s). HP said it was killing the line so they were going to be stuck with K-Y worth of inventory. If HP already paid for those parts, why would they care if they were ever assembled?
    Let me explain why the second batch was done, one more time, in terms you can understand. If the parts cost $8, and the assembly cost $2, that makes the total real cost $10. Now that means for every unit that sits assembled hp loses $8. If they then sell the units at a loss for $6 each their loss per unit is now only $4. In fact, with the real cost of $10 every dollar they can sell it over $2 reduces their loss per unit, over just scrapping the parts.
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverickz View Post
    Let me explain why the second batch was done, one more time, in terms you can understand.
    Thanks, I appreciate it. It makes much more sense to just speak plainly rather than try and cloak ones words in mystery. Now, if you'd only clarify whether this is pure conjecture on your part rather than actual inside information, I think we might be getting somewhere...
    If the parts cost $8, and the assembly cost $2, that makes the total real cost $10. Now that means for every unit that sits assembled hp loses $8. If they then sell the units at a loss for $6 each their loss per unit is now only $4. In fact, with the real cost of $10 every dollar they can sell it over $2 reduces their loss per unit, over just scrapping the parts.
    I think (hope?) we both know that assembly is not the only additional cost involved. Shipping? Order processing? Fulfillment? When one takes those into account as well as the fact that those parts were unlikely to be sitting in an HP warehouse, but in one belonging to Compal, that explanation becomes shakier.

    "Let me sum up" - Inigo Montoya

    Basically, my 'position' is that HP sprung the WebOS hardware discontinuation on everyone. Stock price tanked 20% the next day. Anyone who could cancel orders since they were not shipped (AT&T), did so. Retailers who already had loads of stock on hand (Best Buy et al) tried to return that stock. HP in an effort to not take those returns back and eat the whole cost, came up with the fire sale idea so they could only eat the difference between the $316+ average real cost and whatever price they agreed with retailers on the existing stock at those retailers. Those retailers then sold all available inventory they had at those prices, and HP sold any inventory that it had remaining through its various direct channels (EPP, HO website, SMB website, etc.). Then Compal called and said, "What about us? You wanted 1 million of these things, and we only made 800,000 so far. We've got parts for between one and two hundred thousand sitting in our supply chain." HP said, "Crap, we can't do that to these guys if we still want them to build laptops. OK, we'll say we're going to do one last run and update people via email and Twitter." Then Meg took over, they had that one last run, and realized that if they sold them directly to consumers, they'd have to incur shipping costs to an HP distribution facility, handle order taking and fulfillment, and then shipping costs to individual consumers. HP: "Why not just ship them to a few select retailers who can handle the volume and then bundle them with other items? We'll still lose $150+ per unit, but we'll make a small margin on the PCs and notebooks at Best Buy et al and not incur additional order processing and fulfillment costs. Tell Mark and Bryna to just say we're out of stock forever, but select retailers will have limited stock." Pretty standard business there. I say, "Bravo, Meg."

    Your position seems to me to be: HP had parts sitting around, so they decided to put them together and sell them directly to their employees. The retailers didn't sell all their stock for the fire sale, so they held some back incurring storage and opportunity costs, so they could bundle them with notebooks and PCs a few weeks before Black Friday conveniently timed for the HP update about that last run. If I'm misunderstanding you, please clarify.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Thanks, I appreciate it. It makes much more sense to just speak plainly rather than try and cloak ones words in mystery. Now, if you'd only clarify whether this is pure conjecture on your part rather than actual inside information, I think we might be getting somewhere...

    I think (hope?) we both know that assembly is not the only additional cost involved. Shipping? Order processing? Fulfillment? When one takes those into account as well as the fact that those parts were unlikely to be sitting in an HP warehouse, but in one belonging to Compal, that explanation becomes shakier.

    "Let me sum up" - Inigo Montoya

    Basically, my 'position' is that HP sprung the WebOS hardware discontinuation on everyone. Stock price tanked 20% the next day. Anyone who could cancel orders since they were not shipped (AT&T), did so. Retailers who already had loads of stock on hand (Best Buy et al) tried to return that stock. HP in an effort to not take those returns back and eat the whole cost, came up with the fire sale idea so they could only eat the difference between the $316+ average real cost and whatever price they agreed with retailers on the existing stock at those retailers. Those retailers then sold all available inventory they had at those prices, and HP sold any inventory that it had remaining through its various direct channels (EPP, HO website, SMB website, etc.). Then Compal called and said, "What about us? You wanted 1 million of these things, and we only made 800,000 so far. We've got parts for between one and two hundred thousand sitting in our supply chain." HP said, "Crap, we can't do that to these guys if we still want them to build laptops. OK, we'll say we're going to do one last run and update people via email and Twitter." Then Meg took over, they had that one last run, and realized that if they sold them directly to consumers, they'd have to incur shipping costs to an HP distribution facility, handle order taking and fulfillment, and then shipping costs to individual consumers. HP: "Why not just ship them to a few select retailers who can handle the volume and then bundle them with other items? We'll still lose $150+ per unit, but we'll make a small margin on the PCs and notebooks at Best Buy et al and not incur additional order processing and fulfillment costs. Tell Mark and Bryna to just say we're out of stock forever, but select retailers will have limited stock." Pretty standard business there. I say, "Bravo, Meg."

    Your position seems to me to be: HP had parts sitting around, so they decided to put them together and sell them directly to their employees. The retailers didn't sell all their stock for the fire sale, so they held some back incurring storage and opportunity costs, so they could bundle them with notebooks and PCs a few weeks before Black Friday conveniently timed for the HP update about that last run. If I'm misunderstanding you, please clarify.
    Your first scenario seems reasonable up until HP chose where to sell them. You THINK (no Proof) that HP shipped new product to retailers that were already wanting to get rid of what they had in stock, while I think (only marginal proof) they sold them internally to employees. I think the retail STORES sold out all they had but the retail warehouses still had some units that had not been distributed yet. Those are what they are selling now.

    The bottom line is that we both have our opinions and both think the other one is wrong. Unless someone can provide invoices showing BestBuy recently received new inventory, or complete shipping records from HP then neither of us have HARD evidence to prove one way or another. So let's just agree to disagree and move on.
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverickz View Post
    Your first scenario seems reasonable up until HP chose where to sell them.
    What's unreasonable about it? Those retailers sold them as fast as they could on the original fire sale day, and continued to sell out fast whenever other limited distributions came up. Best Buy had people lined up outside their stores on the morning of, and had people asking about them in stores whenever word leaked of inventory coming from the distribution centers. Those three or four retailers offer a relatively small number of distribution points for HP to deliver to and the infrastructure to take over from there and bundle them with HP product.
    You THINK (no Proof) that HP shipped new product to retailers
    I deduct that from the available information. HP set up the system to disseminate information on the new run. The only information that was ultimately disseminated was that HP would have no stock, but certain retailers would have limited stock. Coincidentally(?), certain big box retailers waited until a couple days later to start selling bundles with HP PCs/laptops. If they already reached their deal on original inventory back when the fire sale started, what's their motivation to let product sit and grow more stale in the distribution centers?
    that were already wanting to get rid of what they had in stock,
    This only makes sense if they were having trouble getting rid of the stock at the fire sale prices which were already in place. Given that they've been selling on eBay for $200+ even for the 16GB, this doesn't seem like a plausible scenario.
    while I think (only marginal proof) they sold them internally to employees.
    From what I recall, the last EPP hurrah was late September. According to everything Mark and Bryna posted, that 'last run' was not going to be available until later in October.
    I think the retail STORES sold out all they had but the retail warehouses still had some units that had not been distributed yet. Those are what they are selling now.
    Except that continued during the interim. After the initial fire sale day, Best Buy continued selling them sporadically in stores as inventory was cleared from the distribution centers. Same with Walmart. Sams doesn't stockpile inventory in the same way. Their clubs are their own warehouse. It just doesn't make sense for retailers to let discontinued/clearance items sit in distribution centers when they sell the same day they show up in inventory at the stores.
    The bottom line is that we both have our opinions and both think the other one is wrong.
    No, this started by my asking for the basis of your opinion. I don't think you are de facto wrong. I think your opinion contradicts the available evidence, so I was asking for additional evidence to support your opinion. You may think my deductions are wrong, but I have provided ample basis for my 'opinion'.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  15. #35  
    Believe what you want to, it matters not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    From what I recall, the last EPP hurrah was late September. According to everything Mark and Bryna posted, that 'last run' was not going to be available until later in October.
    I placed my order on Oct 21st at about 2:00pm the order confirmation email did not come in for a few hours (which made me a bit nervous) but arrived with a time stamp of Oct 21st 6:22pm.
  16.    #36  
    So now you can add Office Depot to the list of retailers offering you the chance to buy a TP if you buy a laptop.

    I find it hard to believe that this is not new inventory making its way from HP to these retailers. Some speculated that the retailers did not get any new inventory but were simply and opportunistically clearing out their old inventory.

    IMO, this is HP trying to "make it right" with their retailers for the TP fiasco by allowing them to profit on a laptop at least and use the TP as help.

    I am sure these retailers were very upset that they dedicated display space and resources to carry a device that eventually taxed their system and was sold at likely no profit.

    Clearly, this is an attempt by HP to get the retailers back in their good graces so they will be willing to carry the TP 2.0 (just kidding on this part everyone!).

    -- Sent from my Palm Pre3 using Forums
    PDA Lineage: Palm Pilot, Palm V, Palm Tungsten, Treo 650 (Cingular), Treo 750 (AT&T), Treo Pro GSM (unlocked), Pre Plus (AT&T), Pre 2 GSM (unlocked), Pre 3 16GB (AT&T Branded) and Touchpad 32 GB
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverickz View Post
    Believe what you want to, it matters not.
    I believe what the available evidence supports. Did HP release information about the last run and set up email lists, blog posts, and tweets just so they could sell that last run internally to employees only? Your line of belief doesn't seem too complimentary. Mine at least grants that they did what they said they'd do.
    I placed my order on Oct 21st at about 2:00pm the order confirmation email did not come in for a few hours (which made me a bit nervous) but arrived with a time stamp of Oct 21st 6:22pm.
    The real issue that your line of belief creates is that HP went through some significant effort to assuage consumers that there was another round of production coming up which would be available for purchase. My 'belief' allows HP to have fulfilled those promises, albeit in a manner that won't please everyone. Your 'belief' is that they decided to sell them to employees instead.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by Dsol View Post
    So now you can add Office Depot to the list of retailers offering you the chance to buy a TP if you buy a laptop.
    They found them behind a stack of boxes in the warehouse.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by Dsol View Post
    I find it hard to believe that this is not new inventory making its way from HP to these retailers. Some speculated that the retailers did not get any new inventory but were simply and opportunistically clearing out their old inventory.

    IMO, this is HP trying to "make it right" with their retailers for the TP fiasco by allowing them to profit on a laptop at least and use the TP as help.

    I am sure these retailers were very upset that they dedicated display space and resources to carry a device that eventually taxed their system and was sold at likely no profit.

    Clearly, this is an attempt by HP to get the retailers back in their good graces so they will be willing to carry the TP 2.0 (just kidding on this part everyone!).
    On a more serious note, regardless of whether a TouchPad 2.0 ever sees the light of day, this in general is exactly right. The biggest damage that Apotheker did to HP was in the channel. HP's historic relationship with its channel partners has been its strength. Mark Hurd was very good in this regard. You build relationships so your partners are selling an ecosystem of HP products, e.g. servers, workstations, laptops, printers, etc. on the business side or laptops, PCs, printers, etc. on the consumer end. Apotheker really damaged a lot of those channel relationships (even simply through neglect). I'm encouraged to see that HP is trying to make it right.

    http://www.crn.com/news/client-devic...c-business.htm
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions