Is too much choice an issue and how do you decide what to buy?

mysteron347

Well - close to the truth.

One of my first jobs with a well-known hardware-retailer was precisely the opposite. When they'd sold all of their stock of a particular product, other stock was pushed into the empty space and eventually the out-of-stock item's label was removed. This meant that the store didn't re-order the item, so the holy computer immediately reported zero sales which justified the dropping of the line at that store.

Then there was the clothing store that invoked "demographics" as the reason that they had stock of small collar-sized shirts in all colours of the rainbow, but none of larger sizes (maybe one or two in white or blue). Well - actually, the small collar-sizes are worn by younger people who shop in the city and the larger by older people who shop in the suburbs. Can't get the bean-counters to understand that, though.

When I widened the great shirt-hunt, I encountered one store which had two small displays of mens' business shirts, but no fewer than SEVEN full-height, full-length racks of socks. Naturally, men - especilly older men - are no longer expected to be going to work and have to dress appropriately.

There was the incident where a manufacturer of soups suddenly dropped their tomato line. I asked them why, as a small shareholder in their company and received the usual run-around and waffle.

Some months later, the company was taken over by another. Now normally, if you trade shares the monetary side must be settled within 3 days (5 in those days.) However we small shareholders were left holding shares we couldn't sell and no cash for a number of weeks until the very last moment allowed by the takeover laws. There's an extra provision - if a shareholder asks for a list of shareholders within 10 days of the takeover announcement then the deadline gets delayed by the ten days. Need I say that indeed a shareholder asked for such a list, delaying the payout. Who? Not allowed to know. Why? That's their business, not yours.

So - you can't get proof, but you'd be forgiven for suspecting collusion to minimise the cost-of-acquisition.

Then there's the common practice where companies issue offers to buy more shares. Sure - everyone has two weeks to get their cheque to Melbourne (no other payment type allowed) which is really fair on small shareholders in remote WA who go into town to pick up their mail once a week or more rarely. Add in the requirement to have such an offer coincide with Easter and Anzac day, and the inconvenient small shareholders who wish to participate have no time to marshal the required funds and post the required cheque so miss out. All fine and good for the mates in the next concrete tower in Melbourne though - and those are the people we really want to buy shares.

And then there's the pollies. Oh - if they have an election, we are kept waiting for results while possible postal votes which are posted before the deadline wend their ways to the Electoral Commission. Important things at stake here -- a polly's sinecure on the line.

Doesn't work that way with the tax department though. It's your responsibility that the mail ARRIVES at the office that they select by their deadline. Any communication arriving late - pay a fine. Most important things at stake here - money to pay pollies.