Complaint Review: COSTCO

ROBERT, It is highly likely, in light of the other commenter ("coast" ?)  who actually referenced you in his/her report defending yet another company-- or hell, it may even have BEEN you defending you, for that matter, lol-- anyway, evidence points to you being either a paid commenter or a troll.  

If that's the way you choose to earn a living, I'm sorry for you.

If so, I hate to say it, but they are paying you for...not a very good job, IMHO, considering your work on this topic.

If you are just one of those angry, anonymous internet trolls who like to jump in and personally attack other people who express legitimate concerns,  again, I'm sorry for you.

No, I didn't spellcheck or edit that last report. I'm actually an excellent speller, and rarely need to check myself, but I didn't care to bother.

Your personal attacks were transparently designed to obfuscate your "rebuttal" arguments, which were specious...even ridiculous.

I guess I just discounted you generally because of that. 

I commented on your poor spelling because it kept grabbing my attention and annoying me.

You did a good enough job of discrediting yourself.

Well, I know there are a LOT of paid commenters - politicians, even,  have slews of 'em I hear...lol. And there are a lot of people out there who just like to take advantage of the anonymity of the internet to weigh in on things that probably don't concern them at all just to be obnoxious. 

And just like most of them, your comment is simply designed to be personally critical--- and is as illogical as your pal Robert's is.

  I notice you speak of "Robert" in a very friendly way (grin) and you, too, are located "somewhere" in America (city not specified). Now you denied being an employee of COSTCO, and directed meto another report rebuttal in defense of a company... 

Hmmm....I see that you seem to defend a LOT of companies. a LOT, LOT of companies. And WOW! "Robert" appears in that OTHER report you directed me to...roflmbo. Talk about yer plummeting credibility ;>

And, now,  you chiming in to defend COSTCO makes perfect sense - because neither  "you" nor "Robert" calmly posited any facts or reasoning that negated my report, both just went on the attack.

I will simply let the readers draw the same conclusion I have come to about paid commenters and the like, given the evidence you so kindly provided by pointing out your numerous reports exclusively defending companies...............

Just for the record:

(Deep sigh here) At no time did I say that I DIDN'T know the policy about membership refund policy. Anyone with a shred of common sense who signs a paper to become a member of ANYTHING reads before signing. Not to mention that this policy is plastered all over the customer service desk and on the wall behind it, as I recall.

That had nothing to do with the price of beans...or gas. (no pun intended of course ;>)

SO... your real reason for writing is - Maybe you are earning a living by getting in the mix. Well, let me say now that I hope you are paid well enough to be able to sleep at night, given the nature of your employment.

[NOTE: I use the term "maybe" to imply your status as paid commenter as "fact", much as you used that word in your rebuttal to imply "fact"  in your suppositions]

But, (mischievous sigh here ;>) I will respond to your comments, just for fun.

Uh, that was a rather absurd and extreme analogy of 20 COSTCO stores in a line all 15 miles apart, by the way. But anyway....I would think first of all that 20 stores 15 miles apart in a row would be an oversaturation of the market... lol.  And "needing to charge a different price" ? Well,the store has already established that their pricing, in fact, is due to "regionalization" -  did you miss that?  So I guess their "need" to charge a different price" is to make more money.

But here we go:

 Maybe they use different gas suppliers because they have different contracts.

Why would an nationwide -   international, even-- chain not use its negotiating power and choose to use a different supplier within a (total) regional diameter of 300 miles? I can see a thousand miles, maybe, but 300?  Prolly not....

Maybe one of the suppliers is not willing to travel any further from their home base.

Why would a nationwide chain not use its negotiating power and choose a different supplier?  FIFTEEN miles would be the straw that broke a contract's back? Prolly not....

Maybe their supplier charges more for travelling the extra few miles.

Not even going to ...lol

Maybe one of the locations has a smaller underground tank so they must purchase less and therefore they don't get the same quantity discount.

And there I was "assuming" that a huge chain like COSTCO WHOLESALE CLUB would have  purchasing power to call their own shots.....

You are making claims based on assumptions instead of facts.

And (baseless) presumptions prefaced by "maybe" are valid and "factual" ?  LOL again (tears in eyes from laughing).

You claim the price of gas is a rip-off due to your opinion as to what Costco’s pricing policy should be. 

Nope, I said that cost factors involved in delivering gas another 15 miles to a sister store should have been about the same and the price therefore should be the same to be fair to ALL the customers/members in the Charlotte area (I even allowed for a couple of cents' difference). I'll go one further and assert that  that same cost-based pricing practice should be in place nationwide, given the same minimal distance between stores as a transport costing factor within the same city.

 And finally,

The folks at Costco must be doing something right because their stock value has increased 142% in the past five years.

Yeah buddy! Their marketing department has been playing COSTCO members like a well-tuned fiddle  - from the beginning. But most of the net profit affecting the cost per share increase has been realized since the last of the co-founders left  and W. Craig Jelinek, I think his name is- took over in 2012. 

(sorry. I have to interject a juvenile thought...that name makes me think of him as jelly-necking around constantly to see what the guys down the street -this way! that way! behind me! - are charging....lol.......sorry again)

COSTCO's  net income (profit/loss) bounced from 1.46 BILLION (pre-Jelinek, 2012) to 2.38 BILLION DOLLARS fiscal year ending Aug/Sep 2015, due primarily to an expanding membership base and --dare I say it ?--price  "regionalization" taken to extremes,

maybe?  (Gee, another "fact" there...)

I suppose a lot of my objection to COSTCO (aside from the gas price facts in the original Ripoff Report) is rooted in its deceptive use of  semantics in marketing - implication vs reality.

It CALLS itself a "wholesale" club. But in fact is  simply just another retail store, buying in bulk and charging the highest possible prices while (sometimes) undercutting the big box retailers, to make shareholders happy with their dividend checks.

Sure, people buy into the charade - the term" 'wholesale!' WOO h*o!" is a calculated and deliberate misuse of the word, and that's the sad part. 

Considering its sneaky use of  conceptual semantics in marketing tactics, COSTCO is the UBERexample of the manipulation of the American consumer. 

Entering into COSTCO-World is like entering Emerald City...just don't look behind the curtain.

(and no this wasn't worth spell-checking ...lol. BUT, I used Comic sans MS font, because this was definitely comical, heh)

So out of the entire post the main thing you got was that I didn't use a Spell Checker. Okay, pardon me while I roll my eyes.  Yea, you will just never get it.

You know there is an old saying that basically states "Those in glass houses should not throw stones".  So before you try to discredit me on my lack of use of a spell checker.  Perhaps you should actually look at what you wrote.

You made the following statements...

"But I had business to take care of the next day that was closer to the the COSTCO"

"South Carolinians who hop the border to shop a closeby COSTCO"

"continued rebuttal is to fillibuster"

Do you see anything wrong with those statements?

Well let me help you out.

What exactly is "the the"?

closeby is actually close by or close-by

fillibuster is actually filibuster...

Yes, I could go on.  But it is obvious that the only reason you mentioned a spell checker was to discredit my post.  So if we have now determined that spell checking is a guidelines as to the creditability of the post, what does that say about your post?  Does it discredit your post as well?  Is this only a one-way street where any error by you is excusable, but any error by someone who posts something you don't agree with makes their post meaningless?

There is a point of diminishing return so don't worry I won't be posting anymore on your post.  But I will leave you with one thing to ponder...

If you continue to patronize a business that has policies you don't agree with.  What incentive does that business have to change their policies?

Now, yes you did not come out and say you are not going to cancel your membership.  But you posted that you do not suggest people cancel.  So we can only figure by that statement you have not and will not cancel your membership.  You of course will also see this as an "assumption".  So if in fact you did cancel it you have the power to turn this assumption into fact by posting back that you did cancel it.  Otherwise we have no other thing to conclude.

You accused Robert of working for Costco partially based on his knowledge of Costco’s membership refund policy but now you admit you know of that policy. Why did you imply that only a Costco employee would be aware of that policy? That negates your false accusation. I know the accusation is false because it’s common practice of complainants on this site to accuse others of working for a company when they disagree with a commenter’s statements. I have been falsely accused of working for many companies. Now I can add Costco to the list. Maybe you should read my comments from 9/14/15 on RR# 1250716 and then come back and tell me if you still think I work for Costco. Or maybe you’ll be like that guy and refuse to respond to my post.

You claim the price of gas is a rip-off due to your opinion as to what Costco’s pricing policy should be. That is totally absurd. The folks at Costco must be doing something right because their stock value has increased 142% in the past five years.

Suppose there were 20 Costco stores in a line where each store’s location is less than 15-miles from the next closest store. Is it your opinion that they all should charge the same price for gas? There are different costs incurred for delivering gas to different locations. They would need to draw a line somewhere so two locations less than 15-miles apart may need to charge a different amount. For some reason you are assuming that these stores must incur the same expenses because they are in the same city. Maybe they use different gas suppliers because they have different contracts. Maybe one of the suppliers is not willing to travel any further from their home base. Maybe their supplier charges more for travelling the extra few miles. Maybe one of the locations has a smaller underground tank so they must purchase less and therefore they don't get the same quantity discount. You are making claims based on assumptions instead of facts.

(Quote)

"Look the format of this site isn't condusive to debate  You were given reasons and observations as to why you are making incorrect assumptions.  What you do with that information is totally up to you. "

(End quote)

Allow me  to congratulate  you on your excellent spelling! And that statement is exactly correct! What I do IS up to me :)

I find myself needing to assert that my right to post my experience, observations, and a logically supported statement of my personal conclusions  is really not subject to debate, in view of the First Amendment - and the mores of this website, for that matter.   I simply exercised my freedom of speech.  One might conclude, though,  that what you really want in continued rebuttal is to fillibuster, hoping I will not respond. 

My reason for writing this report - which you so vehemently and ineffectively are trying to debate - was simple: I saw something that to me is an unfair business practice, given the vendor's own self-definition as wholesaler and the parameters of the specific  situation, and I decided to share my observation with other consumers. The more knowledge consumers have of being manipulated, the more they can assert their rights to fair and equitable treatment. I did not try to tell them how to react. I simply shared an observation.

The tone of your responses is uncomfortably close to that of a business owner/executive (or PR person) who, faced with a criticism of his establishment/company, takes a dim view of a customer who has higher expectations than said owner/executive wants to meet in the performance of his duties and thus is ordering the customer to leave his place of business.

"But what is not up for debate is the solution I gave you before."

 And you have the right to issue such an imperative statement ...why?  

I'm sorry this report disturbs you, an ordinary "consumer", so greatly. I must admit I have never, ever, seen a mere consumer become so irate in the face of criticism leveled at a place of business to which they (presumably) have no connection.

It further troubles me that you have unraveled to the point that you would use so snarky a tone as to say

" In case you still don't quite grasp this concept.    It means you can go inside to their Membership Desk, say you are not satisfied with their pricing policy and want to cancel your membership."

Well of course I know their membership policy, dear.  And you've reiterated it more than once.  :) Almost as if it is a familiar, knee-jerk response to a customer complaint.

"You were given reasons and observations as to why you are making incorrect assumptions."

Well, in point of fact, I wasn't given any reasons or observations that in any way negated my report.  No logic, no facts.  What I read and continue to see are your assumptions, vagaries and opinions, with no factual base or reasonable hypotheses to support any of them.

Further, I must admit that one quote haphazardly pulled from my rebuttal and pasted, with  a   nonsensical  and unrelated response, was puzzling - something about 5 out of 5 people filling up their tanks with gas and not thinking they were purchasing large quantities of gasoline, followed by  mumbling about someone buying several hundred gallons of gas giving a different response. 

The meaning, if any, was quite obscure, to be polite in my assessment of that rambling disaster of

a paragraph.

You implied that I "set up" the question posited to my 5 polled opinions. If explaining exactly what I found and asking them if they would expect the gas to cost the same is a "set up", I have no other way to ask the question.

Three out of 5  in my poll are not COSTCO members for perfectly legitimate reasons:

Frequently higher prices than other stores

Manufacturer's coupons not accepted

Large quantity purchases often required with no actual savings per item realized

Fresh  meats in bulk packaging that exceeds their needs and would have to be broken down and repackaged

Produce in quanitites that would go bad before consumed

No point of reference maps/accessible data bases on the floor to help the customer navigate the huge facility to find specific products without tracking down an employee to ask (and they often don't know)

However, I don't suggest that people cancel their memberships.

I suggest that they register their concerns about unfair practices such as the one reflected in my report and, as members, register their objection to arbitrary retail pricing adjustments not based on cost. 

They should be valued on the same level as shareholders, because without them, COSTCO would cease to exist and the stock would be worthless.

Contrary to your statement, it IS perfectly logical to assume that, all factors being even, a BUYERS' MEMBERSHIP CLUB that charges everyone the same price for said membership would thus be expected to offer the same pricing to those who live in a general vicinity that covers less than 15 miles between stores, again, with all costing factors being EQUAL.

- And of course you have access to all of the Costco financial statements showing that all costs are exactly the same between the two stores. 

 I asked a few folks who they agreed with, me or thee, and they 5 out of 5 said yes they WOULD expect to be offered the SAME goods at the SAME price, given those parameters.

- And 4 out of 5 dentists... So what's your point?  You can phase or "set up" a question in any way to just about guarantee you will get the answer you want. 

Wholesale pricing usually is considered separate and distinct from the retail market.  The most common dictionary definition of wholesaling I could find is "the selling of goods in large quantities to be retailed by others." Directly competing with retailers is not mentioned anywhere.

- And I bet those 5 out of 5 people would also not consider filling up their tank as purchasing "large quantities" of gasoline.  Now, perhaps if you find someone buying several hundred gallons at one time you may get a different answer.

Look the format of this site isn't condusive to debate  You were given reasons and observations as to why you are making incorrect assumptions.  What you do with that information is totally up to you. 

But what is not up for debate is the solution I gave you before.  If this policy upsets you so much, Costco allows you to cancel your membership at any time and for any reason.  They will also refund your FULL Membership cost if you cancel.  In case you still don't quite grasp this concept.  It means you can go inside to their Membership Desk, say you are not satisfied with their pricing policy and want to cancel your membership.  They in turn will give you a refund of your membership fee where you can walk out and spend that money at any other store or gas station you feel better meets your needs.

Perhaps you should ask those 5 out of 5 people to join you in cancelling their membership.  Then all 6 of you head to the membership desk at the same time to make your point.  After all there is strength in numbers...right?

 Hello Robert, and thank you for your rapt attention to my concern and your complimentary response to my writing! I did write for a living, you know :)  And I love to bring a smile into someone's day :)

Most of your questions, including the one re: the price you are paying for your gas which I am not, are fully answered in the above reply/rebuttal to your co-employee.  ;) 

"So why am I still paying around $2.87/gallon for gas you are getting at $1.90/gallon if they are supposed to be the same price according to you?"

In further response to that, I can only say two things.

First, your reading comprehension skills need a little work. 

I did not say that anyone anywhere should pay the same price for gas (please refer to the "costing factors" section of my rebuttal of the previous response for clarification).

What I actually said was that people living in the same city, within a distance of 15 miles from one COSTCO store to another, could reasonably expect (or assume, if you will) to pay the same price when buying from said purported "membership-only wholesale club" vendor, all costing factors being identical. 

Secondly, Robert, you didn't share with us whether or not you priced the gas at  other COSTCOs similarly located in YOUR town to both reproduce the conditions I outlined and to see if there was a variation in price (though I saw you failed to identify your fair city, other than implying you do live in the USA). So I have no idea if you are getting ripped off even more than the price you are complaining about (assuming you are a COSTCO member, that is).  

In reply to your suggestion that I get a refund for my membership to COSTCO and be done with it - and may I say that your comprehensive knowledge of COSTCO's membership policies is both thorough...and suspect...(chuckle):

The membership was a gift, actually, and from someone, I might add, who is ALSO more than a little peeved with the unfair methods COSTCO uses in gas pricing. That person, by the way, told me she was going to let her membership simply expire.  You see, she is not going to try and rip off COSTCO, for she has used the membership and was fairly happy in her ignorance until she discovered the previously unknown retail pricing methods that COSTCO WHOLESALE actually uses.

I will add that if people just stopped shopping at a store - or as in this case buying memberships - and walked away, very little would be accomplished in this world when something is truly unfair to all. The most poignant example of this is that well known saying, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing."

I would amend that to read, "The only thing necessary for people to keep getting deceived and ripped off is for good people to do nothing."

Americans are abused enough by the corporate world on a daily basis.  I feel it is everone's responsibility to work together, to prevent further abuses when they become aware of them.

Finally, Robert, just FYI, may I say that a rebuttal is used in polite society to address the ISSUE being discussed, not as a means to personally attack someone for having an opinion or concern?

Oh, one more thing:  Spellcheck is a marvelous program! May I recommend it?

Kindest regards, I assure you.

There are certain factors that apply to pricing, and one of those is transportation cost. Generally, COSTCO would want to keep costs level in providing a product like gas to the same town, and therefore would deliver their gas via a tanker that would service both their stores in that same town. Ergo, it IS naturual to assume that the add-on costing for that product would be equal, presuming they are purchasing from the same vendor, paying the same driver, delivering to both stores that are within 15 miles of one another, and not delivering to stores located, say,  on different sides of a mountain range or stores separated by oceans requiring ferrying. So my assumptions were LOGICAL.

Contrary to your statement, it IS perfectly logical to assume that, all factors being even, a BUYERS' MEMBERSHIP CLUB that charges everyone the same price for said membership would thus be expected to offer the same pricing to those who live in a general vicinity that covers less than 15 miles between stores, again, with all costing factors being EQUAL.

You disagree, but you do not say WHY it is not logical to make that assumption. I asked a few folks who they agreed with, me or thee, and they 5 out of 5 said yes they WOULD expect to be offered the SAME goods at the SAME price, given those parameters.

If you truly feel it is all right to be expected to pay MORE for your items at COSTCO than your cousin a few miles across town, then by all means, go ahead and do so. But most folks would feel that you are VERY understanding, have more money than you know what to do with, or a little...simpleminded.

I must say that you offered nothing to support your argument besides...your own assumptions.  Do you HAVE any LOGIC to counter MY logic? Please share it, if so.

One other thing:  COSTCO calls itself a "wholesale club"  which is accessible by membership only. Yet it operates using retail methodology, apparently adjusting prices according to the myriad of retail stores  in each store's  immediate area.

SO, is the name just to confuse people or is it simply a marketing strategy to imply --or cause people to infer  - that they are  a real wholesale vendor?  I figure since you rang in to counter the "implication" terminology, albeit weakly, you might want to share your opinion as  to what Costco calling itself a WHOLESALE CLUB would "imply" ?

Wholesale pricing usually is considered separate and distinct from the retail market.  The most common dictionary definition of wholesaling I could find is "the selling of goods in large quantities to be retailed by others." Directly competing with retailers is not mentioned anywhere.

Perhaps ordinary customers ultimately must be forced to conclude, since COSTCO is actually pricing itself in direct competition with retailers surrounding it,  that COSTCO can only legitimately use the term "wholesale" because they house themselves in buildings as LARGE as wholesale warehouses... .

“COSTCO charges the same price for memberships nationwide -- so the implication is that all members get the same warehouse prices, at least in the same general area, right?”

No, not right. That isn’t implied. It was your incorrect assumption.

“I DEFINITELY expect the prices at a store where I bought a MEMBERSHIP to be the same at least in the same CITY. Don't you?”

No.

I do want to thank you for posting one of the most outragous and funniest reports ever on this site.  Some of the thoughts you came up with I don't think could have been conjoured by some of the greatest conspiracy theorists out there.

Oh this was a serious report?

I don't know where you get the idea or who has the expectation that since the membership is the same price that gas needs to be the same price.  But if that is actually the case, I actually agree with you.  Since the membership is the same price across the country, they should sell gas at the same price.  So why am I still paying around $2.87/gallon for gas you are getting at $1.90/gallon if they are supposed to be the same price according to you?

In the end I have one very simple suggestion for you.  If you dispise this practice so much then cancel your membership with them.  Because they have a full money back guarantee that if you are ever disastisfied with your membership you can cancel it and get a full refund.  On the flip side, if you don't cancel it then you are just a person with a lot of "hot air" but no action, who is just complaining to complain.