Lee Valley Shows its True Colo(u)rs

Page 1 of 2  
In a heated debate a few years ago, Rob Lee defended the company's charging of much higher prices to Canadians due to unforseen shifts in CDN-US exchange rates.
He said:
"We can either float prices daily and make the exchange rate work exactly - or fix prices and tolerate exchange differences, until we can correct them - which for us, is annually."
"Thanks for the clear and correct explanation - yes - we set our rates in June, and hold for a year"
I guess they hold the prices for a year if the exchange rate movements are favourable to Lee Valley. They have announced increases for Canadian customers starting Jan 5 to offset the weaker Canadian dollar. Too bad they didn't lower prices when the Canadian dollar went up. Heads they win, tails you lose.
John
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And now Rob Lee is supposed to compromise the health of his fine company to make 'you' happy?
Had Robin Lee been the 'cause' of the US dollar/Canadian dollar problem, then I would also hold him responsible.
He owes it to his business to put it first. It is his business to do as he seems fit so that all his employees can at least have a chance at keeping their jobs. (Which may or may not be possible due to the enormous economic mismanagement beyond our control.)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I 'applaud' your 'use' of irrelevant quotation marks for 'effect'.
I have merely pointed out an obvious inconsistency in Lee Valley's stated policy when a currency move that went in their favor and the opposite behavior when it did not. They are free to do what they want, as a privately-held company. Not sure if raising prices, against a stated policy, in this turd-bowl of an economy is the smartest move, but I simply wanted to point out the lack of consistency with former company statements.
Are you the unofficial Lee Valley apologist?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

ROTFLMAO.... I'm dying over here!!
Seriously.... your hot buttons....
Sometimes you really crack me up!
Robert
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Before this little misguided thread, your last contribution, JohnD was: 6. JohnD

As a group, we have JohnD to thank for that contribution. 3-1/2 years ago since we heard anything from him.
Sometimes people leave for one reason or another, and sometimes we miss them. This is not one of those times.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:
Before this little misguided thread, your last contribution, JohnD was: 6. JohnD

As a group, we have JohnD to thank for that contribution. 3-1/2 years ago since we heard anything from him. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

him to continue to provide excellent tools and service at good prices.

the use of any LV tools. I'll be glad to hold any planes for you until you get over it, and promise to keep them in good use.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

change policy, and it's possible the the economic situation forced him to do so. I don't know.
You seem to have a low opinion of Robin, or of his company. I have no idea whether it's justified or not, but in any case you simply need to buy from someone else. Give your business to someone whom you respect, based on whatever business behavior pleases you. I doubt Robin will miss you anyway.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It's bidness. I don't know if you own or have ever owned your own bidness but times is hard and bidness does what bidness needs to do. Mr. Lee has employees who depend on him to make intelligent decisions - so that they can continue to have jobs. It looks to me like Mr. Lee is doing just that.
tom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Wow.
What I said, using smaller words, so as not to confuse, is the following.
When the CDN dollar went up, Robin Lee said his hands were tied, the fact that LV products cost way less in the US was regrettably out of his hands, due to the long-term currency-buying and catalog-printing policies of Lee Valley. The fall of the Canadian dollar is, apparently, easier to address, in the form of price increases to Canadian customers. I know it is subtle, but do you see the inconsistency. In the first case, when the currency movement benefitted LV, no change could be made, due to currency commitments, and catalog printings. In the latter case, when the currency movement harms Lee Valley, then they abandon recently-distributed catalog pricing and push it up. All I am saying, Einstein, is that this is inconsistent.
I am not suggesting Lee Valley should pursue a plan to make me happy. I am simply pointing out the dishonesty and inconsistency.
I feel I should use smaller words, since Robatoy and now Tom are confused by longer On Jan 2, 8:48pm, Tom Watson

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Was that an attempt at condescension?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
inconsistency. In the first case, when the currency movement benefitted LV, no change could be made, due to currency commitments, and catalog printings. In the latter case, when the currency movement harms Lee Valley, then they abandon recently-distributed catalog pricing and push it up. All I am saying, Einstein, is that this is inconsistent.
No, it's business. Robin's first duty to his company is to see that it doesn't lose money. When the Canadian dollar was worth more than the US buck, it was only that way for a relatively short period. Nobody is immediately going to change prices under those conditions until they're fairly sure those rates are going to stay fairly consistent. They didn't stay that way for long so no prices were changed.
However when the dollar went way down again, immediately LV would be losing money, so he has to address that condition immediately. That's his duty and it is what he did. There's no greed or inconsistency there, just ordinary business.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message

I'm not a financial advisor, so don't take this for gospel. It's common business practice to hedge against commodity price movements by holding futures on those commodities. This has the effect of locking in the price of that commodity. For LV, USD currency futures would lock in an effective exchange rate for their US sales revenues. Losses from an adverse price movement are offset by gains on the futures contracts, and vice versa. To not hedge this way amounts to speculating on the commodity market. That's a valid business model also, but should be undertaken as a conscious decision. Maybe this will shed some light and take some of the angst out of the discussion. But what does that mean in context of LV price adjustments? Was John so far off mark to cry "Foul!" in the face of LV's stated policies? Sales projections were undoubtedly skewed by the suddenly tight retail market. They would then be over hedged, and losing money on the exchange rate. It might also be they were playing a little lose and free with the long term CDN strength on the dollar, scraping a few extra pennies on the favorable exchange rate. They would then be under hedged and over exposed. This is the scenario John paints, that LV was playing the market in their favor with their customers' pocketbooks. Who's to say? I'm guessing there was a little of both.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message

Lot's of over-analyzing snipped....
You're beating up on a guy that is only doing what he needs to do to stay profitable. The bottom line is that in my experience they have always had good quality products for sale at a fair price. Add to that excellent customer service. If you think you can get the same product/price/service somewhere else, you're free to shop elsewhere.
Myself, based on past experience I believe I will continue to receive the same value I have in the past and will continue shopping there. I don't believe the core values have changed, only the current market. YMMV
Larry
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The policy was stated a few years ago. It may have changed. Rather than rant and spout off nonsense because he is PO'd, John should have checked to see what the policy is today. If you search the LV web site and catalog and find that policy written and still in effect, different story. I've not looked and doubt it is there. No written contract or promise exists. LV is a private owned business and can change the rules every day if they want to.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And I get to choose whether to do business with them or not, taking those rules into account.
I chose to keep doing business with them. Of course, the store 5 minutes away from work helps.
But bottom line, if I get value for money I will buy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

That explains the hour-long 'bathroom' breaks. ;)
R
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I dunno, seemed most of the ranting and raving was people attacking John for passing along information. I have no opinion on LV myself, they can charge whatever they want far as I'm concerned.
If you search the LV web site and catalog and

As long as they are a private business, and not doing anything illegal,(almost impossible considering the millions of laws "private" business must 'freely' operate under these days) they can change their policy anytime the government lets them...
I've not

I think the government should look into it, and see if Lee Valley is making obscene profits over this, like say 8% or more, and then consider imposing a "windfall profits" tax on anything over 8%. Whats good enough for XOM is good enough for LV, right?
Where's Ralph Nader when you need him?
--
Jack
Using FREE News Server: http://Motzarella.org
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Only from your perspective. From LV's - it's profitable both ways. As Tom says, it's business.
Perhaps LV is doing this because most of their business comes from the US, and if they have to show "favorites," they pick the one that gives them the most profit.
Now if you have a suggestion that will allow LV to do the "right thing," and remain at least as profitable, please enlighten us..
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 18:58:31 -0800 (PST), JohnD

Fuck You.
(are those words small enough for you?)
Regards,
Tom Watson http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1 /
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.