Ridiculously priced infant kit, amongst others!!

[h's dad]

It's not the quality for me, but the fact that £45 is on the granddaughter's/grandson's back for a few months at most.

Agree completely, that's why I keep an eye out for offers.

Have to agree with the comments above re the excessive price of kids shirts, bought a series of cotton traders kids shirts which my son has now outgrown but refuse to buy a canterbury replacement because aside from the price being excessive in itself for a childs shirt, the differential between that and an adult shirt seems unreasonable i.e. a shirt which is 30% of the size of the adults but only 20% cheaper. Add to that the dismal design of the strip itself and I can't justify buying one.

I'm available to explain basic costing, economies of scale, fixed and variable costs etc.

Actually the Asda quality is pretty good especially on children's clothes. This business of player quality shirts I see as a nonsense. Yet another rip off by introducing a premier level.

It is time the kit manufacturers worked out that many people want some value for their money.

Agree that George quality is pretty good, even very good for its market segment but to compare it quality wise with playing kit, that is nonsense. Note that I'm not justifying the size of the price differential, just that there is one.

Speaking of George my Sunday afternoon viewing this weekend is a ladies Leicestershire Cup game with representation from George on both sides.

[tb1]

I fundamentally don't understand this type of thread.

If you think it is too dear, don't buy it. If enough people do that, the price will decrease.

If plenty of people are buying the item, obviously it has been priced quite accurately.

[Bill W (2)]

I fundamentally don't understand this type of thread.

If you think it is too dear, don't buy it. If enough people do that, the price will decrease.

If plenty of people are buying the item, obviously it has been priced quite accurately.

Just so! Demand v supply!!

[Isambard]

Well a clue to understanding it is that when a child is born you want to celebrate it's birth with some Tiger gear. The child grows so you have to decide when, what and if to buy. I won't buy an Aston Martin but I could afford a second hand Fiesta. The clothing market we are talking about effectively prohibits people from buying because of the stupid cost. Stupid because it is over priced, and stupid because it is not a good use of the money.

Most clothes have at least 100% mark up but these Canterbury items must have about a 500%, that's greedy.

[h's dad]

I think you’ll find the typical mark up on volume product is around 100% rather than at least; but this mark up is applied at each stage; manufacturing importing, wholesale, retail although there is variation on this in modern trading. Of course, each stage has to cover its overheads. I don’t know the appropriate financials or performance for Canterbury so I’m not in a position to call them stupid. Unless you know them I would suggest you’re not in that position either, just because something costs more than you want to pay for it. The shop does cater for a range of pockets, we’ve already established that if you want kids clothes from Tigers you don’t have to pay £45 for them. We’d all like an Aston Martin for the price of a second hand Fiesta, but as I think you point out, it’s not going to happen.

[h's dad]

The right to the brand in the UK seems to be held by JD Sports. I expect a lot of you were aware of that but I wasn't.

[tb1]

Well a clue to understanding it is that when a child is born you want to celebrate it's birth with some Tiger gear. The child grows so you have to decide when, what and if to buy. I won't buy an Aston Martin but I could afford a second hand Fiesta. The clothing market we are talking about effectively prohibits people from buying because of the stupid cost. Stupid because it is over priced, and stupid because it is not a good use of the money.

Most clothes have at least 100% mark up but these Canterbury items must have about a 500%, that's greedy.

Congratulations on your award for circular logic. It is really trivially simple, if the price was too high such that people were not buying it then the manufacturer/club would either
1) decrease the price, or,
2) discontinue the item.

It isn't "greedy" to sell an item for the greatest amount which people are willing to pay for it.

[fleabane]

H's dad for Chancellor!

No, that will never happen, he is too good at economics and speaks too much sense!

[Isambard]

Canterbury have a stupid approach, stupid in meaning not sensible or appropriate.
Exploitative would also be another word. I expect that a £45 item cost less than £5 cost at all stages of production. It costs 20pence approx. to ship a pair of jeans from china to the uK.
There's only a limited market for these items and my approach in retail is to try and sell to a significant % of the market available.
As a retailer it seems a nonsense or stupid approach to me.

[tb1]

Canterbury have a stupid approach, stupid in meaning not sensible or appropriate.
Exploitative would also be another word. I expect that a £45 item cost less than £5 cost at all stages of production. It costs 20pence approx. to ship a pair of jeans from china to the uK.
There's only a limited market for these items and my approach in retail is to try and sell to a significant % of the market available.
As a retailer it seems a nonsense or stupid approach to me.

What is your turnover and gross/net profit compared to Canterbury or Leicester Tigers?

[northerntiger]

Don't like the price, don't buy. They charge what the market will take.

School kit, on the other hand.......

[jgriffin]

Our local sports shop told us what the mark-up for Canterbury is and what they can sell it for and still make a good profit for an independent retailer. And it's a few squid less than Tigers shop.

[h's dad]

Canterbury have a stupid approach, stupid in meaning not sensible or appropriate.
Exploitative would also be another word. I expect that a £45 item cost less than £5 cost at all stages of production. It costs 20pence approx. to ship a pair of jeans from china to the uK.
There's only a limited market for these items and my approach in retail is to try and sell to a significant % of the market available.
As a retailer it seems a nonsense or stupid approach to me.

As a retailer you really should be aware that if an item retails at £45 in Tigers shop, it doesn’t mean that Canterbury get £45 for each item sold, further, just because it may have an RRP of £45, nobody with any sense will expect the average selling price of this item over its shelf life top be £45.

[Isambard]

No need to be rude, I didn't imply or say that Canterbury received £45. But the manufacturer usually sets the SRP and all mark ups retreat from that. Kit suppliers are similar to Mattel and their Barbie dolls. "Let's see how much we can rip the customer off and for how long". It is a common approach but imho the retailer should offer value for money so that the customer returns. They that repeat business is golden in retail.

This thread would not exist if the price was reasonable.

[h's dad]

No need to be rude,

I haven't called anybody stupid.

I didn't imply or say that Canterbury received £45. But the manufacturer usually sets the SRP and all mark ups retreat from that. Kit suppliers are similar to Mattel and their Barbie dolls. "Let's see how much we can rip the customer off and for how long". It is a common approach but imho the retailer should offer value for money so that the customer returns. They that repeat business is golden in retail.

A common approach for a large business is to attempt to achieve a reasonable rate of return. JD Sport are achieving that and no more.

This thread would not exist if the price was perceived to be reasonable.

I'm sure I could have a look at the goods on your premises Isambard and pick out items that I felt were extremely overpriced in terms of what I would be prepared to pay.

Do you know how the licence between Canterbury and JD Sport works?