Custom GeForce RTX 3060 Ti graphics cards from the big four

[wazzickle]

That argument is a bit simplistic though, isn't it? Yes what your saying is fudamentally correct, but if the RRP isn't available until 3 months after release because of scalping practises, it's frustrating and unethical to force the market to run dry of stock to benefit your own personal wealth. It's a non-essential commodity but it's just not cricket old boy.

I'm not trying to justify their behaviour, but at the same time, moaning about it and then spending hours trying to get the thing at or near RRRP and then complaining about it and then buying one at higher prices is only going to further the practice. Just wait the 3 months. RRRP is a silly concept anyway. Value is value, if something's not worth the price, don't pay it.

In any case, the product itself is available, in the form of first come first serve, and also pre-built systems. It's not like it's easy to get tickets for Glasto every year. If they can't get enough stock, they don't make as much money, so it's not like this is some grand conspiracy to make more money off you the consumer by not actually being able to sell you their product. The whole thing smacks of entitlement. No-one is entitled to a new graphics card, as soon as they come out, at the price advertised. Just wait.

[LSG501]

Was going straight to Scan when I clicked, Scan add postage then checkout, one per customer and all that, £380.50 all told.

oh I didn't actually click on buy, didn't even see that option lol, it was either coming soon or sold out... like I said though, not the end of the world as I can wait, if I'm really lucky the whole rig I want might end up in stock again (there is literally nothing of it available) lol

[mrwill79]

oh I didn't actually click on buy, didn't even see that option lol, it was either coming soon or sold out... like I said though, not the end of the world as I can wait, if I'm really lucky the whole rig I want might end up in stock again (there is literally nothing of it available) lol

I also didn't get to see a 'buy' button. Nothing, then simply out of stock. Oh well the wait continues!

[Frogrocker]

Managed to order one on Ebuyer after three worrying attempts on a credit card. Fingers crossed they actually deliver.

[The Hand]

The Asus Dual 3060 Ti looks reasonable at £369.99, I doubt well see it at that price though this side of Xmas.

[Gentle Viking]

Yes but can you actually buy one after a few house of sales started.

[Iota]

Edit: Scrap that, just got a 3090 FE from Scan.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I'm not trying to justify their behaviour, but at the same time, moaning about it and then spending hours trying to get the thing at or near RRRP and then complaining about it and then buying one at higher prices is only going to further the practice. Just wait the 3 months. RRRP is a silly concept anyway. Value is value, if something's not worth the price, don't pay it.

In any case, the product itself is available, in the form of first come first serve, and also pre-built systems. It's not like it's easy to get tickets for Glasto every year. If they can't get enough stock, they don't make as much money, so it's not like this is some grand conspiracy to make more money off you the consumer by not actually being able to sell you their product. The whole thing smacks of entitlement. No-one is entitled to a new graphics card, as soon as they come out, at the price advertised. Just wait.

RRP isn't a stupid concept - its set by the companies and review sites use it to assign whether its worth to buy. Also remember,this there are actually laws regarding pricing too,and also competition. For example RAM makers and CRT makers were found to have colluded on fixing pricing upwards and were fined by various governments. So as long as those prices are down to supply and demand its OK,or technical issues causing prices to go up,however if there was any gentlemen's agreement to try and manipulate stuff,then they can get involved. I am not saying its happening here,but there is a little bit more nuance here.

So instead of attacking consumers,attack the companies for setting false RRPs then. They set artificial low ones,just to look good in reviews,and any reviewer worth their salt would highlight it. AMD did it with Vega,just so they could look good against Nvidia,and rightly got mocked when it transpired the real price was much higher,and Nvidia deserved to win that round.

Do I also think people need to actually have some patience too,yes I also agree there. As long as your rig works,you can wait even if its frustrating. If the consumer shows no fortitude,its just saying they can pay more!

However,remember that Big pharma and Big oil also get rallied against when they charge too much,and have price caps set on their products by dozens of governments. These are industries that spend billions on R and D,etc.You could argue its entitled of people to expect big pharma and big oil to not maximise profits too. In the realworld(not tech forums),it seems most people really don't care as rightly they need to think of their personal situation. Just because we are tech enthusiasts,does not mean we can also start giving a free pass to tech companies,just because we get some warm fuzzy feeling from them.

Back in the day websites like Toms Hardware were fronted by people like Tom Pabst who were merciless against tech companies and their shennigans. Nowadays,the tech media is so scared of companies cutting them off,only the few who have some sort of financial independence can actually try and rock the boat.

Even DR told us many years ago,of the "bribes" companies try and give the tech media,and how he would make sure to refuse as much of the "hospitality" as they could.

[[GSV]Trig]

Edit: Scrap that, just got a 3090 FE from Scan.

Woah there, no competitor discussions, did you not get the memo..

Oh, hang on lol

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Woah there, no competitor discussions, did you not get the memo..

Oh, hang on lol

You have too much overclocking on your mind....obviously!

[wazzickle]

Thanks cat, good answer.

Think there should be a distinction made between oil/pharmaceuticals and consumer GPUs, though - the former are a vital resource, the latter are a luxury item.

So what's the legal power behind an RRP? Is there some minimum proportion of the goods that as described must be sold at that price and no higher, or something like that?

[Xlucine]

Recommendations don't have legal power, unfortunately

[wazzickle]

So... it's just a concept. Why do people pay any attention to it then? If I see that a company is selling a watch for £200 where they're claiming the RRRP is £2000, I know they're FOS, the same way I know that hot girls are sometimes less hot once they take their makeup off. Not quite sure why people are so up in arms about this.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Thanks cat, good answer.

Think there should be a distinction made between oil/pharmaceuticals and consumer GPUs, though - the former are a vital resource, the latter are a luxury item.

So what's the legal power behind an RRP? Is there some minimum proportion of the goods that as described must be sold at that price and no higher, or something like that?

The problem is you could argue some aspects of computing are now essential though(maybe not GPUs so much),and that is why tech companies have been clobbered with fines for pricing fixing(RAM,NAND,CRTs,etc). So I would imagine if AMD and Nvidia conspired to fix prices etc via some backroom dealing they could possibly be fined by regulators. Event things such as predatory pricing(to drive competitors out of business),and or even doing things such as artificially inflating prices weeks before a sale,can potentially be in breach of some governmental guidelines:

https://www.asa.org.uk/advice-online...es-rrp.html#ad

It is common to see ads promising savings compared to a recommended retail price (RRP). But marketers should be aware that while it is acceptable for them to quote RRPs if they are genuine, such price comparisons are likely to mislead if the RRP differs significantly from the price at which the product or service is generally sold.

Be aware that advertising a price isn’t the same as selling at that price

Simply offering a product for sale at a stated price is not necessarily enough to use it as a point of comparison. The ASA has upheld complaints about marketers who have claimed to have offered products for sale but were unable to demonstrate that anyone purchased them at that price.

In 2013 the ASA upheld a complaint about a promotion that offered a new toothbrush worth £169.99 in exchange for a customer’s old one. The advertiser stated that this price claim was based on the RRP. However the product was sold at only one retailer, and their price data showed that the brush had only been sold at the RRP of £169.99 for 12 weeks, and that in the other 32 weeks it had been sold for £84.99 or less. This demonstrated that the product was not generally sold at its RRP price and the ASA therefore concluded the claim "worth £169.99" was misleading (Colgate-Palmolive (UK) Ltd, 30 October 2013).
Be aware that “generally sold” can vary based on product and sector

In 2006, the General Media Panel was asked to define the test of what constituted “generally sold”. Although it did not specifically define the test, the Panel considered that the product and sector could play a vital part in reaching a conclusion. It was feasible that large, seldom-bought items such as furniture might be considered “generally sold” if available through a relatively small number of nationwide stores. The ASA accepted that sales in two outlets for a pair of binoculars and ten outlets for hearing aids was adequate to justify that the products were “generally sold” (Express Newspapers plc and BVG-Airflo Group plc, 8 November 2006, and Ultravox Holdings Ltd, 23 August 2006). Marketers should bear in mind that the same number of sales outlets would almost certainly not be enough for other, more frequently-bought products.

The definition of what constitutes a significantly different price has not been specifically defined, but a ruling in 2014 considered whether a screenshot showing the product being sold by other online retailers for £59.99, £49.99 (in two cases), £46.85, £43.99, £39.95, £34.99 and £29.99 justified a savings claim against an RRP, or generally sold, price of £49.99. The conclusion was that the wide range of prices the product was offered for meant that it was not generally sold for £49.99 and the savings claim was therefore misleading (Mothercare UK Ltd, 23 April 2014).

See also "Prices", "Savings Claims" and "Comparisons: General".

So... it's just a concept. Why do people pay any attention to it then? If I see that a company is selling a watch for £200 where they're claiming the RRRP is £2000, I know they're FOS, the same way I know that hot girls are sometimes less hot once they take their makeup off. Not quite sure why people are so up in arms about this.

Because products are recommended on RRP,not in a vacuum. Price is always a factor in whether a products is recommended,or whether there are better products you can buy. As AT said,there is no such thing as a bad GPU,but a badly priced GPU. Artificially selling an an RRP which is barely attainable warps comparisons with other products on the market.

An example is Vega. AMD didn't make it very clear the RRP was for only a few units at launch. At the RRP it was better value than the Nvidia offerings,especially the GTX1070,ie,the Vega 56 was faster for a similar price,but consumed more power,etc.

Except once the few which were at "RRP" were depleted,the real price was much higher,and the reviews where pointless,ie,the GTX1070 was much better price/performance.

Artificial RRPs are a lie and a con,used to buy favourable reviews. Better for companies to make it clear the RRP is an "introductory price",which AFAIK is legally fine,rather than essentially doing the same and the street price being 20% higher.

The tech press needs to also make it very clear the recommendations are based on X price,and then say if its between X and Y,this is how the recommendation changes. If not companies can sell the 1st 100 cards at a "low RRP" and then realistically sell the next 100000 at 25% more. It makes all of the reviews kind of pointless if they are making a recommendation based on a price which is rarely seen.

Which is the problem which Vega had,the price went so high for a Vega 64 you could almost get a GTX1080TI IIRC. Yet the Vega64 "RRP" placed it against a GTX1080. Yet so many reviews never bothered to update their articles in light of this.

[wazzickle]

Well I don't know about supply shortages or other components at all really but one thing to consider is that they have no particular obligation to flood the market with stock, i.e. they can choose to whom they sell, and if they want to sell to system builders and retailers before the wider public, that means the RRRP represents the value in a system or the value to the retailer and unless there's some legal or moral obligation to make the same product available to everyone at the same price, I have no problem with this particular practice and think some responsiblity has to go to the consumer not to pay a price if you don't think it's worth it. No-one has a gun to their head and their policy is broadly in line with 'charge as much as people are willing to pay' which despite me being commie af and believe in price controls for things such as rent / power / electricity etc when it comes to what is definitely a slice of the market that counts as a consumer luxury, therefore more being sold to people that can afford them, they can charge what they like.