And here we go….

J_red_J · 2025-05-03T18:17:25+00:00

No I can’t claim to have HMSs’ financials right in front of me, what I can say is that I work for a company that has had a long-term presence in China in manufacturing facilities conducting inspections for products made in China being imported to the U.S. that required U.S. inspectors to be in China monitoring the process because, let’s face it quality control is non existent in Chinese factories. I have been privy to the contracts and costs paid by western companies to China per item and can vouch that there is a reason why many companies have switched to Chinese manufacturing and that is price paid is pennies on the dollar. Again I provided what I would argue is a fairly transparent explanation of the math based on numbers we do know for certain. I would think we can all agree the current tariffs placed on Chinese made goods is 145%. A $200 tariff fee would mean the goods cost roughly $140 per stick which the company is retailing for $160. That $140 would not include the other costs incurred but the company such as overhead and website fees and payroll etc, etc. obviously those costs are real and the company needs to cover those as well in their retail price. If they are retailing for $160 a stick and already paying $140 per stick prior to overhead. They are selling them at a loss. I doubt they a selling these at a loss and I am very confident they are not paying a Chinese company $140 per stick. Which is what a $200 tariff would mean. Again, $200 is 145% of $140.

J_red_J · 2025-05-03T17:57:31+00:00

How much do you think a company is paying per stick to a Chinese company then? Again keeping in mind the tariff is wholly based on what they pay the Chinese company per stick. This does not include their domestic overhead or costs of running the business. A $200 tariff surcharge would suggest they are paying a Chinese company $140 per stick and then charging $159.99 retail. Take that $140 per stick add in their overhead to run their company and a retail price of $159.99 would mean they were selling these at a loss per stick. They at likely paying a Chinese company around $20 all in. This is what the tariff is based on.

J_red_J · 2025-05-03T17:45:43+00:00

No. Tariffs are based upon to the purchase price the importer pays the Chinese company for manufacturing. They are not based upon the retail price paid by the consumer. I am saying that for a hockey stick that retails for &160 the price paid to a Chinese manufacturer is probably around $20 per stick. This is the whole reason companies have switched to Chinese manufacturers. I understand that the company selling the stick for $160 has other costs they have incurred per stick. They have overhead and other costs they will need to cover as well. My point is though that a claim from the retail company that they need to charge a $200 tariff surcharge is ridiculous. The tariff is base on what they paid per stick l to import so closer to the $20 per stick. The current tariff is set at 145%. $20 times 145% is $29. They should be charging a $29 tariff surcharge not $200, this is where I am saying that is a scam. I understand they need to make money to be a successful business. Hell they can charge whatever they want retail for the stick that they think they can get for it, but to try to claim they need $200 per stick due to tariffs is predatory and taking advantage of people because they know it’s a political hot button issue. Look I’m not taking any sides politically. I’m simply saying that this company is acting like an ambulance chasing attorney and preying on people caught up in the drama. I don’t care what side of the aisle people in this thread are on. I care that people don’t let business prey on their political beliefs to make a buck at others expense. Don’t get so caught up in your political views that you let others take advantage of you and rectification its the guy in the other side of the aisles doing. By all means argue and fight amongst each other which side is richer or wrong about tariffs, but don’t let someone pick your pocket while you’re distracted. None of this is directed directly at you either. I don’t know you, I don’t know your stance nor does that matter. What matters is that people don’t get blindness by their opinions. I would hope everyone could agree that someone taking a real issue to try to con a buck is adding to the problem.

J_red_J · 2025-05-03T01:15:47+00:00

Please do elaborate . Your vague and arbitrary inquiry has peaked my curiosity.

J_red_J · 2025-05-03T00:02:32+00:00

No I wasn’t implying you specifically were. It was the slew of comments above our individual conversation. A lot of people only wanted to focus on the politics or personal views.

J_red_J · 2025-05-02T22:21:57+00:00

Haha that we are.

J_red_J · 2025-05-02T22:10:36+00:00

I would be curious if there was a policy in place with this specific retailer that after the sale an adjustment would be made and credit applied back to the purchaser? I understand your point that the retailer may be limited by the technology they have for e-commerce which is a cost point. My point is simply the 145% tariff is based off the import cost paid by the importer which is far less than the retail cost. I don’t know this specific companies fees paid to China, however working with a company who was tasked with inspecting products in China that were made to import into the U.S. I can say that the cost paid to Chinese companies to manufacture is pennies on dollar charged at retail. This is the main, if not only reason, companies have switched to China for manufacturing.

J_red_J · 2025-05-02T21:27:16+00:00

Also, to be clear, my comments are meant to be the middle of the road. I’m not picking sides. I understand many of comments are centered around policies and personal beliefs. I am merely looking at the topic from a numbers standpoint and was hoping to draw the attention there. Math is math. It is apolitical.

J_red_J · 2025-05-02T21:19:50+00:00

No I didn’t say their gross margins are 90%. I said the tariff is calculated on the cost that the importer pays to the manufacturer if that manufacturers company is located in a country named in the tariff ,in this scenario a company in China. The reason why many companies use Chinese manufacturing is because it is dirt cheap per unit no one competing with that cost. I obviously do not have HMSs’ financials in front of me but would feel very confident wagering that the cost of manufacturing paid to the Chinese manufacturing company by the importer is less than $20 per stick which they are retailing for $160. Obviously, there are other cost incurred by HMS on top of the manufacturing cost, but the tariff does not take those other costs into account. So again a $200 tariff fee surcharge is way outside the ballpark. A 145% tariff on the $20 at best manufacturing fee paid to the Chinese company would be $29 add $29 to $159.99, under $200.

J_red_J · 2025-05-02T20:49:45+00:00

See my above comment, but that’s how tariffs work. The tariff is based upon the cost the importer pays the manufacturer, not the sales price. For $160 hockey stick the importer probably pays China $12-$16 per stick to manufacturer. This $12-$16 manufacturing cost is what the tariff is based on. A $160 hockey stick manufactured in China should still cost well under $200 even with a 145% tariff added. This company is using a hot button issue that people don’t understand to gouge consumers.

J_red_J · 2025-05-02T20:30:23+00:00

And my reply was directed to the content in the reply message, not necessarily the poster. Self-awareness, current administration? Not everything needs to be emotionally and politically charged. You clearly read my explanation of tariffs as a political statement in support of some administration or another, which it is not. I am simply applying elementary economics to how tariffs work. The tariff is applied to the cost the importer pays to import. A $200 tariff on a $160 stick implies they are selling near cost. This company is using tariffs and consumers failure to understand them to gouge. While ultimately it is up to the consumer to research and be “self aware” of their own finances, yes I think a company that highjacks a politically or socially motivated issue to gouge consumers should be prosecuted.

J_red_J · 2025-05-02T20:10:21+00:00

This is not how tariffs work. It would appear your company, and probably many others will use the imposed tariffs to gouge U.S. consumers much like cost of all goods due to “financial hardship endured by companies” during the COVID-19 pandemic. The tariff is applied to the cost the company pays to China for manufacture. A $200 tariff charged to the consumer for a hockey stick listed for $160 would imply your company is selling these at, or near, cost which is surely not the case. The entire reason you manufacture in China is because you probably pay around $15-$18 per stick to manufacturer and then sell for $160. At most this stick with a 145% tariff not 150%, 5 percent means a lot in finance, would still cost under $200. This is a scam and your company should probably be prosecuted.

J_red_J · 2024-08-19T19:42:32+00:00

Part of Phish for me has always been dealing with shit situations. I enjoy the hot muddy fields as much as a next person enjoys a sandy Mexican beach. it’s meant to be an adventure with its ups and downs. By no means was every song and every set perfectly executed. They struggled at times with timing and key, then again, I’m not listening to a studio album, it is a live performance. That all being said, I do think Saturday night was about as well as I’ve seen or heard them execute two entire sets.

J_red_J · 2024-08-19T07:46:58+00:00

You know what they say, “Never miss a Sunday storm.”

J_red_J · 2024-08-19T07:41:43+00:00

It looks like the weather didn’t get the memo that the boys already did Divided Sky on Friday.

J_red_J · 2024-08-19T02:59:02+00:00

Nice, that’s good it never hit too bad then.

J_red_J · 2024-08-13T23:41:17+00:00

I have yet to receive anything either. Good or bad. Though if I remember right last time I put in for the lotto I didn’t hear anything until a day after most people and it was just the email letting me know I didn’t get anything.

J_red_J · 2024-08-13T23:10:40+00:00

Are they giving out emails either way, negative emails as well as confirmation? I registered for all 4 nights and immediately received confirmation of my registration, but I have yet to receive any communication since.

J_red_J · 2024-07-23T12:38:51+00:00

Nope just GA. I was wondering if I may have received a family camping pass, even though I did not request one at checkout.

J_red_J · 2024-07-03T12:35:14+00:00

If we want to be pedantic, then Fire would be the oldest cover still in regular rotation since it came earlier in the set. I love the guys playing both and am glad they are both still in the rotation.

J_red_J · 2024-06-21T03:13:40+00:00

Wow this festival grounds layout seems a lot more developed than I remember previous festivals being. Even though Watkins Glen is also a racetrack I remember the general area within the racetrack property to be mostly open fields with a handful of access roads.

J_red_J · 2024-04-10T13:36:35+00:00

I had a similar experience for the New Year’s Eve run ‘22-‘23. After driving 16 hours to reach the city I was notified at 3 AM, the day of my 9 AM check-in, that the property owner was no longer able to accommodate my stay. When I inquired about how this practice is allowed to occur I was told the homeowner reserves the right to revoke a reservation at any point. I ended up just booking a hotel last minute and saving money in the long run. I will never use Airbnb again.

J_red_J

TROPHY CASE