PDA

View Full Version : The Guardian reviews Sonos



jeebers
2008-04-03, 06:05
A reasonably fair review from what I can tell (never having used a Sonos...) although it is a little frustrating when it is criticised on price, and then the only competitor mentioned is Apple.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/apr/03/gadgets.digitalmusic

jaffacake
2008-04-03, 06:22
The review is fairly flawed in several areas, but not entirely surprising given the limited research the author often does for his articles.

His US pricing comparisons fail to take into account currency variations, import duties and local taxes - the Sonos website price in the US even excludes sales tax. The Apple pricing comparisons I assume are accurately based on UK pricing, although I haven't checked.

He clearly didn't do any research into standby power consumption of these devices, 5 watts is green by any reasonable standards. (Source: http://www.jaffacake.net/dx/sonoszp100 )

I don't know of any other home audio device with a parental lock, the Sonos doesn't play pr0n videos lol.

To top it all...the proximity sensor...I can only assume Charles has very poor floorboards in his home....lmao!

ik632
2008-04-03, 07:47
He did mention beer several times during the article so he may have been too busy focusing on that then reviewing the hardware :D

Though, it's good to see more of this. As people get interested in multi-room audio and start searching they will find the Slim solution and it's a great option. I have a wife to appease with the technology and we tried a Sonos but she wasn't impressed for the cost. On the other hand, she has embraced the SB3 that we have and is leaning towards a Duet for my birthday.

James_B
2008-04-03, 13:50
A reasonably fair review from what I can tell (never having used a Sonos...) although it is a little frustrating when it is criticised on price, and then the only competitor mentioned is Apple.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/apr/03/gadgets.digitalmusic

Squeezebox had a brief mention here a month before, in a "basement of Carphone's Oxford Street flagship store, where it has built a mocked-up wireless flat in which to run focus groups."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/feb/03/carphonewarehousegroupbusiness.retail

smc2911
2008-04-03, 14:19
From the article:
Just about the only thing it can't do is navigate to any of the BBC's Listen Again pages - which is, it must be said, a real shame.Thank you AlienBBC for giving us this on the SBs!

Robin Bowes
2008-04-03, 14:22
jaffacake wrote:
> The review is fairly flawed in several areas, but not entirely
> surprising given the limited research the author often does for his
> articles.

<snip>

Ahem, unlike your totally fair and thoroughly researched cnet reviews,
eh Ben?

More FUD from the Sonos fanboy.

R.

jaffacake
2008-04-03, 15:10
Ahem, unlike your totally fair and thoroughly researched cnet reviews,
eh Ben?

More FUD from the Sonos fanboy.

R.

Very much unlike. At least everything in my review was accurate and factual.

I fail to see how any of my input in this thread is FUD, you guys do crack me up.

/still laughing at the proximity sensor.

smc2911
2008-04-03, 15:56
His US pricing comparisons fail to take into account currency variations, import duties and local taxes - the Sonos website price in the US even excludes sales tax.As I read the review, "at present exchange rates, plus VAT" local taxes are factored in and for imports to the UK, while VAT would apply US sales tax would not. There would not be other "local taxes", so I think that the article's point on pricing differences is well made. Having said that, Squeezeboxes tend to suffer the same fate (although there do seem to be more 3rd party distributors prepared to apply a much smaller margin). It intrigues me to note that a Sonos fan is just as quick to find excuses for regional price mark-ups on the Sonos as many on this form are for mark-ups on the Squeezeboxes!

James_B
2008-04-03, 15:56
Very much unlike. At least everything in my review was accurate and factual.

I fail to see how any of my input in this thread is FUD, you guys do crack me up.

/still laughing at the proximity sensor.


Excellent. I've never actually used SC but it seemed quite straightforward :-D

.. so that does not constitute a flawed review, neglecting to try the software? Limited research?

James_B
2008-04-03, 15:58
It intrigues me to note that a Sonos fan is just as quick to find excuses for regional price mark-ups on the Sonos as many on this form are for mark-ups on the Squeezeboxes!

Nice point, I guess there is much common ground!

jaffacake
2008-04-03, 16:34
As I read the review, "at present exchange rates, plus VAT" local taxes are factored in and for imports to the UK, while VAT would apply US sales tax would not. There would not be other "local taxes", so I think that the article's point on pricing differences is well made. Having said that, Squeezeboxes tend to suffer the same fate (although there do seem to be more 3rd party distributors prepared to apply a much smaller margin). It intrigues me to note that a Sonos fan is just as quick to find excuses for regional price mark-ups on the Sonos as many on this form are for mark-ups on the Squeezeboxes!

To legally import good from the US, you pay the cost price in the US, then you add on the local sales tax in the US, then you add on shipping to the UK. Total that.

Then you add on import duty as a percentage of that total - I believe it was 10% last time I looked. Note that total.

Then you add on VAT @ 17.5%

Having done this to the retail price of a Sonos in California, adding on 8% sales tax, then shipping, then duty, then VAT...and converted to GBP, I found a price not massively different to the UK retail price. Last time I calculated, the break even was somewhere between 1.6-1.7$ to the £. Currently the £ is stronger, so the import price is cheaper, I think it was about £50 on a Sonos bundle.

Personally, I think the £50 fully justifies the UK retailer handling and local warranty. Marketing of the product would cost more here too.

This is why I felt the article totally inaccurate, it's a topic that's been well covered in many places.

(ignoring the trolls in an attempt to stay on topic, you're boring)

Robin Bowes
2008-04-03, 16:45
jaffacake wrote:
> Robin Bowes;287134 Wrote:
>>
>> Ahem, unlike your totally fair and thoroughly researched cnet reviews,
>>
>> eh Ben?
>>
>> More FUD from the Sonos fanboy.
>>
>> R.
>
> Very much unlike. At least everything in my review was accurate and
> factual.

Did you write that review [1] based on having actually got your hands on
a Duet? The whole thing is FUD.

Would you like to tell us about your involvement with the Sonos user
forums, how you were a moderator, but were removed when you tried to
throw your weight around?

By all means give us a fair and objective account of the Sonos gear, but
don't come the "I'm a neutral reviewer" crap.

R.

[1]
http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-media-receivers/logitech-squeezebox-duet/4864-6739_7-32815168.html?messageID=2563491

jaffacake
2008-04-03, 17:07
Did you write that review [1] based on having actually got your hands on
a Duet? The whole thing is FUD.

Would you like to tell us about your involvement with the Sonos user
forums, how you were a moderator, but were removed when you tried to
throw your weight around?

By all means give us a fair and objective account of the Sonos gear, but
don't come the "I'm a neutral reviewer" crap.

R.

[1]
http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-media-receivers/logitech-squeezebox-duet/4864-6739_7-32815168.html?messageID=2563491


I've reported your efforts to the site admins. My report is as follows:

"Continued personal attacks...becoming tedious.

I'm constantly being attacked with false accusations, inccurate information and general troll behaviour.

If you check over my posts I've been courteous and helpful in my time on the forums here, I think it's time the moderators brought these guys into line."

I'm hoping this isn't standard behaviour from an open source community with such a respected reputation.

JimC
2008-04-03, 17:43
I've reported your efforts to the site admins. My report is as follows:

"Continued personal attacks...becoming tedious.

I'm constantly being attacked with false accusations, inccurate information and general troll behaviour.

If you check over my posts I've been courteous and helpful in my time on the forums here, I think it's time the moderators brought these guys into line."

I'm hoping this isn't standard behaviour from an open source community with such a respected reputation.

You posted an "authoritative" review, under the name ro53ben on c/net without ever having used the commercially available version of Duet. (In fairness, you claim to have used a beta versions on loan from a "friend".) In my opinion, you are far from the fair-and-balanced perspective you wish to portray.

Personal attacks are not acceptable, and if anyone does attack you in a manner that we find violates our forum guidlelines, you may rest assured that we will remove that post. Calling into question your intentions behind posting here, as well as other forums (on A/V sites, cnet, etc.) hardly qualifies. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion, but be prepared to defend it. As Harry S. Truman was fond of saying: "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen." (cite is here (http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/get-out-of-the-kitchen.html))

-=> Jim

jaffacake
2008-04-03, 18:19
-=> Jim,

I have absolutely no desire to waste my time defending myself against false accusation and speculation.

Robin Bowes, and others, are attacking me with untruths and guesswork.

This is damaging to my reputation yet you choose to allow it to remain within your forums. I can only assume that it may be commercially advantageous to yourself to allow the name of one who posts a negative review of your product to be tarnished in such an incorrect and unnecessary manner.

I am a Sonos owner and I have made this more than clear in directly competitive threads on forums such as avsforums.com:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13367359#post13367359

Readers will note that even with this early disclosure on page one of the thread, I will still attacked by Slim forum users not once, but twice in that thread questioning my intentions. Whilst you can't be help responsible for content held in other, 3rd party, forums - it should be noted that those offensive posts link back to the content here on these official Slim Devices forums. Content that you clearly feel is entirely suitable and within your forum guidelines.

Your house, your rules, I'm just very surprised and disappointed.

JimC
2008-04-03, 18:45
-=> Jim,

I have absolutely no desire to waste my time defending myself against false accusation and speculation.

Robin Bowes, and others, are attacking me with untruths and guesswork.

This is damaging to my reputation yet you choose to allow it to remain within your forums. I can only assume that it may be commercially advantageous to yourself to allow the name of one who posts a negative review of your product to be tarnished in such an incorrect and unnecessary manner.

I am a Sonos owner and I have made this more than clear in directly competitive threads on forums such as avsforums.com:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13367359#post13367359

Readers will note that even with this early disclosure on page one of the thread, I will still attacked by Slim forum users not once, but twice in that thread questioning my intentions. Whilst you can't be help responsible for content held in other, 3rd party, forums - it should be noted that those offensive posts link back to the content here on these official Slim Devices forums. Content that you clearly feel is entirely suitable and within your forum guidelines.

Your house, your rules, I'm just very surprised and disappointed.

Let me ask you this: did you test the Duet--a commercially available version--prior to posting your cnet review? Now let me answer it for you: you did not. You purport to be fair, but you did not disclose that fact in your review. Did you expect that the community would welcome you with open arms? They feel like a product that they've built was unjustly portrayed; I agree with them. Your "review" was, simply put, an attempt to sow FUD.

Again, you are entitled to your opinion. Others are within their rights to question it. If there is a personal attack--and, no, we don't consider Robin's response to you to have crossed that line--we will deal with it as per our forum guidelines.

You may act as aggrieved as you wish. Petulance is hardly an endearing trait, however, and will likely make your time and efforts here far less productive. If you really want to be perceived as fair, amend your review on c|net and disclose both your prior association with Sonos as a forum admin, as well as the fact that you did not actually use a Squeezebox Duet prior to posting (using a borrowed beta version doesn't count). I think that would go a long way in creating a positive reputation here on our forums.

Personally, I'm not interested in the whole Duet vs. Sonos debate. We build different products for different kinds of users. Sonos went about solving the problem of getting music from PC to stereo by building a private, completely controlled island; this gives them an advantage in ease of installation and multi-room sync of specific sources of music (but not all sources). We built a "freeport" where we can *integrate* fully into a home network environment and we opened our source code to the public so they can extend functionality, add features, and build the solution they are most interested in; our advantage then is openess, lower total ownership costs, and flexibility. Which one is most suitable for any given person is a question best answered by that individual.


-=> Jim

smc2911
2008-04-03, 21:30
Personally, I'm not interested in the whole Duet vs. Sonos debate. We build different products for different kinds of users. Sonos went about solving the problem of getting music from PC to stereo by building a private, completely controlled island; this gives them an advantage in ease of installation and multi-room sync of specific sources of music (but not all sources). We built a "freeport" where we can *integrate* fully into a home network environment and we opened our source code to the public so they can extend functionality, add features, and build the solution they are most interested in; our advantage then is openess, lower total ownership costs, and flexibility. Which one is most suitable for any given person is a question best answered by that individual.Well put! This would be great boilerplate text to append to any Sonos v SB thread (here or elsewhere).

FredFredrickson
2008-04-03, 21:35
Let me ask you this: did you test the Duet--a commercially available version--prior to posting your cnet review? Now let me answer it for you: you did not. You purport to be fair, but you did not disclose that fact in your review. Did you expect that the community would welcome you with open arms? They feel like a product that they've built was unjustly portrayed; I agree with them. Your "review" was, simply put, an attempt to sow FUD.

Again, you are entitled to your opinion. Others are within their rights to question it. If there is a personal attack--and, no, we don't consider Robin's response to you to have crossed that line--we will deal with it as per our forum guidelines.

You may act as aggrieved as you wish. Petulance is hardly an endearing trait, however, and will likely make your time and efforts here far less productive. If you really want to be perceived as fair, amend your review on c|net and disclose both your prior association with Sonos as a forum admin, as well as the fact that you did not actually use a Squeezebox Duet prior to posting (using a borrowed beta version doesn't count). I think that would go a long way in creating a positive reputation here on our forums.

Personally, I'm not interested in the whole Duet vs. Sonos debate. We build different products for different kinds of users. Sonos went about solving the problem of getting music from PC to stereo by building a private, completely controlled island; this gives them an advantage in ease of installation and multi-room sync of specific sources of music (but not all sources). We built a "freeport" where we can *integrate* fully into a home network environment and we opened our source code to the public so they can extend functionality, add features, and build the solution they are most interested in; our advantage then is openess, lower total ownership costs, and flexibility. Which one is most suitable for any given person is a question best answered by that individual.


-=> Jim

Complete Disclosure is definitely neccessary to report, even (especially) in editorials. You cause your own reputation harm by not being completely transparent.

And (a tad off topic) I agree with Jim on this last thing he said about openness...

The number one reason I chose Slim over Sonos (And I was about 90% convinced I would eventually buy a sonos) was not price- (although that helped), it was the promise with the openess of the platform. These guys made a rediculously smart decision- because this guaruntees that this product will maintain momentum. I'm just too sick of going the closed route to have the manufacturer lose interest and cut a product short. I have a $250 Sansa Connect that will be losing it's wireless features next month, because Yahoo Music Unlimited is closing. If it were open, somebody with a little knowledge could fix it to at least stream with a UPNP server or Shoutcast. But since it's not open, it was a pointless investment and thanks to Slim- I vow never to go this pointless and dangerous route again.

danco
2008-04-04, 00:11
To legally import good from the US, you pay the cost price in the US, then you add on the local sales tax in the US, then you add on shipping to the UK. Total that.

Then you add on import duty as a percentage of that total - I believe it was 10% last time I looked. Note that total.

Then you add on VAT @ 17.5%

Having done this to the retail price of a Sonos in California, adding on 8% sales tax, then shipping, then duty, then VAT...and converted to GBP, I found a price not massively different to the UK retail price. Last time I calculated, the break even was somewhere between 1.6-1.7$ to the £. Currently the £ is stronger, so the import price is cheaper, I think it was about £50 on a Sonos bundle.

Personally, I think the £50 fully justifies the UK retailer handling and local warranty. Marketing of the product would cost more here too.



An individual making a purchase when in the USA would pay local sales tax, but no shipping.

An individual ordering from the USA would pay shipping, but usually not sales tax.

A distributor (and the retail price would be based on that) would pay shipping, which might be quite small per unit when ordering several but would not pay local sales tax when ordering from the manufacturer.

And the reviewer was more concerned with the cost compared with other products (whatever one thinks of his choice of an alternative) than the comparison with US prices.

ModelCitizen
2008-04-04, 00:47
This is damaging to my reputation
You've just got to laugh.....

MC

cliveb
2008-04-04, 01:13
To legally import good from the US, you pay the cost price in the US, then you add on the local sales tax in the US, then you add on shipping to the UK. Total that.

Then you add on import duty as a percentage of that total - I believe it was 10% last time I looked. Note that total.

Then you add on VAT @ 17.5%
Just to correct this. When you personally import something from the US, you pay the US retail price *excluding* local sales tax, plus UK VAT at 17.5%, plus the courier's fee for collecting the VAT on behalf of HMRC. (Last time I imported anything, the Royal Mail charged me £8 to collect about £8.75 of VAT!). There is no "import duty".


Personally, I think the £50 fully justifies the UK retailer handling and local warranty.
I agree. Grey import of complex electronics is a risky business. If anything goes wrong, getting it fixed is so much easier if you bought it from a UK retailer.

adamslim
2008-04-04, 01:51
Just to correct this. When you personally import something from the US, you pay the US retail price *excluding* local sales tax, plus UK VAT at 17.5%, plus the courier's fee for collecting the VAT on behalf of HMRC. (Last time I imported anything, the Royal Mail charged me £8 to collect about £8.75 of VAT!). There is no "import duty".

To, err, correct the correction, check out this website:
http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageVAT_ShowContent&id=HMCE_CL_001454&propertyType=document

There is import duty (plus VAT as well), although this is often pretty low: MP3 players are 2% (which is probably the SB3's category), as are CD players - although DVD players are 14%. Odd, but that's tax for you.

But the rest is right - there is no US sales tax. So the SB3 at £149 from dabs is comfortably cheaper than buying direct from Slim Devices in the US at $299. Doing the maths with the Duet:
US price $399
UK sterling say £200
Add shipping say £210
Import duty added £214
VAT added totals £252
UK price (dabs) £285

So there's a 13% premium, which does not seem totally unreasonable to me.

jaffacake
2008-04-04, 02:00
An individual making a purchase when in the USA would pay local sales tax, but no shipping.


Correct, but then they would need to get it shipped.



An individual ordering from the USA would pay shipping, but usually not sales tax.


They would need to find a vendor who would sell directly overseas. Most vendors won't do this and most have agreements not to do this with manufacturers.



A distributor (and the retail price would be based on that) would pay shipping, which might be quite small per unit when ordering several but would not pay local sales tax when ordering from the manufacturer.


An interesting question. I believe for purchases within the UK (it's been a while since I was in retail) the distributor often pays VAT but it gets claimed back through a tax return. I don't know how this applies to overseas import/export.



And the reviewer was more concerned with the cost compared with other products (whatever one thinks of his choice of an alternative) than the comparison with US prices.

He was certainly equally concerned with both, he'll likely get no more Apple kit if he was buying both products in the US though as the overseas "markup" is pretty consistent between manufacturers.

jaffacake
2008-04-04, 02:06
So there's a 13% premium, which does not seem totally unreasonable to me.

Thanks for saving me those maths. It does greatly depends on the customs classification of the product/ I know somebody who imported Sonos and got stung quite heavily. I finally found the post I was looking for:

http://forums.sonos.com/showthread.php?p=39719#post39719

Indeed, and a local 2yr warranty for the extra £33. Let's not forget that UK retail staff earn a significantly higher wage than those in the US...and they get paid in £s.

Robin Bowes
2008-04-04, 02:39
jaffacake wrote:
> I have absolutely no desire to waste my time defending myself against
> false accusation and speculation.
>
> Robin Bowes, and others, are attacking me with untruths and guesswork.
>
> This is damaging to my reputation yet you choose to allow it to remain
> within your forums. I can only assume that it may be commercially
> advantageous to yourself to allow the name of one who posts a negative
> review of your product to be tarnished in such an incorrect and
> unnecessary manner.

Ben,

Please demonstrate exactly what I have said that is false, untrue, or
incorrect and I will gladly retract and apologise.

R.

mick_w
2008-04-04, 04:57
Ben / Jaffa

Can I also take the opportunity to retract any of my observations about your activities that I made in this post if they are untrue: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43155&page=7

Particularly my claims that you...

...lied about owning a Duet in your CNet profile.
...lied about being a "freelance consultant to some UK based hifi resellers and publications” to give credence to your CNet review.
…And have a self proclaimed large ego.

If any of these are untrue I’ll gladly remove them from my post.

Mick

MuckleEck
2008-04-04, 05:44
Ben / Jaffa

Can I also take the opportunity to retract any of my observations about your activities that I made in this post if they are untrue: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=43155&page=7

Particularly my claims that you...

...lied about owning a Duet in your CNet profile.
...lied about being a "freelance consultant to some UK based hifi resellers and publications” to give credence to your CNet review.
…And have a self proclaimed large ego.

If any of these are untrue I’ll gladly remove them from my post.

Mick

Perhaps Ben should revise either his cnet post or this post (posted on the 2nd April at 08:47)on the avforums

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1006811&page=7

Where he states


I don't work for Sonos and never have.
I don't work for a Sonos reseller, never have.
I don't work for anybody in the AV or consumer electronic industry, never have.

danco
2008-04-04, 05:44
I suppose that an individual buying the Sonos on a visit to the USA would probably need to ship. For the Squeezebox, this could probably be taken in one's personal baggage, so no shipping (I have done this).

By the way, jaffacake, I liked your latest suggestion in the AVS forums. Namely, get a couple of both systems on the thirty-day approval and test which you prefer.

mherger
2008-04-04, 06:04
> Can I also take the opportunity to retract any of my observations about
> your activities that I made in this post if they are untrue:

Please get in touch, call each other on the phone or go out drink a beer. But please stop that boring discussion. It's far off-topic. Thanks.


--

Michael

jaffacake
2008-04-04, 06:19
I suppose that an individual buying the Sonos on a visit to the USA would probably need to ship. For the Squeezebox, this could probably be taken in one's personal baggage, so no shipping (I have done this).

By the way, jaffacake, I liked your latest suggestion in the AVS forums. Namely, get a couple of both systems on the thirty-day approval and test which you prefer.

You can actually get both in baggage, it's been done. Not delaring to customs, however, is technically smuggling and your liabilty to HM Customs & Excise does not end the moment you get to the other end of the green channel in the airport.

It's simply not reasonable to compare pricing based on smuggling kit illegally into the country.

One the issues with shipping in hand baggage is with ditching the packaging. If there is a warranty issue, you'll need to ship it back to the place of purchase and you no longer have a suitable box in which to do it. Nothing is as good as the original packaging.

Glad you like my idea, a 30-day home trial need not just apply to one system.

danco
2008-04-04, 07:01
You can actually get both in baggage, it's been done. Not delaring to customs, however, is technically smuggling and your liabilty to HM Customs & Excise does not end the moment you get to the other end of the green channel in the airport.

Glad you like my idea, a 30-day home trial need not just apply to one system.

I said nothing about smuggling or not declaring, I just said one could avoid shipping costs.

In fact, the Squeezebox I bought (NOT the Duet) came within the limit that is allowed for purchases. And it was even small enough to carry in its packaging.

jaffacake
2008-04-04, 07:16
I said nothing about smuggling or not declaring, I just said one could avoid shipping costs.

In fact, the Squeezebox I bought (NOT the Duet) came within the limit that is allowed for purchases. And it was even small enough to carry in its packaging.

My apologies for not understanding the full intent of your post.

Indeed, there are duty free limits...I remember importing something from the US many many years ago...

It was a CD-ROM DRIVE! Can buy them in the supermarket now.

cliveb
2008-04-04, 07:32
To, err, correct the correction, check out this website:
http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageVAT_ShowContent&id=HMCE_CL_001454&propertyType=document
Interesting. I stand corrected. What's confusing is that I've bought various items from abroad and have NEVER been charged import duty: just VAT at 17.5%. (This was the reasoning behind my previous posting). For example, the table in the document you reference says that there's duty of 3.5% on audio CDs. I have bought these at various times from the USA and only ever been charged VAT. So it seems that the rules are not being applied consistently.

jaffacake
2008-04-04, 09:37
Interesting. I stand corrected. What's confusing is that I've bought various items from abroad and have NEVER been charged import duty: just VAT at 17.5%. (This was the reasoning behind my previous posting). For example, the table in the document you reference says that there's duty of 3.5% on audio CDs. I have bought these at various times from the USA and only ever been charged VAT. So it seems that the rules are not being applied consistently.

Some importers check every item for potential customs charges, others just randomly check line 1 in 5 packages. It's the senders responsibility to make a valid customs declaration on the outside of the package regarding the content.

"Gift" used to be a popular option amongst CD/DVD retailers when shipping overseas. I know one vendor that used to include a B'day card hand written to the buyer, lol.

Siduhe
2008-04-04, 09:51
Some importers check every item for potential customs charges, others just randomly check line 1 in 5 packages. It's the senders responsibility to make a valid customs declaration on the outside of the package regarding the content.

"Gift" used to be a popular option amongst CD/DVD retailers when shipping overseas. I know one vendor that used to include a B'day card hand written to the buyer, lol.

"Used" is another one - where the import charge is calculated on the much lower residual value of the supposedly used item.

I can only speak for the UK but expect to see a much tighter scrutiny of import packages (particularly from the US) by both the courier company and HMRC. HMRC has recently made very clear it considers the couriers are failing effectively to collect import duties, and further that it is concerned by the steep rise of people trying to import electronics from the US. HRMC also has the power to impose sanctions on any company who isn't doing what HMRC thinks it should.

danco
2008-04-04, 10:43
My apologies for not understanding the full intent of your post.


Your so-called apology is NOT accepted.

You claim that you were "not understanding the full intent" of my post, whereas in fact you were fantasising about what you thought I might have said.

I stated

"For the Squeezebox, this could probably be taken in one's personal baggage, so no shipping (I have done this)."

There really is not any room for misunderstanding the intent of this.

You need to be much more careful about going beyond what others have explicitly said.

All the more so in this case, since you implied that I had acted illegally.

Club1820
2008-04-04, 13:37
Geeze! People need to go relax and listen to their SB3s/Duets.

I am!

jeebers
2008-04-04, 14:06
I wish I'd never mentioned it to be honest.

adamslim
2008-04-04, 16:27
I wish I'd never mentioned it to be honest.

LOL a pretty cool thread though - all the wrong reasons, sure, but comedy value is really high :)

danco
2008-04-05, 01:29
If you think I over-reacted to jaffacake, take a look at his posts 13 and 15 to see what a real over-reaction is like!

mherger
2008-04-05, 01:46
> If you think I over-reacted to jaffacake, take a look at his posts 13
> and 15 to see what a real over-reaction is like!

Please stop it now. This thread is about a review, not about your problems
with each other.

Have a nice weekend.

Michael