The regular prices they charge make it possible for them to still make money when they have specials like the one that's been running. I don't have a price list in front of me and I'm thinking out loud here....but the big deal going is the spend $300 get $200 free, correct. I hear that a vial of Test E is around $70? (5) vials would be $350. You are then entitled to (3)free vials($210 retail.) That has (8)vials costing $350. That's $44 per vial. Where's the special? If I'm missing something or if I'm way off with prices please correct me.
As far as this credit thing goes, if pharmacom wasn't reasonably sure that this was a money maker it wouldn't be happening.
When dealing in aas, overall, you're dealing with a group of people that are more reliable than if you were dealing in a physically addictive substance.(ie, heroin, meth, etc) We've got a fair # of guys that are clean and who pay their bills and who care about their names and what people think of them. They generally will do the right thing.
Look at the reverse scammer we've just dragged through the streets and hung him out to dry. The small % that may bail out will be meaningless. File that away as the cost of doing business or advertising.
What it does is lock guys in. They won't even consider another lab as they owe these guys. If only this thing were legal.
The issue that I have and all pharmacom customers should have is the bookkeeping/records that are going to have to be kept to track who owes and who has paid? To me, this talks to pharmacom losing sight of what is(or was) one of the most important things to members of meso. Security. Our personal info being collected and stored is something that we would never have accepted? It's a non issue now?
For pharmacom to have not addressed this at the same time it started talking about this program tells me its not important. If they now say it was a big consideration I'm calling bullshit now.
We've seen what happens to dealers that keep records. The longevity clinics in Florida made it easy to find customers and for the gov't to know how big a thing they were dealing with. Heidi Fleiss and the names of those banging her hookers.
Keeping records gives the drug dealers more control when the law comes..because when you are this big and this vocal and the dealers boast in the open and tell the world that their goal is to be the most popular brand in the world...they will come.
When they do come about the only thing they have that can give that LE wants is the names of customers and the dollar amounts being taken in and where those dollars are so they can seize assets and freeze accounts.
The smart dealers who are around for years and years lurk in the shadows. The fall guys are the guys on the front lines. I suspect the guys making the big dollars at pharmacom have insulated themselves the best they can. I'm not talking about frank and darius. I'm talking about their bosses bosses. The big money guys. Darius may know who they are being with them as long as he has.
He's a concern to the big guys. He's who can take them down when the day comes. The day always comes. When it does, the money doesn't seem as important. The regrets start eating at you. When it comes down to it, it's every man for himself. I don't want my name on any ledger when that day comes.
I agree with kdog and Biggerben as well. This is not a great idea. Undoubtedly, you are going to take losses particularly if you are extending credit to people who have placed as little as one order with you.
Ultimately, good companies pass their losses unto their customers in the form of price increases. The people you want to do business with know the game and realize it is cash and carry. Also as Ben mentions the US authorities may take special interest in a program like this and attempt to target Pharmacom.
From what I have seen and read you provide a good service at a fair price which is all the members here are looking for. I know you guys are trying to do the right thing for your customers but this will only bring you the kind of business you don't need.
If a guy who has spent $3,000 with you in the past is $50 short on a $300 order then this might make some sense although I wouldn't advocate it. Giving $300 credit to someone who has spent a total of $600 on a couple of orders makes little sense.