Do businesses have an ethical responsibility to pass on
savings to the people buying their products?
That's what, G.L, a reader in the Northeast U.S., wants
to know. G.L. and his wife spent four months traveling in Europe this past
spring. When they left Europe to return to the U.S. in July, the euro was worth
around $1.36. Now, eight months later, the euro's value has dropped
significantly, to roughly $1.13.
"That's a drop of 17 percent in six months,"
writes G.L. "And yet the cost in the United States of a French bottle of
wine hasn't dropped at all." To G.L., this doesn't sit right. Shouldn't
his local wine store drop prices to reflect the weakening of the euro, he
wonders.
From a business standpoint, even if a wine shop did
decide to lower its prices because its inventory presumably cost less to stock,
it would take some time for those lower prices to register. The bottles on the
shelf presumably were purchased when the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar
and the euro was higher.
Granted, if G.L. and his wife wanted to, they could hop a
plane, return to France and get a better deal on their wine than they did when
they were there six months ago. But the added cost of the airfare would
obviously outweigh any cost savings, and 3,400 miles would strike many as a
long way to go to save a few dollars on a bottle of Languedoc-Roussillon wine.
Certainly, once G.L.'s local wine shop starts stocking
French wine it purchased at the better exchange rate, it might be able to pass
on some cost savings to customers. It would be a nice thing to do.
But is it unethical not to do so? No.
The wine shop is free to charge whatever price it wants
on the products it stocks. If customers are willing to pay the same price
they've been paying over the past year -- even though their dollars might go
further in Europe this month than six months ago -- then the wine shop owner
stands to earn a bigger profit than before. This would not be unethical.
If G.L. and other customers are unhappy about the local
wine shop's failure to drop prices reflecting the stronger dollar (or weaker
euro), he and others are free to shop around to see if other stores offer
French wines at better prices. Eventually, if every other store drops its
French wine prices slightly and G.L.'s local wine shop does not, it stands to
lose business and profit.
This principle holds true for most any business selling
products that can also be purchased elsewhere. There's nothing wrong with a
business making money, just as there's nothing wrong with customers shopping
around for the best price.
As for G.L.'s question about the weakened euro, the right
thing for the wine shop owner to do is to stock wine customers want at a price
they're willing to pay. And the right thing for G.L. to do is to decide how
much he's willing to pay for the wine he likes to drink. Tchin-tchin.
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Right Thing: Conscience, Profit and Personal Responsibility in Today's Business and The Good, the Bad, and Your Business: Choosing Right When Ethical Dilemmas Pull You Apart, is a lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School.
Follow him on Twitter: @jseglin
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to rightthing@comcast.net.
(c) 2014 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. Distributed by TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.
1 comment:
There is so much more to price than actual material cost (import cost, transportation, taxes, labor, store rentals, etc.), the cost difference may end up being minor as a percent. And there may not even be one depending on supplier contracts and other things.
Jeff's answer is correct. Shop around and if other stores drop, then go to one.
Eventually should the change still be in force, it will drop.
Alan Owseichik
Greenfield, Ma.
Post a Comment