Frank Lay wrote:
gary,
If you are trying to point out that the increace is small,
That's right.
But as you don't want any increace, you will surely be happy that it is so small.
You really don't get it, do you?
I didn't say I don't want an increase. We all want an increase.
But the increase has to be a real one, one which covers real cost increases, one which represents a real increase in earnings, which is sustainable and sellable to the public.
We can't do this at this time.
We are a discretionary spend, we are in the middle of recession, our customers are choosing cheaper alternative, they would not wear an increase at this time.
The proposed increase would only have increased our rate by around one third of the increase needed to maintain parity with the formula. It took no account of the increasing fuel costs we are currently being subjected to. It would have bound us over for a further 18 months. We would have lost out heavily.
By delayng for 6 months we can let things settle, see where the competition goes with their tariff, what happens to our costs and then review the situation then. If we can sell it then we could get the real increase we all need.
Ouyr group reps are tumshies Frank. And it's your, and your ilk's fault, for giving them carte blanche to run the trade to suit themselves.
