Originally Posted by zaneblue
As for the Sears fish oil brand, yes, you have to buy it direct. I imagine it would be ridiculously expensive sold someplace else; they’d have to up the price for the seller’s cut.
Actually, no, it would be less expensive for the consumer due to two main reasons:
A) They provide their affiliates an immediate 20% discount on all (fish oil) sales referred by the affiliate. That means that they are still making a sufficient profit off one bottle (autoship) sales at a net price of $32. Thus, they could be selling in volume to resellers at a price reasonably below that point. The resellers could then mark up the product to the point that they were making money. Even with the reseller’s markup the general price in the marketplace should be well below $40, probably between $30 and $35, without the need to to "autoship".
B) A network of resellers provides a major advantage for the customer: competition for your purchase. Such competition results in a mix of lower prices and better service. Currently there is no competition for the sale of their specific product.
The "Carlson Labs - Super DHA - 180 Softgels" can be used as an example of what price differences develop between buying directly from a manufacturer and a reseller. On the Carlson Labs website a bottle of these will run you $54.50. However, from the retailer above you can get them in single bottle quantities for $32.10 (41.1% discount). If a similar discount was applied to the ZoneLabs product, the price from the reseller would be $29.45 (assuming starting from $50; $23.56 if $40 is the starting point).
Quote
I am also put off by the affiliate thing.
The affiliate thing, in and of itself, does not put me off. It is the way that it is implemented, and the culture that they are engendering with their "affiliates". For example, things like the "Zone Cruise". Also: that affiliates are bared from being resellers; and that affiliates are not permitted to compete on price. The "affiliates" are effectively commission-only sales reps that have been covered in a very thin veneer of "independent contractor" in an attempt by the company to force the "independent contractor" to bear the costs of operation (marketing), taxes, health care, etc (or at least that is how the courts have looked at such relationships in the past). I had thought that such relationships, with such a thin gloss of legitimacy, had been ruled illegal in many/most jurisdictions. [NOTE: You _can_ set such things up legitimately, but not in the manner in which they have done so.]
In addition to the affiliate issue, I also have a significant problem with the ethics implied by how they have presented the "autoship" discount. While "autoship" could be quite desirable to many of their customers, it _feels_ like they are presenting it in one of the typical manners used to get people to commit to purchasing things that they don’t actually want (I.e. People forget to cancel and get extra undesired product).
Basically, the whole picture resolves to the image of a company that is intentionally skirting the edge of legality in order to wring the most financial benefit out of their quasi-employees and customers. It certainly does not give me warm feelings about the care and effort they put into their products.
On the other hand, their products could be really good, and this might just be the business model they fell into as they began development as a company. Once in this model it is hard to break out of it, even when it restricts the growth of the company.
Quote
But if you don’t like that particular brand, there are other pharmaceutical-grade fish oils out there. I would recommend finding one that has EPA in it too, the Carlson’s is mostly only DHA.
Thank you for making sure that the relative concentrations of EPA and DHA were noticed by me and others. At least in my case, I had definitely noticed the difference once I read your post with the contents of the capsules earlier in this thread. On the other hand, prior to that I had read your recommendations and noted the fact that you recommend mixing two types of similarly classified capsules. Given that the highest probability for your doing so was a difference in formulation, I was expecting to see that they were different.
However, the facts that you are recommending mixing them, and that they need to be mixed, imply that there are differing schools of thought as to what relative concentrations of EPA and DHA are best. In addition, it implies that you have specific ideas as to what those concentrations should be, and that your thoughts differ from those of the these manufacturers. [Well, actually, there is the possibility that you merely picked one of these to compensate for a deficiency you perceived in the other product. Based on the products and their relative concentrations, I would expect that it is the Carlson Super DHA that is compensating for the lack of DHA in the ZoneLabs product.]
All of that begs the questions: What are your thoughts on the desired relative concentrations of EPA and DHA? What lead you to these conclusions? Given that that there is a good chance I will choose not to use the ZoneLabs product, what relative, and absolute, concentrations should I be targeting for EPA and DHA?
Quote
I would love if you started off on the Sears stuff for a couple months and then switched to something cheaper. That’s the kind of useful feedback I need to know.
Getting this data point was a significant consideration in my choice of methods. It appeared clear that you had a reasonable number of people that had done it the other way around, but I did not recall hearing much about doing it this way. I thought there was a bit along these lines in the information you linked to from the doctor with whom you had the long telephone conversation. Unfortunately, I did not find that link again when going back through the thread.
makyen