# Why have CANEX?  (Split fm "Up to 1500 military housing units ...")



## LCIS227 (17 Feb 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> What core combat or combat support capability does CANEX provide?  Why should the military be in the business of running a third rate chain of retail stores?  Why should money that could buy boots or clothes or fuel or vehicles or ammo be spent so people can pay the same price as Best Buy for a TV?
> 
> The question of military housing is the same: if there is no viable local market, providing housing makes sense (and is aligned with policy).  But Kingston, for example, has a population of over 100000.  Why does the military need to own & maintain 497 housing units there?  Certainly, some SQs for courses are a good use of money (cheaper than sticking people in the Holiday Inn), but why should DND/CAF spend time, effort and money to be a third rate landlord?



I can tell you that in Petawawa the Canex grocery store is a godsend. They provide much better quality produce and meats than Moncion did, without the monopoly prices! In small areas the Canex is a must.


----------



## PMedMoe (17 Feb 2016)

LCIS227 said:
			
		

> I can tell you that in Petawawa the Canex grocery store is a godsend. They provide much better quality produce and meats than Moncion did, without the monopoly prices! In small areas the Canex is a must.



I do have to agree with that one.


----------



## dapaterson (17 Feb 2016)

LCIS227 said:
			
		

> I can tell you that in Petawawa the Canex grocery store is a godsend. They provide much better quality produce and meats than Moncion did, without the monopoly prices! In small areas the Canex is a must.



And in Ottawa?  Kingston?  Halifax?  Victoria?  Montreal?  They need CANEX why, exactly? CANEX loses money (their financials don't show it, since they don't pay rent).  Scale back to the minimum requirement in remote locations only.  And perhaps even contract out those operations.  Hey, Loblaws / Giant Tiger / Walmart / anyone else: how much are you willing to pay to deliver retail services to the CAF community? 

The CAF has a constant desire to own and control everything it touches.  In many cases it makes more sense to let outside professionals do the job; our focus should be on being a first-rate military, not a third or fourth rate commercial enterprise.


----------



## McG (17 Feb 2016)

How much of Canex's ability to support small and/or remote communities comes from it having the buying power of a small retail chain?  Could/would it have the same ability if it were cut to only those locations that need it?


----------



## dapaterson (17 Feb 2016)

MCG said:
			
		

> How much of Canex's ability to support small and/or remote communities comes from it having the buying power of a small retail chain?  Could/would it have the same ability if it were cut to only those locations that need it?



Again, why do we need Canex to deliver that effect?  Canex has the geographical challenges of any Canadian retailer, without the economies of scale.  Would we not be better served by leveraging expertise in the private sector in those places where there is a true need, maintaining only a small group maintaining expertise in deployed operations morale and welfare support?

For 14-15, Canex had gross sales of $125M (down $4.3M from the previous year) and showed a profit of $5M.  If they were paying rent (and a number of other costs paid out of public funds and thus not appearing on their financial statements) that would be a loss. (https://www.cfmws.com/en/AboutUs/Library/PublicationsandPresentations/AnnualReport/AnnualReport2014-15/Documents/2014-15%20NPP%20Annual%20Report%20May15.pdf )


----------



## jollyjacktar (17 Feb 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> And in Ottawa?  Kingston?  Halifax?  Victoria?  Montreal?  They need CANEX why, exactly? CANEX loses money (their financials don't show it, since they don't pay rent).  Scale back to the minimum requirement in remote locations only.  And perhaps even contract out those operations.  Hey, Loblaws / Giant Tiger / Walmart / anyone else: how much are you willing to pay to deliver retail services to the CAF community?
> 
> The CAF has a constant desire to own and control everything it touches.  In many cases it makes more sense to let outside professionals do the job; our focus should be on being a first-rate military, not a third or fourth rate commercial enterprise.



You know what?  If you don't want to be a customer of the CANEX, don't shop there.  I have and do and will continue to do so as the mood takes me.  You don't like it.  Got it, we've heard you loud and clear.  But bear in mind, there are those of us who do like it and use it.


----------



## dapaterson (17 Feb 2016)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> You know what?  If you don't want to be a customer of the CANEX, don't shop there.  I have and do and will continue to do so as the mood takes me.  You don't like it.  Got it, we've heard you loud and clear.  But bear in mind, there are those of us who do like it and use it.



But why should we spend defence dollars to subsidize CANEX operations?  No rent and other public support represent resources being spent there which could be directed elsewhere.  I'd rather see that money go to MARLANT or MARPAC to pay for fuel for more sea days.  That's a tangible defence output.


----------



## PuckChaser (17 Feb 2016)

I have a feeling the losses would be a lot higher if we only had CANEX in isolated locations. CANEX isn't going to magically turn a massive profit because you closed down the one in Halifax and Kingston (which was very busy almost everytime I went in there in the last 12 years).

You also cherry-picked data to fit your argument, Sales down $4.3M, but Income from Operations up $1.9M, and a Net Loss from FY13/14 (minor at $231K) turned into a Net Income of $1.6M.

If you bulldoze the CANEX properties on bases, they're going to sit vacant and generate nothing. DND isn't magically going to have all this money around because you closed a CANEX down.


----------



## runormal (17 Feb 2016)

Does anyone know if CANEX actively tries to make a profit? Or is it more focused on providing services? Likewise if it makes a profit where would that money go?

I've only ever shopped at CANEX's on courses or on ex's but every-time it was extremely convenient and had good prices.


----------



## captloadie (17 Feb 2016)

I initially was in full agreement with DAP, but then I stepped out of my shoes and into that of my subordinates in the various places I've been posted. I am still surprised by the number of dependants who don't have access to transportation (either single vehicle families or the spouse doesn't drive). The CANEX becomes their lifeline many times. Most CANEXs on the bases I have been at are geographically situated to serve the PMQs, making it easier for the stay at home spouse to access groceries, clothing, gifts, etc. It may not be cheaper, on a per item basis, but compared to insurance and car payments over a year, it probably evens out in the end.

Now does it need to be a CANEX, as opposed to some other outlet? That becomes the question. We already have lots of concession agreements out there, so its not impossible, maybe to convince a Giant Tiger to come in and run a retail outlet, but what happens when they decide its no longer profitable or practicable and goes away (like the McDonalds in Borden). We then leave those same families that the CANEX now serves in a lurch.


----------



## Loachman (17 Feb 2016)

Rotten Ronnie's moved up the road to Angus, where it could attract more customers, as a fair number of potential customers would likely have been too shy to venture onto a base, especially after sunset, even if they knew it was there.


----------



## Pusser (18 Feb 2016)

runormal said:
			
		

> Does anyone know if CANEX actively tries to make a profit? Or is it more focused on providing services? Likewise if it makes a profit where would that money go?
> 
> I've only ever shopped at CANEX's on courses or on ex's but every-time it was extremely convenient and had good prices.



Depends on how you define profit.  Economics 101 defines profit as that which is left over after all expense are paid (including salaries) so that a profit of $0 is actually a mark of success.  Having said that, although it's not out to make huge amounts of money, Canex does actually try to generate a small profit in order to contribute to Personnel Support Programs (PSP).  Canex pays royalties to both Base Funds and the Canadian Forces Central Fund (CFCF).  Thus Canex profits go toward improved base recreational/sporting facilities/programs, base teams, CFPAF loans/grants, education loans for dependants and the list goes on.  Canex as a retailer is not allowed to undercut local markets, but their lack of overhead costs enables them to be very competitive and turn more money over to base funds and the CFCF.  

One of the things that makes Canex most competitive is their no-interest credit plan.  It is worth noting that even if Canex doesn't have something on the floor or even if they don't normally stock something at all, they can often order it in for you and still give you the interest-free credit plan.  In recent years, this has even been extended to work with other local retailers (e.g. in Ottawa, Canex will give you an interest-free plan to buy tires from certain local tire shops, or mess dress from local tailors).


----------



## dapaterson (18 Feb 2016)

Pusser said:
			
		

> One of the things that makes Canex most competitive is their no-interest credit plan./



Is extending easy credit to young military members without financial experience or acumen in the best interests of the individuals or the institution?


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (18 Feb 2016)

I've been watching this   :trainwreck:  for a while now, without commenting but:

Wow! Just Wow! Dataperson, where does this hatred of CANEX come from. Did they wrong you in another life or something.

Why do you have it in for an institution that provides some services and support to the CF members and takes nothing from the CF budget.

I think we all would like to know where you are coming from on this - there has got to be some psychological unresolved problem at issue here. Please enlighten us.


----------



## dapaterson (18 Feb 2016)

CANEX does cost public money.  The infrastructure and PILT and other costs are borne by the public - CANEX contributes not one thin dime.

CANEX costs effort and attention of senior leadership.

I would rather defence efforts go to building and maintaining a world class Navy in roles as deirected by government, and the same for the Army and Air Force.  Running a third or fourth rate retail chain does not contribute (other than in a minor indirect way) to meeting those objectives.

First principle of war: Selection and maintenance of the aim.  I do not believe flogging T-shirts, mugs, keychains, chips and TVs is the aim of the CAF.


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Feb 2016)

Lots of good, detailed debate here, so pulling it onto its own from the PMQ thread.  Please, continue ...

*Milnet.ca Staff*


----------



## Strike (18 Feb 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Is extending easy credit to young military members without financial experience or acumen in the best interests of the individuals or the institution?



How about it teaches them how to budget properly every month and that there are ways to buy things that don't include exhorbitant interest rates and credit cards.

And how about people with 20+ years in?  Picked up my washer/dryer set there after my last move.


----------



## PuckChaser (18 Feb 2016)

This hate on for CANEX is completely unfounded. You could fire 50% of the GOFOs in the Ottawa tomorrow, and have less impact on operations and budgets than closing every CANEX down in the same timeframe.

Picking on CANEX is low hanging fruit if you're trying to talk about selection and maintenance of aim.


----------



## dapaterson (18 Feb 2016)

Strike said:
			
		

> How about it teaches them how to budget properly every month and that there are ways to buy things that don't include exhorbitant interest rates and credit cards.
> 
> And how about people with 20+ years in?  Picked up my washer/dryer set there after my last move.



Other way to buy things: wait until you can afford them.  Or is the CAF in the business of enabling immediate gratification?

As for white goods: Are there no stores in the local area that provide them?  Why is there a military requirement for the CAF to support a store for you to shop for Maytag / Kenmore / Frigidaire / LG?


----------



## PuckChaser (18 Feb 2016)

Because a new Pte with his young spouse moving into a PMQ, likely out of an apartment doesn't have 4 grand to dump on appliances from his pay cheque.


----------



## Strike (18 Feb 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> As for white goods: Are there no stores in the local area that provide them?  Why is there a military requirement for the CAF to support a store for you to shop for Maytag / Kenmore / Frigidaire / LG?



None that offer 0% interest rate.  Most stores will offer 18% at a minimum but they are usually 22-26%.


----------



## dapaterson (18 Feb 2016)

Strike said:
			
		

> None that offer 0% interest rate.  Most stores will offer 18% at a minimum but they are usually 22-26%.



Again, what do $0 down, 0% interest dry goods have to do with excellence in military operations?


----------



## blacktriangle (18 Feb 2016)

The real question is why do soldiers have to buy appliances for their own rental units? And then drag said appliances from posting to posting? Not only does it negatively impact the member (a whack of upfront costs for a sub-standard rental) I'm sure it costs the taxpayer enough to move a members appliances from PMQ A to PMQ B. 

Outfit the PMQs properly, and I think we can justify scaling back the CANEX considerably. Want a TV? Go buy one at the store like everyone else.


----------



## George Wallace (18 Feb 2016)

Spectrum said:
			
		

> The real question is why do soldiers have to buy appliances for their own rental units? And then drag said appliances from posting to posting? Not only does it negatively impact the member (a whack of upfront costs for a sub-standard rental) I'm sure it costs the taxpayer enough to move a members appliances from PMQ A to PMQ B.
> 
> Outfit the PMQs properly, and I think we can justify scaling back the CANEX considerably. Want a TV? Go buy one at the store like everyone else.



A question would also be, why don't those soldiers SELL their appliances to lighten their load?  Some Service Members may prefer to keep what they buy, and move with all their F&E; while others may be more inclined to sell/auction off their F&E.  Some Service Members prefer to buy quality, top of the line, items over cheap items that would be provided by an "owner".   There are a long list of counter points to your argument.


----------



## blacktriangle (18 Feb 2016)

I'd really have to ask someone that prefers "quality, top of the line" ANYTHING what they are doing in a run down PMQ.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (18 Feb 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> . . .
> 
> First principle of war: Selection and maintenance of the aim.  I do not believe flogging T-shirts, mugs, keychains, chips and TVs is the aim of the CAF.



Second principle of war:  Maintenance of morale.

The following quote (or something similar) will probably be found in any of several pubs that list and discuss the principles of war:

" . . .  Circumstances will dictate the relative importance of each principle.  Often, the commander adheres to one at the expense of another.  To disregard a principle, however, involves risk and the possibility of failure. . . . "

I did not find "cost effective"  or "profit-loss" among the principles, however, I suppose that is covered under "Economy of effort".

Honestly, I do see your point of view and if CANEX had even the slightest iota of effect on my life (it's probably been a dozen or more years since I was in a CANEX outlet), I would probably question its operation.  Not the existence of it (or a similar organization), but the manner in which it is organized and managed.

Like the married quarters (not to bring back into discussion the thread from which this one started), CANEX has evolved from a locally organized and managed entity (under a greater NDHQ umbrella that provided only broad policy and general direction) which was responsive to the needs of the local community (and commanders who had a vested interest) into a centrally organized and managed entity that brings with it the bureaucracy of a large retail chain but none of the benefits.  There is a need for some form of retail outlet(s) to provide morale support at some (maybe all?) CF locations, but whether CANEX can be made into the perfect vehicle for that is unlikely.


----------



## Strike (18 Feb 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Again, what do $0 down, 0% interest dry goods have to do with excellence in military operations?



Nothing.  And that's not the question that you originally asked in this thread.  Stop moving the goal posts to support your argument.


----------



## Steve_D (18 Feb 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Again, what do $0 down, 0% interest dry goods have to do with excellence in military operations?



Successful military operations need to rely heavily on good morale. A young, new soldier/sailor/airman who is struggling financially (and NO, not due to improper budgeting, so don't go there) who is struggling to make payments on an 18% credit loan simply to put appliances in their dwelling will always have a hard time focusing on the job at hand when they know that their family has almost no money left over to pay for basic groceries.

Offering the CANEX plan greatly assists in preventing this.

This is not the CAF of 40 years ago where if the military wanted you to have a family, they would have issued you one.  Support of our troops includes support of their families as well. Money is not everything. Good morale is critical and proper support from a happy (read not stressed) family is a huge factor in that.

Hating on CANEX the way that this thread has gone, you probably despise Walmart too. Not everyone is able to just walk into another store and purchase large ticket items which are a necessity the same way that others can for any number of reasons and they should not be judged for it. Have you had to put out the money for a child's braces lately? That will have a big impact on your monthly budget, especially if you are not making the "big bucks".

Support of our troops and their families comes in different forms and the CANEX is one of them. If you remove the support mechanisms, then you can expect a mass Exodus.


----------



## Steve_D (18 Feb 2016)

Spectrum said:
			
		

> I'd really have to ask someone that prefers "quality, top of the line" ANYTHING what they are doing in a run down PMQ.



That is a big assumption that people are looking for "quality, top of the line" stuff.  Even lower end appliances can add up when you NEED to purchase them. You don't really need a TV to live, but a fridge, stove, washer and dryer are very essential. Try purchasing those 4 appliances, even at a cheaper cost and you will quickly find that the total adds up.  The argument can be made to buy used, but still not something the average Private can purchase for cash outright while supporting a family.


----------



## blacktriangle (18 Feb 2016)

NavyPhoenix said:
			
		

> That is a big assumption that people are looking for "quality, top of the line" stuff.  Even lower end appliances can add up when you NEED to purchase them. You don't really need a TV to live, but a fridge, stove, washer and dryer are very essential. Try purchasing those 4 appliances, even at a cheaper cost and you will quickly find that the total adds up.  The argument can be made to buy used, but still not something the average Private can purchase for cash outright while supporting a family.



Yes but that was the argument George Wallace brought up. I suggested that PMQs come equipped with appliances/proper facilities (like almost all modern rentals I have ever seen) and he countered that items provided by CFHA may not be up to the high standards of our apparently cash strapped, destitute Jr NCMs. 

Appliances ARE expensive, I am not arguing this. So why are we forcing such a burden on our brand new soldiers making less than 40k a year? The shacks have washers/dryers, and so should the Q's.


----------



## runormal (18 Feb 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> CANEX does cost public money.  The infrastructure and PILT and other costs are borne by the public - CANEX contributes not one thin dime.



Do you have a dollar figure? Or even a ball park figure? Your biggest gripe seems to be that it:
A) Costs money
B) Takes time from leadership.

Whereas countless members are saying it is beneficial whether this is 0% interest, good produce, very useful, close to PMQ's etc. 

Looking at the report and financial statements it says:



> One of the strengths that set our services apart from others is the caring, cooperative framework upon which NPP is founded. The proceeds that military members, veterans and their families invest in NPP programs go back into local community services. For instance, by buying new furniture at CANEX or signing up for life insurance with SISIP Financial, military members maybe helping send a child to summer camp, or investing in their Base/Wing’s Family Day. In FY 2014-2015, $4.09M was reinvested in the delivery of local morale and welfare services. [1]



Looking at the Financial statements we see.



> CANEX
> 
> Contribution to CFCF and Royalties
> 3,754,000 FY 14/15
> ...



I'm assuming  that SISIP paid for 3.15M and CANEX paid 0.94M and that the remaining 2.81M was paid to base Royalities. (Not 100% sure on the allocation, if a SME with more experience in this area can correct me that'd be great)

So we have a Service that members seem to enjoy and various members have posted stories where it is a neccesity (Such as Petawawa (and other postings), New Pte's with little money, dependants without transportation) and for the past two years has paid on average $3.768M To services that directly support the CF member and their family members. How much does it really cost to operate 33 retail stores (Some of which are express marts)[2]? Likewise if we shut it down who pays the 3.75M that CANEX currently provides? 

Edit:
Wait a minute, 



> ''CANEX Concessions
> CANEX in our effort to provide the highest level of available products or services will lease excess NPF space on CF Bases/Wings to local businesses through Concession Agreements.
> 
> CANEX concessions include Subway and Tim Hortons, as well as several other convenience operations including:
> ...


 [3]

Does NPF then actually pay for the CANEX space in the first place? If that is the case what is the issue? 

Refs:

[1] https://www.cfmws.com/en/AboutUs/Library/PublicationsandPresentations/AnnualReport/AnnualReport2014-15/Documents/2014-15%20NPP%20Annual%20Report%20May15.pdf 
[2] http://www.canex.ca/ustorelocator/location/map
[3] https://www.cfmws.com/en/AboutUs/CANEX/services_operations_concessions/Pages/default.aspx


----------



## jollyjacktar (18 Feb 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Again, what do $0 down, 0% interest dry goods have to do with excellence in military operations?



Everything.  Excellence in military operations comes from looking after the welfare of your troops.  If you're helping Pte/Cpl Bloggins and his/her family feel that they have a reasonable means of getting things they need without being gouged by the high interest that comes of your favorite flagship, whatever you're beating a drum for, then that service person will do better at work. If you cannot see beyond the end of your spite for CANEX to see that it does provide for your fellow service member, then you are missing something in your makeup.

You want to lash out at institutions?  Why not go after the messes?  Why, in today's CAF do we have them?  There must be some who don't use them much or at all.  With that reasoning then, we should ban them.  Tear them down.  Hell, let's go after the Regimental Museums after that.  What good are they, eh?  Doesn't put a Leopard in the field, does it?  Really, where do we stop then?

As I said, you don't like it.  Don't shop there then and leave it to those of us who do.


----------



## GRACE OMALLEY (18 Feb 2016)

Again, what do $0 down, 0% interest dry goods have to do with excellence in military operations?

Everything. I have over 20+ years experience running budgets of multiple millions, successfully making pennies stretch to dollars. Two masters degrees. Age and experience. I am understating my responsibilities as they are not the point. The point of Canex is those families and members who are trying to afford the entire month before their money runs out, supporting families. I will fight for Canex and their role and responsibilities despite being in a well paid position myself. Leadership is action, not to serve oneself, but others.  We can play the numbers and reports in circles, pulling graphs to support one position on Canex or another. Simply, it runs a margin that we could argue from a multitude of angles. Our core values in the forces, is the final voice. I will continue to buy Canex items although I can shop anywhere. Our brothers and sisters, with more limited choices, don't need us to sit in judgement of why they support  Canex. Instead, they need to know that we respect that military operations don't stop at foreign borders , and we will continue to give them the ability to walk to a Canex, count their change, get those few items they have to have, and damn well respect them while they stretch pennies to dollars. I might get commendations for pulling every cent out of a large operational budget, but when I stand behind that soldier buying diapers at the Canex, let me tell you my respect for his military operational support outshines pride I have in my efforts. A drive to Walmart isn't always possible with an exhausted spouse, kids in need and no money for car insurance. Thank everything holy for the soldiers who still split a package of diapers with their buddy until pay gets deposited. You think we don't notice, but we do, and we respect you. Well done Canex, and well done you. I am not sorry for this rant. I am sorry, though, for anyone who forgets that Canex is a contributor to operations.


----------



## LCIS227 (18 Feb 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Again, why do we need Canex to deliver that effect?  Canex has the geographical challenges of any Canadian retailer, without the economies of scale.  Would we not be better served by leveraging expertise in the private sector in those places where there is a true need, maintaining only a small group maintaining expertise in deployed operations morale and welfare support?
> 
> For 14-15, Canex had gross sales of $125M (down $4.3M from the previous year) and showed a profit of $5M.  If they were paying rent (and a number of other costs paid out of public funds and thus not appearing on their financial statements) that would be a loss. (https://www.cfmws.com/en/AboutUs/Library/PublicationsandPresentations/AnnualReport/AnnualReport2014-15/Documents/2014-15%20NPP%20Annual%20Report%20May15.pdf )



You just made my point about why Canex is required on most bases. The potential for profit is minimal therefore no private company would consider opening a grocery / furniture / general goods store. As was pointed by a few here already the Canex also serves an important role for many spouses / pers on course / mbrs without cars due to it's convenient location. 

Off topic: By your logic we should privatise all infrastructure, education and healthcare since it's a 'failing business model'. Name me one example of where deregulation turned out in the best interest of the consumer. Every Canadian case of deregulation ended in some form of oligopoly with monopolistic outcomes; deminished service at a higher cost to the consumer.

Electricity? Ontario is paying the highest electricity rates in North America 
Telecommunication? We have some of the highest wireless & internet bills in the world
Airlines? We pay 2-3 times the amount flying accross Canada when compared to US airlines. The difference in Europe is even more drastic.


----------



## Steve_D (18 Feb 2016)

Spectrum said:
			
		

> Yes but that was the argument George Wallace brought up. I suggested that PMQs come equipped with appliances/proper facilities (like almost all modern rentals I have ever seen) and he countered that items provided by CFHA may not be up to the high standards of our apparently cash strapped, destitute Jr NCMs.
> 
> Appliances ARE expensive, I am not arguing this. So why are we forcing such a burden on our brand new soldiers making less than 40k a year? The shacks have washers/dryers, and so should the Q's.



Agreed


----------



## George Wallace (18 Feb 2016)

NavyPhoenix said:
			
		

> ......... A young, new soldier/sailor/airman who is struggling financially (and NO, not due to improper budgeting, so don't go there) who is struggling to make payments on an 18% credit loan simply to put appliances in their dwelling will always have a hard time focusing on the job at hand when they know that their family has almost no money left over to pay for basic groceries.



I will call BS on that.  IT IS DUE TO improper budgeting.  Far too many soldiers/sailors/airmen have indeed spent well above their means.  



			
				NavyPhoenix said:
			
		

> This is not the CAF of 40 years ago where if the military wanted you to have a family, they would have issued you one.



Those are considerations that any young person should take into account.  Can they afford to get married if they do not have the income to support their family.  This has never been "if the military wanted you to have a family, they would have issued you one".  This has always been about being fiscally smart.  Too many have been thinking with the wrong head.

This does not apply solely to members who have PMQs; it applies to all -- no matter whether they live in the Shacks, PMQs or on the Economy.  If you can't afford it, don't buy it.  

Several here have stated that if they have washers and dryers in the shacks, then the PMQs should have them as well.  Sorry, but those are two different things.  I did not say that members HAD to buy top of the line items; ONLY THAT some do prefer to.  If you are going to live in a PMQ and raise a family, you may as well OWN all your appliances as you will eventually leave the military and require them.  

CANEX does serve a function, but members have to be fiscally responsible, especially if they have dependents.  CANEX is only an option.  Smart buyers shop around.  Most of the crying being done here has been an indication that many are not being fiscally responsible for their own economic situations.


----------



## PuckChaser (18 Feb 2016)

CANEX is such a terrible idea. That's why the Brits, Dutch, and US all have something similar. In fact, you can buy below market costs at US PX/NX.


----------



## Steve_D (18 Feb 2016)

George

Please don't read me wrong. There are definately a lot of individuals who couldn't budget their way out of a wet paper bag and then go on and whine and cry about their situation. I agree completely. I guess that I was just trying to defend the few who have been diligent, yet still find themselves a bit strapped.  I personally have enjoyed the 0% CANEX plan, but would not have a tantrum if I had to purchase from elsewhere.  I see far too many families in too much debt while a big pick-up truck and motorbike sit in the driveway while they watch their 60" plasma tv. Those people definately need to sort their crap out.  But let's all remember not to paint everyone with the same brush and make assumptions based on others actions.


----------



## Arty39 (18 Feb 2016)

NavyPhoenix said:
			
		

> That is a big assumption that people are looking for "quality, top of the line" stuff.  Even lower end appliances can add up when you NEED to purchase them. You don't really need a TV to live, but a fridge, stove, washer and dryer are very essential. Try purchasing those 4 appliances, even at a cheaper cost and you will quickly find that the total adds up.  The argument can be made to buy used, but still not something the average Private can purchase for cash outright while supporting a family.


Considering I bought a stove,washer and dryer for $550 used, a private can buy these items, I've done it. You just have to prioritize your purchases.


----------



## George Wallace (18 Feb 2016)

NavyPhoenix said:
			
		

> George
> 
> Please don't read me wrong. There are definately a lot of individuals who couldn't budget their way out of a wet paper bag and then go on and whine and cry about their situation. I agree completely. I guess that I was just trying to defend the few who have been diligent, yet still find themselves a bit strapped.  I personally have enjoyed the 0% CANEX plan, but would not have a tantrum if I had to purchase from elsewhere.  I see far too many families in too much debt while a big pick-up truck and motorbike sit in the driveway while they watch their 60" plasma tv. Those people definately need to sort their crap out.  But let's all remember not to paint everyone with the same brush and make assumptions based on others actions.



I have been a bit strapped at times as well.  That is where, as Arty39 said following your post, you have to prioritize.  There is no reason for a Service Member to get so far in debt on the wages they are earning, even at the lowest ranks, other than their not prioritizing their needs over their wants.  

In my day, there were married Service Couples, of fairly senior ranks, living in PMQs, driving big cars and trucks, with a boat, camper trailer and a ski-doo in their driveway and numerous other 'toys'.  Sadly, when it came time for them to retire, they were destitute.  They had problems getting loans and mortgages and had to sell all their toys to get by.  Most members today are being given better advice on money matters and are more sensible in handling their money.  It is those few who stand out and are the focus of this slip off the rails on all matters CANEX.

BACK to CANEX.

(GERMANY STORY)  The CANEX in Lahr and Baden were very professionally run, with Buyers travelling around Europe purchasing products for the stores.  They held regular promotional displays/events with Reps and merchandise from major manufacturers; Sony, Panasonic, Bose, Siemens, Phillips, etc.  The CFE CANEX made profits that kept all the CANEX in Canada in business.  The profits CANEX made in CFE were more than all the CANEX outlets in Canada combined.  My question is:  What happened to all those people who made the CFE CANEX such a success?  

Anyone who has shopped at the CANEX in CFE will think that CANEX here is a joke; a shadow of its former self.


----------



## Steve_D (18 Feb 2016)

And during my time in Goose Bay early 90s, the CANEX was pretty much it. I don't know what we would have done without it.


----------



## Pusser (18 Feb 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Is extending easy credit to young military members without financial experience or acumen in the best interests of the individuals or the institution?



Canex can give it to them at reasonable rates, or they can go down the road to the nearest finance company or pay-day loan shark and pay outrageous rates.  One way or the other, they're going to get the items they want/need.  Rationally, yes, people should not buy things they cannot afford, but such decisions are not always rational (nor is marriage for that matter).  The Canex plan actually helps to make things more affordable for folks, especially the ones with lower incomes.  Think of the young private with a young spouse and a young child.  Should they have to continue with regular trips to the laundromat when we have the means to alleviate that stress on their lives?  I've never had to deal with a young service member who had financial difficulties as a result of buying things on Canex's no-interest plan, but plenty who've gone to finance companies.

Other "no money-down, no payment for one year, etc" plans are far worse.  At least with the Canex plan, payments start right away (so the member doesn't have a chance to forget about it)  and since they come directly off your pay, there is no chance of missing one.  The other plans actually love it if the customer forgets because when they do start collecting, the interest charges are horrendous.  There have been cases where some businesses have made all of their profit with only a handful of payments and then repossessed the goods to sell them again!

"Morale is just as important to operations as are rations and ammunition; and just as legitimate an expense on the public treasury."  I wish I could remember who said that, but I believe it was a US Secretary of War in the early 20 Century.


----------



## vincent.escanlar (18 Feb 2016)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> CANEX is such a terrible idea. That's why the Brits, Dutch, and US all have something similar. In fact, you can buy below market costs at US PX/NX.



US Exchanges/Commissaries seem to be a great part of the overall compensation package of being in the military (and all with just your standard-issue military/dependent ID card - no separate "CF1" card required!).



> Commissaries still sell products at cost as they have since 1825. Today’s customers also pay a 5-percent surcharge, mandated by Congress. The surcharge pays for new stores, as well as renovations of existing facilities. Patrons thus help pay for their commissaries twice - once as taxpayers and once through the surcharge. Commissary employees’ salaries are tax funded.
> 
> Commissary patrons save an average of more than 30 percent on their grocery bills. That level of savings, verified by the agency’s Price Comparison Study, amounts to approximately $4,500 per year for a family of four that regularly shops in a commissary. Customers receive substantial additional savings through special sales and coupons.
> 
> Surveys consistently rate the commissaries as one of the military’s top nonpay benefits. Many young service families, particularly those stationed in high cost-of-living urban areas, simply could not make ends meet without the price savings provided by the commissaries. Those savings amount to about double the appropriated cost of running the system. In other words, preserving this level of compensation in direct dollar payments to military personnel would cost the government twice the current fund appropriation.


https://www.commissaries.com/press_room/press_release/2012/DeCA_13_12.cfm


----------



## Jarnhamar (18 Feb 2016)

Somewhat off topic; I never got an answer to who was responsible when the Canex in Wainwright all of a sudden doubled the price of energy drinks when visiting troops started buying them up.


----------



## TCM621 (18 Feb 2016)

The gist of the anti-canex argument seems to be that the money would be better spent on ships or tanks etc. Correct me if I am wrong but Canex is a NPF entity. By virtue of being non-public funds, it wouldn't be funds available to military expenditures. 

As for free rent,  if there is one thing the CAF has it's a lot of it is space. We could give them Walmart size plots of land on most bases with out actually interfering with much. 

As someone who has spent multiple combined years on TD or restricted posting without a car, I can tell you not having a CANEX would have made my life very difficult. An on base store with basic necessitates is a must for those people.


----------



## Loachman (18 Feb 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> (GERMANY STORY)  The CANEX in Lahr and Baden were very professionally run, with Buyers travelling around Europe purchasing products for the stores.  They held regular promotional displays/events with Reps and merchandise from major manufacturers; Sony, Panasonic, Bose, Siemens, Phillips, etc.  The CFE CANEX made profits that kept all the CANEX in Canada in business.  The profits CANEX made in CFE were more than all the CANEX outlets in Canada combined.  My question is:  What happened to all those people who made the CFE CANEX such a success?
> 
> Anyone who has shopped at the CANEX in CFE will think that CANEX here is a joke; a shadow of its former self.



There was a spoof, but not completely inaccurate, CFE (Canadian Forces Europe) org chart with a spaghetti-like tangle of lines connecting units. The Canex and Vandoo Mafia were the two at the top, from which all lines emanated.


----------



## Happy Guy (18 Feb 2016)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> The gist of the anti-canex argument seems to be that the money would be better spent on ships or tanks etc. Correct me if I am wrong but Canex is a NPF entity. By virtue of being non-public funds, it wouldn't be funds available to military expenditures.
> 
> As for free rent,  if there is one thing the CAF has it's a lot of it is space. We could give them Walmart size plots of land on most bases with out actually interfering with much.
> 
> As someone who has spent multiple combined years on TD or restricted posting without a car, I can tell you not having a CANEX would have made my life very difficult. An on base store with basic necessitates is a must for those people.


I to have spent multiple times on crse (Gagetown and Borden) without a car (we are a one car family) and having a CANEX on base made my life easier.


----------



## c_canuk (19 Feb 2016)

I got a surprise posting message in the middle of renovations july 2014, because of the depressed market and that all my reno's were upgrades to the house, I took a bath on the sale of my home. On paper it looks like I broke even.

Got posted to a place with a much higher cost of living, Ottawa.

Our place that we managed to purchase came with appliances. Then we had to get my Son lots of expensive tests, our car got totalled, and my wife's orthodontics went over the capped amount.

So I will state I'm quite happy Canex exists here in Ottawa where I can replace the fridge that just died for a small monthly sum at 0% interest. 

I'm happy that I was able to use price matching so it was the cheapest I could find anywhere before you even include the 0% financing.

I'm also happy that some of the money I'm paying for the new fridge is used to fund various support agencies of the CAF.


----------



## Pusser (19 Feb 2016)

vincent.escanlar said:
			
		

> US Exchanges/Commissaries seem to be a great part of the overall compensation package of being in the military (and all with just your standard-issue military/dependent ID card - no separate "CF1" card required!).
> https://www.commissaries.com/press_room/press_release/2012/DeCA_13_12.cfm



Yes, US Exchanges and especially their commissaries are most definitely part of their pay and compensation packages (which is often why our use of them is restricted).  They often sell at wholesale or even below wholesale prices (especially in the commissaries).  Ours are not part of our compensation package and Canex is required to mark up goods in order to at least cover their costs and hopefully generate a reasonable profit to pass onto PSP programs.  However, because Canex has minimal overhead (e.g. buildings provided at public expense as per the NDA under the guise of "public support to NPF"), it is able to keep prices competitive with local markets.

Ii don't really understand the vitriol lately surrounding the CF1 Card.  Do folks not realize that the idea was to make things easier overall?  We don't have "dependants cards" (notwithstanding that the MFRC network had some, but not universal success in creating one) and not all veterans were issued with the ND 75.  However, all veterans, serving members and eligible dependants can get a CF1 card.  There may be some teething pains, but before too long, all services (including business who are participating in the CF Appreciation Program) will accept it as proof of eligibility.


----------



## jollyjacktar (19 Feb 2016)

I believe the vitriol, is that the card solution seems to be cheesy when set aside the ND 75 for comparison.  Perpaps you could add the distain some hold for the CANEX as well into the ire that is displayed.


----------



## Pusser (19 Feb 2016)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I believe the vitriol, is that the card solution seems to be cheesy when set aside the ND 75 for comparison.  Perpaps you could add the distain some hold for the CANEX as well into the ire that is displayed.



I'm not sure the ND75 was ever designed for the same purpose.  It just happened to be a handy card that was available and adaptable to the various discount programs that are starting to appear.  Keep in mind that it was a tad discriminatory in that it was only issued to former members with at least 10 years service.  Everybody else was out in the cold.  Everybody gets a CF1 and although it denotes which type of patron one is (i.e. member, veteran, dependant) it's still basically the same card and thus easily recognizable to everyone.  As I said before, I think there will be some teething pains, but overall, this is an improvement.

As for those who disdain Canex, that's their problem.  It's not exclusively a Canex instrument.


----------



## jollyjacktar (19 Feb 2016)

Of course the ND 75 wasn't designed to get you discounts.  It was designed to identify you as a former member of the CAF.  I think one thing that is sticking in the craw of some is that unlike the ND 75, the CF1 doesn't have a photo of the bearer to confirm, "yes, that is you".  Anyone could wave a CF1 around and say "yup, that's me".


----------



## TCM621 (19 Feb 2016)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Of course the ND 75 wasn't designed to get you discounts.  It was designed to identify you as a former member of the CAF.  I think one thing that is sticking in the craw of some is that unlike the ND 75, the CF1 doesn't have a photo of the bearer to confirm, "yes, that is you".  Anyone could wave a CF1 around and say "yup, that's me".


That is a potential issue and one that may need addressing in the future. Those that have an issue with it would be well advised to bring it up with the relevant parties.


----------



## George Wallace (19 Feb 2016)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Of course the ND 75 wasn't designed to get you discounts.  It was designed to identify you as a former member of the CAF.  I think one thing that is sticking in the craw of some is that unlike the ND 75, the CF1 doesn't have a photo of the bearer to confirm, "yes, that is you".  Anyone could wave a CF1 around and say "yup, that's me".



The lack of a photo is why the CFOne card is not being accepted for many CAF/Veteran discounts.

Although the NDI 75, for that fact the NDI 20 and other NDI cards, was not designed to get you discounts, it did prove that you were whom you claimed to be, as a Veteran.  Discounts did not even exist a decade or so ago, so that point is really moot.  All the NDI cards have been accepted as photo ID, like a Dvr Lic or Health Card with a photo have been used to ID you upon request in most places, although  I have witnessed the NDI 20 not be accepted as a legitimate ID as proof of whom you are at certain locations. So there will be numerous differences in the rules used by different organizations, businesses and occupations as to what is acceptable "proof" of whom you are.

Long before CANEX came out with their proprietary card, many Bases issued Dependent IDs through their IDent Sections to give non-military family members access to CANEX and other Base facilities.  Either CANEX has to rethink this card and create a card with the holders photo, or we rely on VAC to create a photo ID card for Veterans.  Until then, we will likely see numerous complaints on the failures of this card.


----------



## Pusser (19 Feb 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> The lack of a photo is why the CFOne card is not being accepted for many CAF/Veteran discounts.



Is there proof of this or is it just speculation?  All of the participants in the CF Appreciation Program (i.e. the ones giving the CAF/Veteran discounts) should be aware of and accepting the CF 1 Card.  Keep in mind that most credit cards don't have pictures either, so this shouldn't be a huge issue ("we'll accept this card without your picture for payment of $1000, but we can't offer a discount because this other card - with the same name on it - doesn't have your picture...").


----------



## George Wallace (19 Feb 2016)

Pusser said:
			
		

> Is there proof of this or is it just speculation?  All of the participants in the CF Appreciation Program (i.e. the ones giving the CAF/Veteran discounts) should be aware of and accepting the CF 1 Card.  Keep in mind that most credit cards don't have pictures either, so this shouldn't be a huge issue ("we'll accept this card without your picture for payment of $1000, but we can't offer a discount because this other card - with the same name on it - doesn't have your picture...").



I have heard from members in PEI and NS who have experienced the CFOne card not being accepted as proof towards a CAF/Veteran discount.  

Do not add a "Credit Card" to the argument.  It is not, and never has been, a form of identification.  They have quite often been the subject to identity theft.


----------



## Pusser (19 Feb 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I have heard from members in PEI and NS who have experienced the CFOne card not being accepted as proof towards a CAF/Veteran discount.
> 
> Do not add a "Credit Card" to the argument.  It is not, and never has been, a form of identification.  They have quite often been the subject to identity theft.



I suspect (and hope) that after the program matures, these problems will go away.  Time will tell.


----------



## newwifey (19 Feb 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I have heard from members in PEI and NS who have experienced the CFOne card not being accepted as proof towards a CAF/Veteran discount.
> 
> Do not add a "Credit Card" to the argument.  It is not, and never has been, a form of identification.  They have quite often been the subject to identity theft.



Those people should be bringing those observations to the Program.  My guess would be those particular companies aren't in the CFAppreciation itself so wouldn't be aware what the cards are for??


----------



## vincent.escanlar (19 Feb 2016)

Pusser said:
			
		

> Yes, US Exchanges and especially their commissaries are most definitely part of their pay and compensation packages (which is often why our use of them is restricted).  They often sell at wholesale or even below wholesale prices (especially in the commissaries).  Ours are not part of our compensation package and Canex is required to mark up goods in order to at least cover their costs and hopefully generate a reasonable profit to pass onto PSP programs.  However, because Canex has minimal overhead (e.g. buildings provided at public expense as per the NDA under the guise of "public support to NPF"), it is able to keep prices competitive with local markets.



Thanks for the explanation, I see the difference. Yes, sometimes the US Exchanges/Commissaries see my CAC card that says "Foreign Navy" and check to see that Exchange/Commissary privileges are authorised.



			
				Pusser said:
			
		

> Ii don't really understand the vitriol lately surrounding the CF1 Card.  Do folks not realize that the idea was to make things easier overall?  We don't have "dependants cards" (notwithstanding that the MFRC network had some, but not universal success in creating one) and not all veterans were issued with the ND 75.  However, all veterans, serving members and eligible dependants can get a CF1 card.  There may be some teething pains, but before too long, all services (including business who are participating in the CF Appreciation Program) will accept it as proof of eligibility.



Yes, it might take a while for the word to get out. For example, here's a ski resort where the CF1 card is only eligible for a discount with a NDI20 or NDI75: http://skiwhitefish.com/assets/wmr_1516_armed_forces_card_explained.pdf. So only those who are currently in, or retired with 10 years service (which seems to be their intention) can prove entitlement - but as the NDI75 is no longer issued, new retirees despite 10 years service will be out.


----------



## Gunner98 (20 Feb 2016)

NavyPhoenix said:
			
		

> And during my time in Goose Bay early 90s, the CANEX was pretty much it. I don't know what we would have done without it.



Other than a seasonal food truck selling burgers, fries, and deep-fried ice cream there was nothing but Canex in Cornwallis to support the recruits.


----------

