There is both a demand for Ikea, the furniture store and the kitchen studio, and everyone finds their satisfaction elsewhere (or not); it is not black and white here either, so the small ones are good and the big ones bad or vice versa, but in my opinion, that is too simplistic; it would be nice if it were that simple. Of course, there is a lack of transparency and questionable practices in many other areas of trade (mobile communications, cars, insurance, leasing, groceries, and much more), which is precisely why comparison portals are increasingly popular or institutions like Stiftung Warentest or Foodwatch find more and more justification. However, here it is precisely the kitchen topic at hand, and here concealment is systematic; this is not just one opinion, there are numerous statements from recognized experts; plus countless experiences from users here that just make you shake your head. To generally push the idea onto a customer that he always only wants to follow the "stinginess is cool" theory seems inappropriate to me because this slogan was not invented by the customer; believing that the customer could shape the market remains a pious dream. Ikea or whoever is not "better" but by no means worse either, and the customer who is satisfied with it or whose overall package fits is doing it right. So why these blanket statements that one way is perfect and the other unreliable? One goes to Ikea because he enjoys the self-assembled kitchen for life and can touch and endlessly look at everything beforehand; another already breaks out in a rash if he had to hold a screwdriver. Both or many options are possible. In my bill from the car mechanic, for example, I read every installed part as well as the labor performed, and that person does not starve either. Since when is the demand to receive an understandable and verifiable offer or invoice something that should not be entitled to the customer or puts them in a bad light? On the topic of "negotiation," the fact is that we negotiate something every day. Our employment contracts, the house construction with the general contractor, the general contractor negotiates something with the tiler, the tiler with the wholesaler, etc. Negotiating itself or price-conscious negotiating is nothing reprehensible. We constantly negotiate something with our spouse, our children. It is about being fair in this "negotiation," on both sides, and I cannot see that the customer is generally less fair than the dealer. The dealer can say stop or the customer can leave the room, both are free. The one who pays a price without questioning it is not necessarily a fairer person than the other who conducts a "normal" sales talk, including price/performance, with his service provider. Otherwise, the wealthy would inevitably be fairer than low earners who have to be more frugal. I generally dislike blanket judgments, neither from the customer side nor the dealer side. I am not THE Ikea customer or THE furniture store customer. I am once this and then that, always as it suits me best. That is precisely part of the free market. Our friends had an Ikea kitchen and also had the craftsmen organized through Ikea. They were less satisfied with the result. We, on the other hand, like planning very much and tinker endlessly or also include parts from other companies and then have them installed by our long-known carpenter, so this time it was a fancy Ikea kitchen. We always see the price immediately and handle the product, and the result is great for us. If we did not know this craftsman, we would probably have bought the kitchen elsewhere and would not be less satisfied. Therefore, I cannot understand this frequently written allocation of right/wrong here.