• Evkob@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Presenting the pricing as if it represents a bulk discount when it doesn’t.

    The only reason to do this is to trick people who can’t do multiplication into buying more.

      • Quicky@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yeah, but only for 1. There would still have been no saving buying 3 over 2.

        • squirmy_wormy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          If original price was 9

          1 for 9

          2 for 18 (deal gives 2 off)

          3 for 27 (deal gives 3 off)

          If it was 10

          1 for 10

          2 for 20 (4 off)

          3 for 30 (6 off)

          • Quicky@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yeah but it was never that. Only the original price was changed with a sticker. The 2x and 3x were always as they were.

            • squirmy_wormy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              I know. If the single price was anything other than 8, the other hard coded prices give scaling discounts.

              The adjusted price saves you money on a single one and removes the bulk savings. Kinda neat to me. Wonder if that was on purpose to make it easier to move stock.

              *Edit: hell, the actual way to look at this is you get bulk pricing without the bulk. This is pretty awesome and mildly interesting if anything.

              • Quicky@lemmy.worldOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                Does it though? The moment 2x is £16 , the cost of 1 shirt is £8. Therefore there’s no scaling at 3x. It doesn’t matter how much the starting price was or how much the later prices were, if the 2x price is £16 and the 3x price is £24. The cost of 1 shirt is only ever £8 if you buy more than one, meaning that any pricing variant over 2x is pointless.

                • squirmy_wormy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  I’m assuming the £8 is a sticker put in the item and not what it originally said, since it looks raised and like a sticker.

                  That leads me to believe the original price under the sticker is greater than £8, which makes the discount make sense. And makes it interesting because the lowest a store could set a single unit and maintain the price curve is £8.

                  • Quicky@lemmy.worldOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    9 months ago

                    Exactly. In which case the 3x price is redundant.

                    There is no curve.

        • Lojcs@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          But you don’t pay more either. Without the discount on 3 pack, buying odd numbers would’ve been worse value than even numbers but the 3 pack discount makes all bulk purchases equal.

      • thepreciousboar@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        It only makes sense they did if the origianl price was higher, which is quite weird unless they specifically don’t want people to buy more than 1

    • Turun@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’d argue it’s a nice thing to make the costs obvious for people who can’t do multiplication.

    • fishos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      You can clearly see there is a sticker over the original price. It originally probably was a bulk deal that the store reduced to an all around deal.

      You’re over here bitching about people who can’t do math and you can’t even see.

      • Evkob@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        I’m bitching? About people who can’t do math? That’s news to me. Thank god you were there to tell me!

        • fishos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          Oh, does “bitching” offend you? Would you rather I say “you are so prepared to be annoyed by something that you completely gloss over the facts in front of you so that you can present the situation in a negative light”? Is that better? Ffs, they LOWERED the price and you’re over here spouting Big Capitalism Conspiracies®.

          I’m way more worried that there are people like you amongst us than I am of Big Sweater confusing me with multiplication. Maybe worry more about the education system if a tag like that is so confusing to you.

          • Evkob@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I’m not particularly annoyed by the original post, I was just trying to be helpful and answer the question the other commenter had. Even then, this community is named “mildly infuriating” , you’d think being annoyed would be kinda the baseline.

            I will admit I’m a bit annoyed by your tone and approach to conversation, which is probably why my last comment was a bit snarky. I do apologize for that. However, I honestly don’t have the energy to deal with people initiating a discussion with immediate aggression, especially when they decide to read things into my comments that aren’t there. You should try engaging in good-faith conversation sometime, it’s a lot less exhausting than jumping at people’s throats.