What's mildly irritating you today?

[Carruthers]

It isn't the actual premises and certainly not the staff at my local branch who are a great bunch.

It isn't even the woman at the check out in front of me last week who appeared to have based her shopping list on the possibility of the Red Army dropping in unannounced for afternoon tea.

What really annoys me is the methods that are employed to make you spend more than you need. They would probably call it merchandising or marketing. I would call it sharp practise and chicanery.

Everyone is familiar with economies of scale. It's obviously cheaper to buy a box of one hundred teabags than two boxes of fifty. Except that it isn't on occasion, it's actually more expensive.

Similarly, two 500 gram bags of sultanas should cost more than a 1kg bag but they don't from time to time. The shopper in a hurry will just grab what should, on the face of it, be the cheaper option, and ends up paying more.

Then there's the periodic rearrangement of the whole store which means nobody can find anything. I've mentioned that one before so I won't revisit it.

There's also the practise of putting the costlier items on shelves at eye level. Look down at the lower shelves and you'll find the cheaper stuff there, but how many people bother?

It's probably the same in the US, Canada and Oz, but in the UK we have unit pricing regulations which means it should be possible to compare different size packs of the same, or similar, product for value.

Here's a couple of examples:



Not difficult to see which is the least expensive, given that the packs are the same size. But why is the unit price of one expressed in pence per 100 grams, and the other one in £ per kg?

That can be annoying when you're trying to compare packs of different sizes.

It's easy enough to shift a decimal point about, but we shouldn't have to do it.

Chicanery and sharp practise.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by Carruthers

why is the unit price of one expressed in pence per 100 grams, and the other one in £ per kg?

Sometime here, you will see one product as cents/ounce and another as dollars/pound. It makes doing math in your head much more tricky when you have to multiply by 16 to get the answer. I'd love to just move the decimal.

[limey]

Originally Posted by Carruthers

... in the UK we have unit pricing regulations which means it should be possible to compare different size packs of the same, or similar, product for value.
...
Chicanery and sharp practise.

Better still when the cost of apples (in our local Co-operative) is expressed in cost per kilo for one sort, and cost per unit (apple) right next door ...
Also I always double-check the prices of the "bargain" litres of booze, sometimes these are more expensive than the standard size bottle ...

Chicanery and sharp practice indeed.

[Carruthers]

Originally Posted by limey

Better still when the cost of apples (in our local Co-operative) is expressed in cost per kilo for one sort, and cost per unit (apple) right next door ...

Chicanery and sharp practice indeed.

It's the same with bananas in Tesco. This morning I bought a bunch in the main store at £0.68/kg, but if I go around the corner to the mini Tesco they're on sale individually.

I can't remember what the price differential was, but it was obviously big enough to stop me from buying them there ever again.

[monster]

Originally Posted by Carruthers

It isn't the actual premises and certainly not the staff at my local branch who are a great bunch.

It isn't even the woman at the check out in front of me last week who appeared to have based her shopping list on the possibility of the Red Army dropping in unannounced for afternoon tea.

What really annoys me is the methods that are employed to make you spend more than you need. They would probably call it merchandising or marketing. I would call it sharp practise and chicanery.

Everyone is familiar with economies of scale. It's obviously cheaper to buy a box of one hundred teabags than two boxes of fifty. Except that it isn't on occasion, it's actually more expensive.

Similarly, two 500 gram bags of sultanas should cost more than a 1kg bag but they don't from time to time. The shopper in a hurry will just grab what should, on the face of it, be the cheaper option, and ends up paying more.

Then there's the periodic rearrangement of the whole store which means nobody can find anything. I've mentioned that one before so I won't revisit it.

There's also the practise of putting the costlier items on shelves at eye level. Look down at the lower shelves and you'll find the cheaper stuff there, but how many people bother?

It's probably the same in the US, Canada and Oz, but in the UK we have unit pricing regulations which means it should be possible to compare different size packs of the same, or similar, product for value.

Here's a couple of examples:



Not difficult to see which is the least expensive, given that the packs are the same size. But why is the unit price of one expressed in pence per 100 grams, and the other one in £ per kg?

That can be annoying when you're trying to compare packs of different sizes.

It's easy enough to shift a decimal point about, but we shouldn't have to do it.

WHY NOT?

Chicanery and sharp practise.

[devilsadvocate] If you are too hurried, lazy or stupid to do the math, why shouldn't you pay more? A store is a business, not a non-profit public service. [/DA]

Also, regarding the costlier items at eye-level .... A scarily large proportion of people want the name brand product (which is usually the most expensive) If they don't find it quickly, they will become frustrated and leave. So that is what is put at eye level. then they feel happy which puts them in the mood for and gives them time to look around and add more items they hadn't intended to buy to their basket.

Here's a recent article about brand-name painkillers from the BBC

[Carruthers]

@monster

[devilsadvocate]If you are too hurried, lazy or stupid to do the math, why shouldn't you pay more? ..... [/DA]

Unit pricing is just one aspect of grocery retailing where there is less than plain dealing.

Two for one, or three for two offers rely on the products being sold at differing (higher?) prices in the preceding twenty-eight days.

They are manipulated with such byzantine complexity that it becomes impossible to determine if any savings are being made when considering a multi-buy offer.

[devilsadvocate].... A store is a business, not a non-profit public service. [/DA]

Quite so. My pension fund has holdings in the grocery retailing sector on both sides of the Atlantic so I want Tesco and Walmart to be successful.

I'd just rather they made their profits by fair means not foul.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Ah, but foul is in the eye of the beholder. Is it foul if it's standard practice on both sides of the pond? Certainly the consumer has been subjected to it continuously, so it's not a quick switch. The price in the previous 28 days is a nonstarter when it comes to produce as that's a constant supply/demand variable.

And don't forget, "If you are too hurried, lazy or stupid to do the math" is coming from a mathematician.

[glatt]

I was deferred from donating blood this morning. I had even gone online and searched for info about donating eligibility if you have stitches but could find nothing. So I showed up. "Yes. I feel well." (I do.) And then at the end of the screening, when they ask if I have any questions, I ask about the stitches. Deferred.

They should put it in the literature somewhere if it means you can't donate. Wasted 30 minutes and took up a donation slot somebody else could have filled.

Apparently if I said I didn't feel well, there was a sub-menu that gave me the stitches option to check off.