One practice that I simply despise is downsizing.
I do understand that inflation is a reality; and that companies must, therefore, periodically pass along those higher costs--including wholesale costs of the product itself; labor costs; rent on the building (if it is not owned outright); and any other costs associated with the production of goods.
But a straightforward price increase is certainly an honorable way to achieve that.
Downsizing, on the other hand--in the apparent hope that many people will just not notice the slightly smaller package--is not really honorable.
For instance, the 23.6-ounce container of body wash that I regularly purchase is now just 22.0 ounces. (The container it comes in is of an irregular shape--so I really cannot describe it by the typical geometric terms--but the new bottle is designed just like the old bottle.)
If the company had simply increased its wholesale price by less than seven percent, so that its retail outlets might increase their own price from an even $3.00 to $3.26, it could have achieved the same end--but without any deception.
I suppose that I just do not like deception in marketing.
Correction: I know that I do not like deception in marketing.
Their job is to sell product. If they think they will sell more product in 22oz containers at $2.99 than they would of 23.6oz containers at $3.26 then that's what they will do. I think companies are much more familiar with consumer trends and psychology and they know that pricing an object at $2.99 and at $3.10 is really pretty insignificant in terms of cost for consumer, but some consumers only see the 2 and the 3 and it makes it seem like a larger difference than it really is, so they don't buy, or they buy 1 instead of 2, or they buy the store brand etc. As long as the container is accurately labeled and the price is clearly displayed, I'm not sure I see a problem or even really any dishonesty.
One practice that I simply despise is downsizing.
I do understand that inflation is a reality; and that companies must, therefore, periodically pass along those higher costs--including wholesale costs of the product itself; labor costs; rent on the building (if it is not owned outright); and any other costs associated with the production of goods.
But a straightforward price increase is certainly an honorable way to achieve that.
Downsizing, on the other hand--in the apparent hope that many people will just not notice the slightly smaller package--is not really honorable.
For instance, the 23.6-ounce container of body wash that I regularly purchase is now just 22.0 ounces. (The container it comes in is of an irregular shape--so I really cannot describe it by the typical geometric terms--but the new bottle is designed just like the old bottle.)
If the company had simply increased its wholesale price by less than seven percent, so that its retail outlets might increase their own price from an even $3.00 to $3.26, it could have achieved the same end--but without any deception.
I suppose that I just do not like deception in marketing.
Correction: I know that I do not like deception in marketing.
They know for fact by doing so they will more likely maintain necessary revenue while controlling cost for whatever is their reasoning. They've got the consumer psychology DOWN.
One practice that I simply despise is downsizing.
I do understand that inflation is a reality; and that companies must, therefore, periodically pass along those higher costs--including wholesale costs of the product itself; labor costs; rent on the building (if it is not owned outright); and any other costs associated with the production of goods.
But a straightforward price increase is certainly an honorable way to achieve that.
Downsizing, on the other hand--in the apparent hope that many people will just not notice the slightly smaller package--is not really honorable.
For instance, the 23.6-ounce container of body wash that I regularly purchase is now just 22.0 ounces. (The container it comes in is of an irregular shape--so I really cannot describe it by the typical geometric terms--but the new bottle is designed just like the old bottle.)
If the company had simply increased its wholesale price by less than seven percent, so that its retail outlets might increase their own price from an even $3.00 to $3.26, it could have achieved the same end--but without any deception.
I suppose that I just do not like deception in marketing.
Correction: I know that I do not like deception in marketing.
(1) It is not really incorrect to declare that their job "is to sell the product." But it is highly cynical (and even amoral) to decide that it may reasonably be done by any means necessary--just so long as it does not run afoul of the law. (I simply refuse to see consumers and product-suppliers as opponents; rather, I see them as different sides of the same coin.)
(2) This place never sold the product for $2.99, but for an even $3.00. (It evidently disdains the 99-cent form of pricing; so it sells all goods for an even amount.)
(3) I often purchase the store brand. That is because in many cases, it is just as good as the national brand--it is surely manufactured by a major wholesaler--and yet it costs less. (It is my understanding that stores would really rather that one should purchase their store-brand products, as they make more money on those purchases--even though the retail price is less.)
One practice that I simply despise is downsizing.
I do understand that inflation is a reality; and that companies must, therefore, periodically pass along those higher costs--including wholesale costs of the product itself; labor costs; rent on the building (if it is not owned outright); and any other costs associated with the production of goods.
But a straightforward price increase is certainly an honorable way to achieve that.
Downsizing, on the other hand--in the apparent hope that many people will just not notice the slightly smaller package--is not really honorable.
For instance, the 23.6-ounce container of body wash that I regularly purchase is now just 22.0 ounces. (The container it comes in is of an irregular shape--so I really cannot describe it by the typical geometric terms--but the new bottle is designed just like the old bottle.)
If the company had simply increased its wholesale price by less than seven percent, so that its retail outlets might increase their own price from an even $3.00 to $3.26, it could have achieved the same end--but without any deception.
I suppose that I just do not like deception in marketing.
Correction: I know that I do not like deception in marketing.
One practice that I simply despise is downsizing.
I do understand that inflation is a reality; and that companies must, therefore, periodically pass along those higher costs--including wholesale costs of the product itself; labor costs; rent on the building (if it is not owned outright); and any other costs associated with the production of goods.
But a straightforward price increase is certainly an honorable way to achieve that.
Downsizing, on the other hand--in the apparent hope that many people will just not notice the slightly smaller package--is not really honorable.
For instance, the 23.6-ounce container of body wash that I regularly purchase is now just 22.0 ounces. (The container it comes in is of an irregular shape--so I really cannot describe it by the typical geometric terms--but the new bottle is designed just like the old bottle.)
If the company had simply increased its wholesale price by less than seven percent, so that its retail outlets might increase their own price from an even $3.00 to $3.26, it could have achieved the same end--but without any deception.
I suppose that I just do not like deception in marketing.
Correction: I know that I do not like deception in marketing.
One practice that I simply despise is downsizing.
I do understand that inflation is a reality; and that companies must, therefore, periodically pass along those higher costs--including wholesale costs of the product itself; labor costs; rent on the building (if it is not owned outright); and any other costs associated with the production of goods.
But a straightforward price increase is certainly an honorable way to achieve that.
Downsizing, on the other hand--in the apparent hope that many people will just not notice the slightly smaller package--is not really honorable.
For instance, the 23.6-ounce container of body wash that I regularly purchase is now just 22.0 ounces. (The container it comes in is of an irregular shape--so I really cannot describe it by the typical geometric terms--but the new bottle is designed just like the old bottle.)
If the company had simply increased its wholesale price by less than seven percent, so that its retail outlets might increase their own price from an even $3.00 to $3.26, it could have achieved the same end--but without any deception.
I suppose that I just do not like deception in marketing.
Correction: I know that I do not like deception in marketing.
1. I never said "by any means necessary". I just don't see this method as dishonest in any way. The price and size are clearly labeled.
2. Understood. In my experience, nearly every store uses the 99-cent or 49-cent form of pricing, so I assumed this.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?