• renzev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    It’s the three strategies of pricing:

    • Price the item as XX.99 to make it feel cheaper than it is
    • Price the item as a whole/round number to make it feel premium
    • Price the item as a seemingly random number like XX.57 to get ahead of the shopper who are weary of the first two tactics
  • OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    3 days ago

    From my experience working in retail I’ve seen people say out loud something like “oh, it’s only 4 dollars!” When the sticker says $4.99. This shit apparently works on a lot of people for some reason.

  • rhacer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    172
    ·
    4 days ago

    But it IS how we see prices. If there weren’t science behind it, they wouldn’t be doing it.

    • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      93
      ·
      4 days ago

      A lot of marketing strategies are pseudoscience. Just like a lot police investigation practices or body language assumptions.

          • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            38
            ·
            4 days ago

            The CEO decided that clients were smart intelligent people and treated people as adults. Aka, no discounts, no 99 pricing, it just costs what it costs, as low as we can make it, plus our margin.

            JC Penny was already not too well, this helped sink them

            • TehWorld@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              32
              ·
              4 days ago

              It was less about the .99 pricing and more about “Sale” pricing and ‘coupons’. Retailers will put a pair of pants on “Sale” for 50% off 51 weeks out of the year and people think they’re getting a great deal whereas when it’s not half off, they just don’t buy.

            • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              16
              ·
              4 days ago

              Poor guy. Tried to do some good in the world and paid the price for it. Nobody ever went broke overestimating the stupidity of the average person.

              • Laurel Raven@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                4 days ago

                “Why would I pay $25 for these pair of pants at full price when I could pay $24.99 for those [identical] pants that are half off?! Clearly, that’s the better deal!”

                Hell, could probably even make it $29.99 for the identical pants and people will still go with that because they think they’re paying five more bucks and getting a $60 pair of pants

          • SuperEars@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            4 days ago

            This doesn’t meet the bar you want, but my marketing professor called the .99 idea the single greatest thing to come out of marketing in a century.

            • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 days ago

              Sounds about right.

              Marketing hasn’t done anything positive for humanity. It is all just to manipulate people into buying shit they don’t need. It is the main driver for the overconsumption.

      • BakerBagel@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 days ago

        I was watching a PBS documentary about the first humans in the Americas. All the scientists are super cool until you get to the American anthropologist who starts using phrenology to explain why Native American tribes shouldn’t be given repatriation rights, only for a Danish geneticist to say “yeah, this is absolutely a Native American and i am willing to testify to that in any court of law”

        Pseudoscience is still all the rage if it can be used to push a political agenda.

    • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      The science is about how you initially react to the number. Your brain will see $19, and immediately you’ll think it’s $19. Only upon further inspection and processing through your cognition, you recognise that its $19.99, which is basically $20.

      It’s that initial reaction they want, to grab your attention. Anyone who is going through life without leveraging their higher thinking will fall for this shit. Anyone who thinks, at all, won’t.

      Unfortunately, there’s a nontrivial number of people who fall into that first category. People who were never taught to think. They just do.

    • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      4 days ago

      It is kind of a dick move when companies overcharge for shipping. I only charge calculated shipping on large or heavy items because those are the ones that vary a lot and I don’t want someone in zone 8 (like Southern California or even someone in HI buying it and shipping costing more than they paid. If it’s under 1 lb then I just give free shipping and bake it into the price.

      • moonbunny@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        This reminds me of my early shopping days using EBay, where it wasn’t uncommon for sellers to under-price their products so they show up near the top of the price (cheapest-most expensive) sort pile, and then charge an outrageous amount in shipping.

        I’ve found that almost always (at the time), that the seller offering free or low cost shipping was usually cheaper.

        • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 days ago

          That was because their fees were based on the sale price of the item minus the shipping. So they were only paying fees on 1 cent. They changed the fees so that the total sale including shipping is calculated.

    • Mercuri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Part of it is that there’s less hidden costs. I like it when it’s just “the total is $30” instead of “there’s $8 shipping and a $2 service fee and then $4 in taxes and…”

      I’ve also seen some online stores lure in a customer with a really cheap initial price and then on the last page just slam them with insane shipping and handling fees hoping that the customer either doesn’t notice or feels too invested at this point to cancel their purchase.

      But yes, part of it is also people are stupid when they see the word “free” as if the store wouldn’t move the cost somewhere else.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      That at least allows you to retrieve the full amount if you return the goods. Shipping costs you don’t get back.

    • Jackthelad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 days ago

      I don’t understand people who won’t pay £5 for shipping, but will instead spend another £15 on something they don’t need so they get free shipping.

      All you’ve done is lost money.

    • Snowclone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Worked in pricing for a big retailer, it 100% works and retailers don’t even like doing it, but it’s basically a necessity to get baseline sales. It’s WAY easier to have simple even number prices that calculate easily and get percent off sales and clearance prices that make sense. Really the only items you see it on are items competing with other retailers, so kraft mayo that every store has vs. A store brand soda you don’t care about volume on. The Mayo you better have $5.99 instead of $6.00 or it looks like you’re ripping them off. And even if they sell it got $4.99 it still keeps people thinking it’s a complex price difference rather than an even number they can compare more easily.

    • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 days ago

      That is honestly insane.

      In NZ the sticker price is what you pay, if the price on the sticker doesn’t include tax, it is false advertising and you pay what is on the sticker.

      It is entirely up to the retailer to ensure that the price is correct. The only exception to this, is if the price is obviously wrong e.g. $5.00 rather than $500.

  • Sixty@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    3 days ago

    The amount of times I’ve watched Youtubers say something like “35 dollars” while showing an image that shows the price as $35.96 happens too often for me to side with OP lol, sorry.

    • Jolteon@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      To be fair, in that specific case, they could have been rounding to the nearest $5. Unlike virtually all other instances of that behavior.

  • volvoxvsmarla @lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    4 days ago

    My husband is awful in that regard. He sees the first digit only and then rounds it down. “It’s just 30€” - it’s 39,99€. “It’s like 200€” - it’s 289,90€, “5000€” - 5999€. I love him to pieces but I don’t trust any of his numbers.

  • itsonlygeorge@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    People suck at math and this is how they confuse people into not caring what the actual price becomes when they have to add multiple items together.

    What’s 19.99 + 21.75 + 4.99 + 3.99 + 1.99? Can the common person do that math in their head while grocery shopping? What about adding the tax to that total? Not a chance.

    Most people probably don’t even know what the sales tax is in their own state.

      • MirthfulAlembic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        The major reason given is that taxes vary so much in the US by location that it would be onerous for businesses with locations in different areas to print different price tags and advertise prices broadly.

        It’s even an issue online because, until you enter your address, the online retailer has no clue what your tax rate will be, and they have to assess tax based on the purchaser’s location. Postal code isn’t always enough, as they can be shared by different cities with different tax rates.

        Some areas also vary tax by date (tax free holidays), though I don’t think consumers would care if their total ended up being cheaper than they thought.

        A national standard VAT would be the only way businesses might start including tax in price, but there’s no way to do that without a constitutional amendment. States have the power to tax, and they’re not going to stop now even if they receive VAT revenues.

          • NiHaDuncan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 days ago

            And then calculates tax right at the register. They have everything they need to do it, it’d hurt their bottom line and be consumer friendly so they don’t.

        • Sourav Satvaya@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          In some countries like India they have GST (Goods & service tax) which is applicable all over India. It was implemented in 2017 and has unified the indirect tax system across the country. This means that the same tax is levied on goods and services irrespective of the state or territory in India. Most items have 18% GST and the price tag always shows tax included, which is convenient for buyers.

      • cynar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        Most people round down. Their brain locks on to the 1 of 19.99, and approximates it to 10.00. We need to actively counter this to see it as 20.00. It’s a skill most people don’t apply all the time, and a number can’t even do.

        Once you can do it reliably, it’s mind-boggling that others can’t, but it’s still a learnt skill, that needs to be applied.

          • cynar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 days ago

            It’s a subconscious thing. It’s how our brain is wired. It’s a bit like advertising. Most people don’t like ads. However, when confronted my 2 similar products, we will go with the familiar one. The source of that familiarity is irrelevant, ads make it familiar, just the same as using it, or a recommendation.

            It’s possible to override both of these effects, but that requires a level of conscious effort. I can almost guarantee you’ve been caught by both at different times. You just didn’t notice (since noticing would allow you to correct).

            Basically, $19.99 is in the category “under $20”. $20.00 is in “over $20”. Without conscious correction, you act on this.

          • cynar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            Some slight ramdom paper reading, back in my uni days. Though I’ve ran across it via other sources over the years since. Unfortunately I don’t have any links to hand though.

            It might better be described as people put numbers into categories. Most people have a 10-20 category. 19.99 fits. 20.00 gets bumped up to the next box. It’s a sub/semi conscious thing. If we use our higher thought process, we can deal with the numbers. That takes effort however, by default, we chunk. The price just abuses a common rollover point most people share.

      • itsonlygeorge@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        No. Most people round to the nearest whole number and often just pick a direction to round.

        Since no one does math in their head anymore the total is always more than they expected. No calculators on shopping carts anymore either.

  • gerryflap@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    4 days ago

    Honestly, however much I want to pretend to be better than that, I think it does work on me. Obviously not on a conscious level, I know how numbers work, but some part of my monkey brain sees the 1 instead of the 2 and therefore concludes that it must be way cheaper. It’s a feeling that no amount of facts is going to disable. And in the end many purchasing decisions aren’t based on a full analysis but on feelings.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    4 days ago

    I generally round up to nearest bigger number or close to that. $19.99 is $20. $23.99 would probably be $25. $180 would just be $200.

    No real rhyme or reason, just the bigger the number the more I fudge the “real” price upwards thanks to sales tax and a “can I really afford this?” factor.

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    4 days ago

    It does work believe it or not. It is something that plays to your subconscious. You will favor the slightly cheaper option even if you aren’t aware of it.

    • shneancy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      not just cheaper though

      even subconsciously $15.55 will not be that better than $15.56

      but in a change from $20 to $19.99 the whole first number is smaller, and that gives our ape brains the feeling that it’s not as expensive

      to reveal the vibes your brain operates on, think about bigger numbers. Imagine yourself to be in kind of a rush, you want to buy something, but family is waiting, or you need to walk your dog, or maybe you’re doing shopping before work, regular life stuff,

      first scenario

      an identical item is sold for $2920 in the first store you visit, and for $2970 in the second store you visit. The stores are an inconvenient travel time away from each other. Do you go back to the first store?

      second scenario

      now, an identical item is sold for $2975 in the first store you visit, and for $3025 in the second store you visit. The stores are still an inconvenient travel time away from each other. Do you go back to the first store?

      though the difference is still $50, the jump from $2975 to $3025 feels more significant than $2920 to $2970. And obviously many of us will go back to get the cheaper option in both cases, but there’s a lot of people on this planet who have money to spare but not the time, and a lot of other circumstances too, marketing people know it and will do their damnest to sway you to buy their product

    • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I learned all about this in “thinking fast and slow” by Daniel Kahneman. He talks about system 1 and system 2, where system 1 is your kind of knee-jerk reaction to a thing (thinking fast), and system 2 is the contemplative and careful consideration of a thing (thinking slow).

      I would argue that some people overly leverage system 1 (thinking fast) because it’s generally easier, and takes less time and mental effort to do. Those that either can’t, or are unwilling to engage system 2 in their day to day activities, will 100% fall for these kinds of misleading prices, since system 1 is cutting so many corners so that it can be fast and efficient (mostly on how much energy is used), that it skips a lot of the cognitive steps and goes right to the (often incorrect) conclusion. That $19.99 is $19 (or $10 in some cases).

      In the book, they discuss that system 1 often gives the wrong information that is later rejected by system 2 when further consideration is given to a particular input/stimulus.

      If someone isn’t engaging system 2 as a check to ensure system 1 isn’t lying to them, then shit like $19.99 seems cheaper than $20. It doesn’t hold up to any scrutiny, but they’re not targeting thoughtful people with these practices. For thoughtful people, there’s functionally no difference between $19.99 and $20.

      Yes, the difference is one cent, but given that one cent is so worthless in today’s society, to the point that Canada stopped making one cent coins (and other countries have done so as well), there’s functionally no difference between the prices.

      One cent is only worth anything if it is combined with many other cents. The sum of those pennies becomes valuable when you conglomerate enough of them.

  • AnimalsDream@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 days ago

    This is one of those things that makes me feel the slightest bit more agitated and cynical towards people and society. We all know it’s manipulative, and that should be enough reason not to do it. So why does everyone who runs a business do it? Like yeah it does work, but is it really worth subtly eroding your own customer’s trust in you? There’s an invisible cost of goodwill here.

    • Jackcooper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 days ago

      Are you choosing to go to the store that does $20 instead of $19.99?

      Does that store exist?

      It’s more that the customer refuses to buy the $20 item but at 19.99 it seems just a little more attainable.

      • AnimalsDream@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        4 days ago

        That is a fair point. But then again, I don’t even remember the last time I was in a store that had honest prices.

        • nek0d3r@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 days ago

          I remember that for a time, JC Penney focused on honest pricing and abandoned common predatory prices. They came close to bankruptcy and went back to their old ways. The psychology of feeling like we got a good deal is so ingrained into most people that it becomes difficult to run a business without those things

  • PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    4 days ago

    I’m not sure it works on me. Not because I’m some super human resistant to advertising (I’m not) but because I’m so bad at math that when they start asking me about anything involving small change I tune out and overestimate by 50% rounded into nice whole numbers.

    “This is 19.99”

    “Okay so it’s basically 30$.”

    It gives me nice surprises sometimes when I get my receipt.

        • Sludgeyy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          You can remove the decimal then add it back at the end

          15.50

          Is

          1500

          Half would be 775

          Or 7.75

          • cheers_queers@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            yep, and figure out what 20% of your bill is by taking 10% and double it. saves my ass every time i gotta tip lol

            • Sludgeyy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              You can take 1% of anything, then multiply as well.

              Like 7% of 15.50

              1% is .155 (10% is moving decimal to left once, 1% is twice)

              .155 × 7 = 1.083

              That’s a hard one to do in your head, but .155 × 7 is easier to do on paper than 15.50 × .07.

              Say something is 49.99 and 7% off. 1% is .5. .5 ×7 = 3.5. You could probably do that in your head. Otherwise, good luck trying to do 7% of 50 in your head.

              Edit: Hmm. So you could also do 3.5% of 100 instead of 7% of 50. That would have been the easiest way to do that one.

              Bonus: I thought I’d mention 11s. They are my favorite thing in math because they are so easy and you seem like a math wizard to anyone.

              Say you have 42 × 11. That’s 462.

              You just split apart the 4 and 2, add 4 and 2, then stick it in the middle.

              Something like 67 × 11. Where the digits add >10.

              6…7, 6+7=13, 6+1…3…7. So 737.