3 ms·

The company interest is also to give customers value

by iddan 7y ago

firethief 7y ago
Value as judged by the customers, not rational actors. Useful as this is, drawing more focus to costs would drive customers to shop elsewhere. A version of this I could see shops actually implementing would be a graph of the "savings" per-item, a metric which is essentially meaningless but gives people savvy feelings.
- IggleSniggle 7y ago
  I disagree. I would prefer to shop at a place that showed me this. It would increase my loyalty to that grocer. The downside to the grocer is that I might be less inclined to buy meat, but maybe that still works because I instead gravitate to expensive veg options and look at my percent spend and celebrate my good decision making. The only way this would drive me to use a different grocery is if it did a price comparison vs other grocers and I discovered I was getting screwed...but even then, if it was marginal, I’m not sure I would change grocer. Edit: currently, as a shopper, you are most likely to just look at the bottom line. I think you are right that grocer adoption would be complicated from a business decision perspective, but I think implementation of this would hit “brand names” more than anyone else. It’s in both the grocers and shoppers best interest.
  - firethief 7y ago
    I never said no one would like it, so your counterexample isn't a basis to disagree unless you think most people are as rational as you [think you are] in the checkout line (they aren't). Besides, our own assessments of our preferences are notoriously inaccurate. It would be logical for you to like it, but I'll believe you actually do when you make choices reflecting the preference. Which you'll never have a chance to do unless some store's marketing department thinks this is a good idea.
    - IggleSniggle 7y ago
      You are right, I am disagreeing on the basis of speculation based on my own experiences and preferences. I assumed you were making an argument from the same place? That said, you are right, we will likely never have the opportunity to test this particular preference. So, from the place of my personal experience: I am sucker like everyone else, and prefer stores that tell me a per-unit price that I can compare like-to-like brands, often to the point of irrationality. I will also grant that I could have a backlash on this if it makes the receipts unduly long, which is a reason for me to prefer RiteAid over CVS. Plenty of reasons not to like this. I just don't personally believe that drawing attention to price would be a reason for me to stop shopping at a place, although it would (hopefully) alter my buying habits within said store.
      - firethief 7y ago
        > You are right, I am disagreeing on the basis of speculation based on my own experiences and preferences. I assumed you were making an argument from the same place? Actually, no. I too think I have logical preferences and would prefer the additional information--but I don't think typical shoppers would respond well to it, possibly including myself (because I don't know if I would act in accordance with my estimation of my hypothetical preferences). So I'm making my argument from psychological principles, and in particular by inferring what supermarkets know about the psychology of typical shoppers (because I'm not an expert, but I assume the people the big supermarkets consult to stay competitive are the best in the field). > So, from the place of my personal experience: I am sucker like everyone else, and prefer stores that tell me a per-unit price that I can compare like-to-like brands, often to the point of irrationality. If that's what people actually want, stores have no idea what they're doing. The supermarket where I usually shop uses different units for the "unit prices" of different brands, so if I want to compare unit prices I have to do the math myself. The information they highlight tends to be the "sales", which serve to: convey a feeling of beating the system (even when they're so common, taking the sale obviously just means not paying the sucker price); and constantly invalidate all previous price comparisons for commodities like coffee where in-depth price comparison would otherwise make sense. > I just don't personally believe that drawing attention to price would be a reason for me to stop shopping at a place, although it would (hopefully) alter my buying habits within said store. I wouldn't expect anyone would think they'd be unhappy to have the additional information, because people consistently assume their behavior is logical. Ha.
xrd 7y ago
I don't know a lot about supermarket economics but I recall seeing articles about how supermarkets put impulse food right by the checkout. I just succumbed to that, and when I'm with my kids, I get chills when I see Paw Patrol or Frozen branded crap. That is intentional by the store and gives me zero value. Also recently heard a story on NPR about the dynamics of shelf space. No one who needs to get that space other than a Canadian company would talk on record. And, if I heard correctly, not only do you pay for placement, but you can pay to position your competitors. https://www.npr.org/2019/04/30/718711109/how-grocery-shelves-get-stacked https://www.npr.org/2019/04/30/718711109/how-grocery-shelves... For these reasons, I really like that online shopping is becoming an option. But, I'm not sure Amazon will use any fewer dark patterns to fill their virtual shelf space.
gumby 7y ago
I like to think so but it rarely feels that way.

The company interest is also to give customers value

by iddan 7y ago

The company interest is also to give customers value

Value as judged by the customers, not rational actors. Useful as this is, drawing more focus to costs would drive customers to shop elsewhere. A version of this I could see shops actually implementing would be a graph of the "savings" per-item, a metric which is essentially meaningless but gives people savvy feelings.

IggleSniggle 7y ago
I disagree. I would prefer to shop at a place that showed me this. It would increase my loyalty to that grocer. The downside to the grocer is that I might be less inclined to buy meat, but maybe that still works because I instead gravitate to expensive veg options and look at my percent spend and celebrate my good decision making. The only way this would drive me to use a different grocery is if it did a price comparison vs other grocers and I discovered I was getting screwed...but even then, if it was marginal, I’m not sure I would change grocer. Edit: currently, as a shopper, you are most likely to just look at the bottom line. I think you are right that grocer adoption would be complicated from a business decision perspective, but I think implementation of this would hit “brand names” more than anyone else. It’s in both the grocers and shoppers best interest.
- firethief 7y ago
  I never said no one would like it, so your counterexample isn't a basis to disagree unless you think most people are as rational as you [think you are] in the checkout line (they aren't). Besides, our own assessments of our preferences are notoriously inaccurate. It would be logical for you to like it, but I'll believe you actually do when you make choices reflecting the preference. Which you'll never have a chance to do unless some store's marketing department thinks this is a good idea.
  - IggleSniggle 7y ago
    You are right, I am disagreeing on the basis of speculation based on my own experiences and preferences. I assumed you were making an argument from the same place? That said, you are right, we will likely never have the opportunity to test this particular preference. So, from the place of my personal experience: I am sucker like everyone else, and prefer stores that tell me a per-unit price that I can compare like-to-like brands, often to the point of irrationality. I will also grant that I could have a backlash on this if it makes the receipts unduly long, which is a reason for me to prefer RiteAid over CVS. Plenty of reasons not to like this. I just don't personally believe that drawing attention to price would be a reason for me to stop shopping at a place, although it would (hopefully) alter my buying habits within said store.
    - firethief 7y ago
      > You are right, I am disagreeing on the basis of speculation based on my own experiences and preferences. I assumed you were making an argument from the same place? Actually, no. I too think I have logical preferences and would prefer the additional information--but I don't think typical shoppers would respond well to it, possibly including myself (because I don't know if I would act in accordance with my estimation of my hypothetical preferences). So I'm making my argument from psychological principles, and in particular by inferring what supermarkets know about the psychology of typical shoppers (because I'm not an expert, but I assume the people the big supermarkets consult to stay competitive are the best in the field). > So, from the place of my personal experience: I am sucker like everyone else, and prefer stores that tell me a per-unit price that I can compare like-to-like brands, often to the point of irrationality. If that's what people actually want, stores have no idea what they're doing. The supermarket where I usually shop uses different units for the "unit prices" of different brands, so if I want to compare unit prices I have to do the math myself. The information they highlight tends to be the "sales", which serve to: convey a feeling of beating the system (even when they're so common, taking the sale obviously just means not paying the sucker price); and constantly invalidate all previous price comparisons for commodities like coffee where in-depth price comparison would otherwise make sense. > I just don't personally believe that drawing attention to price would be a reason for me to stop shopping at a place, although it would (hopefully) alter my buying habits within said store. I wouldn't expect anyone would think they'd be unhappy to have the additional information, because people consistently assume their behavior is logical. Ha.

xrd 7y ago

I don't know a lot about supermarket economics but I recall seeing articles about how supermarkets put impulse food right by the checkout. I just succumbed to that, and when I'm with my kids, I get chills when I see Paw Patrol or Frozen branded crap. That is intentional by the store and gives me zero value. Also recently heard a story on NPR about the dynamics of shelf space. No one who needs to get that space other than a Canadian company would talk on record. And, if I heard correctly, not only do you pay for placement, but you can pay to position your competitors. https://www.npr.org/2019/04/30/718711109/how-grocery-shelves-get-stacked https://www.npr.org/2019/04/30/718711109/how-grocery-shelves... For these reasons, I really like that online shopping is becoming an option. But, I'm not sure Amazon will use any fewer dark patterns to fill their virtual shelf space.

gumby 7y ago

I like to think so but it rarely feels that way.