> but if they didn't pocket it, many more would walk away. You do realize that this would that customers do _not_ view it as a sunk cost right? Hence my origin

> but if they didn't pocket it, many more would walk away. You do realize that this would that customers do _not_ view it as a sunk cost right? Hence my original confusion. Also your statement here pretty directly contradicts what you wrote earlier: > Very few people are going to walk away from that new truck that they were so enthusiastic about put down $5k to reserve it. edit: Okay the more I think about it I can see sort how you're calling this a sunk cost. You mean it's a sunk cost in the sense that the dealer isn't letting them take the 5k back and that will keep some people in the game. That's not really my understanding of a normal sunk cost though. In this case the 5k comes out of the purchase price of the car meaning that someone who has put 5k down will actually pay (marginally) 5k less than who has not. So there is actual economic value in considering the 5k down payment in future decisions as opposed to sunk costs that are entirely lost. In any case, I find it kind of insane to burn these customers like this when you have such a hot market. Instead just let people out if they want and increase the prices a little more if you want those 5k in your pocket. Killing your reputation for money you can get otherwise seems a bit silly when you realize that the market will someday turn around.