In relation to this, I really hate the South Korean convenience stores’ aggressive 2-for-1 on many of the most basic things, because you know you’re essentially being forced into buying the second item you didn’t need.
When I lived in a tiny apartment, and had a tight budget, I felt completely unseen at the supermarket—I have no place for the surplus, and to get the discount I have significantly increase my spend. Thank goodness for “dollar stores”, who shift the other way to decrease the items value to keep it at the same price point (ie. 1/2-sheet paper towels in single packs).
Isn't that pretty easy to get around with better wording? eg. "2 for $x, min 2"
Not if the same law doesn't permit minimums in order to get a discount. People on HN like to pretend that the people who write laws are completely clueless, but they've been doing it longer than we've been alive and know exactly what they're doing.
It helps to read the infinitesimally small print on the sale tag on the shelf. As I've moved from state to state and city to city you can tell where this sort of thing is regulated or not.
I shamelessly pull the tags off the shelves to read them. If the stores don't want me damaging the tags, they can simply make them in a size that's readable.
Are there any jurisdictions that actually have such laws? This is basically bulk pricing and it's essentially impossible to outlaw without getting rid of it entirely, which come with other issues. Legislating "2 for $x = $x/2 for each item" is the most you can realistically implement. Moreover any such laws are trivial to bypass by gluing multiple packs together (like they do at costco) and selling that as a separate sku.
Yes. You can tell because the tag will read something like "SALE! $5 when you buy 2!" and then have smaller print reading "Individual price: $2.50."
Moreover any such laws are trivial to bypass by gluing multiple packs together (like they do at costco) and selling that as a separate sku.
But that's not what we're discussing here. We're discussing discounting existing items when bought in bulk, not creating new items.
To your point, though, creating a new SKU is not without its costs, both for the manufacturer and the retailer. If you're selling something in someone else's store (supermarkets are the example this thread is dealing with), you don't get to just make up SKUs and products on a whim. Think about the logistics involved.
Then again, is food is inflating faster than the interest rates, then you could still come out ahead!
Unless you're not coming back for months, the "interest" you lost is under one cent and not worth worrying about
It's also quite a "safe" loan to have because not only is it free to hold, you're probably never going to need to repay it all at once.
???
How is taking both items home, possibly wasting one, better than taking one home, and taking the other in a few weeks and having no wastage? You're just hurting yourself (by possibly wasting an item) just to deny business some fraction of a cent worth of interest, which in ironic given that convenience stores are high margin businesses and you're choosing to buy from them in the first place. Whatever margin they made on the sale far exceeds any "interest-free loan" you gave them.
There's a reason so many companies like to make it easy for you to top up some kind of prepayment account or otherwise hold benefits for you. Not only is it a free float, but it keeps bringing customers back.