Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

People spend more when prices end in .99 (2018)

kenthendricks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 210 posts

Re: People spend more when prices end in .99 (2018)

#141

Post by nine_k »

agumonkey wrote: post #114
tracerbulletx wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Retailers don't do this because of published studies. They do it because they've tested it internally for the last 40 years.

Reminds me of people who tried selling sturdy repairable phones with longer battery life. Even when people complained about battery issues etc. They kept buying the thinnest flagship. Mass markets are mass market.

Phones, besides the functionality, are fashion accessories and bragging chips, and sometimes chiefly so.

I think it was Vertu who first recognized the potential back in early 2000s, The Matrix (1999) made a visual point of it, and since 2007, Apple has been building their entire strategy based on that, with enormous success.

People who need sturdy phones do exist, are few, and they don't brandish them, because these phones are well-beaten.

Re: People spend more when prices end in .99 (2018)

#143

Post by johnnyanmac »

kerkeslager wrote: post #50

The kind of person who looks at this sort of thing and says, "Hey we should use this to manipulate people" is the kind of person our society needs less of. I'm sure Hacker News will have some earnest argument for why this form of competition is actually good for people.

> sure Hacker News will have some earnest argument for why this form of competition is actually good for people.

Nope, the current consensus this time is HN assuming they know better than a researcher (and decades of business) and inserting their own opinions.

>The kind of person who looks at this sort of thing and says, "Hey we should use this to manipulate people" is the kind of person our society needs less of.

Ever since JC Penney, I grew apathetic. People want to be tricked, why ruin their fun?

Re: People spend more when prices end in .99 (2018)

#144

Post by johnnyanmac »

apantel wrote: post #18
add-sub-mul-div wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not just a flippant reply. The fundamental purpose of invention in our society is no longer about benefitting our lives. If they invented consumer travel to Mars tomorrow I'd have no interest. In 2024 it would be stupid to believe the customer experience would take the form of anything better than the Star Wars hotel.

The “fundamental purpose of invention in our society” has been for military advantage more often than not.

You can call it marketing if you're really cynical. What client has more money than the government, and the budget to spend in the trillions?

Re: People spend more when prices end in .99 (2018)

#145

Post by teekert »

agumonkey wrote: post #114
tracerbulletx wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Retailers don't do this because of published studies. They do it because they've tested it internally for the last 40 years.

Reminds me of people who tried selling sturdy repairable phones with longer battery life. Even when people complained about battery issues etc. They kept buying the thinnest flagship. Mass markets are mass market.

The people that complained may not have been te ones buying the flagships. At least, I wasn’t.

Although normie friends have commented on why I bought a OnePlus3 instead of something normal like a Samsung.

Re: People spend more when prices end in .99 (2018)

#146

Post by RankingMember »

__cayenne__ wrote: post #55
throwaway13337 wrote: post #9

I never like thinking of pricing in this way. When you price something as $9.99, you're signaling to your customer that you're trying to manipulate them. Whereas a flat $10 is honest. Integrity means a lot. The software I sell is priced in whole numbers. However, the magnitude of effect claimed in the article is huge. It's the difference between selling at cost and a huge margin. Between doing well and shutting down…

In 2012, JCPenney launched their "Fair and Square" pricing campaign, which included adopting whole number pricing. This campaign was considered a significant failure and is attributed with causing a 20% decrease in sales.

I think the "no more coupons or discounts" played a huge part in this failure. This whole strategy was something brought in by ex-Apple Retail Store exec "Ron Johnson" when he became CEO in 2011.

My own speculation is that he tried to apply hard-line strategies that work when you have a unique good with strictly-set pricing (Apple products), but fall apart when you're selling goods that people can get anywhere for a variety of prices (e.g. Levi's jeans).

Re: People spend more when prices end in .99 (2018)

#147

Post by swores »

indymike wrote: post #97
qup wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'll provide evidence that they've studied it internally? I don't think so.

> I don't think so. OK.

They were being polite because you were flat out wrong: a walk through a shopping centre gives you absolutely zero information about whether prices chosen have been tested or were picked by throwing darts at a calculator. It just tells you what prices those shops have chosen to sell things for, nothing at all about the reasoning behind those prices.

Re: People spend more when prices end in .99 (2018)

#148

Post by dennis_jeeves2 »

subroutine wrote: post #42
tracerbulletx wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Retailers don't do this because of published studies. They do it because they've tested it internally for the last 40 years.

And many physicians still recommend putting ice on sprained ankles 5x per day to reduce the “harmful” swelling. Even though the abundance of research now shows icing delays the infiltration of proteins, hormones, and cells that aid in healing processes (and can even cause further tissue damage). Practices like this stick around because of the desire to be seen making proactive recommendations with putative benefit. W…

>Practices like this stick around because of the desire to be seen making proactive recommendations with putative benefit

One manifestation of this phenomenon in it's extreme form is cancer diagnosis and treatments. Barring a few exceptions, most cancer treatments are useless.

Re: People spend more when prices end in .99 (2018)

#149

Post by Sightline »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #137
Sightline wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not affordability, that's tricking someone into buying something that they wouldn't have otherwise.

If they buy something becsuse it's a penny cheaper, who's really being tricked?

The consumer.

$0.01 doesn't make it affordable, it's just a mind trick. You seem to be aware of this, yet you're defending it.

Re: People spend more when prices end in .99 (2018)

#150

Post by dieselgate »

chmod775 wrote: post #135
agumonkey wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of people who tried selling sturdy repairable phones with longer battery life. Even when people complained about battery issues etc. They kept buying the thinnest flagship. Mass markets are mass market.

> Reminds me of people who tried selling sturdy repairable phones with longer battery life. My brother buys these. They survive up to a year in his "care", rather than the usual 3-4 months of flimsier phones. They all end up with cracked screens within months though. Almost no mainstream consumer electronics nowadays are meant for people who lead active lives (outside of planned and streamlined activities like going…

Indeed, regarding watercraft have seen it as “you don’t sell the boat you sell the dream”
Post reply on HN