this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
597 points (97.6% liked)
memes
17055 readers
3216 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
But it IS how we see prices. If there weren't science behind it, they wouldn't be doing it.
JC Penny kinda showed that no. It isn’t pseudocience
What's the story about JC Penny?
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
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.
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.
"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
Some marketing strategies are pseudoscience, but this one isn't.
Does anyone in the thread have actual info to back this up?
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.
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.
You should be able to find various tests and studies of this phenomenon on Google
So, it's a "no" than?
It's a yes but find it yourself
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.
I don't. Never did. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
You do though
At some level you will favor the 19.99. You might justify it with some other rational but there will be the bias.
No, I dont though.
It really depends on the study you choose to believe into. (No, everyone does it, isn't a pro argument. People always had strange beliefs which later changed. I think it's called major consensus narrative or maybe consensus reality
I like this hill, I'll stay here. Thank you.)
dowsing for suckadrippas