Posted by tomorrow@erols.com on June 16, 2008, 4:46 pm
> Turby wrote:
> > The marketing dweebs think we'll care if they change to whole
> > numbers and drop the 9/10ths,
> But underlying all of this is the practical impossibility of doing it.
> Unless *all*companies* do it, the ones who do are at a competitive
> disadvantage. Ain't gonna happen, but you knew that.
They'll be at a competetive advantage, of course, if they simply DROP
the $00.9 and undersell their neighbor by 9/10ths of a cent per
gallon. And they'll be better of than if they had dropped the price
by a whole cnt, too.
Posted by Bob Myers on June 16, 2008, 4:53 pm
> They'll be at a competetive advantage, of course, if they simply DROP
> the $00.9 and undersell their neighbor by 9/10ths of a cent per
> gallon. And they'll be better of than if they had dropped the price
> by a whole cnt, too.
That makes the assumption, though, that a suffiiciently
high percentage of customers will notice the $0.009
difference so as to buy YOUR gas (as opposed to the
other guy's - i.e., they actually notice something beyond
the first few digits) so as to make up for the lower revenues.
Dropping the full cent ensures that even those who check
only the first three figures see that you have a lower
price as well, and costs you just $0.001 additional. Hard
to tell, unless you have some really good data on the buying
habits of the general public in this regard (and I have to think
that the gasoline retailers DO have that data) which is the
best option.
Bob M.
Posted by tomorrow@erols.com on June 16, 2008, 4:55 pm
> > They'll be at a competetive advantage, of course, if they simply DROP
> > the $00.9 and undersell their neighbor by 9/10ths of a cent per
> > gallon. And they'll be better of than if they had dropped the price
> > by a whole cnt, too.
> That makes the assumption, though, that a suffiiciently
> high percentage of customers will notice the $0.009
> difference so as to buy YOUR gas (as opposed to the
> other guy's - i.e., they actually notice something beyond
> the first few digits) so as to make up for the lower revenues.
> Dropping the full cent ensures that even those who check
> only the first three figures see that you have a lower
> price as well, and costs you just $0.001 additional. Hard
> to tell, unless you have some really good data on the buying
> habits of the general public in this regard (and I have to think
> that the gasoline retailers DO have that data) which is the
> best option.
> Bob M.
Think of the money to be saved on gas station SIGNAGE!!!!
Posted by Turby on June 17, 2008, 3:38 am
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 08:05:52 -0400, "St. John Smythe"
>Turby wrote:
>> The marketing dweebs think we'll care if they change to whole
>> numbers and drop the 9/10ths,
>But underlying all of this is the practical impossibility of doing it.
>Unless *all*companies* do it, the ones who do are at a competitive
>disadvantage. Ain't gonna happen, but you knew that.
Yebbut...
<pedantic Krusty history lesson mode on>
In the old days, there was a gas station on at least 3 corners of
every intersection. You'd get to the corner looking for the cheapest
gas and see the signs, all ending in 9/10ths. You'd choose based on
the signs you saw.
<pKhlm off>
Today, with only 10-20% of the stations still standing, you only see
one sign and not another for the next mile. There is no competitive
advantage to the 9/10ths any more.
--
Turby the Turbosurfer
Posted by . on June 18, 2008, 8:21 pm
> <pedanticKrustyhistory lesson mode on>
> In the old days, there was a gas station on at least 3 corners of
> every intersection. You'd get to the corner looking for the cheapest
> gas and see the signs, all ending in 9/10ths. You'd choose based on
> the signs you saw.
> <pKhlm off>
There are four kinds of people in this world.
The first group makes things happen, while the second group watches
things happen. The third group wonders what happened, and the fourth
group never noticed that anything happened at all.
> > The marketing dweebs think we'll care if they change to whole
> > numbers and drop the 9/10ths,
> But underlying all of this is the practical impossibility of doing it.
> Unless *all*companies* do it, the ones who do are at a competitive
> disadvantage. Ain't gonna happen, but you knew that.