Sometimes items are priced at 5 cents less than a dollar, e.g., $49.95. I wonder why? Does that give shoppers a subconscious urge to consider it $40-something where $49.99 would not? Otherwise, why do vendors forgo the extra four cents?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Words or phrases that annoy you (even if you can't explain why) . . .
- Thread starter usagora
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Exactly as you say. It's very well known, but even people who know it still fall for it.
£14.99 triggers the £14 bit and hence makes it seem a lot cheaper than if it was priced at £15. This is why I round up and say (aloud or just in my head to myself) that it costs £15.
For example at Costco, $.97 means the last manager's discount or clearance. Basically if you were holding out on buying an item and saw this price, it is almost guaranteed 1) it is never going to be restocked 2) lowest price you can get at this store 3) time to buy now if you wanted it.
While I suspect that there may well be some truth to the psychological explanation (namely, that - subconsciously) one may read the price as cheaper than it actually is, a senior member of the staff of a venerable store (one of those affluent places that was more than a century old at that point) explained to me (when I had made exactly this argument to him) - a quarter of a century ago (when cash still ruled) that the main reason for this practice is actually to ensure that the customer can see the till being opened, the cash placed therein, and registered, and a minimal amount of change returned to the purchaser, thereby ensuring that an exchange and transaction has taken place, and has been witnessed by the purchaser as having taken place.
In other words, such numbers ensure that the till must be opened, the cash placed within, (rather than surreptitiously pocketed), the purchase thus registered - this opening of the till is proof of purchase - the (least amount of) change returned to the customer and that this exchange, or transaction, has been witnessed.
Last edited:
I'm sure that was one reason, or the sole original reason (I also heard this) but nowadays with most payments being made by card, and/or with receipts usually given out or swiped against loyalty cards, the reason is most likely to be marketing.
It's called "charm pricing". Apparently, as customers (i.e. us!) read numbers left to right, £14.99 is subconsciously thought to be closer to £14 than £15. We're so manipulable*.
* I had to type that into google as I was sure I'd just invented a word. Apparently I'm not that smart, and someone beat me to it 😁
It's called "charm pricing". Apparently, as customers (i.e. us!) read numbers left to right, £14.99 is subconsciously thought to be closer to £14 than £15. We're so manipulable*.
* I had to type that into google as I was sure I'd just invented a word. Apparently I'm not that smart, and someone beat me to it 😁
Text speak. All the lols, 2s, 4s, Us, and the like. Emojis.
Agreed! I just got a comment on a Facebook post that was very genuinely nice but it made me cringe just because of all the slang, it was quite ridiculous.
i am genuinely having a hard time thinking up cringey phrases that bug me im sure there out there i just cant think of any what i keep coming back to is the poor or complete absence of grammar and punctuation in writing of grown adults thats what can get me going
A guy used the term "drummist" a few days ago when we were talking about instrumentation for this upcoming show. While that's not the proper term ("drummer" is), I do kind of like it.
Also, one I just saw on a comment that always makes me angry is, "You ate" as in "you did well."
Aslo seen it used when commenting on say a series that is a hit or enjoying an outing or concert.
If I ever saw you in concert, I would say afterward "close the buffet because rm5 ate!"
That one is peak Gen Z slang. No cap, I say it sometimes.
Blame Walmart for this; in particular, Sam Walton, and upending the entire concept of product distribution.
Back in them old days, There was the following means for shipping a product to a store for sale (used by the likes of Sears, JC Penney, Brandeis, KMart, Macy's, Nordstrom, Bloomingdales, Montgomery Ward, etc.):
- a company creates a product that costs $5 to create.
- That product gets sent to from the factory to the national warehouse, via (insert transportation company here).
- Product gets sent from the national warehouse to a regional distributor (again, insert transport company here).
- Product gets sent from the regional distributor to a local distributor (again, insert transport company here).
- Product gets sent from the local distributor to the store (again, insert transport company here).
- Product gets put out on display for sale.
Enter Walton. Walton sees a way to make money from that, so instead of using steps 3-5 in the chain, he:
- buys his own trucks, to save the money that would be paid out to the various transportation companies to transport that product,
- creates his own distribution network: Sam Walton Distribution Centers, to eliminate the need for the regional and local distributors and again saving the money that would be paid out to those distributors. That way, he ships from himself to himself, and eliminates that part of the markup.
- Ships from his own warehouses to his own stores, and saves the money from the transport of the product there.
- The store sells the product for $24.94 or some weird non-even price, to give the consumer the (mis)perception that they are buying the product for a cheaper price than those companies that are using the old model.
- Sam Walton pockets all of the savings, and makes more money than the stores using the old model
So yes, that $.04 to $.06 difference does psychologically make a difference in the eyes of the typical consumer; however, they don't realize how duped they have been with who is actually saving the money, and where that savings goes.
BL.
Apropos a recent video on MacRumors talking about the zoom factor of iPhone cameras...
I can easily forgive the slight typographic laziness of using "2x" for two times instead of "2×". After all, typewriters of past decades didn't have the symbol, so we got used to the lower-case x meaning times.
What curdles my curd is when people pronounce "2x" as "two ex", when they actually mean "two times".
I can easily forgive the slight typographic laziness of using "2x" for two times instead of "2×". After all, typewriters of past decades didn't have the symbol, so we got used to the lower-case x meaning times.
What curdles my curd is when people pronounce "2x" as "two ex", when they actually mean "two times".
a new one that people say that I hear all the time is “I appreciate you” it sounds so cringey and insincere 🤮
Pet hate for the day: "I could care less". No, you mean you couldn't care less. If you could care less, then you obviously care at least some, and potentially you care a lot. It seems to be mostly an American thing. Which surprises me about as much as snow falling in Lapland in December.
Exactly, and well said.
Yes, this tiresome expression does seem to be confined to the US; elsewhere, we say (and write) "I couldn't care less".
Another expression that really irks me is when I read the weird "off of" (another expression the use of which appears to be confined to Americans), instead of the correct usage of "from", or simply "off" ("I took my coat off"; also, "he took it from me", or, "he took it off me", the latter use most frequently heard from a complaining child).
However, this isn't the only (mis) use of "of" (from Americans) that riles me. There is another, that ghastly "could of", "would of", "should of". Grrr.
This use of "of" is, or has come about - I strongly suspect - as a result of a verbal contraction, a compression of sound that is then rendered in writing. Originally, it would have been written (and spoken) as "could have", "would have", and "should have", but - both orally and in writing - has been compressed, or contracted, to "could've", "should've", and "would've", which, through mishearing, then is rendered (phonetically) as the appalling "could of"....and so on.
I will admit to gritted teeth, clenched jaws, and averted eyes when I come across such horrors.
Last edited:
One of the places I might well say or write "I could NOT care less".
The number of times you can remove "of" and the words still makes sense, or make better sense, is huge! If that doesn't improve things, replace "of" by "have". That sorts out most of the rest!
People calling machine learning and large language models Artificial Intelligence.
The terminology has changed over the years and it is complicated. Static expert systems used to be called "AI" back in the day. Now I must admit when people say "artificial intelligence" I don't know if they are referring to computer systems that adapt or learn as a result of feedback or "artificial general intelligence", as if human-like intelligence is the only true form of general intelligence. Indeed these days I rather wonder just how intelligent we human beings really are.
I always thought, and was taught, that ML was a subset of AI (as is Deep Learning). I still do think that
I always thought, and was taught, that ML was a subset of AI (as is Deep Learning). I still do think that
HTML, VRML, and SGML would all like to have a word with you.
BL.