• QuickyOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1210 months ago

    Yeah, but only for 1. There would still have been no saving buying 3 over 2.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      If original price was 9

      1 for 9

      2 for 18 (deal gives 2 off)

      3 for 27 (deal gives 3 off)

      If it was 10

      1 for 10

      2 for 20 (4 off)

      3 for 30 (6 off)

      • QuickyOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        510 months ago

        Yeah but it was never that. Only the original price was changed with a sticker. The 2x and 3x were always as they were.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          8
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          I know. If the single price was anything other than 8, the other hard coded prices give scaling discounts.

          The adjusted price saves you money on a single one and removes the bulk savings. Kinda neat to me. Wonder if that was on purpose to make it easier to move stock.

          *Edit: hell, the actual way to look at this is you get bulk pricing without the bulk. This is pretty awesome and mildly interesting if anything.

          • QuickyOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            4
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Does it though? The moment 2x is £16 , the cost of 1 shirt is £8. Therefore there’s no scaling at 3x. It doesn’t matter how much the starting price was or how much the later prices were, if the 2x price is £16 and the 3x price is £24. The cost of 1 shirt is only ever £8 if you buy more than one, meaning that any pricing variant over 2x is pointless.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              210 months ago

              I’m assuming the £8 is a sticker put in the item and not what it originally said, since it looks raised and like a sticker.

              That leads me to believe the original price under the sticker is greater than £8, which makes the discount make sense. And makes it interesting because the lowest a store could set a single unit and maintain the price curve is £8.

              • QuickyOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                4
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                Exactly. In which case the 3x price is redundant.

                There is no curve.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  310 months ago

                  Well sure - they put one sticker on and it solved everything. Are you suggesting they should have put a sticker to adjust the price of a single item and then also put another sticker on to hide the 3x item? That’s not only a waste of stickers and time, it also really doesn’t add or remove anything from the situation.

                  I’d argue you are the mildly infuriating part of this scenario at this point.

                  • QuickyOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    310 months ago

                    I’m not sure what you’re suggesting was solved. You’re positing scenarios whereas I’m presenting facts - the photo. Which, for the consumer, is mildly infuriating.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      But you don’t pay more either. Without the discount on 3 pack, buying odd numbers would’ve been worse value than even numbers but the 3 pack discount makes all bulk purchases equal.