Slashdot Mirror


Price Optimization Software Big in Retail Business

prostoalex writes "Even if you spent only a single day in an economics class, you're probably familiar with a concept of supply and demand. The Associated Press is running an article on retailers employing mathematical models for price optimization, where some products are priced higher to generate higher margins, and some are discounted to generate larger volumes even at the expense of per-product margins. DemandTec, Oracle and SAP are some of the companies producing those mathematical models for retailers around the country, with AP listing some of the pricing optimizations employed currently."

34 of 121 comments (clear)

  1. Quick - someone patent it ... by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... after all, "price optimization" has been done for centuries, but now its "with software" instead of a paper and pencil, or a calculator, or a gut feeling.

    Seriously - this is NOT new. Not even in the software field.

    1. Re:Quick - someone patent it ... by symbolic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They can optimize their little hearts out, but it won't change the fact that I counter this with my own optimization strategy- I always look for the best deal, period.

    2. Re:Quick - someone patent it ... by AlXtreme · · Score: 4, Insightful
      So you would be willing to search for a cheaper paintbrush, taking maybe an hour of your time, even if it only saved you a dollar?

      I would also look for the best deal, but only if in doing so I'd save more per hour than I would make if I were working instead. Personally, I don't enjoy wasting my time running from store to store. Even if I'd save 50 dollars, it probably won't be worth it if that meant shopping 8 hours to find the cheapest store.

      Just my two cents.

      --
      This sig is intentionally left blank
    3. Re:Quick - someone patent it ... by nelsonal · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This means that you're more likely to get a sale at a price you like than without price optimization. Take for example you and your MBA gadget hungry associate. Say both of you want a LCD screen and the company's cost is $500. If they have a single mark up it might be $700, which Mr. MBA would purchase one and you none, but if they can sell to him for $800 and you for $600, both of you buy a TV and the store makes more (even though they made less in your sale it was better than no sale at the single price).

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    4. Re:Quick - someone patent it ... by no_pets · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As someone that quit IT to go into retail I will say that price optimization will benefit retailers looking for your business more than other types of consumers.

      A specialty shop with unique products can just slap a large margin on a product as long as the price is fairly well justified and do fine, but when catering to a clientèle working with higher volumes, low margins and aggressively price conscious consumers then wringing every last possible penny out of them works.

      Everyone knows that by and large in the U.S. that Wal-Mart is the price discount king. And even if you are really watching prices and comparing a consumer will still believe that they are getting the best deal at Wal-Mart. But I know that a significant number of their products are name brands packaged into their own unique size. Of course at Sam's Club things have to be bought in bulk for a discount but comparing product X at Wal-Mart in a 13oz size verses the same product X at a local competitor in a 20oz size can appear to be the exact same product for significantly less than a competitor although the price per ounce is a better deal at the competitor.

      I sell pet food and I'll say that Ol' Roy is one of the cheapest priced pet foods per bag. Sure there are some others cheaper per bag at feed stores which may or may not be a better deal. I know some feed stores that use loss leaders to beat Ol' Roy. But, when comparing Ol' Roy to premium pet food the price per feeding will beat Ol' Roy most every time. So, buying a $15 bag of feed per week is more expensive than buying a $26 bag of feed per month.

      --
      "A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." - Shepard Book Quoting Malcolm Reynolds
    5. Re:Quick - someone patent it ... by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 3, Interesting
      What I do is default to my local Wal-Mart Supercenter (which also happens to be the 2nd nearest store, so is most convenient). On average, their prices easily beat Safeway, Albertson's, and the small regional chain store that is a little closer to me than the Wal-Mart. Furthermore, they are indeed "everyday low prices". This lets me easily memorize Wal-Mart's prices for most of my regular items.

      If I happen to be shopping at one of the other places, it is then easy to see if their current sale price beats Wal-Mart's everyday price. If so, and I need the item, or can reasonably store it, I will buy at the other store. If I notice an advertised sale on something at one of the other stores, I might go there for it.

    6. Re:Quick - someone patent it ... by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "I sell pet food and I'll say that Ol' Roy is one of the cheapest priced pet foods per bag. Sure there are some others cheaper per bag at feed stores which may or may not be a better deal. I know some feed stores that use loss leaders to beat Ol' Roy. But, when comparing Ol' Roy to premium pet food the price per feeding will beat Ol' Roy most every time. So, buying a $15 bag of feed per week is more expensive than buying a $26 bag of feed per month."

      It depends on which "Ol' Roy." If you buy the cheaper, cornmeal-based products, you'll definitely spend more, and be picking up more poop - than the non-cornmeal ones - look for the bag with 27% protein, 21% fat - you'll be picking up 2/3 less poop, and it actually works out a LOT cheaper per feeding (note: when you have a St. Bernard, a Newfoundland, and a big mutt, having to buy 100 lbs. of dog food a month instead of 300 lbs. a month makes a big difference in what comes out the other end, but its a lot of sh*t no matter how you look at it :-)

    7. Re:Quick - someone patent it ... by costas · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's not price optimization: that's discriminatory pricing or price differentiation. The latter is usually done with coupons ("here's a $100 loyalty coupon for you Mr Smith"), the former is about maximizing profit (i.e. profit per unit times total units sold).

      Yes, I am a supply chain consultant...

  2. Sell at a loss... by kybred · · Score: 3, Funny

    and make it up in volume! That's what I always say.

  3. before all the "duh" responses by acvh · · Score: 2, Informative

    this is more about consumer behavior than straight economics. the optimizations referred to aren't just adjusting pricing to supply and demand, but, as noted in the article, address perceived value as well. I'm no economist, nor do I want to be, but it seems to me that such analysis can uncover otherwise unexpected responses to price adjustments.

    1. Re:before all the "duh" responses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This isn't just straight supply-and-demand like you get in a pretty, shiny free market. This is stuff like attempts at price discrimination in a market that's got monopolistic competition.

      Considering that pricing software can cost seven figures, what's going to come of all the money being spent on figuring out how to get us to spend our money?
      Interested parties will consider entering the market and driving down the cost, that's what. Or maybe consider selling different versions (more price discrimination), or selling it as a service, or....
  4. Why this is good for everyone by G4from128k · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Customers vary in their willingness and ability to pay. If a company charges one simple price for each item, it creates a situation in which some people get a great deal (they pay less than they might be willing to) and some people don't buy the product at all (because the price is more than they want to pay). But if a company can find a way to separate the customers that really value the product from the customers that value it less, then more people will be able to buy the product and the company will earn more profit. (You mathematically prove that this increases what is called consumer surplus which is the equivalent to the consumers "profit" on the purchase and the seller's profit). Both side benefit, as does society.

    The amusing fact is that this is nothing more than a capitalist version of taking from the rich (those are willing and able to pay more) and giving to the poor (those aren't willing or able to pay more).

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    1. Re:Why this is good for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, this is true, but you don't need complicated mathematical schemes for this. They've been doing it for years.

      It's called coupons!

      The product is priced on the shelf at the price most consumers are willing to pay (say, about 60%). The coupon discounts the product to a price the other 40% are willing to pay. Now you get to charge two prices for the same product! Woohoo!

    2. Re:Why this is good for everyone by Nf1nk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      One technique for this is the extended warranty racket. For the perception of improved service, and to make up for frequent shoddy workmanship, the product is available with several different layers of warranty available. The person who can marginally afford the product gets just the product but no added service or peace of mind, the person who will pay more for the product, gets the service he should expect with a quality piece of merchandise. All with just one line of product.

      --
      I used to have a cool sig, back when I cared
    3. Re:Why this is good for everyone by tungstencoil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No to be rude - and you're correct in your premise - but that is typically called (market) segmentation in the industry, and not price optimization (I have some background in telecom marketing segmentation). The idea that one can segment their customer base and target product marketing efforts (either by price, features, or what advertising is focused on) is a little different than the article, which talks about looking at behavior within a larger set (the entire "chain") are large demographic subset (all of Dallas), and making a strategy out of existing full-set behavior. One could argue that charging a different price in Dallas versus Boston is segmentation, but it misses to definition a bit and falls more accurately into the price optimization category.

      I just wanted to point out they're two different (but related) interesting topics.

    4. Re:Why this is good for everyone by bitt3n · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The amusing fact is that this is nothing more than a capitalist version of taking from the rich (those are willing and able to pay more) and giving to the poor (those aren't willing or able to pay more).
      Except it isn't necessarily the case that the rich are willing to pay more. It's the people who think they're rich, or want to look like they are.
    5. Re:Why this is good for everyone by dubl-u · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The amusing fact is that this is nothing more than a capitalist version of taking from the rich (those are willing and able to pay more) and giving to the poor (those aren't willing or able to pay more).

      Some people might think you are kidding there, but there really are cases where everybody wins from differential pricing, and businesses really do take from the rich so they can afford to sell to the poor. Let me add an example to make it clearer:

      Imagine you want to build some sort of clever new software. You see that 10,000 people would pay $100 for it (as a fun toy, say), and 5 companies would pay $1m for it, because they can each make $3m from using it commercially.

      If the software costs $1m to develop and you sell all the copies for $100, your profit will be $500. Nobody's going to go to all that trouble for $500, so you wouldn't make the software. And if you did, you'd be steamed that these companies made millions while you got pocket lint.

      However, if you sell the first 5 copies for $1m each (with, say, some fancy documentation and a support contract), you can then go on to release a consumer version to get everybody else. You get $5m in the bank, so you're happy. The companies netted $10m, so they're happy. And everybody else got a fun toy at a reasonable price.

      Note that although your average price per copy there is $600, you couldn't get the same effect by charging $600; none of the consumers would pay that much for a toy.

    6. Re:Why this is good for everyone by impos · · Score: 2, Interesting

      well I'm not going to comment on the quality of store brands, but in my 20+ years at Kroger, I know the store brands make a boatload of profit compared to the national brands... like a 4-1 margin... on some items, mayonaise for example, we'd make 60 to 70 cents on the store brand per unit, maybe 10-15 cents on Kraft or Best Foods. And that's only one example out of about 8000 or so.

      We aggressively pushed store brands, the profits were much greater.

  5. game the system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As other posters will doubtless already have said, price point optimisation by software is neither new nor interesting. What is interesting IMHO is the scale of the whole system. Big box superstores employ an army of psychologists, ergonomics experts and statisticians to try and control your behaviour and squeeze as much cash as possible from your pocket.

    There was a quite fascinating article published the other day in a Digg linked blog that I am sure many here read (I don't have the link unfortunately). What is really interesting is that by knowing the system and subverting it you can make HUGE savings in your shopping. The layout of the store is carefully crafted to expose you to the products they want to push. Color schemes and shelf placememt are designed to confuse or lead you to select certain products. Prices and product sizes are carefully designed to make comparative math very difficult to ordinary folks. Bargains are placed outside the normal lines of sight.

    In other words, the very existence of a cold and calculated system is what enables you to game it.

    Some bits of strategy I remember:

    1) Make a list and stick to it. Impulse purchases account for a huge amount of profit and the stores rely on you buying things you do not need.
    2) Never look at the products at eye level, they are the most expensive and worst value.
    3) Move as fast as you can to the back of the store. Start at the back of the store and work your way forwards.
    4) Do not stop unncecessarily. Deliberate impedences are put in isles to slow you down.
    5) Don't take a cart or basket unless you really can't carry what is written on your list.
    6) Use the bathroom before you go shopping. They place the restrooms to make you walk as far as possible past tempting impulse products.

    A couple of my own...

    7) Eat before you shop, never go to a grocery supermarket when hungry.
    8) Take cash, just as much as you need and no more, and use the cash only fast checkout.

    Perhaps someone who knows the systems they use in detail should write a piece of open source software in their spare time to calculate the optimal path through a store :)

    1. Re:game the system by stoolpigeon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      2) Never look at the products at eye level, they are the most expensive and worst value.
       
      That is really not a valid statement, for a couple reasons. The first error is the last two words 'worst value'. Only the customer can determine what the value is. If I'm looking at a condiment section and at eye level is a name brand catsup, and below it is a private label equivalent, the price per unit will probably be lower on the private label. That doesn't necessarily make it a better value. If I think the private label tastes rotten and wont eat it, the more expensive catsup is a much better value.
       
      The second issue is that quite often what you see at eye level is determined by who payed for the placement. It may not be the highest margin item for the retailer on its own. But it is their because the vendor payed a royalty to have it where they want it.
       
        3) Move as fast as you can to the back of the store. Start at the back of the store and work your way forwards.
       
      That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If you are talking grocery, very few stores are laid out the same way. There's no way this can be a 'rule' that will help you when what is at the front or back will vary from location to location. I think a better way of looking at this might be - don't buy what is on end-caps and floor displays until you have looked at the prices for comparable items. This means, not running to the back, but going to the aisle where the item is normally located.
       
      In larger stores this really doesn't make sense. If I go to Fry's Electronics and run to the back, how does that help me? If I go to Best Buy and hustle right back to home appliances, I'm not sure what I've done to help myself out.
       
      The psychology of all this is over rated. A little common sense - like many of the other suggestions in the list, will go a long way. That's not manipulating the 'system' it's just using your mind and operating above a visceral level.

      --
      It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    2. Re:game the system by jadavis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The vendor then has to pass its cost to the consumer with higher prices, TNSTAAFL.

      You assume that the vendor always charges the same price. Often, the vendor will pay for good shelf space and lower the price. It's called a promotion.

      The vendor uses this as an investment to encourage new customers to try the product or people who've forgotten about the product to start purchasing it again. Some of those people then begin to like the product and purchase it when or where the promotion is not available (perhaps they purchase Coca-Cola on promotion at the store, and then ask for it in a restaurant later).

      You're right: there is no such thing as a free lunch. The people who pay for the shelf space and the promotional prices are the people who purchase at non-promotional prices because they were reminded of (or introduced to) the product by the promotion.

      --
      Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.
  6. Interesting ... by LaughingCoder · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wonder how much this software costs. Does everyone pay the same price for it?

    --
    The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
  7. So what is new? by figleaf · · Score: 2, Informative

    Lots of companies have been using it for a long time.

    I have used a prize optimization solutions based of MS SQL Server back in 2005
    http://www.microsoft.com/industry/retail/solutions /priceoptimization.mspx

  8. A better way to game the system... by DogDude · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have a better way to game the system: don't participate in "the system". Shop at your friendly local, independent retailers. In our store, we put things where people can find them, and price them competitively.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  9. Watch out for customer "value" cards by argoff · · Score: 2, Informative

    You see. A lot of stores would like to charge each and every customer a different price. Those prices being the set that maximizes revenues from that particular customer. But in practice that is very difficult. Changing differnet prices on the same item for every sale would be cumbersome, and customers who see the person in front of them get a better deal than they do might get pissed. The stores response to this is customer "value" cards.

    In an idea scenario, they set all prices on the high end - but then give the customers "value" cards that offer varing discounts and rewards so as to optimize sales and profit. For example, if they know you won't pay more than $2 for a soda, then your soda will always be $2. For example, they might do something like use buying habits track your period. If you buy tampons on the day of your period - you will get reamed hard because they know you need them right now, but if you buy them in the off cycle then you get a good deal. If you buy just milk in the early morning, you will get reamed hard because they know you might need it for breakfast right then, but if you buy it later on you will get a competitive discount. If you buy a phone today, but the last phone you bought was two years ago and had a two year average lifespan, then you get reamed hard because they know you need a replacement right now. Otherwise you get a deal. If you buy condoms on friday night, you get a nailed hard, but if you buy them on wednesday morning you get a great deal.

    1. Re:Watch out for customer "value" cards by wkitchen · · Score: 3, Informative

      And how is that going to affect buying decisions when the buyer doesn't know about it until checkout time?

      If the gallon of milk is marked $4.99 on the shelf, the customer who is unwilling to pay more than $3 is not going to put it in his cart. That the store plans to discount it to $2.99 at the register won't change that. And if the customer is willing to pick up the $4.99 milk, what incentive is there for the store to charge less for it?

  10. price optimization vs. market segmentation by G4from128k · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, you are right that they are separate but related. (Your post is not rude and I hope my response is not rude, either). The lead example concerned pricing of drills. The three models (perhaps from three different makers) define different market segments as far as the retailer is concerned. Optimizing the price on the three models gives the retailer a chance to maximize both revenues and profits even if the retailer doesn't do anything to market the products differently. Similarly, markdown optimization is both a price optimization and a segmentation issue -- segmenting the "I'll pay anything to be the first person to own this" customers from the "I'll buy it later when its discounted" customers.

    The classic example, that I was thinking of, is the revenue management strategies of airlines that attempt to optimize prices across presumed underlying segments of price-sensitive leisure travelers versus price-insensitive business travelers. Technically, it's the identical seat that's being sold for radically different prices (up to 10X different) depending on issues such as how the customer buys the ticket, when they buy the ticket, whether they book a saturday-night stay, etc. The result is that the business customers pay for the plane and the vacation travelers only pay for the fuel and variable costs. The ability to differentiate does benefit the business customers because the added volume of travelers means a more frequent schedule of flights, larger planes, and more destinations.

    You are right, though, that true market segmentation involves much more than just price optimization.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
  11. Re:And if you spent a second day in that class... by c_sd_m · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's not just price optimization that's relatively easy to learn. There's also location theory and optimization (e.g., retail, essential and emergency services, noxious facilities), routing and scheduling, order and inventory levels, ... The math is relatively simple (most of the time) and if you can set up the problems there are some decent OS software packages with very good solvers. COIN-OR comes to mind but I'm sure there are several.
    The real issues are getting the data and interpreting the results. I've got a land use decision model for urban fringe areas that's doing a reasonable job of presenting sets of potential solutions for decision-makers. The tough stuff is the pre-processing, e.g., defining what's feasible and desirable, and interpreting the results, e.g., what solutions are or aren't significantly different. For this type of work geographic data is readily available. I doubt that will be the case for most business decisions.

  12. We were doing this years ago by spywhere · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I was the purchasing agent for a chain of auto parts stores, and we used a method called GROI: Gross Return on Inventory.
    The original pricing theory in traditional auto parts stores was based on four "turns" per year: after opening a parts store and filling it up with stuff to sell, you needed to sell each stock number four times, at 35% gross profit, to make an adequate gross profit to cover your expenses -- and pay off your inventory in twelve months.
    This resulted in some items being priced much higher than at mass retailers, and caused stores to lose sales on popular items: people would go elsewhere for oil, antifreeze, and the most common spark plugs, brake pads and filters, because they were much less expensive at places like Pep Boys.
    The GROI method constantly recalculated sales and adjusted the prices downward on popular items, thus increasing sales and lowering the prices still further. For example, the best-selling oil filters would sell at under 10% gross profit, but we would sell out our inventory of those items twelve to fifteen times per year... thus making a larger profit on the initial purchases we had made to stock a new store. By setting a minimum gross profit percentage, runaway sales on an item would result in higher profits instead of ever-lower margins.

    This was all calculated by an incredibly expensive 200 MHz Pentium Pro box, running proprietary software atop SCO Unix.
    (I was the only one who could work the thing... which led to me running a newly purchased Netware 4.1 network in the chain's offices... which led me out of that filthy auto parts business altogether, thank Jeebus).

  13. Wal*Mart's low prices by Anonymous+McCartneyf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Advice for Wal*Mart shoppers:
    Never buy produce or fresh bakery goods at a Wal*Mart. The premium at the true grocery stores often corresponds to the produce & bakery goods actually being better quality.
    Also, since you actually have a choice, try to memorize the routine sale prices at your other local stores. Sales tend to be cyclical. Wal*Mart has lower prices on the most popular items; for more obscure stuff they can go higher because those items are harder to find elsewhere, or fewer people are looking for them. I learned this when trying to buy a rare iron syrup (which could've had a proof number).
    Wal*Mart is a good place to shop for low prices, but other places have different selection, and it's a good idea to give at least token support to its competition.

    --
    There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
  14. Yes, there are new things by Mark_in_Brazil · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seriously - this is NOT new. Not even in the software field.

    First, a disclaimer. I was employee #4 at KhiMetrics, the company founded by Ken and Tim Ouimet (employees #1 and #2). They're mentioned in TFA. SAP bought KhiMetrics in January of 2006. Ken had been my office-mate in grad school. That said, I haven't seen Ken and Tim in years, and I have no financial stake in KhiMetrics or SAP anymore (SAP bought out the KhiMetrics stockholders with money, not shares of SAP stock).

    Yes, it's true that humans doing pricing try to do the same things. But the thing is that software can do things a human mind cannot. Yes, the opposite is also true, but here software has a lot of advantages. In the case of the KhiMetrics (now SAP) software, it works on the category level, optimizing profit for the category as a whole, which can include taking losses on individual items. The software never makes the common mistakes human beings make. For example, different "flavors" of the same size package of the same product should come out at the same price, and the unit price of a given item should go down as the amount bought increases. I can tell you that I have seen examples where humans have screwed this up this week. When there are two sizes of a given product, let's say a certain laundry detergent, then the price per weight of the larger package better be less than the price per weight of the smaller package, or there's never any incentive for the customer to buy the larger package. Still, I see examples where the pricers have gotten this wrong. I've even asked people at the stores if they were trying to move the smaller packages because of having too much of that size in stock or something, and they told me that no, they had no such problem.
    The other thing is that the KhiMetrics software uses actual sales data to determine how sensitive the customers are to the price of a given product. This can be done down to the SKU (individual item) level in the product dimension and down to the level of customers of a specific store in the geographic dimension. In other words, the KhiMetrics software is capable of determining the sensitivity of the customers of each individual store to the price of a specific product. No human being could do that at all, much less in the time the KhiMetrics software can do it. Even with a pricing team for each category in each store, which would end up costing a fortune in human resource costs, the result would not be as good as what KhiMetrics can deliver. Additionally, since the Ouimets "grew up in retail," the KhiMetrics software, since the beginning, has been compatible with things like Category Management and Efficient Replenishment, and able to take into account things like having different goals for different products in a category (loss leader, profit generator, traffic generator, etc.). The software takes into account complex factors like seasonality, promotion, and product visibility. Since I have a reasonably good idea of the internal workings of the software, I can tell you with some confidence that I, a Ph.D. in theoretical physics, would not even want to try to tackle the problem of optimizing the prices for a subcategory of 20 products in a single store, much less the dozens of categories and tens of thousands of SKUs in the dozens of stores in a retail chain. KhiMetrics can do all that, basing itself on years of actual sales data, before breakfast.

    There are experienced people in retail who are good at such things, but the software was created with people that have the same level of understanding of retail pricing, plus it has all the advantages of being able to do high-speed computerized analysis of huge amounts of price and sales data. I don't work for KhiMetrics anymore, nor for SAP, but I can say that if I were working in a retail company, I would definitely want us to be using software like this for pricing. And experienced retail people agree with me. One thing we saw back when I was with K

    --
    "It is nice to know that the computer understands the problem. But I would like to understand it too." --Eugene Wigner
    1. Re:Yes, there are new things by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "The software never makes the common mistakes human beings make. For example, different "flavors" of the same size package of the same product should come out at the same price, and the unit price of a given item should go down as the amount bought increases. I can tell you that I have seen examples where humans have screwed this up this week. When there are two sizes of a given product, let's say a certain laundry detergent, then the price per weight of the larger package better be less than the price per weight of the smaller package, or there's never any incentive for the customer to buy the larger package. Still, I see examples where the pricers have gotten this wrong. I've even asked people at the stores if they were trying to move the smaller packages because of having too much of that size in stock or something, and they told me that no, they had no such problem."

      Actually, this is quite common practice. A lot of people assume that just because the package is bigger, the "cost per gram" or "cost per ounce" MUST be lower - and they buy accordingly. Not only didn't the retailer screw up - he's making more by this "tax on ignorance."

      A lot of people can't do the math in their head if one item isn't an exact multiple of another item. Others "can't be bothered" doing the math. And still others, they just make the aforementioned assumptions that "bigger == cheaper per unit". And in places where retailers are required by law to display the "per unit" price, people can't be bothered to look.

      I've seen retailers take items that were dogs at $x per unit, bundle them 3 to a package and price them as "Clearance: $4x" and sell them out.

      And I frequently see items that are cheaper when bought in smaller units. There's a whole "to-the-retailer" rebate thing you're missing in any such analysis - manufacturers or distributors will frequently offer retailers a rebate to promote a smaller size of an item as a way to get buyers to try out a particular brand as an impulse buy. The regular brand-loyal buyers just assume that bigger==cheaper, and don't stock up on the cheaper smaller size.

      Last week, for example:

      1. 8 boxes of 36-bag tea worked out to the same price as the large 216-bag box, which holds 72 fewer ... (so I bought 10)
      2. 6 cans of 28 oz. tomatoes worked out a buck cheaper than buying the 160 oz jumbo can, which holds less ... (so I bought 30)
      3. 375 ml jars of sparerib sauce were less than half the price of the same brand at 500 ml - (so I bought 15 - and 6 had an added 30 cents off coupon attached, for an extra bonus)
      4. 475ml bottles of soya sauce were almost 70% less than the jumbo 900ml bottles (so I bought 5)
      5. 20 jars of olives, same scenario
      6. 10 jars of gherkin pickles, ditto
      7. same story for 6 bottles hunts of bbq sauce
      8. ... and mustard - 5 jars
      9. ... and relish - 6 jars
      10. ... tinned peaches, tinned pears, tinned fruit cocktail - same story (25 cans)
      Added to the other stuff I bought on sale (10 kg of coffee, for example, at $2.60 less per kg), I easily saved between $100.00 and $150.00

      The manufacturers do their price optimizations, the wholesalers and distributors do theirs, the retailers do theirs ... and it all comes down to getting the consumer to give them the money instead of giving it to someone else.

      Consumers who do their own "pricing optimizations" can save a bundle, especially if they're alert to the "bigger is not necessarily cheaper" scam, and are willing to buy a years' worth at a time. It gives a better return on investment (easily 25 to 50% per annum, tax-free) than any other investment you'll find out there.

  15. Re:Quick-someone patent it ...Airlines not WalMart by toccoa · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Although, WalMart is NOT a good example of profit optimization; there strategy is more likely to take cost decreases and pass them on. Which may not optimize the short term. And certainly only works if you are the more efficient retailer, which scale tends to help. But it is very pre-consumer and relatively dificult to compete against based upon price.

    A MUCH better example would be airlines; where what is practically the same product - a coach seat on the same flight might go for 5 to 8 price-points of $100 to $1000 each way. Grocery and department stores might sell comparable products for 10 to 50% more than WalMart but rarely can get the 1000%

  16. Re:Another lap in the race to the bottom by shmlco · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "NOTHING about the individual case; we're just plain hard to predict..."

    Don't care. While the individual case can't be modeled the group case can be. Plus a WM can price a DVD at one price in LA and another in SF, seen the trend, reverse it next week, see what happens then and adjust the price in all of the stores accordingly. Do variations of the above for 1,900 stores nationwide. See what happens when you advertise price A vs. price B and seel how many are sold. Do variations of the above for 1,900 stores nationwide. Compare against the entire history of every DVD you've ever sold. Correlate against box-office receipts. Find out that I'll sell more copies at $14.95 and make 5% more than if I sell each copy at $14.99.

    Do the same thing for 140,000 other products. Rinse. Repeat.

    "people do indeed communicate and discuss the prices / merits of their purchases"

    Indeed. When was the last time you and your friends discussed the fact that baked beans are $1.23 at store A and $1.25 at store B, while the dial soap was $1.45 vs $1.42?

    "Stores that do this well find that they can reduce the number of SKUs they stock and make even more by only stocking the items with the highest markup / fastest turnover."

    They're smarter than that. By your logic my grocery store would only sell sugar water. They don't. And they understand long-tail economics and price elasticity and loss-leaders much, much better than you do.

    "Nobody likes to be manipulated."

    True. However, if you're selling your house or car (and all other things equal) you probably want the most money you can get for it. If you're on the other side, you want that house or car for the fewest number of your hard earned dollars as possible. Your employer would probably like to get the same work done for less, you, OTOH, would like to do the same work for more money, benefits, vacation days, whatever.

    Some people will pay more for convenience, others will drive ten miles out of their way for bargins. Some people think Apples are more than worth the price, while others think that anyone who buys anything other than the cheapest beige box on the shelf is nuts. Horrses for courses.

    As long as all of these variables are in play prices will be adjusted and raised and lowered and fought over... and in some cases, manipulated.

    --
    Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.