'"Who can I complain to if a shop is overpricing goods?"' blog discussion

Enfieldian

Cornucopia wrote: »

I'd prefer it if the retailers didn't have everything on their side on this.

I stood behind someone at the Cinema refreshments till the other day.

He bought a 750ml bottle of still water (not even a fancy brand). It cost £2.75. I had a 500ml bottle of still water in my pocket that I bought from Aldi in a pack of 12 - it cost me the equivalent of 17p.

I totally understand that cinemas need to make money from refreshments, but there must be something slightly wrong when a product is subject to a 1600% markup.

People are paying these prices so there is nothing wrong there at all.

Cinema goers are a captive audience, not everybody is as smart as those of us that plan ahead and take our own food & drink.

Similarly, if you break down and need to join the AA or RAC by the roadside then it will be more expensive than if you already had taken out cover, otherwise nobody would bother and everyone would wait until the problem arose.

arcon5

As long as the price is clear then whether its 17p or £2.50 is irrelevant - nobodies forcing you to buy it. You should have brought your own bottle of water in.

Plus how would be even regulate prices? Especially with vastly varying overheads between ecommerce and a high street shop, between a high street shop and a moto station, between companies with automation and companies intensive with labour, between service sector and manufacturing.

Then what about iPhones costing so much compared to lessor brands with similar products.

How far do we take it, based on overall profits? Based on market sizes? Energy companies for example makes hundreds of millions but actually convert a very very tiny amount of money per customer.

To think its a good idea to control prices is crazy and defies the whole point of commerce. Once we start dictating how business should be run is when we see the advances in technology etc slow down due to the reduced reward factor.

POPPYOSCAR

Cornucopia wrote: »

I'd prefer it if the retailers didn't have everything on their side on this.

I stood behind someone at the Cinema refreshments till the other day.

He bought a 750ml bottle of still water (not even a fancy brand). It cost £2.75. I had a 500ml bottle of still water in my pocket that I bought from Aldi in a pack of 12 - it cost me the equivalent of 17p.

I totally understand that cinemas need to make money from refreshments, but there must be something slightly wrong when a product is subject to a 1600% markup.

Then more fool him!

Some people could not care less what they pay for things and cannot be bothered to shop around, that is why he paid what he did and you took your cheaper one with you.

Million_Percent

Cornucopia wrote: »

He bought a 750ml bottle of still water (not even a fancy brand). It cost £2.75. I had a 500ml bottle of still water in my pocket that I bought from Aldi in a pack of 12 - it cost me the equivalent of 17p.

And there was probably someone else who filled a bottle from the tap at home and saved the 17p you spent.

I understand your point but nobody is forced to pay those prices. Maybe this guy learned his lesson and will bring his own next time or maybe he is wealthy enough that spending a few quid is preferable for the convenience.

Either way, consumers must be able to determine the relative value of a product and choose to not purchase if they think it's not worth the price. If enough people refused to pay the prices, they would come down.

Aside from anti-competitive activities and price fixing etc. businesses must be free to set their own prices and consumers are free to haggle or choose not to buy.

Cornucopia

It's an interesting topic - and I agree there are no obvious or desirable answers.

In my case, I kind of know that my very cheap Unlimited cinema- going is subsidised by others paying full price for their tickets and refreshments. So as long as the cinema doesn't start patting people down for illicit drinks & snacks, it is a happy compromise.

Interestingly, my cinema recently introduced a 25% discount on refreshments for Unlimited customers - I assume that this is to try to get them to spend more. But if you are going several times a month, this is still too expensive IMHO. (It gets to the stage where your refreshments would cost you more than the cinema ticket).

I suppose the other angle is when overpricing makes the transition into misdescription. That is where there is the potential/the intention to deceive customers.

somethingcorporate

Cornucopia wrote: »

I suppose the other angle is when overpricing makes the transition into misdescription. That is where there is the potential/the intention to deceive customers.

Care to elaborate with an example? I cannot see where a price alone would infer anything that would fit a (mis)description.

ILW

somethingcorporate wrote: »

Care to elaborate with an example? I cannot see where a price alone would infer anything that would fit a (mis)description.

Reduced from XXX to XXX possibly.

Cornucopia

somethingcorporate wrote: »

Care to elaborate with an example? I cannot see where a price alone would infer anything that would fit a (mis)description.

I'm thinking Bid TV, where starting price (sometimes combined with misleading commentary) has been used to deceive - according to the regulator, anyway.

Also, not exactly "price" as such, but payday lenders, dubious competitions, etc. where the price is emphasised, de-emphasised or structured in a particular way to create a particular perception.

Nick_The_Greek

Cornucopia wrote: »

I'd prefer it if the retailers didn't have everything on their side on this.

I stood behind someone at the Cinema refreshments till the other day.

He bought a 750ml bottle of still water (not even a fancy brand). It cost £2.75. I had a 500ml bottle of still water in my pocket that I bought from Aldi in a pack of 12 - it cost me the equivalent of 17p.

I totally understand that cinemas need to make money from refreshments, but there must be something slightly wrong when a product is subject to a 1600% markup.

The guy probably saw £2.75 worth of value in not having to carry a bottle of water around in his pocket all day which he ultimately might not want. Years ago i put a bottle of water in my wife's bag and it leaked and ruined a £600 phone - I wish i had paid £2.75 instead

somethingcorporate

ILW wrote: »

Reduced from XXX to XXX possibly.

Cornucopia wrote: »

Also, not exactly "price" as such, but payday lenders, dubious competitions, etc. where the price is emphasised, de-emphasised or structured in a particular way to create a particular perception.

Neither of which refer specifically to the price, more around the marketing of that price (in relation to previous prices etc).

I remember a very long and tedious thread where someone belligerently insisted it would not be possible for a shop to sell a tin of baked beans for £500.

The price in relation to the value of the item is largely free to be set at any price a shop wants, whether it can get a sale at those prices is another question entirely (take a bow HMV).