"KW" <keith_warrennospamatallteldotnet> wrote in message
...
>
> "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "KW" <keith_warrennospamatallteldotnet> wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >> "B. Anderson" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > On Tue, 22 May 2007 13:49:15 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> >>> It is interesting to note that there are thresholds for the prices
>> >> >>> people
>> >> >>> are willing to pay for some things. Marketing specialists put a
>> >> >>> lot
>> >> >>> of
>> >> >>> effort into understanding those thresholds. When the price of
>> > something
>> >> >>> rises above the threshold, consumers stop buying it. So they pack
> it
>> > in
>> >> >>> smaller units and get the price under that threshold.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Interesting. In one paragraph, you call it deceptive. In another,
>> >> >>you
>> >> >>explain why the practice is valid.
>> >> >
>> >> > An observation, the marketing gurus may have studied this issue and
>> >> > come the conclusion about pricing/packaging practices that you are
>> >> > defending but the fact that you are the lone voice rationalizing
>> >> > this
>> >> > practice in this thrread while most others find it deceptive is
>> >> > somewhat telling. I'm pretty confident that most consumers when
> given
>> >> > the facts (costs vs. packaging vs. thresholds vs. profits), would
>> >> > prefer to see higher prices than unannounced reductions in size or
>> >> > weight of the products they buy.
>> >> >
>> >> > I think the marketing gurus need to revisit this issue.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Until some of the participants in this discussion reveal their job
>> >> functions, I think we're stalled for the moment. I think you know why.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > JSP,
>> >
>> > Your point is well taken and I expect companies to remain both
> competitive
>> > *and* profitable....otherwise the laws of finance come into play and
> they
>> > company will die. What I do take issue with is the deceptive means with
>> > which they often accomplish this goal. i.e. the way that they
> intestinally
>> > reduce the amount of product yield but oftentimes continue to sell it
>> > in
>> > the
>> > same size canister/box/bag as before in an attempt to hide the fact
>> > that
>> > the
>> > consumer is not expected amount of goods. To put it in a way that
>> > addresses
>> > the question you have repeatedly posed in this thread.....I do hope for
> an
>> > increase each year, but if I don't receive one, I don't simply cut a
>> > couple
>> > of hours out of my time *on the clock* each week to create a higher
>> > rate
>> > of
>> > pay per hour and then make every effort to hide the fact that I'm
> sticking
>> > it to the company.
>> >
>> > Not to mention that I too have inherited a lot of recipes from my dear
> old
>> > Granny that list ingredients per the package/can/bag...etc with no
>> > other
>> > units of measure, so when the old standard packaging is mucked with,
>> > the
>> > recipes have to be adjusted as well.
>> >
>> > KW
>>
>>
>> A sensible response. But, we still don't have honest answers about the
>> job
>> functions of various participants in this discussion. This is important
>> to
>> me.
>>
>>
>
> Believe it or not....after my response....I am a sales executive for a
> large
> logistics company <G> ...and one of the deciding factors for me in joining
> this company was their overwhelming commitment to a high standard of
> business ethics.
>
> KW

That's good. Let's see what some of the others say.

Logistics: Trucking?