MikePA
Super Moderator
<font color="blue"> the ad is intentionally misleading in that there is an intent to make the consumer believe that (s)he must purchase two in order to receive the discount, when that is actually not the case. The manager I spoke with pretty much admitted that. </font>
Therefore, since one manager in one store admits it, all 'two for' or 'three for' sale prices are intentionally misleading? I, and I imagine most people, do something simple, I buy what I need. If I need one, I buy one. If I need two, I buy two. I doubt many people with an IQ above that of a turnip are 'tricked' into buying more than they need. I don't see this as disingenuous, it's marketing.
I've never seen pricing like AndyM has, i.e., you have to buy two to get the sale price. However, I also admit to never inspecting my receipt at the grocery store to this extent nor asking the store manager about how they price. I drop what I need into the cart, check out and go home. Life's too short.
Therefore, since one manager in one store admits it, all 'two for' or 'three for' sale prices are intentionally misleading? I, and I imagine most people, do something simple, I buy what I need. If I need one, I buy one. If I need two, I buy two. I doubt many people with an IQ above that of a turnip are 'tricked' into buying more than they need. I don't see this as disingenuous, it's marketing.
I've never seen pricing like AndyM has, i.e., you have to buy two to get the sale price. However, I also admit to never inspecting my receipt at the grocery store to this extent nor asking the store manager about how they price. I drop what I need into the cart, check out and go home. Life's too short.