Beware the 'Buy 1, Get 1 Free' trap

Posted Oct 7th 2007 5:10PM by Zac Bissonnette
Filed under: Consumer Experience, Personal Finance

I went on a shopping expedition with some friends last night and, like many other shoppers was lured in by a a rack at H&M bearing the following sign: "Buy 1, Get 1 Free" with the usual caveat that the free item must be of equal or lesser value.

I picked out some shirts and stood in line for about 15 minutes while the customer in front of me argued with the cashier about the way she was being charged for her "Buy 1, Get 1 Free" purchases. The cashier patiently explained that, if she really wanted to, she could save some money by paying for everything separately, which would require about nine separate transactions. What?

Here's how it works. Let's say that you buy four items from the "Buy 1, Get 1 Free" sale, with the following prices:

The cashier explained that you would pay for $20 items and then get the $10 pieces free -- a total of $40. But in a wonderful bit of alchemy, you can save $10 by splitting the order into two transactions, with one consisting of the two $20 items and the other the two $10 items: Buy one for $20, get the other $20 piece free, and then the same with the $10 items. Your total? $30. Total savings? $10.

Why would a company engage in such misleading sales tactics? They know that most people won't notice and, even if they do, many won't bother splitting each order into a bunch of orders, scanning their card five times, and waiting. Either that, or these companies don't have the technology to program a computer to group higher priced items together when calculating discounts. Given that researchers have created a computer that can understand jokes, I somehow doubt that's the case.

Tags: buy one get one, sales, sales tactics, Shopping, Spending, two for one

Print this

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

10-15-2007 @ 10:06AM

Paul Neumann said...

Refernce the Two for One gimmick.

How's the following for crass stupidity?

Wal-Mart Broken Arrow OKLa.

I , 85 year old male, in reasonable mental health have on the last two occasions purchased BEER at ther above stare and on each occasion my Identification has been requested. Well, on one occassion I had left my drivers license in my car and was unable to provide that I was somewhat over the age legally require to purchase BEER. and as I was purchasing 2 x 30 cases I had to tear off a couple of hundred yars to get my drivers license.

Second occasion, 3 months older I might add, I was requested documentary proof of my age.
Being foreward I decided to put the ciitizens of Broken Arrow to the visual eye test. I walked the line of perhaps 20 people, more changing queues
as the news spread that a free eye test was being offer, asking each person to quess my age, calling out to the cashier in a loud voice to age the person askk\ed. In each case the answers were give between 65 and 75, somewhat into the legal bracket set by a concerned Country.

Can Wal-Mart not issue a dictat that if a person looks likely to be over the age of 50 then it is safe for their cashiers to assume that the person purchasing beer is probably not under the age of 18.

Be warn folks. Wal-Mart may have a thing about serving people who are just years away from a cold grave.

10-08-2007 @ 6:29PM

Kacie said...

Your post about BOGO offers is brilliant. If I ever take advantage of one of those sales, I'll be sure to really take advantage of it, and get the best price possible.

-Kacie
http://sensetosave.blogspot.com

11-25-2007 @ 3:32PM

teresa said...

After perusing the newspaper, I noticed the ad for Kmart's jewelry sale, which states up to 70% off items. Anything red-tag sale is good in my books.

Unfortunately, when I arrived, they said that "incredible buys" were excluded. Well, that was fine. Then, I noticed a case that revolves around and displayed earrings in the locked case.

I inquired about a pair. The associate said it would be around $15.00 (due to the red-tag sale). When she rang it up, it came to the original listed price. Then, she called in the jewelry supervisor who had absolutely no customer service at all.

What irks me the most is that the red tag sale implies on all items (except for the "incredible buys). The jewelry supervisor stated that it was "70% off regular price." To me "regular price" insinuates the listed price on item, in this case $49.99. Thus, K-mart is misleading the consumer. They should say "ALREADY reduced 70% off." The former ("70% off regular price" implies that the reduction will still be applied when the item is ready to be checked out).

I would highly suggest that if K-mart wants customers to remain loyal, they stop MISLEADING the consumer by having objective phrases. Be more specific in their phrases on the sales.