So which would you choose?
- Option A: Buy two Brand X candy bars for $10.
- Option B: Buy one Brand X candy bar for $11 and get a second candy bar free.
Put like this, the choice is obvious. You can have two candy bars for $10 or for $11. The problem is that it’s rarely put like this, and there is always a calculation we are forced to make to get to the two relevant numbers of $10 and $11.
Dan Ariely is a behavioral economist with posts at MIT and Duke who was just interviewed in Money. In the interview, he talks about how consumers get blinded by the allure of getting something for “free.” He mentions his own experience in deciding to purchase one car over the other because of the offer of free oil changes—though he later figured out the value of those oil changes was negligible relative to the purchase (maybe $150-200). He even conducted an experiment giving candy away at Halloween:
I gave a bunch of trick-or-treaters two Hershey’s kisses, then told them they could have a small Snickers for free or a huge Snickers for the price of one chocolate kiss. The bigger bar was a better deal, an 8-to-1 return on chocolate. But most chose the smaller one: the idea of getting something for nothing was too tempting.
Ariely goes on to explain how consumers are often overly influenced by relative prices. Essentially, when you go shopping for a particular item, you’ll likely see lots of the choices together at the store. If the most expensive version of that item is $100, it may seem fine or even a deal to get the one that costs $60. But if the most expensive version of that item is $160, it may seem fine to get the one that costs $100. Even if you really don’t need the more expensive one, you’re likely to be influenced by the relative price and buy more than what you need. In the consummate example, Ariely warns, “Letting a broker show you a house above the top of your range can be costly.”
The tips I take from this are:
- If you see the word “free,” realize that the offer is being packaged to influence you. Try to stop and do the math on how good a deal it is (or isn’t).
- When a salesperson tries to show you a higher-end product than what you requested, realize again that you are being “sold”—and cut off that effort early.
- Ariely also chips in a specific suggestion: “try not to look at price, not at first. Decide what you want and what you’re willing to pay without being influenced by outside factors.”
For the full interview, see the April 2008 issue of Money. (As of the time of this post, I did not see this up on the website yet.)
Welcome to Visitors from MSN Money!
If you are new to this blog, please look around if you have the time. This is a personal-finance blog aimed at helping people accumulate wealth while still working their regular jobs. To go to the front page, where the most recent posts appear, go to the top of this page and click on the blog title "Can I Get Rich On A Salary" or on the "Home" tab. Or go to the upper right, where you can click on any of the "Selected Top Viewed Posts" or posts under "Getting Started At This Blog." If you like what you find, I hope you'll consider coming back or even subscribing (see the link immediately below this post or near the top of this blog).



Great post! That makes all the sense in the world.
Nicole,
Thanks for the comment, and I'm glad you liked the post!
A candy bar that regularly sells for $11 is very likely to be larger or made of higher quality ingredients than one that regularly sells for $5, so most likely, the buy-one-get-one-free offer represents better value. Products should not only be compared across price, but also contents, performance and usability. As for the stipulation that the exact same candy bar is involved in both propositions -- that's impossible. No company would allow a price fluctuation of over 100% for its products (regular price of $5 vs. regular price of $11) except at places like theater concession stands or airports. There's a manufacturer's recommended retail price, and a wholesale price, and the two usually do not differ by that much.
In short, the question is artificial and meaningless as posed, and when framed meaningfully, the opposite answer to the author's intended answer is correct.
Anonymous Person,
Thanks for the comment! It's always great to get this level of engagement, and I appreciate your pointing out the factors that you have. For me, the opening question is for illustration or to preview the subject of the post more than to give a "real world" market example. What did you think of the professor's experiment with Halloween candy?
First, we observe that kids are lousy mathematicians, especially when their blood sugar is low. Second, the facts of the trade as presented to us may not have been available to the kids for consideration. We are told that the larger Snickers chocolate bar represents an 8-to-1 return (by weight, we assume) on an investment of a Hershey's Kiss, but the kids may not have been allowed to inspect the packages so they may compare weights, etc. They may have been asked to make a snap judgment. In some cases, it is known for manufacturers to artificially use larger packaging than is merited by the contents, in order to give impression of better value, or merely take up more shelf space. (Potato chips and computer games are especially known for this.) The kids had no way of knowing whether such a factor was at work. Therefore, given the uncertainty of what value they may be receiving, the kids opted for the free offer. Uncertainty motivates risk aversion. Had they been specifically asked whether they would choose x grams of free chocolate on top of the x grams they already had, or traded in their x grams for 8x grams i.e. given the chance to make a fully informed choice, most would have acted rationally.
Anonymous Person,
Thanks for the follow-up! Interesting points to raise. I think there are few experiments for which there couldn't be some issue taken, and I still think Professor Ariely's experiment and observations are interesting. They were still instructive for me in my own behavior, at least.
What were other people's reactions? Do you feel like the idea of watching more closely when someone uses the word "free" makes sense for you? Or do you think you usually make the "right" choice without having to think twice?
I just came across this post titled, "Buy One Get One Free. Sort of." It's sort of a related and sort of a branch-off discussion of another issue about the use of the word "free" in advertising.
Check it out:
http://justshootmenow.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/buy-one-get-one-free-sort-of/
from
Are You Going To Be This Way The Rest of the Time I Know You?
Who knew how much folks would want to discuss "free"? Below is a link to a post that mentions this one -- and the comments go back and forth on "free" (and on the candy experiment)! One commenter has read Dan Ariely's book, "Predictably Irrational," and says the candy experiment was repeated with the same result with college students.
Check it out:
http://blogs.moneycentral.msn.com/smartspending/archive/2008/03/27/the-word-free-can-make-us-take-leave-of-our-senses.aspx
(Sorry, I need to get around to putting these in as real links.)
No surprise to anyone trained in marketing... we used to have a saying, "the most powerful word in advertising is FREE".
"Anonymous" states that MSRP and wholesale price are usually close. The opposite is true in many instances. Retail markup to wholesale is commonly 100% (i.e. wholesale price $2, retail price $4). There are exceptions in highly competitive industries (certain consumer electronics come to mind) but for everyday items like candy, shoes, clothes... think about the size of the discounts you see when things go on sale: these merchants are seldom selling their products at a straight loss.
"Anonymous" is also mistaken in suggesting that retail prices are under the control of producers. This is seldom the case although there are exceptions (companies that closely control the channel by refusing to sell to discounters).
I really admire people who know how to write informative and useful articles. Thank You for sharing your knowledge with us! I hope to read more from you!
nike mercurial
That was remarkable post! I’m glad that you share your knowledge with us! I look forward to next post! Great Job!
Gold Eagles
Great article, were doing a study on overweight dating and we will include your blog url in our email for visitors to read positive blog info, as we are a edu supporter.
bbw bbm