Comments on: Citibank’s absurd pricing policies

By: Paul F

Paul F — Sun, 05 Jun 2005 21:31:07 +0000

On this note of being ripped off I love the British supermarket system of specials. They take a product, push its price up by around 50%, then offer it on a 2for1 deal for a while and then take it off that and have a sign saying new and reduced price… which is in fact just the original price before the whole up down trun around rubbish.

By: Adam

Adam — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 19:35:02 +0000

Let me guess, they probably only gave you half of the things that were supposed to be in the sandwich, in addition to ripping you off by 25c. I’ve been very tempted to write an email whoever is in charge of food at Caltech to invite him to lunch at Broad so that I can point out all of the stupidity going on.

By: suavisimo

suavisimo — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 19:26:05 +0000

I’ll tell you what pisses me off. I ordered a sandwich at the Broad Cafe. The chalk-board sign clearly states “$1.00″ off for sandwich only, no sides. I ordered the sandwich only. She only took off 75 cents. I called her on it, she said its “75 cents.” I said your board says “$1.00.” She’s like, yeah, but its “75 cents.” Its only a quarter, but thats all it takes to make you feel like you’ve been cheated.

By: Adam

Adam — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 07:45:53 +0000

Okay… yeah… I agree with that aspect of it being bad. I didn’t quite catch the idea as clearly from the original post.

By: paulcook

paulcook — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 00:45:26 +0000

Ok, I agree — that’s nonsense from Sprint.

Your point that not everyone would think about the implications of the price drop is a good point. But I still think that Citibank’s approach will at the very least, by a process of stimulus and reward, encourage people to complain and haggle with companies, in the hope of getting price drops. This means that companies will need to spend more on customer service agents, and also rewards the least “polite” members of society — which is in my opinion (and others might disagree) a bad idea.

By: Adam

Adam — Fri, 03 Jun 2005 23:00:27 +0000

As you pointed out to me in the “accents” post, not everyone is a Caltech student, and most people don’t have a clue what “microeconomics” is. You’re average Joe, when offered the reduced 65c cost will say something like: “Wow, they really want my business. They up and offered me a lower price without me asking. 65c is less than 85c, I guess I’ll keep that insurance afterall.”

However, I have similar issues with Sprint. I’ve been a customer since September of either 2001 or 2002. I started out with a one-year contract, which has obviously long since expired. I can drop them at any point without a penalty. And, for my loyalty to them, so long out of contract they send me offers to make my nighttime minutes start 1 hour earlier (they start at 9pm now). However, I could simply go out and buy a new phone, and set up a plan with nighttime minutes starting at 7pm, although I’d have to pay for the new phone and sign a TWO-year contract (at least, last time I checked). If I go with their kind offer of bumping my nighttime minutes to 8pm, I have to sign another TWO-year contract.

So this kind of annoys me. I’m cool with my phone. It may be big and heavy, but it has good battery life, reasonable reception, it’s durable, and if someone tries to rob me, I can bludgeon them to death with the thing. So, I don’t need a new phone. But, if I want my nights to start earlier I have to either settle for 8pm (which is 11pm on the East Coast, so my parents/brother will already be in bed) and a two-year contract, or I can get 7pm but I have to buy a new phone and sign a two-year contract. They’ve ALREADY gotten a helluva lot more out of me than my original 1-year contract, so it should be obvious that I’m not interested in switching to another company. And yet, to get a feature that a new buyer gets, I have to sign a contract twice the length of my original one. If I’m going to show loyalty to them, they should show loyalty to me by AT LEAST giving me the same options as a new customer, but without the new contract.