Non private mode on left. I am not logged in but have cookies enabled. Right is private mode.
this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2024
370 points (92.8% liked)
AssholeDesign
7569 readers
2 users here now
This is a community for designs specifically crafted to make the experience worse for the user. This can be due to greed, apathy, laziness or just downright scumbaggery.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This has been common for ages. In lots of stores.
Yeah, like, decades. It basically means whatever agreement they have with the supplier says that they can't advertise for under MSRP. This is not a thing that's unique to Amazon.
That's because of restrictions/contracts with the manufacturer. Sometimes there is a clause about the minimum advertised price. If it's being sold below that price, that's what you'll see.
However, that clearly isn't what's happening- or if it is, then Amazon is violating those terms. They are showing the price in some circumstances, but not others. That leads me to think it's a smokescreen, using the above as an excuse.
More likely, the price changed between screenshots.
We don't know what the price is on the left.
Yup. Or minimum advertised price is location bound. So the one on the right which has a location set can show it but the one on the left can't.
This is actually a common thing and has been around for awhile. I see it on amazon mostly. Seen it on Microcenter's website a number of times as well. Newegg was big on doing it when they were more PC focused and not a chinese website. Was more prominent in the early 2000s as there were more competing online stores back then.
I've never seen it either. Might be a regional thing, as in better/worse consumer protection...? I'm from the EU.
US thing. It's a loophole vendors will use to get below contracts with manufacturers so they can clear stock and not actually be publicly displaying the sale price. Keeps them from getting sued by the manufacturer and the consumer ends up with a better deal.
Except now the consumer has no reference for the price, which is illegal in most if not all EU member states. Not to forget that now the seller can hide the prices of products and make it impossible for a consumer to make an informed purchase. If any store, physical or otherwise, were to pull a stunt like this to me (EU as well), they'll be talking to a regulator.
Not sure what you mean uninformed. They will see the price in the cart before checkout. Also the price here is always cheaper for the customer. This is one thing we don’t need the EU to regulate to stop these kind of discounts. They can go after “convenience fees and surcharges” on other websites, like $40 fee for a $100 concert ticket.
Again, that would not sail in the EU. As a seller, you must list your price up front.
Plus, again, it makes comparison at a glance impossible. It's a hassle to take multiple items with unlisted prices and compare their qualities for cost-effecticeness if you don't see the price, and have to add items to cart before making any assessments.
Your comment reads like false exclusivity. Go after unlisted prices or convenience fees and surcharges? How about we go after both?
The prices are not shown outside of the cart because the companies are using loopholes to sell it at a lower price than they are allowed to as per their contract. It’s always lower and not higher. Going after this loophole means they will stop selling at a lower price. No need to make an assessment when the price will be lower at checkout. I have never seen any complain about getting additional discounts at checkout. This is one thing American consumers benefit from. 😂
It’s different when the prices are higher like for concert tickets as you will see a massive difference at checkout.
That is a very edge case scenario that, to be honest, I find improbable. What incentive does a seller have to charge less? Especially if they are not required to tell you what they're charging? It's in a seller's interest to try to get as much money from their customers as possible, and if they hide the price until they inform the buyer at the moment of purchase, that gives them all the power to charge as much as they can get away with.
The incentive is to move old stock and offer additional discounts without advertising it as they will be selling it below it’s contracted price. This is the only scenario the sellers are not trying to screw the customer. They are protecting themselves from being sued.
Which happens how often exactly? And if the seller is not required to display the price, knowing that he has every reason to charge as high a price as he can get away with, what is a reason in the vast majority of transactions that he might be inclined to charge any less than that maximum?
Your entire argument is based on an edge case. And if regulations have to be created, I'm calling for the European model. No questions, no conditions, you are listing the price.
I can't actually visualize what Amazon looks like at the moment I don't currently have a way to check, but I'm positive if it shows me prices.
I know it does because I use it to filter out the cheap crap that infests Amazon. If something is too cheap it's not worth buying. So I always order cheapest to most expensive and then scroll down a little bit but I definitely can see the actual prices.
I wonder if the a/b testing this if they are then anybody who doesn't see prices should point blank refuse to actually buy anything. We don't want this becoming common
These agreements are specific to certain products. Amazon continues to show prices under normal circumstances.