Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Bad cop/good cop—-don’t buy it. Previous entry: National Coming Out Day 2008

I Feel As If I’m Not Paying Enough For My Race

EconomyRace

imageHow do I get to go to one of these fancy-schmancy extra-cost ethnically focused chain grocers?

Avanza Supermarkets puts its groceries on sale, but then charges customers 10 percent extra when they get to the cash register, virtually wiping out some of the sale prices. It’s a new pricing program that the company, Nash Finch based in Minneapolis, began in its stores in Colorado.

Most shoppers do not notice that the extra charge has been added to their bills until they look carefully at their receipts.

“I don’t usually read the fine print, I just look to see what the sales are,” said Antoinette Garcia of Denver. “I don’t think that’s fair. They should let somebody know before they do that.”

When shoppers and 9Wants to Know asked store employees to explain the new pricing program, the store clerks and managers seemed confused.

“This is for taxes in Mexico and we think that people would feel better if they are charged for taxes as if they were in Mexico,” one worker said.

I always suspected that the main assimilatory issue new immigrants to our country face is not paying the same taxes they did in their homeland.  If you have an immigrant presence in your community, most stores will simply take minor patronizing steps to accommodate them - moving tortillas to the end of the aisle, having a special Eid section, ordering up some extra bratwursts every October.  But somehow I doubt that Avanza serves its German customers by adding that country’s VAT to their bill, a move which would finally allow our Brüder and Schwestern to feel at home in this alien land.

The Nash Finch stores Avanza, Food Bonanza and Wholesale Food Outlets add the 10 percent charge to food at the register and specialize in serving Hispanics, according to store workers.

However, the Nash Finch stores Sun Mart Foods, Econo Foods, Family Fresh Market, Pick N Save and Prairie Market stores do not charge extra at the register and do not cater to Hispanics, according to the store workers.

“It’s an injustice. They’re targeting the people who can least afford it,” said Susana Herrera after learning Nash Finch only charges the fee in stores that have specialty Hispanic foods.

“I feel if this were happening in King Soopers, at Target, at Walmart, there would be an outrage. People wouldn’t put up with it,” said Herrera. “But because the Spanish-speaking community mainly feel that they don’t have a voice, they’re afraid to make noise and they don’t say anything. And I think they know that.”

This is a practice about which I can find absolutely nothing wrong.  It is the very basis of capitalism to pick out customers based on their ethnic background and charge them different prices based on whether or not they like their loose meat between processed bread, corn tortillas, pita, or, as I heard about the Obamas at the McCain rally I went to yesterday, pieces of fried baby.  What’s the store’s official explanation for what’s a blatantly

racist

awesome policy?

In a statement to 9NEWS, Nash Finch denied that it’s targeting Hispanic shoppers with the 10-percent fee.

“The ‘shelf-plus’ pricing program is only used in certain store formats. These stores tend to be located where consumers are more price-conscious, as compared to our more conventional supermarkets,” said Brian Numainville, Public Relations for Nash Finch Company. “The pricing policy is explained, not just in English, but also in Spanish, so that no customer is caught unaware at the cash register.”

The stores do advertise that they are going to add a 10 percent fee in signs posted across the store, on the store shelves below the price of a food item on the store shelf and in flyers and circulars. However, the wording is confusing to many. For example, the flyers read, “A great way to save - Plus 10 % at the Register.”

The big question here is why you would consider adding ten percent to the cost of the bill “a great way to save”.  Does it go up to 15% during holidays?  Half coupon Mondays?  Can I get some extra gristle in my meat if I seem Latino enough?  All I ever get when I go to the grocery store is a free bottle of grape soda for every four packages of Swisher Sweets I buy.

Colorado’s investigating this practice, which Nash Finch says that it can’t do away with:

Nash Finch could just raise its prices by 10 percent but stands by its policy of tacking on the extra fee at the register.

“Given the need to attract and retain customers, our stores cannot afford to alienate its customers by charging unexplained fees or unanticipated mark-ups. Our pricing is attracting customers, rather than losing them, demonstrating that the pricing policy is in fact fair, obvious and well-understood by shoppers,” said Numainville of Nash Finch.

I congratulate Nash Finch’s spokesperson for creating a justification that destroys itself.  In order to keep customers who are paying an unexplained and unanticipated surcharge, they must prevent customers from knowing that they’re doing so lest they think that they’re paying an unexplained or unanticipated surcharge.  And the fact that they’re choosing to shop at a store where they’re being unknowingly charged a higher price than what’s on the shelf in fact proves that they shouldn’t be charged the surcharge that they must be charged to continue the success. 

Also, poop.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Jesse Taylor on 09:40 AM • (57) Comments

How can this not be blatantly illegal?

Comment #1: pink daisy  on  10/11  at  09:56 AM

That is so insane that it made my head explode, and now I need a new one.  However, since I’m not Hispanic, I know I can safely get one at the shelf price at Avanza Supermarkets.

The guy making this statement is one of the people I think should “suck a bag of cocks.”

Comment #2: INTPagan  on  10/11  at  10:02 AM

This is so mindbogglingly horrible it makes me want to scream. 

I mean, I’ve heard (and seen with my own eyes) that grocery stores in low income neighborhoods with large minority populations are often more expensive than their counterparts in middle-income areas.  And obviously that’s extremely fucked up.

But tacking on another 10% at the register?  That’s… well… I can’t think of a word to express something even more horrible than just “extremely fucked up”, but that.  Yes, that.

Comment #3: The Opoponax  on  10/11  at  10:03 AM

I think that this is where the market should rule.  Every single shopper who normally goes there should avoid them if they possibly can for as long as they possibly can.  Make their sales drop by more than half.  Make ‘em hurt.

D

Comment #4: seeker6079  on  10/11  at  10:11 AM

The worst part about this is that it’s purposefully designed to make the consumer think that they’re just bad at math.  The prices on the receipt all appear the same, with a single line item tacked on at the end charging the extra 10%. 

If you’re not paying close attention (particularly if you’re doing your big shopping trip), all your items will seem like they’re the same price, because they are.  It’s just the store tax that’s added on at the end…which is a charitable bit of cultural recognition.

Avanzas are soon to open up in heavily black portions of Alabama and Georgia.  They’re only going to allow black customers to buy 3/5ths of what white customers can.

Comment #5: Jesse Taylor  on  10/11  at  10:12 AM

Their evil is only compounded if they do indeed, a la your illustration, sell flour tortillas, a known sin against God.

Comment #6: Theron  on  10/11  at  10:12 AM

Does Karl Rove do their marketing?
I feel strangely compelled to shop there on the off chance that I will save money by being charged more.
I love the new feeling of optimism and hope that has washed over me since reading about this.

Comment #7: staydaddy  on  10/11  at  10:17 AM

Staydaddy - I know Pandagon is free, but if you want, we can institute a free + $20 charge for you.  It’s like Blogvanza!

Comment #8: Jesse Taylor  on  10/11  at  10:21 AM

“This is for taxes in Mexico and we think that people would feel better if they are charged for taxes as if they were in Mexico,” one worker said.

Really? REALLY? Wow.

Comment #9: annejumps  on  10/11  at  10:34 AM

I do not understand how this is even remotely legal.  There’s got to be a bait-and-switch law in Colorado that could be used to put a stop to this.

Comment #10: Naomi  on  10/11  at  10:56 AM

If you combine this scam with buying out your competitors and preventing other markets from entering your territory, jack the “convenience charge” to 20%, or maybe 40%, you have the makings of a capitalist paradise. 

Feel the Freedom!...

Comment #11: MikeEss  on  10/11  at  11:07 AM

In keeping with the following post by Pam on coming out and being a straight ally, let me interject that the second comment strikes me as homophobic and not cool. Let’s not use “suck a bag of cocks” as an insult. The implication there is that for a man, cock-sucking is a demeaning thing, and INTpagan’s point could surely have been made without introducing that aspect.

Comment #12: Orange  on  10/11  at  11:08 AM

Have you read the comments in the original source? Nasty, nasty, racists. Mexicans are all illegals so they deserve to get ripped off…

Comment #13: Pfil  on  10/11  at  11:30 AM

In my state, I know damn well it would be blatantly illegal because there are still laws requiring the actual price to be stamped on the product.  Now, many retailers evade this by saying that they have price checkers where you can double check and they put it on the shelves, but lets say they ain’t too diligent about it once they got away with not stamping every item!

I do know that it is illegal to add cost to anything at the register like “a tax”.  The pricing must reflect the actual price.  Period.

Comment #14: Ms Kate  on  10/11  at  11:34 AM

Nickel and Dimed is only the least hair-raising tale of what happens to the poor and minorities.  Groups like Avanza is a big part of why it can suck so damn hard to be poor.

Those of you who can afford them, hug your lawyer today!

Comment #15: shah8  on  10/11  at  11:44 AM

“This is for taxes in Mexico and we think that people would feel better if they are charged for taxes as if they were in Mexico,” one worker said.

Oh, so the store is sending that extra 10% off to the government like they do in Mexico?  I wish someone had thought to ask that clerk that.

I really can’t see how it could possibly be legal to tell your customers that the extra 10% you’re charging them is a “tax” and then keep the money for yourself, even in an immigrant-hating state like Colorado.

Comment #16: Mnemosyne  on  10/11  at  11:48 AM

They had Pick N Save near us when we lived in Madison. Last time I go there.

Anyway, I suspect that they will try to move this onto their “regular” market in some fashion or another. Maybe it’ll only apply to people who don’t use one of their loyalty cards (if they have one). It does make me feel better about going to Whole Foods. Yeah, everything is overpriced, but god damn it, it’s overpriced up front.

Comment #17: befuggled  on  10/11  at  11:49 AM

I can’t think of a word to express something even more horrible than just “extremely fucked up”, but that.  Yes, that.

Superlatively fucked up. Yes, that.

I mean seriously, what the hell?

Comment #18: Erl  on  10/11  at  11:50 AM

The corporate hack speil reminds me of a documentary about the Chavez unionization of Californian migrant labor in the late 70s and early 80’s-

Some choad in a suit and tie was talking about what a happy, family based, hard-working culture the migrants had, and how they’d sing all these songs while picking lettuce, and that people who wanted them to get paid more for it were destroying this culture, splitting families apart (que malo! no mas ninios trajbadors!)  and undermining the bedrock of migrant society.


//and I was like wait, what? The basis of their society is having you keep them dirt poor? Sick fuck.

Comment #19: Indy  on  10/11  at  11:54 AM

“If you combine this scam with buying out your competitors and preventing other markets from entering your territory, jack the “convenience charge” to 20%, or maybe 40%, you have the makings of a capitalist paradise.

Feel the Freedom!… “

Cute Mike, but where has this happened?  Last I checked, WalMart still had low prices…

Comment #20: anoNY  on  10/11  at  11:59 AM

Orange -

Perhaps you missed the discussion a couple of days ago about that particular expression.  However, let me assure you that it is not a gendered thing, as, if the person who made the comments was a female, she could suck a bag of cocks as well.  There was no homophobia implied by the statement, and, in fact, it’s been used on this site before.

Sucking cock is all well and good, whether being on the giving or receiving end - sucking a bag of disembodied, flaccid cocks, on the other hand, is just repulsive, regardless of your sexual orientation.  At least, so I’ve heard.  Or not.

Comment #21: INTPagan  on  10/11  at  12:06 PM

I do not understand how this is even remotely legal.  There’s got to be a bait-and-switch law in Colorado that could be used to put a stop to this.

That’s what I thought when I read it too - even leaving aside the blatant racist aspects of this (which, you know, shouldn’t be left aside), how is this not a violation of fair price laws that obligate stores to actually charge the advertised price on products?  I don’t know what the law is in Colorado per se, but I just don’t get how they can do this.  On any level.

Comment #22: sam  on  10/11  at  12:06 PM

I think that this is where the market should rule.  Every single shopper who normally goes there should avoid them if they possibly can for as long as they possibly can.  Make their sales drop by more than half.  Make ‘em hurt.

There’s a little concept called “information asymmetry” that you might want to consider.  Not everybody has the resources to a) know that this is fucked up and not standard procedure in the U.S., b) know that there is an alternative and c) use the alternative.

Comment #23: killjoy  on  10/11  at  12:11 PM

Like so many things gone wrong in our economy today, I can just imagine some people sitting around a table in a conference room, trying to think up ways to increase revenues. Some one or two or three people are responsible for shit like this. And another few are responsible for approving it. Not hundreds or thousands, just a few. I wish we could tap a few millions of Soros’s funds to hire private investigators and find out who these assholes are that make these decisions. Same thing for the jerks in the SEC that allowed Investment Banks to increase leverage from 12:1 to 40:1. There are names attached to these assholes and they need to be made public. I’m not seeing enough pitchfork wielding anger yet!

Comment #24: isopluvial  on  10/11  at  12:16 PM

anaNY, I’m not claiming they will be able to do this.  In fact, I suspect that the publicity their little scam gets will guarantee it gets shut down, although I suspect it won’t be altruism that does the trick but the political ambitions of some state AG or someone like that.

I brought it up because we Americans like to believe that somehow The Market will naturally even things out and that all will benefit automatically, that prices will naturally come down to their lowest level, and the birds will sing or something.

However, anybody aware of history before 5-minutes ago realizes (at some level) that all business tends to monopoly.  And given an environment with no behavioral rules for business or no enforcement of rules, if a business can eliminate the competition, one way or another, they will, and they will use their power to dictate what people will pay for their product/service…

Comment #25: MikeEss  on  10/11  at  12:16 PM

Sucking cock is all well and good, whether being on the giving or receiving end - sucking a bag of disembodied, flaccid cocks, on the other hand, is just repulsive, regardless of your sexual orientation.  At least, so I’ve heard.

There’s your problem.  If actually came to our weekly meetings you wouldn’t have to rely on hearsay.

Sincerely,
Jacques le Dur,
Chair,  Membership Committee,
Sacks-o-Cocks Society (East Chapter)

Comment #26: seeker6079  on  10/11  at  12:23 PM

Damn.  Perhaps I should buy myself a bag of cocks and find out for myself.

Comment #27: INTPagan  on  10/11  at  12:31 PM

Given the need to attract and retain customers, our stores cannot afford to alienate its customers by charging unexplained fees or unanticipated mark-ups.

I have to say, that’s the best attempt at making “we’re making so much money doing this we can’t afford to stop” sound like something that helps the consumer I’ve read in a long while.

Absolutely racist, of course.

Comment #28: Chet  on  10/11  at  12:37 PM

If I saw a flier or a sign that said “A great way to save - Plus 10 % at the Register” the only sensible interpretation would be that they were going to take another 10% off.

In any other country, or even in the US in a different decade, this would be several hundred thousand counts of criminal fraud, all chargeable to the CEO and officers of the company. All the justifications sound like a nigerian spammer claiming it was OK because he only took half the money out of his victim’s bank account.

Comment #29: paul  on  10/11  at  12:58 PM

This is flat out illegal.  Bait-and-switch pricing.  Fraudulently posing as a governmental agency.  Their corporate asses are toast, as long as the State AG isn’t just as much of a racist fuck.

“This is for taxes in Mexico and we think that people would feel better if they are charged for taxes as if they were in Mexico,” one worker said.

Whoa!  Mexico can tax us?!  Even France hasn’t tried that yet!  Whatever happened to taxation without representation?  Time to toss all those tortillas into the harbor!!!

——-
Completely off-topic tortilla comment.  My husband often dreams of Godzilla rising out of Lake Michigan.  In his latest dream, he had us hiding while he threw a bag of tortillas at Godzilla to distract him.

“Corn or flour”  I asked.
“Corn” he replied.
“Good to know.”

Now my kids talk about how much Godzilla likes tortillas.  If he knew he was being “taxed” an extra 10%?  ATOMIC BREATH BLAST!!!!!

Comment #30: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  10/11  at  01:01 PM

“we think that people would feel better if they are charged for taxes as if they were in Mexico”

Huh?!?!?!?

Comment #31: Notorious P.A.T.  on  10/11  at  01:08 PM

Last I checked, WalMart still had low prices…

First, go to Target and make a note of all of their prices on the everyday stuff that you buy.  Then take that list to WalMart and compare.  They don’t actually save you that much money.  They have their big advertised things (like electronics made just for them), but they count on you seeing those specific “low low prices” and assuming that their price must be the lowest on everything, even though it’s not.

It’s not a WalMart-specific ploy—every retailer and grocer does it—but don’t be naive about how much lower their prices are than everyone else’s.

Comment #32: Mnemosyne  on  10/11  at  01:24 PM

CVS drugstores have the awesomest pricing model: Some items are tagged with yellow “sale” signs, while others are tagged with yellow “Wow!” price signs. The “Wow!” price for a 12-pack of Diet Coke was $4.99. Wow! That’s a higher price than I’ve ever seen for that product! I guess CVS is counting on their customers being stupid enough to look at the “Wow!” without noticing that the price is significantly higher than the competition’s.

INTpagan, I’m surprised you’re defending this “suck a bag of cocks” thing. It’s gross (a sack of severed penises? really?) and it can be taken to be homophobic and/or anti-sex. Surely there are more powerful ways of saying “The guy making this statement should be condemned.”

Comment #33: Orange  on  10/11  at  01:43 PM

There are a lot of sites I can go to where people say things like “suck a bag of cocks”, but nowhere but here would I get a reasoned discussion about the phrase.

For the record, I’m more a fan of “candle-sniffing fuck fence, go climb a wall of dicks”.

Comment #34: Damian  on  10/11  at  02:53 PM

“if a business can eliminate the competition”

Mike, that is quite a big “if.”  How can a business prevent its competitors from operating in a free market?

Comment #35: anoNY  on  10/11  at  02:55 PM

“It’s not a WalMart-specific ploy—every retailer and grocer does it—but don’t be naive about how much lower their prices are than everyone else’s. “

You’re right, and for the record I do not blindly believe that Walmart offers lower prices, I don’t honestly know.  I guess my point is that Walmart has not completely taken control of consumer markets and jacked up its prices, which seems to be what MikeEss is afraid of.  If Walmart were to do this, Target would easily start gaining market share by offering better deals.

Comment #36: anoNY  on  10/11  at  02:59 PM

“Mike, that is quite a big “if.” How can a business prevent its competitors from operating in a free market?”

It only remains a “free” market if there are laws governing business behavior and there is serious enforcement of those laws.  Businesses will inevitably seek to tilt the market in their favor if they can.

And regarding “that is quite a big “if”“, ask Netscape what they think about Microsoft and the “free” market in computer software…

...oh sorry!  You can’t ask Netscape, because not only did Microsoft destroy them, the government (post-Bush) decided not to bother and enforce its own anti-trust laws…

Comment #37: MikeEss  on  10/11  at  03:08 PM

Someone needs to call Ciudad de Mexico—apparently Avanza owes them some back tax revenues.

Comment #38: SLP  on  10/11  at  03:11 PM

Mike, that is quite a big “if.” How can a business prevent its competitors from operating in a free market?

In the Cleveland area alone, I’ve seen at least seven different grocers either sell the business or move operations out of the city.  Out of the five that remain, two are national chains from outside the city, and the other three are the last remaining local high-end, discount, and inner city chains.  And that’s not including kinda-sorta grocers like Wal-Mart, Target, Costco, BJ’s, and the Super K.

Now if you have a way of starting a grocery in the ‘free’ market from the ground up, me ‘n the ghost of John D. Rockefeller are all ears.

Comment #39: Doug H. (Fausto no more)  on  10/11  at  03:29 PM

“if a business can eliminate the competition” . . . Mike, that is quite a big “if.” How can a business prevent its competitors from operating in a free market?

1)  Undercut their pricing in some fashion and drive them out of business. Read up on the history of anti-trust laws and Wal-mart for examples.
2)  Use your economic muscle with other companies to gain exclusive rights to large slices of the potential market. For examples, check out articles on Walgreen’s deals with insurance companies and Standard Oil’s rise to monopoly under John Rockefeller.
3)  Work directly with government officials to get exclusive or nearly exclusive access to civilian markets. Note the history of both railroads and the trucking industry. The railroads originally used government connections to get their right-of-ways back in the 19th Century. The truckers and airlines went a step further in the 20th and lobbied the government to build highways and airports for them to undercut railroad freight costs. 
4)  Deal with government officials to gain special or exclusive rights to government contracts. Check out references to the “military-industrial” complex and the history of garbage and towing contracts in Chicago. On the petty side, read articles on how competitors of Rush Limbaugh have been banned from Armed Forces Radio. 
5)  Work directly through criminal means to drive competitors away. Famously done with dockyard work in New York. When Lucky Luciano came back to America from exile in Italy, he was met by a bodyguard of Longshoremen armed with bale-hooks.

This is only a sketch outline of the 10,000 year history of anti-competitive practices.  If anyone can recommend a good general text . . . ?

Comment #40: Berken  on  10/11  at  03:32 PM

This is only a sketch outline of the 10,000 year history of anti-competitive practices.  If anyone can recommend a good general text . . . ?

Done!

Comment #41: Mark Foxwell  on  10/11  at  03:40 PM

If I were a competitor of Avanza, I think I’d start saying “No hidden fees” in my Spanish-language advertising.

Comment #42: Dave Menendez  on  10/11  at  04:22 PM

Pretty much every Econ 101 text has a good explanation of price wars and barriers to entry. What’s really funny is that if someone comes into a new market area and uses loss-leader prices to establish their business, they can sometimes be sued by existing business for dumping…

In general, when there’s a monopoly/oligopoly situation it’s more profitable for all the “competitors” to respect one another’s market territories and exercise de facto monopoly power within those territories than to go out and compete.

The Walmart (and other retailer, but I find they tend to be most egregious) practice of low prices on some stuff and higher-than-market prices on the rest is particularly pernicious in a time of high gas prices and minimal free time for consumers. Once you’ve been suckered into going there, it will cost you more in gas and time than you would save by going somewhere else, even if the somewhere else would otherwise be cheaper on aggregate. This is a market failure that could be alleviated if, for example, all current store prices were available to people from their homes so they could do the comparison. But retailers go to great lengths, including litigation, to prevent that from happening.

Comment #43: paul  on  10/11  at  04:28 PM

There’s another way that Wal-Mart can trick you into thinking you’re getting a good deal. I once bought 9 pack of toilet paper for $4, which was a bit less expensive per roll than the 12-pack that Target sold. Problem was the 9-pack Wal-Mart rolls were much smaller than the 12-pack Target rolls, so it turned out to be a much worse deal. Wal-Mart does this more often than you may think, and I would never buy something with a short shelf life (bread, milk, fresh food of any type) from a Wal-Mart, either.  Just too many horror stories I’ve heard.

Comment #44: crossbuck  on  10/11  at  05:13 PM

Berken, don’t forget #6, which may be more of a corollary than a direct way:  conspire with your competitors to fix prices.  That way, everybody wins—except your customers. But that’s why ADM was calling its customers “the enemy.”  “This American Life” had a great radio piece about it.

Comment #45: Mnemosyne  on  10/11  at  05:54 PM

I do not understand how this is even remotely legal.  There’s got to be a bait-and-switch law in Colorado that could be used to put a stop to this.

There sure should be, if there isn’t.

There’s a grocery chain here in Utah - not sure if it reaches anywhere else - that used to do this +10% thing, though they were nice and egalitarian and stung everybody equally, regardless of race. Their newspaper circulars would have a little “We add only 10% to these prices” down at the bottom of the page, and one branch had an electric sign that would flash up the prices and just below that was a little “+10%” painted on. Appropriately enough, this chain is called “Ream’s”.

In the 90s or so, I believe the state forced them to stop with the +10% crap, and these days they don’t do it anymore. Not sure what the exact legal mechanism was.

Comment #46: SamFromUtah  on  10/11  at  06:59 PM

WHAT. THE. FRELL. Good God.

Comment #47: Nenya  on  10/11  at  07:06 PM

Any publicity-hungry DA out there in Colorado?  Want to really make your reputation?  Here’s your chance….

Comment #48: grumpy realist  on  10/11  at  07:35 PM

As I recall from case law way way back when, it’s the price charged at the counter rather than the price on the label that counts.  So, in the absence of any legislation saying otherwise, I think it is legal.

There’s a little concept called “information asymmetry” that you might want to consider.  Not everybody has the resources to a) know that this is fucked up and not standard procedure in the U.S., b) know that there is an alternative and c) use the alternative.

There’s also a little concept called “handing out leaflets outside the store”.  Start printing up fliers saying “This Store Is Ripping You Off” in Spanish and see how long it takes to get some sort of panic reaction out of the management.

Comment #49: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  10/11  at  08:40 PM

Piator:

Your case law must be very old or from an odd state. New York, the jurisdiction I’m most familiar with, has very strict rules about price-marking. You can lower the price at the register, but you can’t raise it. If it’s on a shelf tag or on the product, that’s what you’ve got. Way too many stores were running one-day sales during which all the merchandise would get marked at the low price, followed by a return to higher prices that would be assessed at checkout.

And if you think about it from a contract-law point of view, it’s pretty clear. Offer is the price marked on the object, acceptance is bringing it to the register with money in hand. Breach of contract is unilaterally and without effective notice changing the contract terms after acceptance and tender of payment.

Comment #50: paul  on  10/11  at  09:42 PM

In the ‘70s in California, grocery stores were notorious for raising prices of shelf items multiple times. I especially remember canned food. In the stores that still used the ink price markers, you could see the residue of the wiped-off ink and a newly-stamped price. In the stores where they used printed stickers, you would find as many as four or five, one on top of the other. Remember, these were already stocked and priced to make a profit. You could find that, by peeling the labels off, they added ten cents pure profit on a can of vegetables. They don’t do that anymore, but there’s still the bait-and-switch tactics where you get an item that looks the same as other stores, but isn’t. This trick is (as I mentioned before) especially prevalent at Wal-Mart. Amusingly, after I wrote my first post today, a Wal-Mart truck driver cut me off on the freeway. I did the same to him, of course as soon as I got around him. Semis have no business in the fast lane of the freeway, and most semi drivers know this. Not Wal-Mart’s.

Comment #51: crossbuck  on  10/11  at  10:19 PM

There’s also a little concept called “handing out leaflets outside the store”.  Start printing up fliers saying “This Store Is Ripping You Off” in Spanish and see how long it takes to get some sort of panic reaction out of the management.

Oh, I’m all for organized boycotts and/or information campaigns.  I took the original commenter’s comment to be the standard “if you don’t like it, don’t shop there” argument.

Comment #52: killjoy  on  10/11  at  10:44 PM

Your case law must be very old or from an odd state. New York, the jurisdiction I’m most familiar with, has very strict rules about price-marking. You can lower the price at the register, but you can’t raise it. If it’s on a shelf tag or on the product, that’s what you’ve got.

Well, it was from a while back, and Commonwealth law, but I think they actually cited a US case.

And if you think about it from a contract-law point of view, it’s pretty clear. Offer is the price marked on the object, acceptance is bringing it to the register with money in hand. Breach of contract is unilaterally and without effective notice changing the contract terms after acceptance and tender of payment.

No, that was precisely the point. Where there were inaccuracies in price tags, the merchant did not have to honour the label.  It was held, via case law, that the offer was the customer tendering the money and the acceptance was the merchant ringing it up.

See here.

Comment #53: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  10/12  at  04:05 AM

Oh, Christ, guys.  It’s just “Walmart” now.  No hypens, asterisks, or camel-case.  All that money they’re not compensating associates with is being spent the conversion to Walmart.

Comment #54: Spooky Skeptic  on  10/12  at  04:21 AM

This would be breathtakingly illegal on so many bases in Maryland - consumer protection, purporting to collect an illegal tax, garden-variety fraud and, quite possibly, discrimination on the basis of actual or perceived national origin.  I won’t speak for other jurisdictions.

Comment #55: Bruce  on  10/12  at  04:23 AM

Piator:

Things have clearly changed since 1961 (although the case you linked to is in england and doesn’t deal with consumer fraud anyway). In the US, one need only look at the discussions of whether to repeal laws requiring price tags on each individual item for sale (versus shelf tags) to see that the displayed price is overrules what is rung up by the register. Otherwise the entire question of whether customer can catch overcharges by comparing the item or shelf tag with the register number makes no sense.

Comment #56: paul  on  10/12  at  08:33 PM

WTF… grocery stores don’t charge sales tax in Mexico, and where there is IVA (the value added tax, but close enough to a sales tax to possibly be confused) it’s included in the list price.  Besides being scumbags, these guys are ignorant scumbags.

Comment #57: Richard Grabman  on  10/14  at  09:29 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.