Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MThibault" data-source="post: 474247" data-attributes="member: 7971">This might be the reason why the mere existence of a higher-priced option significantly increases the sales of lower-priced options.  It sets a higher frame of reference in which the lower-priced products can be judged to be "reasonably" priced or not.Interestingly, it doesn't seem to me that anyone in this thread is setting hard lines on what they are willing to pay.  My impression is that there are two camps: 1) Will buy what you think will scratch your itch and price isn't much of an issue, and 2) Will buy things on sale.Now the second group looks like it is price sensitive, but perhaps it is *bargain* sensitive.  No one has said, "I would buy it new if it the MSRP was $10 cheaper." They would probably still look for the bargains on Ebay or wherever, and try to get an extra few dollars off the MSRP.  Those are two different decision making processes.  Price sensitive (for my purposes here) is having a hard price-threshold over which you will not purchase a product (with perhaps different thresholds for different types or sizes of products).  Bargain sensitive is only being able to make the transaction if the price paid is lower than the initial price offered.The first category of people are not the early adopters (Digital Video Cameras are still priced over the hard threshold) but once the regular price deflates then they will buy one if they feel a want or need for one.  The second category of people are third wave purchasers who wait until the used equipment and in-store sales bring the price down an extra increment.After a quick scan back on this thread I haven't seen anyone say: "I won't buy any product over $15".  But I've seen lots of people say, "I wait until I can find it used or on sale."Interesting.  Do you think that this is an erroneous observation?</blockquote>

Verification