This article describes the luxury bag price points. Everlane chose to use a pricing strategy of around $400 compared to bags $1000 in this category. They can offer these prices by "cutting out middle men like retailers, operation on modest budgets..". However, the big issue is convincing its customers that the quality is still there. Everlane also mentions they will not do discounts because of the customer sensitivity.
This reminds me of the mystery shopping we will have to do! Just by investigating, they found out they were being tricked into buying more expensive clothing. We can look out for these types of tactics when we go shopping.
It also mentioned sales online aren't actually sales. If you look back at the website from January there are lower prices than the sale items now. Did JCP think people weren't going to notice?
It is not uncommon for companies to mark up prices, but the problem is that there is a deception when they mark them up and put them on sale. People believe they are paying less, but they are not. Good marketing strategy?
The least JCP could have done was make new tags so that people couldn't see the previous prices. They seem to think we are lazy! This deceptive pricing could hurt the already hurting JCP.
JCP didn't want to "untrain" they wanted to attract a new generation. By not being able to do so, only the same customers came and therefore were unhappy with the everyday prices. Maybe they needed a better transition instead of changing everything so quickly.
JCP failed to convince customers to buy at "everyday prices" so they decided to bring sales back. To do this, they marked up prices then marked them down however people ended up paying more than the "everyday prices" and there is evidence that proves it.
Crazy to think that one company can affect the way a whole industry is viewed. Makes you reassess the repercussions of a marketing decision and the future ones we will make in our jobs!
When the Ad said "It's about the whole food industry." I completely associate every brand of meat with making the same mistake. It makes me forget that Tesco made a mistake but rather everyone made a mistake. As a consumer, I feel misled.
I think that the Advertising Standards Authority made the right decision by saying that this ad "implied" all the retailers. ASA is a legal firm that I had never heard of before. They keep a close eye on ads to ensure that the rules are being followed.
The play on words "our" and "we" seem to be pushing an ethical issue. It is easy for one to be confused and consider the "our" and "we" as referring to the whole industry. Does this confuse you guys?
It is reasonable that the company was not accused of further "unfairly denigrated" charges however I do think they should have been punished. The legal aspect did what was just.