"Harlan Messinger" wrote in message
...
TakenEvent wrote:
"TakenEvent" wrote in message
...
"YYZedd" wrote in message
nk.net...
"YYZedd" wrote in message
nk.net...
"Jim Rusling" wrote

snip

It is really 25% off not 33%.
3 items at normal price X .25 = 75% of the normal price

3 items at normal price X .333 = 99.9% of the normal price (call it
100%)
Therefore the first three are really at 33% off making the 4th one
"free".

Of course I guess you could look at it another way. They are giving
you
all
four at 25% off. Guess it works both ways.

It doesn't work both ways. I think the problem is that you think "Buy 3
and
get one free" indicates that the deal applies to 3 rolls of insulation.
It
applies to 4.

A 33% discount is what you get if you buy two and get one free (for a
total
of 3).
A 25% discount is what you get if you buy 3 and get one free (for a
total
of
4).
A 20% discount is what you get if you buy 4 and get one free (for a
total
of
5).

If you buy 16 rolls at $32/roll and then get a 33% discount (we'll skip
sales tax for now), you should be charged $341.33.

If you were to buy 12 rolls at $32/roll (and got 4 free as advertised),
you'd be charged $384.

If you were to buy 16 rolls at $32/roll and then got a 25% discount on
the
lot of them, you'd also pay $384, which works out to $24/roll.

With sales tax, you should have paid $407.04 for the 16 rolls you had
on
the
cart, which works out to $25.44/roll. Lowe's was right. You were not
cheated.


Actually, after rereading the original post, I have determined that Jack
got
a better deal than he may think. If the original price was $38/roll,
Jack
should have paid $28.50 per roll, for a total of $456. The confusion
comes
from the $32 price tag. Either way, Jack got the best possible price.
Lowe's gave Jack the advertised discount off the sticker price on the
insulation. Had he received the discount off of the price in the
computer,
he would have paid a total of $483.36.

Sale prices aren't supposed X% off a fictional price stored in a
computer. They're supposed to be X% off the price the customer would be
paying in the absence of a sale. That's the sticker price.

If there wasn't a sale at all, the price on the sticker was $32, the
cashier charged $38, and the cashier said that that what was in the
computer, I'd ask to see the manager on the spot. If the manager's
response was that it was a case of "confusion" caused by my relying on
the sticker price, and that the price in the computer was the real
price, I'd leave the store.

The case when a sale is involved is no different.

Are you supposed to be refuting or disagreeing with something I posted? The
store (eventually) charged Jack based on the sticker price, which was the
correct thing to do as it was, in fact, the sticker price and it was also
the lower of the two. Other than Jack's misconception about there being a
33% discount, he was much less confused than Lowe's. It must be said,
though, that once the discrepency was brought to their attention, Lowe's
handled it as they should have.

The real question is whether Lowe's then relabeled all the insulation,
changed the price in the computer, or did nothing after Jack left. It
wouldn't be that difficult to figure out if the insulation is regularly
priced at $32 or $38. If Jack was up to it, he could send a buddy in to buy
some insulation to see just how Lowe's handled it.