[robertlagrant]

> "Meal Deals" are a fantastic scam that charge you more for eating less. If you don't take the crisps or drink it doesn't "count" as the meal-deal, and the individual items cost more.

How is "If you add a third item the price sometimes goes down" a scam?

[globular-toast]

The real price is the "meal deal" price. The individual prices are scam prices which buyers will often pay if they aren't paying complete attention.

[robertlagrant]

I don't think that's quite true. If I just want a bottle of water I wouldn't buy a meal deal to get the real price. Some of the meal deal items are subsidised more than others, it's true, but that doesn't make it a scam. Paying £3.50 or whatever for quite a lot of stuff is pretty amazing.

[globular-toast]

You don't honestly think the supermarkets are letting you have it our of the goodness of their hearts do you? It's obvious what is going on:

* £3.50 is the price. That means they'll make a profit on that. It's a "low" price because it's garbage, tasteless, low-quality junk food,

* The supermarkets know which items are more likely to sell separately. Like your bottle of water example. So those items are individually priced higher while others that rarely sell separately (like sandwiches) will be individually priced low. Whatever it really is, the supermarket has all the data, they know how to win.

Similarly, it's like how people think shoplifters steal from the supermarket. The supermarket knows how much stuff gets stolen each year. They price accordingly. Shoplifters steal from you.

[robertlagrant]

> * £3.50 is the price. That means they'll make a profit on that. It's a "low" price because it's garbage, tasteless, low-quality junk food,

This is wrong. They won't always make a profit. On some items they make a loss.

> * The supermarkets know which items are more likely to sell separately. Like your bottle of water example. So those items are individually priced higher while others that rarely sell separately (like sandwiches) will be individually priced low.

This is also wrong. These items a) have an actual unit price, which will differ depending on various factors, and b) compete with other vendors selling the same or similar, and c) need to be there or shoppers won't go the the shop in the first place.

There are many forces acting on these prices. Thinking profit is the only force is bound to be wrong.

[globular-toast]

Tesco posted a profit of about £1.5bn in 2022. Where exactly do you think this comes from?

I know about loss leaders, but I severely doubt meal deals are loss leaders considering they are placed at the front of the shop and customers often come in to buy them at lunch time. They are competing with the likes of Gregg's here.

It doesn't matter about the individual technicalities. What matters is the bottom line. You aren't beating Tesco.

[robertlagrant]

> Tesco posted a profit of about £1.5bn in 2022. Where exactly do you think this comes from?

I think it comes from everything they sell. You're taking the business' overall performance and seemingly attributing it all to people not buying meal deals when they could.

> I know about loss leaders, but I severely doubt meal deals are loss leaders considering they are placed at the front of the shop and customers often come in to buy them at lunch time.

This is the definition of a loss leader. Bring people in to buy it, and they'll buy a few other things at the same time.

> What matters is the bottom line. You aren't beating Tesco.

These conversation-ending grand statements aren't relevant. I'm not trying to beat Tesco.

[baz00]

M&S run the real scam. They don't even do a meal deal. It just costs you £7.

[nonrandomstring]

How is "if you try not to eat more than you need and create environmental and energy waste, we will punish you" not a scandal ?