Everybody loves a bargain, and when a company offers a second product free or at reduced price, that can be an attention-grabber.
The problem is that too often companies advertise 2-fer offers that are ambiguous at best, causing the shopper to jump to a conclusion about pricing that might be erroneous.
Example 1:
Okay, what are these people offering? Is it two boxes of checks for a total of $4.95 and you get a third box free? Is it merely buy one box for $4.95, get a second box free? Or is it $4.95 for each box, and if you buy two, you get the third box free?
MOUSE PRINT*:
The answer in this case: This is a straight buy one box for $4.95, get another one free. (That’s an amazingly low price until you factor in mandatory handling charges of $3.45 per box.)
Example 2:
Now, what’s this deal? Is each book of checks 49 cents? Is one box 49 cents when you buy two other boxes for $13.44 each? Are two boxes $13.44 period?
MOUSE PRINT*:
The answer when you clickthrough to their website is that this is a buy one for regular price offer, get the second box for 49 cents. So, apparently the first box is $12.95.
Incidentally, two many of these cheap check printers do not disclose how many checks are in a box. If memory serves correctly, it was standard practice to get eight books of checks in a box, or 200 total. Now some sellers only provide 150 checks, and others only 100.
Example 3:
So cases of paper are $4.99 after rebate at Staples “when you buy two.” So do you have to buy two cases at regular price and then get the third for only $4.99? Or are two cases $4.99 total? Or are cases $4.99 each, but you have to buy two of them to get that price?
MOUSE PRINT*:
In this example, unlike the check ads, the stated price is meant to apply per item. So, paper is $4.99 each case, but you must buy two to get that price each.
With these three examples, you have to wonder if sellers ever look at their offers to make sure that they are clear and unambiguous.
I’ll have to credit these copywriters with the intelligence to know when they’re writing misleading rubbish, as opposed to “golly, we coulda wrote that better, dude.” Or if the copywriters are indeed that stupid, I’m sure the copy editors or whomever oversees their handiwork, is not. Here’s some help, Skippy: “Buy one at ___. get second free!…get second for ___.” And YOU, Staples! Couldn’t manage to spring for “ea.” following the price?
This nonsense is never ending.
With wording that ambiguous I would no longer be interested in the deal.
Poorly written for #1 and #2 , but then you do not have much space to work with.
Under example #2, I think there’s a typo: “Incidentally, two many of these cheap check printers..”
I think I agree with Marty. These would have been very simple to explain more clearly what the deal was, and yet, the shortcuts taken aren’t exactly phrased in a way to suggest it’s any particular misleading way either.
I wonder how this plays out. Do consumers who are confused just not buy, thereby hurting the seller as well?
I see lots of blank advertising space on all three examples. Is there a legal font size requirement for ads? ONLY ALLOWED BIG LETTERS? are they limited by words and not logic ? no room for a “mouse print” explanation?