It's a retail issue, but ...

... I think it belongs here.

Was buying some wine in a store connected to a large grocery chain (sorry - was in a hurry on the way home and nothing local was nearby). I took five bottles to the counter. The guy behind the counter said, "if you buy one more bottle, you get 5% off the total." I explained I had all that I needed for today and thanked him for the information. He said, "you can even buy one of these 99 cent bottles and still get the 5% off." I said, "no thanks, I don't like to game the system - I think it's unethical." The guy looked at me like I just came from Mars. I don't think I want someone like that working for me.

Sounds like good customer service to me. Certainly nothing unethical there.

Sounds like good customer service to me. Certainly nothing unethical there.

To be clear, I said I thought it would be unethical (by my standards, not his) for me to accept his offer. Didn't say he was unethical.

[Robin Garr]

Yeah, I see what you're saying, TP, and admire your standards, but given that the store willingly offers the discount (and clearly isn't going below cost to make it happen), I'd give the guy slack and assume that he's trying to offer good (and friendly) customer service and not conspire with you to stick it to The Man.

Having worked in retail, I'd even go beyond that and guess the clerk was required to offer the deal and would probably be reprimanded for not doing so. I don't see anything unethical on either side of the transaction.

Yeah, I see what you're saying, TP, and admire your standards, but given that the store willingly offers the discount (and clearly isn't going below cost to make it happen), I'd give the guy slack and assume that he's trying to offer good (and friendly) customer service and not conspire with you to stick it to The Man.

Didn't mean that at all, Robin. I just meant that I seriously doubt that the offer to buy a 99 cent bottle of something to get a $5 discount was what the store intended.

I love a good debate about ethics. And thanks for recognizing that mine are mine alone and not intended to reflect anyone else's.

[Robin Garr]

Didn't mean that at all, Robin. I just meant that I seriously doubt that the offer to buy a 99 cent bottle of something to get a $5 discount was what the store intended.

I love a good debate about ethics. And thanks for recognizing that mine are mine alone and not intended to reflect anyone else's.

Got it! And I'd probably feel funny about buying a 99-cent item (which I probably wouldn't drink ) to make the six-pack. On the other hand, if I just wasn't thinking about it, I probably WOULD go back and pick up another bottle in my personal range to claim the discount. And I would appreciate the guy pointing it out.

So, with clarification, I don't think we're far apart on this. And who knows, maybe the discussion will prompt the guy to think.

On the other hand, if I just wasn't thinking about it, I probably WOULD go back and pick up another bottle in my personal range to claim the discount. And I would appreciate the guy pointing it out.

And I can take any criticism leveled for not doing exactly this!

Sounds like good customer service to me. Certainly nothing unethical there.

To be clear, I said I thought it would be unethical (by my standards, not his) for me to accept his offer. Didn't say he was unethical.

Here's the part that I focused in on:

I don't think I want someone like that working for me.

To me, this implies he should lose his job. So, I was just standing up for the downtrodden retail clerk.

I don't think I want someone like that working for me.

To me, this implies he should lose his job. So, I was just standing up for the downtrodden retail clerk.

Purely from a disgusting capitalist perspective, I wouldn't want $5 discount being offered for a 99 cent purchase. I doubt that was the store's intent. If it was, sell your stock in large grocery chain.

But it obviously wasn't a 99 cent purchase if the 5% discount would have been $5...it was a $100 purchase. Big difference. I don't think the cost of the 6th bottle matters so much as the cost of the entire sale. You are still only getting 5% off of each bottle. If you bought a more expensive bottle, your discount would be more than $5. You would only be getting 5 cents off of the cheap bottle, more off of the more expensive ones.

I agree that he was just trying to offer you good customer service. The store wants you to feel like you got a good value for your hard-earned money so you will come back and spend more. He is just the face representing the store.

Was is $5 off the entire purchase, or 5% off the entire purchase? I see both referenced in the thread...

Was is $5 off the entire purchase, or 5% off the entire purchase? I see both referenced in the thread...

It was 5%, but I spent just about $100.

You know, if it was Kroger, that guy who you thought was just a clerk might well have been the buyer or wine manager. It is his job to move volume. Even if it is cheapo stuff. He was doing his job. The 5% break you'd catch on the remaining 5 bottles still brings in the sale within their margins. Period. No retail operation is a charity, no matter how they make it look to you.

Purely from a disgusting capitalist perspective, I wouldn't want $5 discount being offered for a 99 cent purchase. I doubt that was the store's intent. If it was, sell your stock in large grocery chain.

I'd say in most cases the long-term benefits to providing good customer service (including telling customers about discounts they weren't aware of) will outweigh the short term revenue loss of giving the discount.

Whole Foods and Trader Joe's are both known for doing stuff like this - giving away items for free, opening packages to let customers sample them, etc - that hurt the bottom line immediately but do a lot to promote customer loyalty over the long run.