Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
A friend of mine was a manager at a fairly upscale women's clothing store.
She said that even at 95% discounts, they could turn a profit.
In Belgium we have a law stating that no commerce can ever sell at a loss. Yet we still see 70% discounts, in stores for every budget range.
I bet those stores also claim that prices need to go up "because of inflation". Fraudsters.
That's interesting. Why is that? I used to own a local retail spot and sometimes just to make space or whatever, we would sell things at a loss. It sucked, but it was better than never moving it.
I've been told that the idea behind the law was (at least among other things) a matter of fair competition. That if a shop started discounting like crazy on just one item, folks would get inside for it and eventually would be shopping there only. And most times, the bigger store has an easier making those discounts because they have a safer profit margin where the loss will largely be compensated by the variety of items a single customer can buy in a single visit. Now it doesn't mean that there isn't other mecanics that could invalidate this reasoning, but it's the main argum that was appare put forward in the discussions.
Aren't the MSRP tags ordered by the store as a separate item to trick you into thinking the prices are legitimately that high?
Basically. Most clothing is dirt cheap to make.
My store is interesting, I work in a Mar*ials, its an "odd lots" for clothes. no disrespect but I like to buy from there occasionally and had a 20$ blanket and 20$ dress go to tatters in days. Most customers return items verry often