Link This |
Email this |
Blog This |
Comments (0)
Bigger may not always be the better value
February 11, 2008
I was in Barnes & Noble on Saturday and, wanting to supercharge my brain while I looked for a new book, decided to get a cup of coffee. I love coffee, the aroma, the warmth and that great jolt to the brain. I probably like it too much so I always have to make sure that I don’t drink too much. I ordered my small and the clerk kindly let me know that for twenty cents more I could get the next size up.
No, I responded, I just wanted a small. As I put the half-and-half in my coffee, I mused over the fact that retailers and manufacturers generally assume that consumers will see bigger or more as the greater value.
Think about it. Those twenty cents provided me with no additional value as I would not have actually drunk that extra amount. It would have been a wasted additional expenditure. In fact, it could have been a negative value because if I actually drank the whole cup I might have become jittery from too much caffeine and not enjoyed my shopping experience.
In this case, smaller gave me the better value. So as I thought about it, I considered that the snack food business has certainly gotten that message. Bags of potato chips and other snack foods now come in smaller sizes because female shoppers are more inclined to purchase a snack that doesn’t tempt them to take in more calories than they need. In a similar fashion, there are now candy bars and bags of candy that actually come in smaller sizes and quantities and call out the limited number of calories they offer. They are growing their market by offering less and smaller to those who see less and smaller as the greater value.
Maybe we as an industry need to think about this a little. Might a busy mother or father who might ordinarily bypass buying construction blocks because that huge container entails too much clean up, be enticed to buy a smaller size if the package calls out: “Quicker Clean Up?” Might a parent living in a small apartment or home be more enticed by a scaled down version of a larger product if the package calls out: “Takes Up Less Space?” Could we possibly expand our market share by reevaluating the notion that bigger is always better?
Sometimes less might actually be more. Even in the toy industry.
Posted by Richard Gottlieb on February 11, 2008 | Comments (0)
