3 evidence-backed pricing tips worth stealing | Nudge Newsletter


Psychology of Pricing

Read online


1) Charm Pricing for High-Quality Products

Imagine you’re buying a shatterproof iPhone case

Does it matter if it is priced at £49.99 or £49.95?

Well, yes.

Gendall, Fox, and Wilton (1998)¹ ran an experiment with fast-moving consumer goods (fly spray, cheese) and durables (electric kettles).

They found that prices with endings in 99 cents are more attractive for low-priced, fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) than 95 endings.

However, for high-quality, high-priced products, ending in 95 made the demand higher than endings in 99 cents.

2) Right-Digit Discounts

One of these ads seems like better value.


But it's not the cheaper one.

In 2007, Coulter and Coulter² showed these discounts to different groups of consumers.

Turns out, consumers were more likely to buy when the prices ended in small right-hand digits (£244 to £233), compared to prices ending in higher right-hand digits (£199 to £188).

Why?

Researchers found that people more easily differentiate smaller numbers.

The difference between 4 → 3 seems more salient than 9 → 8.

Next time you run a discount, make the sale price and RRP less than five.

3) Avoid Charm Pricing For Hedonic Products

When buying Valentine's Day flowers, which price feels better: £45.78 or £45?

For the flowers, it’s probably £45.

Wadhwa and Zhang (2015)³ found that round prices feel more right for hedonic, emotion-based products, whereas odd prices are appropriate for utilitarian, cognition-based products.

In the experiment, participants had to indicate their purchase likelihood for two products:

A hedonic product: a bouquet of flowers,

And a utilitarian product: a calculator

Prices were set at three levels: rounded ($40), non-rounded/low ($39.72) and non-rounded/high ($40.28).

Turns out, customers indicated a higher likelihood to buy a hedonic product at a rounded price.

The opposite is true for utilitarian products.

Customers prefer non-rounded prices to rounded prices.


Did you find these three tips useful?

Well, there are 74 pricing tips just like this in the Vaults.

The Vaults details all the behavioural science insights I've found and explains how you can apply them.

Preview your first 50 insights for free

Hope you enjoyed today's newsletter — Phill

¹Gendall, P., Fox, M. F., & Wilton, P. (1998). Estimating the effect of odd pricing. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 7(5), 421-432.

²Coulter, K. S., & Coulter, R. A. (2007). Distortion of price discount perceptions: The right digit effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(2), 162–173.

³Wadhwa, M., & Zhang, K. (2015). This number just feels right: The impact of roundedness of price numbers on product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(5), 1172–1185

As a behavioural science practitioner, I believe in the peak-end rule.

Tune into Nudge | Advertise with Nudge | Unsubscribe

Nudge Newsletter

I spend 18 hours each week turning marketing psychology into readable newsletters.

Read more from Nudge Newsletter

The Halo Effect Read online The World Cup is here, and England's kit looks a bit naff. Cole Palmer wearing a shirt that looks 2x too big. The kit seems ill-fitting; it looks far too baggy around the shoulders, and the neck is too wide. If Nike surveyed my opinion for their market research, I'd give it a 1/5. But my opinion could change very soon. Success shifts perception. In 2019, researcher Gerd Nufer¹ asked 3,178 football fans to rank the quality of their club's kits. For the study, six...

Specific Number Bias Read online I stumbled across this Reddit post a few weeks back. Everest surveyors added two feet to their measurement to appear accurate. Rather than listing the exact measurement of 29,000, the British Royal Geographical Society declared Mount Everest's elevation at 29,002. Clearly, the surveyors thought that rounded numbers seem less believable. Something that numerous studies have since proven. Can You Spare 17 Cents? In 1994, Santos, Leve and Pratkanis asked three...

The AI Contradiction Read online I just generated an image in the style of Monet using AI. Have a look, and think about what makes this inferior to a real Monet painting. Made with AI* A few weeks back, X user "SHLOMS" did the same. SHLOM's post on X. 1,300 people responded. Most said this AI art was pure crap.They said it lacked "coherent composition". The colours were an "incoherent muddle". Some said it was "trying too hard". Others called it "obvious AI slop". Replies to "SHLOMS" included...