Talk:Tying (commerce)/Archives/2014
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Tying (commerce). Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Introduction
In the article intro it states: "Tying is related to Freebie marketing, which was pioneered by King C. Gillette...". This statement is directly refuted by the very article that is hotlinked to 'Freebie marketing'! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.96.33 (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
The text says: "Tying may also be a form of price discrimination: people who use more razor blades, for example, pay more than those who just need a one-time shave." Surely it is the other way round! The one-time shaver uses only one blade but has to pay the same as the bigger user. 2.98.198.67 (talk) 14:43, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- I wondered about that statement as well. Technically it is entirely accurate in that someone who consumes (say) 1000 razor blades will pay 1000 times as much for them as someone who buys a single blade. However, the implication of the claim is that the person buying 1000 blades will pay more than 1000 times as much as the single blade purchaser. This claim should be removed as misleading. To be strictly accurate, one generally cannot buy a single blade, so the cost is inflated by the fact that one throws the rest of the pack away. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 10:17, 1 April 2014 (UTC)