# Accused of theft at the grocery! **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [August 3, 2005, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476 "2005-08-03T21:06:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![Velma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/85e7bf/32.png) [@Velma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velma)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/181 "2005-08-09T14:14:26Z")
> [@Trunk](#): > > I guess we need to go back further in time, because I thought everyone at least understood the rudiments of this. . . > > Boca has put research and development dollars into producing “food product X”. They now are overstocked with it because people aren’t buying enough of it. It’s sitting in their freezers and they’re getting worried that they’re going to have to eat a loss. So, they start shipping product X out with a coupon on it. They hope that people who buy it will buy more of it. They hope that people who don’t buy it will start to buy it, like it, and continue to buy it. > > When you remove the incentive for other people to purchase that product, you are undermining Boca’s efforts. Essentially, you are putting them back to square one where product X was not moving and their inventories of it are growing. Except that you have no idea if this is the case or not. You are making up a possible scenario that Boca may or may not have played out. I can give you 10 other possible scenarios that may have happened at Boca that show a different intent. You keep stating that people don’t get it. We get it fine, we just don’t agree with you that there is only ONE possible situation going on here. Here’s an alternate scenario: Boca people: We want to get these coupons out to people that are good for any Boca product. Should we put them in the Sunday paper? Marketing exec: No, let’s put them directly on the boxes. That way, people don’t have to clip them and won’t forget to bring them to the store. Boca people: Good idea. Should we attach them to product X, Y, or Z? Marketing exec: Our lines happen to be shipping a lot of product X today. Let’s put the coupon on that one, but make it good for any product so the customer can choose other ones too. :::scene::: Why is yours situation any better than this one? Do you see that some of us understand what you are saying but simply disagree with you? Another note to the vandalism idea some are putting out. Not all coupons leave that frame. I have used peel off coupons that leave no trace behind at all. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/182 "2005-08-09T14:26:29Z")
> [@Trunk](#): > > I have NEVER seen a thread where a point was made so repeatedly in so many different ways and so many people still have missed it. Ditto right back at ya, for the reasons **Velma** posited. We’re not idiots. We understand what you’re saying. I just don’t think it’s necessarily correct. ---
**Author:** ![Trunk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/87869e/32.png) [@Trunk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trunk)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/183 "2005-08-09T14:41:11Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > Ditto right back at ya, for the reasons **Velma** posited. We’re not idiots. We understand what you’re saying. I just don’t think it’s necessarily correct. Which has ALSO been stated before. The difference is. If you’re wrong (and **Velma** ), you’re stealing. If I’m wrong, I just don’t use the coupon. I just choose not to rationalize questionable behavior by coming up with scenarios in which I’m doing COULD be right. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/184 "2005-08-09T14:52:22Z")
> [@Trunk](#): > > Which has ALSO been stated before. > > The difference is. > > If you’re wrong (and **Velma** ), you’re stealing. > > If I’m wrong, I just don’t use the coupon. > > I just choose not to rationalize questionable behavior by coming up with scenarios in which I’m doing COULD be right. Well, you get a moral gold star. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/185 "2005-08-09T15:00:51Z")
> [@Otto](#): > > So I’m at the grocery, buying among other things some **delicious** Boca products. I couldn’t get too far into this thread because that statement gave it aways as a strictly hypothetical case with no basis in reality whatsoever. Where’s the puking smilie when I need it? ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/186 "2005-08-09T15:02:35Z")
Sorry. I shouldn’t be that snarky in IMHO. In my moral weltanshauung, there is absolutely no problem with this. I don’t feel I’m rationalizing. Except for the wine-meat coupon I mentioned, I don’t engage in this behavior myself, mainly because I simply don’t use coupons and don’t buy items that are not on my shopping list. I just don’t think it’s stealing; I don’t think it’s wrong at _any_ level. ---
**Author:** ![Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e19adc/32.png) [@Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/187 "2005-08-09T15:10:07Z")
> [@Trunk](#): > > Boca has put research and development dollars into producing “food product X”. They now are overstocked with it because people aren’t buying enough of it. It’s sitting in their freezers and they’re getting worried that they’re going to have to eat a loss. So, they start shipping product X out with a coupon on it. They hope that people who buy it will buy more of it. They hope that people who don’t buy it will start to buy it, like it, and continue to buy it. If that actually is their scenario, then they should bloody well put “Save 50 cents when you buy this RIGHT NOW” on their coupon. I have seen this coupon and used this coupon, so I know it ain’t hard. But we’re talking about a coupon that says “Save 50 cents on _any_ our products” stuck on the outside of a box. If it’s not limited to the item it’s attached to, it’s up for grabs, and the company knows it. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/188 "2005-08-09T15:14:42Z")
> [@Barbarian](#): > > But we’re talking about a coupon that says “Save 50 cents on _any_ our products” stuck on the outside of a box. If it’s not limited to the item it’s attached to, it’s up for grabs, and the company knows it. It’s on the box, it’s part of the product, how in the world does that make it “up for grabs”? ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/189 "2005-08-09T15:27:04Z")
If it’s on the box, that implies to me that you need to buy the box before you can use the coupon. Then, at another visit to the store, you use the coupon on ‘Any Boca product’. Boca’s reply to Rubystreak - > [@Boca](#): > > These coupons are offered with the intent of using them simply as an > incentive to the consumer to purchase the product. The incentive to purchase the product is that the coupon is suposed to come with the product. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/190 "2005-08-09T15:42:54Z")
> [@enipla](#): > > If it’s on the box, that implies to me that you need to buy the box before you can use the coupon. Then, at another visit to the store, you use the coupon on ‘Any Boca product’. Actually, no. These are known as IRCs (instant redeemable coupon) in the industry. They are supposed to be redeemed at point-of-sale or saved for later use. ---
**Author:** ![Brynda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e79b87/32.png) [@Brynda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brynda)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/191 "2005-08-09T15:56:30Z")
> [@MaddyStrut](#): > > No worries. After seeing how the thread turned after my response to your post, yours seems like sunshine and lollipops! > > Sheesh. Such vitriol over coupons! I don’t think I take them as seriously–and they were part of my job at one point! I guess this goes up with shoes on/off, toilet paper rolls, and laundry lint on the “SDMB whodda thunk feelings ran so strong” list! The passion is because this thread isn’t about coupons at all. It is about how we treat each other–the social contract, as someone said up thread. It is about whether you believe that “you have to look out for #1” or “treat others as you want to be treated.” Small issues like coupons are interesting because that is where you see differences between how people think about their behavior. ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/192 "2005-08-09T16:27:25Z")
> [@calm kiwi](#): > > If the supermarket get the money back from Boca without proof of purchase, then he really IS stealing from Boca (but they probably like that kind of "stealing’). Um…what? I bought the products as specified on the coupon. No one’s getting money from Boca without proof of purchase. ---
**Author:** ![Rubystreak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Rubystreak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rubystreak)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/193 "2005-08-09T16:53:55Z")
> [@enipla](#): > > If it’s on the box, that implies to me that you need to buy the box before you can use the coupon. Then, at another visit to the store, you use the coupon on ‘Any Boca product’. That’s your interpretation, but that’s not what the coupon said nor what Boca said. > [@](#): > > Boca’s reply to Rubystreak - > The incentive to purchase the product is that the coupon is suposed to come with the product. Again, you assume and interpret things to suit your agenda. I divorce myself from this thread, citing irreconcilable differences. ---
**Author:** ![Velma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/85e7bf/32.png) [@Velma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velma)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/194 "2005-08-09T17:53:09Z")
> [@Trunk](#): > > Which has ALSO been stated before. > > The difference is. > > If you’re wrong (and **Velma** ), you’re stealing. > > If I’m wrong, I just don’t use the coupon. > > I just choose not to rationalize questionable behavior by coming up with scenarios in which I’m doing COULD be right. See, I don’t think it is even questionable behavior so I am not trying to rationalize it to myself at all because I don’t need to. I think the burden in this case would lie to someone to show my why it COULD be wrong. It’s just we are approaching this differently. I have no moral qualms about it at all. I would have moral qualms about doing something like sampling the bulk candy. I would also have moral qualms about embarassing a person by chastising them in the grocery store over use of a coupon. I’ve heard this ‘better to play it safe’ line of argument before in many situations, and I just don’t think it’s a good reason to base moral decisions on. IF I am wrong about this…then it’s worse than being wrong about that kind of thinking. Some people use it to justify their belief in God, for example - “If I am wrong and He doesn’t exist, then I am no worse off. If you don’t believe and you are wrong… you are in trouble, so better to believe… blah blah”. By following this type of argument you have to believe in all kinds of scenarios just because being wrong about the alternative would be worse. Example: I believe plants don’t have conscious thought or feel pain, so it is ok to rip them out of the ground and eat them. But what if I am wrong? The alternative is horrible, so I should ‘play it safe’ and not do anymore weeding in my garden. (I understand the 2 situations are not completely analagous, but I am using it to show why this ‘play it safe’ logic does not always lead to the best conclusions.) I am not trying to make this thread into more than it already is! (If that is possible) by bring up God, etc. I am just giving an example of why I don’t use the “If I am wrong” line of reasoning to come to decisions. I don’t think any less of people who would not choose to use the coupon for reasons stated. I also don’t think it is the moral litmus test that some are making it to be. I do have others’ interests at heart and I look out for other people as I believe it is a good way to live and that I am called to do so. I just don’t think this is a scenario that anyone should feel bad about one way or the other. ---
**Author:** ![chaoticbear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f07891/32.png) [@chaoticbear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chaoticbear)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/195 "2005-08-09T19:24:56Z")
> [@enipla](#): > > In your original post you implied that the customer that did not get the coupon gets cheated. He just doesn’t know it. You could read that into it, I guess. I was saying that the customer doesn’t feel cheated because he didn’t know that there ever was a coupon on it. Like for instance: I go to the store, and there were 100 coupons on the first 100 boxes of product X. **Otto** took a coupon off of a box. I don’t know anything about it, and I get there when there aren’t any coupons left. From my POV, I just went in, bought Product X and left, like I normally would have. From the store’s POV, they just gave 100 discounts on Product X. From Product X Corporation, they moved 100 boxes of product at a ridiculous margin, and made money. Everyone is happy, including **Otto**. ---
**Author:** ![nivlac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/3bc359/32.png) [@nivlac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nivlac)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/196 "2005-08-09T19:27:33Z")
> [@Brynda](#): > > The passion is because this thread isn’t about coupons at all. It is about how we treat each other–the social contract, as someone said up thread. It is about whether you believe that “you have to look out for #1” or “treat others as you want to be treated.” Small issues like coupons are interesting because that is where you see differences between how people think about their behavior. Thanks for the best post (by far) on this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Brynda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e79b87/32.png) [@Brynda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brynda)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/197 "2005-08-09T19:43:57Z")
My work here is done. 🙂 Thanks, **nivlac**. That was a very nice thing to say. ---
**Author:** ![LissyLou](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/5daacb/32.png) [@LissyLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LissyLou)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/198 "2005-08-10T02:50:27Z")
I went to the grocery store today and was irresistably drawn to the Boca aisle-not because of the coupon debate, but rather because all the Boca witnessing earlier in this thread made me decide to try Boca. I bought the Italian sausages and the cheezy Lasagne. If I don’t like them I’m going to blame **everyone**. 😃 Oh yeah, the coupons here were in a dispenser(cut to me standing by the Boca, giggling like a crazy woman). ---
**Author:** ![Yookeroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yookeroo/32/323_2.png) [@Yookeroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yookeroo)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/199 "2005-08-10T06:17:55Z")
> [@Rubystreak](#): > > You have a different definition of harm than I do. Interesting how you then go on to describe a situation where someone is harmed. > [@Rubystreak](#): > > That customer will surely be able to find a box that still has a coupon on it. If they can’t, and they don’t want to pay full price, they don’t have to buy the burgers. The customer now has to pay more than her or she shouldn’t have to. There’s some monetary harm there. You can twist and turn and try to rationize it away, but someone is getting hurt here (however slight). ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_T](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Gary\_T](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_T)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476/200 "2005-08-10T14:20:30Z")
I saw this as a matter of someone taking something that wasn’t rightfully theirs to take, the idea being that the coupon as described was not offered separately but only with the purchase of the box it was attached to. However, given the failure of Boca to confirm this, the insight into coupon marketing some posters have offered, and the apparent encouragement of (at least some) grocery workers to go ahead and take it, I don’t see a compelling argument for that notion. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/accused-of-theft-at-the-grocery/315476.md?page=9)