Regarding Cecil’s article on why prices end in .99, I’d first like to ask dopers if this is mainly an American phenomenon. From my travels in Europe, I do not recall seeing items priced in this way (usually rounded to the nearest Pound, Franc, Mark or Lira–excuse me, Euro today).
Second, I hazily recall a conversation once when purchasing an article of clothing in a department store. The cashier noted by the way the price ended (.98 instead of .99) that the item had been discounted. Does anyone know of any similar practices, e.g. that the last digit of the price is used to indicate something about the product?
I recall hearing that anything ending in .88 indicates “clearance” status. There’s a store down here where everything ends in .88 – you can get some decent bargains, but there’s a lot of dud stuff, too.
As an Englishman I can assure you that .99 pricing is ubiquitous in the UK. In the days pre-decimal currency pricing in guineas was common in some areas, clothiers especially.
Although there had been no guinea coin for over a century (it was worth £1 and 1 shilling, or roughly 1.05p in decimal), suits, etc were still marked in guineas. Thus a suit priced at 20 guineas would actually set you back £21.
This is true with certain stores, but it would be their own local policy and not by any globally pre-ordained system. You can sometimes see evidence of this in the fine-print of many sales inserts for clothing stores. Look for the exceptions to the 15% off shopping pass which will exclude certain categories of items, a few specific brand names, and then possibly something like “prices ending in .50” or such.
You’re best bet would be to befriend a bored store clerk where you like to shop and find out if they have such a system they can share with you. Next best option is to try and identify patterns yourself. IE $xx.95 is full price, $xx.88 is a loss-leader sale, and $xx.77 is clearance merchandise or whatnot.
This doesn’t work obviously with stores that change their sales format from week to week (dollar days, 2 for 1, 25% off, etc.)
Personally I am glad of the practice - not so much .99 as “one less than some multiple of $100”, e.g. $299 instead of $300.
That way when I have to answer Mrs. Call’s demand, “How much did you pay for that thing?” I can honestly tell her, “Oh, it was only two-hundred something.”
Most retail outlets use the cents portion of the price to indicate the current program for the item. IE, if the item is as normal, if it is going out of program(no longer carried in store) but can be special ordered, or if its going out of program and cannot be ordered. I know this is true for Walmart and Circuit City, for sure. I can assume from what i hear, its true for many others.
My mother (grandmother) worked for JC Penney years ago. She always told me that it was James Penney that started the .99 cent prices. From the company website, however:
"1904
Penney recommends opening a new Golden Rule Store in Cumberland, another Wyoming mining town 16 miles south of Kemmerer. He again becomes a one-third partner. It draws a steady stream of customers, attracted by Penney’s personal service, cash-only policy, “one price to all,” and low, odd-cent prices."
There is another explanation for prices ending in 99c, 95c etc. When stores became larger with many employees, staff honesty became a problem, Cash registers were introduced with a listing tape recorded the days sales. If a price was in exact dollars the employee could pocket the money and the boss would not know. If the customer tendered say, $5.00 for an item costing $4.99 the employee had to “ring up” the sale to open the cash drawer to retrieve the change thus providing a record of the sale. Sure there were other means of defrauding the owner but this simple method helped.
It is true that the original point of a cash register was to ring the bell whenever the cash drawer was opened. It takes only a cursory reading of 19th-century sales material from the National Cash Register Company to establish that.
However, early cash registers did not put out a tape, although they did keep a running total.