As part of the preparations for my trip, I had to make a toiletries run at a pharmacy near my work. Which meant having yet again to do battle with my own personal econo-Grendel:
How can a 11-ounce can of shaving cream cost $1.49 while a 1.5-ounce travel size shaving cream, of the same brand and in the same store, cost $2.49?
All tastes and preferences are subjective. I suppose therefore that there could be a small population of travelers for whom conserving space is all-important — for them, “less” is not just “more” but “a lot more” — and it could be perfectly rational for such people to pay such a high premium for the convenience of travel sizes. But is that population really so large that manufacturers and retailers actually accommodate them? (Again, this is not a hotel sundry shop or a “price gouging” airport newsstand making emergency sales — it’s just a plain vanilla pharmacy in midtown Manhattan.)
The alternative explanation is, of course, that people are stupid.
—
So what does this have to do with “Lines — Long and Short, Fair and Unfair, Smart and Stupid”?
Well, I made the logistical faux pas of undertaking my shaving cream quest on the day when the Ben and Jerry’s across the corridor from the pharmacy was having its annual “Global Free Cone Day.”
But as we all know, there ain’t no such thing as a free ice cream cone: the line, which was not moving fast at all, was by my estimate at least 100 people long, snaking all along the underground halls of Rockefeller Center.*
One hundred people or more waiting probably an hour or more for a scoop of ice cream that would normally sell for maybe $2-3. (*And, given that it was Rockefeller Center, a good chunk of those people were probably tourists — for whom the opportunity cost of their time would be inordinately high.)
Two seemingly irrational economic phenomena in the span of a few minutes. It was quite depressing.
And there was more to come:
Lines were so long Thursday [May 8] at some of the 86 Papa John’s stores offering a large, pizza for 23 cents that police stood nearby to make sure people didn’t get unruly.The Louisville, Ky.-based company agreed to the offer after a franchisee in Washington, D.C., made T-shirts calling star LeBron James a “crybaby.” The shirts referred to James’ complaints about hard fouls during a playoff series victory over Washington. The company also will donate $10,000 to the Cavaliers Youth Fund. The 23-cent price is a homage to James’ jersey number.
Now again, all tastes and preferences are subjective, and perhaps some LeBron James fans endured the line not just for essentially free pizza but also to inflict economic woe upon Papa John’s for their “cavalier” attitude towards fans (a bit like, e.g., attending a Marlins game just to boo them). Point conceded.
But spending (in the strict economic sense) one’s time, perhaps several hours, not only “not doing something else” but also spending it in uncomfortable circumstances, just to get a $12 pizza? Sorry, but I’m having trouble not dismissing these people as idiots.
(Via Perfect Substitute.)
For Discussion: Would you have stood in either the ice cream or pizza line if it was already long and slow-moving? What would your rationalization be?
3 responses so far ↓
Link Tony // May 17, 2008 at 9:57 am
I might've checked the situation if I was in the vicinity of either business*. Seeing an abnormally long line, there is zero chance I would've waited.
Having experienced a bout of unemployment, I easily could've justified trading my idle time for a 23 cent pizza. My hours were generating no income, I need to eat, and a $12 pizza was selling for 23 cents. My time could "earn" $11.77. Even at a two hour wait, that's still almost minimum wage.
I would've brought a book.
* Obviously I would've gotten sorbet or pizza with no cheese, if I'd waited in a normal-length line. Obviously. The pizza place near my house has finally stopped giving us funny looks when we order pizza with no cheese.
Link Mark // May 17, 2008 at 11:52 am
I've observed this phenomenon way too often at conventions, where I've watched hundreds of people stand in line for half an hour or more just to get a free sample pack of three crayons. Yes, crayons.
Anyways, the price of the shaving cream is not as economically frustrating as it might appear, at least not once you factor in the effects of our lovely friends at the TSA.
For starters, I'm willing to wager that a disproportionate chunk of the cost of shaving cream comes from the packaging. Since, presumably, the manufacturer produces far more of the larger bottle than of the smaller bottle, it is entirely possible that the production cost of the smaller bottle is actually more than the production cost of the larger bottle. It's also entirely possible that the smaller bottle, because of its size, is more labor intensive in terms of filling it with shaving cream and producing the dispensing mechanism.
On top of that, the travel size fits within the TSA's idiotic restrictions on liquids. This has the effect of creating an artificially high demand for the travel size.
Of course, people are still idiots, because it would be cheaper for them to just buy a full-size shaving cream when they land and throw it out before their trip home. Which returns this back to the realm of economic irrationality.
Link Mike& // May 17, 2008 at 3:37 pm
There might be a rational explanation for the different pricing of shaving cream – production costs.
The actual gunk they put into shaving cream is very inexpensive. It's the metals in the and the manufacturing process that is more costly.
Since more people buy larger cans, you can produce more at less cost. Since fewer people buy those small cans, the production costs sky rocket.
I don't know if that is the case, but it seems plausible to me.
As far as standing in line goes… That's crazy. Then again, look at the bad TV that people watch?
People are morons, sir, who truly can think of nothing more productive to do with their time than to stand in line for a two-dollar ice cream cone.