The supermarkets know what they are doing, the CMA know the supermarkets know what they are doing and why, the supermarkets know the CMA know, but somehow you end up with:
“The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said unclear pricing could be hampering people’s ability to compare products.”
and
“Supermarkets said they would reflect on the CMA’s recommendations.”
Great, they can now be certain that they can’t afford it.
>Chancellor Jeremy Hunt said: “It’s reassuring that competition between supermarkets is working, but the CMA has my backing to look further into price rises for 10 everyday essentials.”
As usual, complete detachment from reality. Competition is not working if CMA allows price fixing to go on. Supermarkets can use a loophole where they can call it “price matching” and doing it in the open. It has nothing to do with competition if one supermarket follows pricing of another, without actually bothering to compete.
CMA is thick as mince.
Everything should be listed as price per 100g/100ml no matter what and the above price to include any discount offers e.g. 50% off would also be translated into price per 100g (I understand it can’t be translated to buy 3 for £5 type offers which have multiple different items).
I doubt that would ever happen though. In the teabag example you would have to have them to list the dry weight of the product otherwise they’d include the weight of the teabag as part of the 100g.
>suggesting that supermarkets were “restricted in their ability to raise prices without losing business”.
Isn’t that supposed to be what the free market does? Let people vote with their feet, rather than giving businesses the ability to raise prices and guarantee no loss of customers.
Looking at you Tesco, with your two prices on everything bollocks.
Poundland are classic for misleading. As you usually get a 3rd of the product size.
7 comments
It’s all a smoke and mirrors game.
The supermarkets know what they are doing, the CMA know the supermarkets know what they are doing and why, the supermarkets know the CMA know, but somehow you end up with:
“The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said unclear pricing could be hampering people’s ability to compare products.”
and
“Supermarkets said they would reflect on the CMA’s recommendations.”
Great, they can now be certain that they can’t afford it.
>Chancellor Jeremy Hunt said: “It’s reassuring that competition between supermarkets is working, but the CMA has my backing to look further into price rises for 10 everyday essentials.”
As usual, complete detachment from reality. Competition is not working if CMA allows price fixing to go on. Supermarkets can use a loophole where they can call it “price matching” and doing it in the open. It has nothing to do with competition if one supermarket follows pricing of another, without actually bothering to compete.
CMA is thick as mince.
Everything should be listed as price per 100g/100ml no matter what and the above price to include any discount offers e.g. 50% off would also be translated into price per 100g (I understand it can’t be translated to buy 3 for £5 type offers which have multiple different items).
I doubt that would ever happen though. In the teabag example you would have to have them to list the dry weight of the product otherwise they’d include the weight of the teabag as part of the 100g.
>suggesting that supermarkets were “restricted in their ability to raise prices without losing business”.
Isn’t that supposed to be what the free market does? Let people vote with their feet, rather than giving businesses the ability to raise prices and guarantee no loss of customers.
Looking at you Tesco, with your two prices on everything bollocks.
Poundland are classic for misleading. As you usually get a 3rd of the product size.