Aldi not giving change

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

TallGlass wrote: »

So day one and I am already down 2c.

Why don't the shops or what ever just don't price things like ticks. Don't price things 1,2,3,4c simple really.

A whole 2 cent! I bought 3 items at 1.99 and gained a whole 2 cent.

Changing prices of individual items makes no sense, as that would be inflationary and cost us all.

TallGlass

Dodge wrote: »

You're complaining about being down 2c but you'd be happy to have the prices increased? And they're the "ticks"?

Never complained buddy, I said day one and I am down 2c.

So you agree they would increase the prices then. Only person who loses out in this is the customer. If they wanted to and they could, they could do this themselves. Would you ever give over.

There going to increase prices regardless, and yeah they are tick, its easy for them to do it. But it doesn't suit them, just as easy to have the customer foot the bill. Do you honestly think they likes of Tesco, SuperValu would bring this in if they are going to lose out on money. Not a chance.

Sure look at the difference in supermarket price comparisons its always down to cents. Believe me buddy, I know what I am talking about.

Jellybaby1

Greenmachine wrote: »

Was in in Tesco the other day and the manager was explaining the rounding to two members of staff. I was buying a single low value item. The Manager went into a near monologue with a few confused words from one of the two staff...

I saw this happening in a M & S store too. It doesn't look like the retail trade was properly prepared. Goodness knows what Dunnes is like!

TallGlass

Jade Moldy Thanksgiving wrote: »

A whole 2 cent! I bought 3 items at 1.99 and gained a whole 2 cent.

Changing prices of individual items makes no sense, as that would be inflationary and cost us all.

Wow a price increase of a whole cent if rounded up to 2€. Oh lord save us.

xabi

TallGlass wrote: »

So day one and I am already down 2c.

Why don't the shops or what ever just don't price things like ticks. Don't price things 1,2,3,4c simple really.

Will you be on here complaining tomorrow when you are up 2c?

L1011

TallGlass wrote: »

Wow a price increase of a whole cent if rounded up to 2€. Oh lord save us.

You were moaning at being down 2c. Make your mind up!

NewDirection

Anyone complaining about this simply doesn't grasp the concept.
Stop focusing on the one single transaction that you incurred a 2c loss on, and just for one moment look beyond.

After 100 transactions will you be up or down and by how much? Probably up or down by a few cent.
After 1,000 transactions will you be up or down and by how much? Probably up or down by a few cent.
After 1,000,000 transactions will you be up or down and by how much? Probably up or down by a few cent.

L1011

TallGlass wrote: »

Sure look at the difference in supermarket price comparisons its always down to cents. Believe me buddy, I know what I am talking about.

Specifically and only Tesco's constructed basket of nonsense that ends up being a few cents cheaper than Lidl and Supervalu doing the same to Tesco.

The price comparisons the other three do always end up multiple euros cheaper (Dunnes to Tesco, Aldi/Lidl to Tesco/Supervalu/Dunnes)

You can't decide if a few cents is important or not, and yet you seem convinced supermarkets are out to get you - not sure you know what you're talking about at all.

Dodge

TallGlass wrote: »

So you agree they would increase the prices then. Only person who loses out in this is the customer

As far as I can see, you're the person asking them to raise prices.

TheChizler

NewDirection wrote: »

After 1,000,000 transactions will you be up or down and by how much? Probably up or down by a few cent.

<pedant> Statistically though that's not actually very likely, more likely to be out by a few tens of Euro either way (you've got me thinking about the maths now!) but that's not likely to be a problem for someone making a million transactions! </pedant>

ohnonotgmail

TallGlass wrote: »

Never complained buddy, I said day one and I am down 2c.

So you agree they would increase the prices then. Only person who loses out in this is the customer. If they wanted to and they could, they could do this themselves. Would you ever give over.

There going to increase prices regardless, and yeah they are tick, its easy for them to do it. But it doesn't suit them, just as easy to have the customer foot the bill. Do you honestly think they likes of Tesco, SuperValu would bring this in if they are going to lose out on money. Not a chance.

Sure look at the difference in supermarket price comparisons its always down to cents. Believe me buddy, I know what I am talking about.

day one and you are down 2c. day two and you buy something and the total is €2.02 and you hand over €2 so now you back to even. it really is that simple.

ohnonotgmail

TheChizler wrote: »

<pedant> Statistically though that's not actually very likely, more likely to be out by a few tens of Euro either way (you've got me thinking about the maths now!) but that's not likely to be a problem for someone making a million transactions! </pedant>

tens of euros for an individual is highly unlikely. For the population as a whole it will be pretty much break even.

TheChizler

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

tens of euros for an individual is highly unlikely. For the population as a whole it will be pretty much break even.

I don't know about the first, I know it's more likely than only being out by a few cent for a million iterations. And yes of course on average across a population it will more or less break even.

Edit: A quick (probably wrong) calculation where you assume being -1, -2, 0, 1, and 2 c out on a transaction are equally likely, after a million transactions you have a greater than 50% chance of being less than or equal to €40.01 out. But at this stage the maths forum might be more appropriate...

ohnonotgmail

TheChizler wrote: »

I don't know about the first, I know it's more likely than only being out by a few cent for a million iterations. And yes of course on average across a population it will more or less break even.

Edit: A quick (probably wrong) calculation where you assume being -1, -2, 0, 1, and 2 c out on a transaction are equally likely, after a million transactions you have a greater than 50% chance of being less than or equal to €40.01 out. But at this stage the maths forum might be more appropriate...

I would like to see how you calculated that but not for this forum as you say. For a population as a whole i cant see how it could be other than a zero sum game.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I would like to see how you calculated that but not for this forum as you say. For a population as a whole i cant see how it could be other than a zero sum game.

It's a variation on this theme: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_walk

As the number of transactions increases, some people will end up appreciably winning while others will end up net losers. Over all participants, though, of course it would balance out - if pricing was truly random.

delahuntv

NewDirection wrote: »

Anyone complaining about this simply doesn't grasp the concept.
Stop focusing on the one single transaction that you incurred a 2c loss on, and just for one moment look beyond.

After 100 transactions will you be up or down and by how much? Probably up or down by a few cent.
After 1,000 transactions will you be up or down and by how much? Probably up or down by a few cent.
After 1,000,000 transactions will you be up or down and by how much? Probably up or down by a few cent.

Ah jaysus - stop bringing common sense in on the argument.

It won't do the catastrophe syndrome groupies any good!

ziedth

NewDirection wrote: »

Anyone complaining about this simply doesn't grasp the concept.
Stop focusing on the one single transaction that you incurred a 2c loss on, and just for one moment look beyond.

After 100 transactions will you be up or down and by how much? Probably up or down by a few cent.
After 1,000 transactions will you be up or down and by how much? Probably up or down by a few cent.
After 1,000,000 transactions will you be up or down and by how much? Probably up or down by a few cent.

To look at it a slightly different way. Let's say you went to the shop ever second day so that's 4 transactions a week rounded up (pardon the pun) or 208 transactions a year. Now let's say your one your very very unlucky and you are shorted .01c 3/4 of the time. Will we guess how long it will take for you to he down the price of a pint in temple bar the answer is...... 3.5 years. Anyone who is seriously complaining about this needs a Hoby IMHO

Ken.

It's so simple. If you end up with your total being 3,4,8,9 buy a 22c plastic bag and you either break even or are up 1c.

NewDirection

ken wrote: »

It's so simple. If you end up with your total being 3,4,8,9 buy a 22c plastic bag and you either break even or are up 1c.

More accurately you are down 20/21c and up a plastic bag. :pac:
But ya, I get your point!!


I think for any purchases where you are buying multiple items (eg. your weekly shopping) the distribution from -2c to 2c will be awfully close to truely random.

If you are in the process of buying all your items individually you will proably be a net loser due to more items ending in €.99. (unlikely scenario)

The only place I can see a net loser would be at the petrol pump where the purchaser can set the price range from say 19.98-20.02. But its common practice for as long as I know that a petrol station will round down the 1 or 2c above the 20 anyway, so again its business as usual.

coylemj

Quinn Tight Tail wrote: »

As the number of transactions increases, some people will end up appreciably winning ...

No they won't. Probability theory says that the more transactions they do, the closer they will get to a zero effect because the overall average is that nobody wins or loses.

It's the same as tossing a coin 1,000 times. In the early stages the result might be skewed in favour of heads or tails but the more times you toss the coin, the closer the overall result will get to 50:50.

Second Toughest in_the Freshers

thats not how it works,

thats not how any of this works

Ken.

NewDirection wrote: »

More accurately you are down 20/21c and up a plastic bag. :pac:
But ya, I get your point!!

But you could always try convince yourself your getting the bag for 1 or 2 cent cheaper and sticking it to the government.

ohnonotgmail

Second Toughest in_the Freshers wrote: »

thats not how it works,

thats not how any of this works

care to expand on this?

ben.schlomo

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

care to expand on this?

I dunno, i think hes summed it all up there really.

TheChizler

coylemj wrote: »

No they won't. Probability theory says that the more transactions they do, the closer they will get to a zero effect because the overall average is that nobody wins or loses.

It's the same as tossing a coin 1,000 times. In the early stages the result might be skewed in favour of heads or tails but the more times you toss the coin, the closer the overall result will get to 50:50.

Define 'closer'?

coylemj

TheChizler wrote: »

Define 'closer'?

Proximity to. In this context the overall (and in particular the average per transaction) net gains/savings will converge to zero.

Second Toughest in_the Freshers

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

care to expand on this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
The gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy or the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the mistaken belief that, if something happens more frequently than normal during some period, it will happen less frequently in the future, or that, if something happens less frequently than normal during some period, it will happen more frequently in the future (presumably as a means of balancing nature).

coylemj

Second Toughest in_the Freshers wrote: »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
The gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy or the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the mistaken belief that, if something happens more frequently than normal during some period, it will happen less frequently in the future, or that, if something happens less frequently than normal during some period, it will happen more frequently in the future (presumably as a means of balancing nature).

+1 If a roulette wheel is spun ten times and it comes up red each time, what are the chances that the next spin will be black?

Answer: 50%.

If you toss a coin and it comes up heads ten times in a row, what are the chances that the next spin will be tails?

Answer: 50%.

Second Toughest in_the Freshers

also, from the above link, on tossing a coin with one side red, one side blue.

the proportion of red versus blue approaches 50-50 (the law of large numbers). But the difference between red and blue does not systematically decrease to zero

wardides

How has this thread got to 18 pages? Insane.