No! No!

More often than not customers feel that products are over priced; but this is usually counterbalanced by the offer of a discount or extra gifts. This is known as the That’s-Not-All (TNA) persuasion technique – offering something to somebody, but rather than giving it to them as a final item, it’s given in pieces. The salesperson ensures that each piece is even more surprising and delightful than the last.

An example of this technique is shown in this “No! No!” advertisement. This advertisement provides a list of reasons why customers have brought “No! No!”. They also emphasise the fact that it has over 2 million customers in over 50 countries, letting the audience know that the product has been established worldwide. The advert ends stating that “No! No!” and the different bits that come with it (different size tips, buffer pad, cream and a travel case) are just $40. “But we're not finished there, if you act now” they will also throw in a 60-day trial money back guaranteed. Once customers are aware of all that is on offer for $40, they are more likely to comply and part with the money.

Bruce et al (1998) carried out an experiment to test the TNA technique. People walking past a table were asked if they would “like to buy a box of chocolate today?”. If the person asked “How much?” they were included in the study. In the controlled condition, the experimenter responded with “$1 for the small box or “$5 for the large box”. In the TNA condition the experimenter responded “$1.25 for the small box or $6.25 for the large box”. After a 2 to 3 second pause the experimenter spoke to another experimenter then announced, “I’m sorry, actually this box of chocolate is now $1” (or $5 for the large). It was predicted that the higher prices associated with the large box would result in more consideration of the offer, ultimately reducing the effectiveness of the TNA condition.

TABLE 1. Purchase of chocolate from each box size and condition
	TNA	control
Small box	76%	45%
Large box	18%	24%

In the small box condition 31% advantage for the TNA was statistically significant. In addition the results indicate that the higher price caused the TNA effect to be non-existent; however this 6% decrease was not significant. To conclude this experiment found that the appearance of a deal increased compliance only with low-costing product.

Bruce, H. J., Knowles, E. S., Pollock, C. L., & Smith, S. D. (1998). Mindfulness limits compliance with the that's-not-all technique, Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1153-1157