Scarcity sells. We all know that. Scarcity coupled with urgency persuades many a person to buy. This is because opportunities seem more
valuable to us when their availability is limited. Because of this reason, its use is
widespread and common. All sorts of variations exist, helping businesses and
manufacturers gain new customers and clients all the time. For example 'sales
periods' can be seen as producing the scarcity influence amongst buyers. For a
limited time only (the sales period) products are cheaper than ever (discounts and bargains) prompting lots of
people to rush and buy them, which in turn increases the products demand as with each product sold the product
becomes a scarce item. A typical thought process upon hearing a new sale could be
‘everyone is buying this item, it’s cheaper than ever- oh no they only have 5
left at this price!’ Bargain prices,can always be seen
as a great tactic to increase sales.
BUT what if your sales period is constant- what if your
products are ALWAYS made to look scarce? It would become extremely obvious that
there is no real threat of the product selling out or even the price being
returned to normal. The illusion of scarcity could in theory backfire. Welcome to the DFS problem.
The above advert is just
one of many highlighting the DFS sale and its amazing discount prices on sofas
which seems like a must buy for the bargain. DFS so notorious for its
never-ending sales could be at a risk here- and indeed might already be. My dad
pretty much sums it up after seeing yet another DFS sale ad as ‘I bet it’s
never even a REAL sale anymore…’ And I’m sure my dad’s not the only one person to have caught onto the DFS scarcity of products scheme through the use of seemingly short real sale periods. This could impact the number of sofa sales at DFS, people will just assume that the price was never really changed and might not jump at the bargains as expected.
So what could DFS do
differently? A potential answer can be found in the well-known cookie study by
Worchel, Lee, and Adewole (1975). Participants were given cookie jars that were
either abundant (10 cookies) or scarce (2 cookies). After a period these cookie
jars in the scarcity condition were either constantly made scarce or they began in abundant supply and then
decreased to 2 cookies (made scarce), either due to an accident or due to a high demand for
the cookies. In the abundant condition, the cookies were either constantly abundant or first scarce and then abundant. The increase in supply was either due to an accident or to a lack of demand for the cookies. Participants were later asked to rate the cookies on
dimensions of liking, attractiveness and cost value. These conditions were
crossed with a manipulation in which subjects thought either a high or low
number of additional subjects were still to participate in the study.
The results in Table 1
show that first of all that cookies were rated as more valuable when their
supply changed from abundant to scarce than when they were constantly scarce.
Which suggests that newly experienced scarcity after a period of abundance
first is more powerful then scarcity alone for increasing likeness and
consumption. Secondly being in competition for scarce products seems to work
the best in terms of valuing the product more too.
Clearly then you should use scarcity tactics sparingly and not as a constant strategy to gain sales. DFS
should be sales scarce for REAL (have a sale every so often, in between a normal price period) and limit the time discount sales are actually
on for. Even better, would be to have the sofas at original price for a while-
so everyone has a comparison rate and then make the sofas heavily discounted at
a sales period that lasts for a month or so (abundance then scarcity). They
could also advertise also the limited availability of particularly cheap or
best-selling sofas that are now only the last 2 left for this price, within
this sales month (competition for scarce products). This
should in theory make people feel more like the products are in demand and if DFS wish the last two sofas that are on the sale could be increased in price ever so slightly to make more profit- as then they really are scarce products that customers might assume are worth more. Thus the scarcity tactic would be free to do what it does best. But
for now just remember, every time you see a DFS sale, this should probably be an immediate
reaction…
References:
Worchel, S., Lee, J., & Adewole, A. (1975). Effects of
supply and demand on ratings of object value. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 906-914.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.