Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

AutoModerator t1_izk5gr6 wrote

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

CaymanRich t1_izkf0ps wrote

So that’s why I’m having trouble selling my house for $599,999.95

11

LurkingLarry43 t1_izkpz1d wrote

This is counter to how you undercut in MMOs.

−5

eulynn34 t1_izlermo wrote

Doesn’t everyone just round up the price in their head? When I see something is $4.99, I say “that’s five dollars”. $199,900 would be 200k to me.

9

AwwwComeOnLOU t1_izlxzgr wrote

3s and 8s are sweet spots.

180,000 does not feel high enough to be in the 200s.

Also 230,000 is still in the low 200s.

3s and 8s let you get as high as you can with out crossing the psychological line.

11

FranticPonE t1_izmtudh wrote

The "999" effect, as I'll call it here, is well established. Sell something for one dollar, or even one cent, less and you're very likely to sell more. It sounds stupid, but never bet against people being stupid.

Here it's reversed. Seems for some items people want to emphasize the idea of the item being valuable, rather than the idea that they're saving money. So the effect is inverted. I wonder if that's true for other classes of items? Is it true for say, luxury items? For other things perceived as "investments"?

3