If something like this were in place at a store near you, (1) Would you use it? (2) Why or Why not?
I think that it would appeal to a lot of people, and actually increase sales. But if that's true, why don't more people just use the information on the food labels to make the same decision?
The problem is that information is costly. It doesn't take you much time to look at a little guy with 0-3 stars over his head. But it does take time to read a nutritional information label, and try to weigh the goods and the bads in the food you are looking at, as well as the 25 slightly different items right next to it. Multiplied over your whole shopping list, the difference is multiplied.
I will assume that, all other things being equal, people really do want to eat healthier. But their desire to do so is outweighed by the investment of time it takes to know how to do that, so they eat as they otherwise would. By making the information "cheap," the grocery store both promoted healthier eating and did something that could create brand loyalty - cruical to people selling commodities (If I can buy the same can of soup at Albertsons, Safeway, and Wal-Mart and I have no particular loyalty to any of them, I'll buy wherever it's cheapest (considering both price, convinience, and how I feel about Wal-Mart). Brand loyalty gives the store a way to eke out a little more profit.)
Kudos to them. And, incidentally, it's a good example of innovation in the private industry that's both profitable to the company and good for the public. Whouldathunk?
Friday, September 07, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment