Economics: negative consumer sentiment following failure to upsell
There are several different participants in the transaction, and you may not be aware of all the issues: In some business (fast food) they are required to ask if you want to super size, they are expected to do this at every transaction, but aren't paid more if you buy more. The employee can also decide that too much pressure to up-sell may push you to purchase the item online. That will cost them a commission, the store location a sale, and maybe drive you to a different company. It is also possible they don't have the training to be able to explain the difference between the items.
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.citylab.com/equity/2017/07/inequality-and-the-recession/530190/) reduced by 91%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; In 2007, 126 urban counties entered a recession, another 266 counties followed in 2008 and 180 more did in 2009.  &gt; Income inequality has a hazard ratio of 1.066, one of the highest in the study-in other words, a one-unit increase in the Gini coefficient increased a county&amp;#039;s risk of entering the recession earlier by 6.6 percent.  &gt; Ultimately, the study shows that income inequality has a negative effect on the resilience of urban counties, reducing their ability to withstand a recession and its shocks, for several reasons.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6nmysj/how_income_inequality_makes_economic_downturns/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~168096 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **county**^#1 **Recession**^#2 **inequality**^#3 **economic**^#4 **study**^#5" Only a failing businessman looking for excuses outside of himself would be ok with negative growth in sales during an economic uptick. This has nothing to do with political ideology and everything to do with political/economic landscape. How that landscape is navigated is what really matters here. Your understanding of the stock market is absolutely correct theoretically. However there is a lot more to it. A stock on a given day is effected by a lot of factors. These factors could really be anything. For example, if you are buying a stock in an agricultural company and there was no rainfall this year, there is a big chance that your stock will lose value. There is also a chance that a war breaks out tomorrow and due to all the government spending on the war, the economy collapses and effects the prices of stocks. Why does this happen? This happens because bad rainfall or war can get people to lose confidence in a stock market. On the other hand GDP growth and low unemployment rates can make people think positive and increase the demand in a stock driving the prices up. The main factor in the stock market is sentiment(How people perceive certain news). This causes a stock to rise or fall even before the event actually happens. (For example:- Weather pundits predicted good rainfall for next year. That news is already known to people, so if the weather pundit was correct, it might not drive the prices up. However, if the rainfall was way better than people expected it to be it would drive the price up and vice versa.   These are just examples at a basic level. There are a lot of other factors which determine the price of the stock. The best way to look at it(In my personal opinion) is the way Warren Buffet puts it, i.e. look at the stock as a business and see the potential growth over a long period of time.  There will be unexpected events, but in the long run, the business must be profitable. There are various ways to value a company such as Price to earnings ratios, PEG ratios, discounted cash flows and you can also create your own. See what works best for you and record your success/failure ratio before you actually put money in.  Good Luck, Common sense was the foundation - the idea that you can't spend more than you take in, indefinitely, without there being negative long term effects.  We've been doing that since 1958.  With that as the base, then watching what is going on in the economy, not just in the present day, but historically.  Looking into how the government has manipulated the economic numbers for decades.  Consumer confidence counts for a lot - which is why some of the numbers have been manipulated.  Investor confidence counts for a lot too - which explains the others.  You can only hide things for so long, though.  Borrowing from Peter to pay Paul and then borrowing even more from Paul to pay Peter so Bob thinks you're credit worthy only works until they all figure out you haven't actually got enough money to pay them back, and won't ever.  As for confidence, I'm making major life decisions based on it, so I'd say pretty confident.  I just hope to be reasonably well prepared by the time it all goes down. I think the strongest reason against DHA purchases (I don't consider them investments) is points 3 and 5 mentioned above. The resale market is only to other investors that are convinced its a good investment.If you can't sell to owner occupiers, you've just removed the MAJORITY of your potential pool of people to resell to - this has a devastating effect on your ability to make any capital gain from your investment - if you're not chasing capital gain...be sure to understand why! (see article below)The marketing people will have you believe that DHA is a great investment from a yield perspective...maybe so, I haven't crunched the numbers. But in my opinion, I would wonder - who cares?Yield is important to ensure you can hold the property, but if there is no capital growth and you can't sell it for a profit or release some equity to buy the next investment, then you've just put a massive road block in your wealth building path.I am at the asset accumulation phase of my investing journey, so my opinion is skewed towards capital growth investments. Unless you have a sizable equity base already, in my opinion $4-5 Million in debt free assets, then you should be looking for capital growth assets...not high yield.This article from Your Investment Property magazine, although now dated, gives a good example to illustrate my point on why capital growth is the sensible strategy during the asset building phase of your wealth creation journey: Why capital growth is still king  I think the strongest reason against DHA purchases (I don't consider them investments) is points 3 and 5 mentioned above.  The resale market is only to other investors that are convinced its a good investment. If you can't sell to owner occupiers, you've just removed the MAJORITY of your potential pool of people to resell to - this has a devastating effect on your ability to make any capital gain from your investment - if you're not chasing capital gain...be sure to understand why! (see article below) The marketing people will have you believe that DHA is a great investment from a yield perspective...maybe so, I haven't crunched the numbers. But in my opinion, I would wonder - who cares? Yield is important to ensure you can hold the property, but if there is no capital growth and you can't sell it for a profit or release some equity to buy the next investment, then you've just put a massive road block in your wealth building path. I am at the asset accumulation phase of my investing journey, so my opinion is skewed towards capital growth investments. Unless you have a sizable equity base already, in my opinion $4-5 Million in debt free assets, then you should be looking for capital growth assets...not high yield. This article from Your Investment Property magazine, although now dated, gives a good example to illustrate my point on why capital growth is the sensible strategy during the asset building phase of your wealth creation journey: Why capital growth is still king "This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://sharesandaffairs.wordpress.com/2017/10/16/behavioural-economics-in-marketing/) reduced by 87%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; According to Daniel Kahneman&amp;#039;s Thinking Fast and Slow people&amp;#039;s mental capacities can be categorised into two systems; system one thinking and system two thinking.  &gt; In order for a firm to begin an increase in their consumer base they must employ marketing strategies to target system two thinking to capture new consumers of that good.  &gt; Therefore while the work of behavioural economics continues to reveal that consumer decisions are more complex than our previous models took into account, it also creates new realms of opportunity for marketers to appeal to their consumers through rational and irrational messages alike.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/7738ir/behavioural_economics_in_marketing/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~230235 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **system**^#1 **consumer**^#2 **Thinking**^#3 **two**^#4 **more**^#5" What happens would depend on company culture.  At the very least they could pass it on to their manager.  Or maybe the company just pays support staff by number of answered emails in which case you get the quickest pre-canned answer they can provide.  But the net effect is they will continue to lose to alternatives because of this issue.  They have been given customer feedback.  And their culture is to ignore it.  The results are self inflicted. You could also interpret these actions as satisfying consumer wants, instead of as some sort of conspiracy.  Businesses want to make sales. That's not news. That's no a secret. I think it's pretty safe to assume everyone knows that.   If you, as an individual decided to pawn of responsibility for for purchases on other people, you'd be seen as ridiculous, and rightly so.  This implies that you think this doesn't apply to you, but does apply to many other people. That makes you an elitist. Exactly how much better than everyone else do you think you are?