Maybe they assume that people speeding on Red Bull don't care to take the time to read, man.

They have places to go, people to see, no time for math.

"JUST GIVE ME MORE RED BULL!"

I see mistakes like that all the time at the grocery... usually the difference is only a couple cents though.

if you were going to buy 12 anyway, then yes, buying 3 4-packs would save you money. But if you'd just let them sit on the shelf in your house and didn't need to have them, then you're really spending money to save money, which isn't saving money at all.

Same thing happens for diapers. but this seems to be isolated to one particular target I go to. I have checked others, and they don't make the same error.

Two bucks, sadly, is not worth the convenience of having a single package.

OP, it's a trick question. The smart option is the 0-pack.

I think it was Target that I saw something (vaguely) similar. The body wash I use had a smaller and larger size. The larger size ended up being more expensive and less volume than 2 of the smaller sizes. So not only could I purchase a variety of scents, I could save money doing it as well.

Wal-Mart was the same way last time I saw the Red Bull display. The four-pack was actually about $0.20 cheaper than the Target price with the 12 pack being the same price. So feel free to make Wal-Mart the punchline as well.

I've noticed it other places besides Target, like Wegmans and Tops (supermarkets), but at least at our supermarkets there's the "Cost per 100 ct" or "Cost per oz" area on the tag so you can just look at that to find the best deal, instead of doing real math.

There is a similar price discrepancy at the local Target involving multi-packs of yogurt.
It boils down to this: I do unit pricing in my head or occasionally on the handy-dandy calculator I carry, but most people probably rely on those little tags with the unit pricing broken down, which Target doesn't have.
In the absence of unit price information on the tags, they probably rely on the "biggest is the best deal" fallacy and buy accordingly.

@DeeJayQueue: I think you're missing the point. Buying ANY number of 4 packs saves you money in per-volume terms

@IrisMR: seriously, why is this even a story? Maybe I'll send in pics next time I see a litercola marked at a higher rate than cans.

If those are 8.3 0z cans that's $20.00 for
0.778125 of a gallon. And people complain about gas prices?

or they were drunk and needed to finish off that bottle of jaeger

I used to drink Diet Coke. A LOT of Diet Coke. At the Super One in Michigan, the 24 pack always cost more than two 12 packs. I asked the store manager why, when I thought I was being overcharged. He explained it was how Coke priced them. You were paying the higher cost for packaging and convenience. Needless to say, I bought the two 12 packs instead of the higher 24 pack. Just more prrof that you have to pay attention and not assume that bigger is cheaper.

@Bladefist: Yes, yes, and vodka costs $20-$120 a gallon depending on what you're buying.

Retailers do this all the time. I've seen this at nearly every grocery store I've shopped at. They know that the conventional wisdom is that larger pack == lower per unit price, so they deliberately break this rule every once in a while to catch the shoppers who aren't paying attention. It doesn't matter if the per unit price is labeled. I've often seen stores do this where the tags clearly showed that the smaller package was the better deal. They know that by the time you've stopped to read the tag, they've lost the "trick them into the higher price" battle anyway.

That's what you call an idiot tax

Hey, this concept of charging more for larger volume is rampant, in many stores. I've had long discussions with the manager of my Kroger store over being charged, for instance, $3.89 for a three-pack of tissues, when the individual boxes cost only $0.89, or getting a pound of spaghetti for $0.69, when the pound and a half costs $2.29! I love how the unit pricing tags manage to find a different unit of measure to throw off even savvy consumers. The bottom line is - don't assume the larger packaging costs less.

Bastards.

I have first hand bought Target-branded eye drops that hd single packaged bottles for $1.97, or a special deal two-pack for close to $5.

I got the two individual packages.

I suppose part of it is the convenience of only carrying one big pack versus three individual packs...after all, if you happen to drop one of them, your foot might be on the receiving end.

Whenever I go to the store I usually compare prices of individual items. I just did a quick google and I know it's not the same, but a 12-pack of Coca-Cola in cans is usually more expensive than a 2 liter of the same product in a bottle, right? Well, it costs more to buy 24 cans of Coke than it takes to buy 4 litres (2 bottles) of Coke and you're getting only .25 litre more for your cans. Why do people do it? Oftentimes, even if you're never going to use the cans for any kind of portability (tailgaiting, parties, etc.), it's the convenience of being able to take a can around and not have to pour a glass, then rinse the glass.

@JD: It's not just convenience and portability. One reason people do it is because 2 liters of coke go flat after a couple days. Cans don't have that problem because you tend to open them and finish them in one sitting.

I was at Ralphs grocery store and they had similar "deal" With Rockstar energy drink. They had 3 cans for $4.98, or a 4 pack for $6.99. I guess you gotta pay extra for the cardboard packaging

I can't tell by the picture, but is the twelve pack the 8 oz or 16 oz cans? I saw similar pricing at my local supermarket and thought it was odd until I saw that the 12 pack was a larger sized can.

And four packs of Campbell's tomato soup are more expensive per ounce at my local store than a single can.

@hc5duke:

ha! litercola! anyone else immediately think of supertroopers or am i the only dork here?

I've seen the same thing at Target with razor blades.

@monkey33: I think the 12 pack is the 8 oz...the 16 oz cans are taller and wider, right? If not, then I suppose those could've been the 16 oz cans.

These aren't mistakes or descrepancies. It is price selection. Target is betting that people who buy redbull 4 at a time aren't likely to be the same people who buy it 12 at a time. Those people who buy it 12 at a time are likely to not care too much about the price (because they are using it as a mixer, so the name is what matters), but the people who buy it 4 at a time treat it like a commodity--if there is a similarly priced energy drink out there instead, they will buy that.

The other element is the idiot tax part of the price selection equation. This is the same thing as pricing pasta sauce at eye level higher than at shin level. If you care about price, you'll compare. If you don't, you'll grab. If you grab, you pay for it.

this is grocery economics 101, people. :)

I see this a lot with other products at Walmart. If you buy the off brand cereals they come with more but cost more per ounce that the big brands, same with the powdered gatorade and other bulk products. I figure that they know that people will assume that the more you buy the cheaper it is so they take advantage of this.

@protest: Ha, nope, that's the first thing I thought of too.

Burger King (ok, I shouldn't be eating at Burger King but stay with me) sells the 4 piece chicken nugget on their $1 menu.

The 6 piece chicken nugget sells for more than $2.

At least this was the case at the Burger King in Elkridge Maryland.

Thus proving my high school math teacher right once again.

The Stupid Tax in effect! I support this.

Why did this story make the front page? This is a standard method of pricing things, as most people do not take the time to look at what will cost them more, or less. Most people will just grab whatever has more of the thing they wish to purchase/have, and do not bother to take a look at the different pricing.

So, why did this make the frontpage? Because you did something that is not necessarily smart, but by today's standards, it just may be? Kinda sad isn't it.. that something this simple is often considered "smart".. so much for North American persons being "smart".

I noticed this with cans of cat food last week. Three twelve-packs of Friskies were cheaper than a case of 32 cans.

Is it possible the sugar free costs more?

It's usually the same thing with liquid laundry detergent. The biggest and smallest sizes cost more per unit and one of the middle sizes is usually the best buy, but because of the sizes it comes in (100 oz, 150 oz, 200 oz., 300 oz) the math is a little harder to do in your head.

I saw the same thing with Swanson Chicken Broth in a local Walmart. The 32oz cartons were just about twice the cost per unit as the 14oz cans. I was very confused, and opted for more of the smaller cans.

Most cell phones have a calculator function. I use mine all the time to calculate per unit costs for comparison purposes. Even in stores that put the per unit cost on the shelf tags, when the item's on sale the per unit cost isn't always included on the sale price.

McDonalds is guilty of this, too. The 4-piece Chicken McNugget usually gives you more McNugget deliciousness for less money.

This kind of "family size" or "economy size" scamming happens all the time.

Open your eyes people. It's all over any supermarket.

Sigh...who would ask why this story is here? It's called "Consumerist" and you can't think of a reason why it might be important to point out "standard" pricing procedures with the purpose of getting more money from the consumer? A good consumer should compare prices and decide whether the convenience of a higher count package is worth the extra $$$.

We aren't all as smart as all you people who've known this since birth.

No, the sugar free Red Bull costs the same as the regular.

Target is exactly the same as Wal-Mart but on a smaller scale. No one ever bitches about their crap employment practices and pay.

You have to remember, Red Bull is advertized to "revitalize mind and soul." That means:

* If you're groggy enough to buy a 12-pack of Red Bull at the higher price, you're probably just half-awake and really should be in a coffee house instead.

* If you're awake enough to realize the price diff, you ether had your last Red Bull before you came into the store or you really don't need Red Bull.

5 Hour Energy is another one where the pricing can just be insane. I really hope you're not using that as a mixer, though.

At my local Walgreens:
6-pack: $14.99
2-pack: $3.99
Singles: $2.49

I prefer my method....
At my local Costcult...er, Cultco...er, COSTCO...
20-pack: $16.99

The way I drink those things (and the way my Valued Associates steal them), trust me, that's a heck of a deal.

Plus, the megapack of toilet paper is like $11 with the current coupon. That just ups the win.

I learned from this story to be more vigilant at comparing quantity prices. On the planet I live on, it's standard to price higher quantites at a LOWER rate due to economies of scale.

@Hyland: i always wanted to be one of those marketing types that consults grocery stores on item placement. i hear they make buckets of money.

slightly o/t, but has anyone else noticed "product segregation" where a particular brand is categorized based on its target audience? i've actually noticed some stores do that with red bull. instead of placing it with the other energy drinks, it is commingling with the mixers.

certainly makes it tough to find stuff.

@ Wal-Mart last night:

2 pack Duracell AA batteries- 97 cents
4 pack Duracell AA batteries- $3.17

I think this post misses the big picture. Are those tiny Red Bull cans really worth the cost, even at the lower price? Anyone who answers yes is an addict and you can't think straight. If you need Red Bull to get through the day, you need more sleep. If you need it to be able to party through the night, you really don't know how to party to begin with. Just saying.

@8abhive: Agreed.