Could the price difference be in shipping? maybe with the nalgene bottle attached you cant ship as many filter 3 packs.

Still, those nalgene bottles sell for about $10 at REI... so $1.50 isnt bad if you were going to pick up a filter 3 pack anyhow.

@kompeitou: No man, the filters w/ the bottle are $1.50 CHEAPER than without.

I'm guessing they are different SKU's, and whoever did the pricing wasn't paying attention.

Target often clearances their limited-time promo packages, so it's not unusual to find a bigger package or one with free stuff that's cheaper than the normal size, but that isn't the case here.

@t0ph:

are we reading the same article?

"Here are the filters that Rob found on the shelf. The filters without the water bottle cost $13.49, and the filters with the water bottle cost $14.99."

I'd throw out there that this is kind of pseudo-insidious plot for Target to get mentioned in consumer blogs and thus bring in some free publicity except it paints Target in such a bad light that the only reasonable explanation is the some Targets are run by loonies.

@kompeitou: Did you keep reading? Laura (the author) then went to her own Target and found that "the package of filters without the water bottle costs $15.39, and the filters with the water bottle cost $14.99."

@kompeitou: Same article, different parts. mea cupla.

"The package of filters without the water bottle costs $15.39, and the filters with the water bottle cost $14.99."

I see this same odd pricing on toothpaste all the time. The boxes that have the free bonus additional tube or something taped to the box always cost more.

I love Target but their pricing is annoying.

i'm going to target later today... we'll see what's available at mine.

The price tags on the shelf seem to say something different on each one. Is there a larger photo which we can read what they say?

Did either of these guys try scanning the products with the price scanners they have all over the store? Sometimes the shelf tags aren't right.

The second scenario where the promo pack is actually a lot more common at Target. They put that stuff on the shelf for a limited amount of time, after which it goes on clearance (meanwhile they're selling the same item in non-promotional packaging for full price). I've gotten good deals on everyday items like batteries, light bulbs, extension cords, shampoo, etc on clearance at Target. I got a 4 year supply of shampoo and conditioner for $.30-.60 a bottle. It was on clearance because it was an introductory package that came with 55% more than the regular bottle. Yeah, I got 55% more shampoo and paid 50-75% less than the regular price.

Since the two boxes are identical, I have a feeling the UPC is also identical, and they would scan the same.

I think the UPC code is the same on both and they will ring at the lower price. Seems like Target employees have a need to put "bonus package" next to the product without the bonus no matter what price label is on the shelf. Didn't they do this with someone with a bottle of a product that had bonus free ounces in it a few weeks ago?

I would hope someone at Target corporate sees these posts and speaks up. I like Target, but they sure are coming off as disorganized and confusing.

@PLATTWORX: No way to tell. They could have those sticker UPCs over the packaging too. I would be curious to scan.

These companies need to start excluding the word "free" and start including what they really mean: "enclosed" or "included".

Just bought Brita replacement filters ate my local Target. The Nalgene package was a full $1 cheaper, then and there. I went with the 6-pack, which was about $1 cheaper per filter and came with a $5 Target gift card.

I bought the Nalgene package at Target just the other day. At my Target, it was marked exactly the same price as the package without the bottle.

The other day, I saw a display shelf of socks at target. At the top, in giant writing, it read "5 for $6" yet every single pair of socks were marked at $1 each...both on the labels in front and the socks themselves.

I had a 'oh, this is what consumerist is always going on about' moment.

Has anyone from Consumerist ever asked Target about any of these incidents?

The water bottle IS free. The extra cost is for the few packets of drink mix. ;-)

Interesting. Just a couple of weeks back (ok more like a month back) I was looking over these, and I do not remember seeing a difference in price.

What was fun however is that the 6pack was not only cheaper per unit, but it also had a $5 target gift card free.

@SabreDC: Are you trying to ruin my fun? I love it when I buy left shoes and get the right ones free.

@Cant_stop_the_rock: More often than not, the UPC is different in a bonus pack of something. The UPC on the box inside the new wrapping is usually the same (I've seen the bonus packaging come off things). I think they do it this way to track the number of sells of one vs the other.

Of course most people are going to choose the better deal if prices are identical. There might be more practical applications to this such as tracking how much the bonus pack on an endcap sells vs the bottle in the usual shelf spot. Maybe even if that product is sold more overall because the bonus pack caught consumers' attention and they gave it a try. Just speculation though.

@Cant_stop_the_rock: Good suggestion on the scanning idea; I was going to recommend that myself. Sometimes the items aren't in the right spot so you never know what the real price is until you scan it. Could be that both packs actually cost the same.

@PLATTWORX: I took the two packages over to the "price check" scanner. They scanned at different packages, so they have different UPCs.

Does anyone know what the "513.00 and 499.67" figures in the second picture are supposed to represent?

@ellemm:

Price per 100 units (filter only, bottle as a bonus isn't included in unit count)

@savdavid: Reader Bob should have talked to the store manager first before coming here with his pictures. Depending on what the manager said about this, that might have made a far more satisfying story to read. For now it's just another pricing error oops.

@SNForrester: That's weird - if you buy the right shoe, you get the left one free. Shouldn't they BOTH be free, then????

@MostlyHarmless: As above!

Okay, I believe this story, absolutely. :)

Consumerist has to be about half blind to not see what is going on at Wal-mart lately. I've tried reporting this stuff, but the story gets ignored.

Wal-mart has to be having real problems financially to be pulling off what they have been doing. Here's the deal:

Del Monte "Sloppy Joe" removed from Wal-mart shelves & replaced with Great Value "Mandwhich" Sauce. A month ago Del Monte's Sloppy Joe went for about .99 cents, it was replaced with the Wal-mart brand which now sells for $1.25 . Also Wal-mart raised the pricing of Hunt's "Mandwich" sauce from .99 cents a month ago, to $1.49 .

Reach tooth brushes removed from Wal-mart shelves entirely. Replaced with Great Value (Oral-B) style tooth brushes, with the pricing raised on both the Great Value (Oral-B) tooth brushes and the original Oral-B tooth brushes.

Starkist Canned Tuna removed from Wal-mart Shelves entirely, replaced with Great Value (Bumble Bee Tuna) and the prices raised on Great Value and Bumble Bee Tuna entirely.

Fig Newton Cookies one month ago were in "New Moister" packaging, where suddenly replaced with a more generic looking, smaller package of cookies. The price was raised to $3.98 for the Fig Newtons and the Wal-mart 'Great Value' "Fig Cookies" were placed on the shelf next to them at $1.50 per bag.

(There's more, but in the interest of time...)
Wal-mart has been doing this throughout their stores, across the Nation. I've been through most of the Western States lately and these changes are consistent. This is not only price fixing, it's bait and switch product manipulation and it's rampant within Wal-mart. You'll notice the manufacturer of the generic Wal-mart branded products gets left on the shelf, but priced way up high. Those manufactures are told that by Wal-mart having their products produced for them, they pick up more money, except there is a problem with this. Wal-mart then turns around and prices the original brand named product at a pricing point that prices the manufacturer right out of the competition. The main thing is that the consumer loses choice and they lose real pricing competition, since Wal-mart controls both the pricing on the brand name product and the generic version. The real competitor, say Star Fish Tuna for example is taken right out of the market. Their only recourse is to advertise and have the general public notice their products are gone from the shelves. Very sneaky and very nasty of Wal-mart...

Wal-mart has also been removing the 'snack areas' from their rural smaller stores. In addition, those rural smaller Wal-mart stores are also considerably lighter in stock than they were a year ago. You can walk through some of the stores and see huge gaps in the isles, where the special buys and seasonal hard good product displays used to be sold. Worse is the overall pricing in the rural stores continues to be incrementally higher than their suburban and urban stores.

@Vandelay Import Export: I noticed that too. But the printing on the bottom picture's price tags is smaller, so they may say the same thing, but in different font sizes.

It looks like it's marked down from $500, so I'd say you're still getting a good deal.

@starrytrekchic:

I wonder if the numbers were supposed to be transposed on that sign -- i.e., "6 for $5". That would make more sense.

@Cant_stop_the_rock: "Guys"?

I did take them over to the in-store scanner. The shelf tag price was correct.

@bovinekid: If I weren't still working on a 5-pack of filters, I would have taken either this or the gift card deal. I suppose they don't really go bad, and I've wanted to try the "new" Nalgenes, since all of mine came from before they went BPA-free.

@Cant_stop_the_rock: Different UPCs.

@Vandelay Import Export: Here are the original photos. I updated the post with them, too.

[cache.gawker.com]

[cache.gawker.com]

I bought the nalgene filters, which were cheaper than the no-nalgene version, yesterday at Target in San Gabriel, CA (east of LA). I didn't particularly need or want a tiny water bottle but I wasn't going to pay $1.50 for the privilege of not getting it.

@mariospants: Well, Target IS crazy.

Alright, this is a simple one to explain. The regular 3 pack and bonus pack are separate UPC codes. The regular package is a very common item for retailers to carry and is included on the list for comparison pricing to other local retailers. The bonus buy is not because it is not carried in other stores (exclusive to target under that UPC.)

What you are seeing is that a regular package of 3 filters would normally cost $14.99. But due to variations in local markets the price is lower in Minnesota and higher in New York. Why? Because people in New York are apparently more paranoid about how clean their water is. (Well, that's my guess.)

@changed my name: Sometimes you can buy shoelaces and they come with two free shoes already attached!

@t0ph: You may have thrown him because you mentioned the $1.50. While the first set is a $1.50 difference, the set that you are mentioning where the filters cost more sans bottle is only a 40 cents difference.

While the second set is still weird, his question of whether shipping could factor into the first is still valid I think. Though I have no idea how shipping relates to the fluctuation of the price of products in this situation.

Well I am a department manager at Target and this happens all the time. The number one reason why a price does not match is because the product was stocked by team members in the wrong location. For example, the pictures shows the Brita filters in two spots. The filters with/without the filters both have the same sku numbers and should only have one facing according to the label so the rest is overstock.

There is also a pricing team at Target which goes around the store and changes the price tags on the shelf. Often due to lack of team members or hours, price change falls behind on their workload and labels are not updated on time to reflect the new price. Of course it is our policy that we honor the price on the shelf as long as it was our error.

As far as signing goes, products are moved constantly around at Target and team members often forget to change the signing because either neglect or they are trying to rush to keep up with the workload due for the day.

Then sometimes it is corporate that is to blame for the pricing error. They often send us signs that are not the correct price or for some reason don't ring up the gift card at prompt.

@starrytrekchic: Or it could be one of those deals where the individual price is higher if you don't buy a specified quantity x of them, like you see in every store ever.

@kompeitou: What you can't see is that it's a mini-Nalgene, so not quite $10. But point taken.

@ZekeSulastin: read it again. 5 socks at $1 each works out to cheaper than 5 for $6.

It looks to me like the stores are forced to sell the promotional item at $14.99, but are allowed to set their own prices on the regular product. While the stores had two different prices before the promotion, they didn't change the regular price in order to comply with the requirement to sell the promotional item at $14.99. If it's a limited time offer, this makes some sense, rather than raising or lowering the regular price to comply with a promotion.