Maybe you should tap into your home's equity and buy a couple while they're so affordable! Ha ha, we kid.

"Incentives: GM Employee Pricing Sale" [KickingTires]
(Photo: Getty)

Reader Roberto says:

This past August 6th, I was in one of my local Target stores (Craycroft and Broadway) in Tucson, Arizona. I snapped a picture of a “buy two and save” item that I thought you guys might like. The difference is only a five cents, but it’s still more expensive to buy the twin pack of deodorants instead of two.

From now on "buy 2 and save" really means, "pull out your calculator."

Reader Austyn, who found the deal at the Layton supercenter in Utah, adds:

Great to know if I go to Walmart I can "Buy 2 and Save!" a grand total of -32 cents.

This isn't the first time we've seen stores futz with unit pricing to screw careless consumers. If you see "Buy 2 And Save," slow down and look for the unit price.

PREVIOUSLY: Target's Degree Deodorant Pricing Scheme Rewards Those Who Pay Attention
Target: Buy 2 And Save! Sort of!

Last night, we went to see The Dark Knight at our local AMC. Since I bought the overpriced tickets, my cousin agreed to buy the overpriced snacks.

When we stepped up to the concession stand, however, we weren't sure just how overpriced the snacks were because there were no posted prices. AMC had replaced the simple menus with fancy flatscreen tv's. Most of the screens showed combo meals or their incredibly annoying flim-guy diving into popcorn. Where there should have been clearly labeled prices for individual products, however, there were only blank screens. The theater had turned those screens off.

Um, that's a little shady, but they might have just been having technical difficulties. We suppose that's one of the awesome perks of having useless flat screen tv menus.

Then again, maybe they did get tired of people skipping the combo meals to save money. Who knows? Nothing surprises us anymore, sadly.

It's extremely difficult to report this sort of thing to AMC corporate (in our experience, they always forward the complaints back to the manager you're complaining about), so if you want to report this, you're probably going to have to call your department of consumer affairs, your state's attorney general, or perhaps your local government.

"When AT&T provides broadband service by speed, it will do so in discrete, non-overlapping tiers," Quinn said in written testimony. "We will strive to provide service within the speed tier purchased by the customer and, if we find that we are not providing service within the ordered speed tier, AT&T will take action either to bring the customer's service within the ordered tier or give the customer an option to move to a different tier."

There's actually no word on pricing yet, but we're going to make a bold, brave prediction that you'll pay more than your current package for the better tiers.

"AT&T To Create Tiered Internet Access For Subscribers" [CNN Money]
(Photo: Getty)

Can you explain to me Target's bulk pricing on their Degree deodorant? As you can see in the attached picture - I could buy one deodorant for $1.82, or a two-pack for $3.89 from my local Target here in Chicago! Am I paying for the plastic they use to keep them together? Neither one is on sale, this is their regular pricing.

This is either Target trying to take advantage of people not paying a lot of attention and fairly assuming that two together will be cheaper than buying two individually, or just bad pricing!

People write us all the time about Target doing this with all sorts of products. We're pretty sure they're banking on you not paying attention.

Jayne says:

On two different occasions, I have visited a particular Starbucks and ordered a Vanilla Latte, priced at $2.95. Twice now, I have been charged an extra $.30 for the vanilla flavoring, bringing the price of my $2.95 drink up to $3.25.

The first time, I let it go, thinking it was a simple mistake and hey, it was only $.30. But then, the same thing happened today. I politely asked the cashier why I was being charged extra for the vanilla in my Vanilla Latte (a Vanilla Latte is a separate menu item, priced exactly $.30 higher than a plain latte with no flavor). The cashier looked at me as if I was crazy and said, "Well ma'am, you ordered a Vanilla Latte", as if that was supposed to make it all clear. I explained that had I ordered a plain latte and asked for an added shot of vanilla, I could understand the extra charge. But, the cashier was having none of my logic. I asked for a manager and when I was told that one was not available I gave up, sensing this was an argument I wasn't going to win.

Think about how many people go to Starbucks on a daily basis for their drink of choice. Now, imagine that Starbucks overcharges each and every one of those people, just $.30 or so, each time. How many of those people do you think would notice or complain? Starbucks is probably making a killing off of their regular customers who just swipe their cards or fork over the cash without a second thought. Just as a warning, if it happened to me twice in a week, it might be happening to others out there as well. Make sure you're being charged for exactly what you ordered!

We think that if it says "Vanilla Latte $2.95" and you order "Vanilla Latte," you should get it for $2.95.

If a store isn't charging you the posted price for what you've ordered, you should report it to their corporate headquarters, and if they don't take care of it, your attorney general. You may be thinking, "There's no way our attorney general will give a crap about me being overcharged $0.30 a few times." You're probably right. However, you should know that San Diego's AG busted Baskin Robbins for shorting people on their so-called "pints" of ice cream, so you never know what will interest an AG...

(Photo: Travelin' Librarian )

Coca-Cola Enterprises, which has about 80 percent of the United States market for Coke, said it would raise prices after Labor Day because of higher commodity costs and declining American soda sales. It said prices would go up by a percentage in the mid-single digit to high-single digit range. Bottlers set prices for retailers like grocery stores.

Hey, at least they didn't change the bottle size, right?

Biggest Bottler of Coke Plans to Increase Prices [NYT]
(Photo: balmes. )

Luke says:

I've been using White Rain shampoo for years. It's in every Walgreens in the nation, and it is the cheapest shampoo ever. It's a dollar a bottle. It's always been a dollar a bottle. Ask anyone. It's also always been in a 590 mL bottle. But now they changed it to a 532 mL bottle. They still insist it's "33% MORE" than something.

Well, it certainly isn't 33% more than it used to be.

A P&G spokesperson told the Boston Globe:
"We don't price in anticipation," Fox said. "We only price to recover costs."

The company has already raised prices 4-8% in order to counter the skyrocketing cost of raw materials such as "pulp, used in paper, tallow, an animal fat used in soap, and oil-based products such as plastics."

Oh well, at least they're being straightforward about it! Honesty is better than the Grocery Shrink Ray.

P&G will boost product prices by up to 16% [Boston Globe](Thanks, Jill!)
(Photo: kandh07 )

I was in the grocery section of my local Super Target today and noticed the pricing for Heinz Ketchup. They had a 2 for $4 "deal" for the 32oz bottles (64 ozs total) which I almost just threw right into my cart until I saw the 64oz bottle for $3.39. The exact same quantity of ketchup, but one is $0.61 cheaper. Had I not been an avid reader of this site, I might have been suckered into the 2 for $4 deal without even looking at the prices. Thanks Consumerist! Every penny counts these days, and you just save me 61 of them!

If you spot any deals that aren't really deals, snap a picture and send them to us at tips@consumerist.com.

From CNET:

The Time Warner division told subscribers last week that beginning July 27, it would raise its monthly dial-up rate from $9.99 to $11.99 per month. Subscribers who specifically sign up for a plan with limited technical support can keep the $9.99 rate, though, but they won't get phone-based help unless dealing with an Internet connection issue.

Hey, mom? What's dial-up? [CNET]

As an idea, risk-based pricing isn't all that bad: consumers pay for credit based on their risk. But with credit cards, only interest rates and late fees are arguably "risk-based."

Interest rates are a terrible way to counter risk. Responsible cardholders never carry balances, so fiddling with their interest rates mean nothing. Kicking consumers with retroactive penalty APRs means that creditors failed to properly assess the risk in the first place; if creditors were truly risk based, they would respond to increased risk by slashing credit lines.

Late fees are equally terrible. Most creditors have three tiers of late fees. It doesn't matter if you're late by one hour or one month, even though the two clearly show different degrees of risk.

Or as Levitin puts it:

Suffice it to say that it is a real stretch to say that credit card pricing overall is risk-based; certain elements of card pricing are partially risk-based, but many are not. Moreover, there is no empirical evidence connecting the advent of risk-based pricing to lower costs of credit to creditworthy consumers or greater credit availability to subprime borrowers. There is a study that correlates late fees and overlimit fees with banks' aggregate cardholder risk, as well as with banks' market power, but there is no research connecting fee levels, which are often one-size fits all, with individual cardholder risk. The putative benefits of risk-based pricing depend on pricing being sensitive to individual level, not aggregate level risk, so that low risk cardholders don't subsidize high risk cardholders.

In any case, the benefits that the card industry attributes to risk-based pricing are explained at least as well by other factors: lower costs of funds explain lower interest rates to creditworthy consumers (issuers’ annual net interest margin has been fairly static for the last two decades), and securitization is at least as good of an explanation for the expansion in subprime lending.

So why do credit card companies pretend to use risk-based pricing? To evade government regulation. Professor Levitin makes a convincing six-point case for the government to lasso creditors with powerful regulations, but we'll let you read the full paper for yourself to see why.

The Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights [Credit Slips]
All But Accurate: A Critique of the American Bankers Association's Study on Credit Card Regulation [SSRN]
(Photo: Getty)

—sorry, we just fell out of our chairs laughing at the idea of a supermarket out there that will heroically pass the savings downstream to consumers instead of profiting directly from it.

The bill’s critics, which include the Massachusetts Public Interest Research Group and the ConsumerWorld.org Web site, say consumers will suffer because they may be forced to wander as far away as 5,000 feet in a particular store to scan an item and check its price. If a retailer opts for the scanning system alternative, prices would still need to be displayed on store shelves for most items.

The critics say it will be harder to catch overcharges at the cash register, and the scanning machines may not pick up on sale prices or special prices for customers with loyalty cards.

"Consumer groups worry that item pricing could go away at supermarkets" *warning! obnoxious ads* [Enterprisenews.com] (Thanks to Linus!)
(Photo: Getty)

If you're in a cinema which gives you a choice between buying a medium bag of popcorn and a large tub of popcorn, there's a greater-than-50% chance that the medium bag will actually contain more popcorn than the large tub.

Here's more of Professor McKenzie's thoughts on popcorn economics:

The prospects of getting more popcorn in the medium than the large is higher here, since the medium is a bag with flexible sides and the tub has rigged sides. Both mediums and large sizes in Winston-Salem are bags with flexible sizes. There I always got more in the large (not much more!). Here, a little more than half the time I got more in the medium. It all depends on the clerks, and how she/he holds the bags and then chooses to literally stuff the bags by pressing the popcorn down. But then the ounce measures are not a firm indicator of value, since a higher weight can mean more bottom of the popping cabinet crumbs and un-popped kernels.

"Richard McKenzie's Popcorn" [Portfolio] (Thanks to Jon!)
(Photo: SMN)

Sally and Tammy are both hot, but Sally's sister is a prude. This makes the fact that Sally puts out salient to me. I attach that meaning to Sally, but not necessarily to Tammy.

PREVIOUSLY: How Sellers Manipulate You With Decoy Pricing

Regarding the graphic above, Ariely writes:

Option (A) is better on attribute 1—let's say quality. Option (B) is better on attribute 2—let's say beauty. Obviously these are two very different options and the choice between them is not simple. Now consider what happens if add another option, called (-A). This option is clearly worse than option (A), but it is also very similar to it, making the comparison between them easy, and suggesting that (A) is not only better than (-A) but also better than (B).

It's called decoy pricing, and stores use it all the time to get you to buy what they really what you to buy.

For instance, as another example in the book shows,

An ad for an Economist subscription gave 3 options

1) Print-only for $59
2) Web subscription only access for $125
3) Print and web access for $125

Obviously 3 looks like the best deal. In an experiment Dan ran with this setup, 16 subjects chose option 1, zero chose option 2, and 84 chose option 3.

What if we remove option 2 and have people choose between print-only and print and web access, all at the same rates? The results should be the same, right, after all, it's the same deal. Instead, the results changed dramatically. 68 chose print-only and 32 chose print and web access. It was only by option 3's relation to option 2 that made option 3 look so good. The subscription marketers at the Economist knew this and used it to boost their sales.

Can you recall any instances of decoy pricing you've seen?

Even worse, the new containers are elongated, giving consumers the false impression that they are receiving more soap. It goes without saying that the price remains the same. Very dirty, Dawn.

I thought I'd send along an interesting find from when I visited a Linens 'N Things (the one going through bankruptcy), they had some Rowenta Irons marked UP by $10... and then had a $10 LNT gift card promotion sign right next to them. It's no wonder they're going bankrupt! I think they need to be a little more savvy than this. I mean, are consumers so stupid that they won't notice that the $10 LNT gift card promotion is on a produce with a handwritten price that's $10 higher than retail?

We think this is evidence that Linens 'N Things has just given up. They're not even trying anymore. How sad.

Fortune interviewed American Airlines' CEO Gerard Arpey, who had this to say:

In this climate, Arpey won't rule anything out. If Delta were able to complete its purchase of Northwest, American would be toppled from its perch as world's largest carrier. And a combined United and Continental would be even larger. That would leave American in arguably the weakest position among the network carriers. But Arpey says the size of his company doesn't matter as much as the strength of its assets. "We believe we will remain competitive irrespective of any consolidation that occurs," he said. "The real challenge is being profitable."

Later, as we were walking down the jet bridge, Arpey paused. "There is no business," he said, "that can go on forever selling its product for less than the cost to produce it."

Mergers would allow airlines to trim routes and, by reducing capacity, further raise prices, though carriers say that's not the plan. (Riiiiight.) This is all good news to one company, though. Virgin America is keeping fares low by burning through investor cash...

American Airlines loses $3.3 million a day[Fortune]
Airlines Finally Passing Higher Costs on to Passengers [Jaunted]
(Photo:Zonaphoto)

Will the grocery shrink ray ever stop? Or will our generation tell our wide-eyed grandchildren stories of the halcyon days of half gallon ice cream containers? Will they even believe us?

(Photo:Kris)

PREVIOUSLY: Breyers Ice Cream Shrinks To 1.5 Quarts

I'm hardly the first to point this out, but had to snap a few pics of the dryer sheets I was buying yesterday at Target.

Note these are regular price items (no sales/clearance). Buying the 120 ct box is a 32% price jump (per 100 sheets).

Another reason to wear your calculator wristwatch at all times when shopping...

Tom said he "tried to control all the variables: Same date/time, same browser, same external IP address, same Dell login, same navigation process (Dell.com>Small Business Desktops>Dell Deals) & (Dell.com>Small Business Desktops>Vostro), and exact same visible URLs." Here are screenshots from the Dell Deals page: as you can see (with some squinting), there is a sizable difference between the dual-panel Vostro system. Computer 1:
Computer 2:

Next, Tom tried to check the price on the dedicated Vostro page. Again, the prices were different. Computer 1:

Computer 2:

Pretty bizarre. Do any of our helpful Dell-employed readers have an explanation for this?

This is regarding something that has always bothered me. While grocery shopping today, I decided I'd better pick up some cat food. I always buy a case of the Fancy Feast 3-Flavor Variety Pack, sliced. That's the only stuff my cat will eat. I promise, I've tried everything else. So, I'm looking over my two choices, which are a 12 pack (4 of each flavor) for $8.29, or $3.684 per pound, and a 24 pack (8 of each flavor) for $17.65, or $3.92 per pound...

As usual, I become irritated because the larger box actually costs MORE than buying two of the smaller boxes. I would love to buy just one size large of the stuff, but the Purina company has made it impossible for a half-way intelligent person to do so. So, as usual, I buy two of the smaller boxes. Once at home, I decide I'd like to email the Fancy Feast people and inquire as to why this situation exists. So I sent them a little note that read: Shopping today, I noticed the 12 can size of the 3-Flavor Variety pack (sliced) costs less per pound than the 24 can size of the exact same product. I can buy two of the 12 can size boxes for about $1 LESS than I can buy one 24 can size. I think consumers naturally think that buying in larger quantities will save them money. I've noticed it has been this way for many, many months, so these are not products that are being discontinued, or are on sale, etc. Why would anyone purchase a 24 can box of your product when they can buy two 12 can sizes for $1 less. Can you please explain this pricing structure to me? It makes no sense. Thank you. So I guess we'll see what they say. Thanks for the work you do.

By paying attention to unit pricing, you've attained the next level of Consumer Ninja-ism. Congratulations!

Okay, so it's not like more expensive gum causes cancer or anything, but we thought you'd like to know why Wrigley's is bragging about their new packaging in the near future. From Brandweek:

When asked if the package shrink would turn consumers off to the product, Paul Chibe, Wrigley's vp North American consumer market-gum, said consumers wouldn't care if they were getting 15 sticks of gum instead of 17 sticks. "To them the value goes up because they're getting a better tasting product in a better package. Price is not the way the consumer is looking at this," he said.
 
Brian Morgan, senior research analyst at Euromonitor, Chicago, concurred: "[Package shrink] is the strategy that has been used in many categories to accomplish a price increase without consumers really noticing or to smooth over the negative reaction."
 
Morgan added that, in the gum category more so than in other categories, consumers would likely respond positively to slimmer packaging: "Packaging innovations like that do make a difference, independent of what that does to the price."
 
Though the new packaging is, in effect, a price increase, Wrigley is hailing it as a packaging breakthrough. "Consumers like the fact that [the envelope] is slim, sleek; it feels very contemporary," said Chibe.

E-Zip Comfort Electric Bike [Walmart] (Thanks to Jeff!)

A couple of weeks ago, I was at Target, and I saw that all of their Mach 3 cartridges were on clearance. As a Mach 3 user, I was kind of concerned as to what was going on. I hoped that they weren't discontinuing the Mach 3 and Mach 3 turbo and forcing everyone to buy their newest razor.

Last night I was at the grocery store and wandered down the shaving aisle, and lo and behold, Mach 3 razors now only come in a 5-pack. Not only that, the price has been jacked way up. A 4-pack of Mach 3 turbo blades was about $8.99. The new 5-pack costs $13.99. So they give you one extra razor for 5 bucks. Thanks, Gillette. I am now switching to Schick.

The reader, Gizmo Sprocket (we'll call him GS), noticed the price difference on the PS3 bundle.

The implication is that Toys R Us is discounting the console further from the list price, but GS knew that the list price is now $499 no matter where you buy the console—hence, this was no discount at all. He decided to ask Toys R Us what was going on:

There was no option for simple pre-order questions or to report problems with the website.... So I navigate phone-tree hell and finally get somebody on the phone. They insisted that the list price was $599. I explained that the initial launch PS3 bundles were indeed listed at this price, but the item they mentioned was not $599. There was some discussion surrounding that the launch PS3 was an entirely different model and SKU- including a 60gb model (not 80) and didn't include Motorstorm as indicated in this online listing. In fact, this sku was always $499. [see image at left. -Consumerist] They went to the Sony store online and told me they searched on SonyStyle for "PS3" and again insisted that the list price was $599. I repeated the search on my end of the phone call and saw what they saw.

They then conceded there was a problem (finally) and said it would be looked into. I asked if they would honor selling me this PS3 for $100 off the list price as Toys R Us Dot Com showed they were selling it (the list price actually being $499 not $599 as listed) and they said they would not.

I am not sure this is illegal or unethical- as a consumer I was prepared to buy it for $399 if they would honor that price. I am still prepared to buy the 80gb motorstorm bundle for $399 if they would honor that price, but that is besides the point.

So- it is definitely illegal to indicate an inflated list-price in NY State and probably other areas. As I live in NY State and this product would be shipped to NY State. Toys R Us Dot Com markets in NY State and it would seem that this consumer protection applies. This could be an innocent mistake, but part of me thinks it would be reasonable for them to honor their posted discounted price in either proportion ($100 off of $599 is a discount of 16.66667 percent) or as a drop of $100 off off the $499 actual list. Either way I'd buy it..

What are your thoughts?

I check Techbargains.com occasionally. At lunch i noticed a clearance sale over at Toys R Us dot com. I wondered if the list price issue was fixed on the PS3 so I clicked through techbargains and then clicked for items over $100 and found the 30gb Zune listed.. the list price is noted as $249.99 and then, below it- Our price: 199.99... I just checked on http://www.zune.net/en-us/products/compare.htm and found the 30gb is listed at $199.00. The price was dropped when the new Zune models were announced. Now what is really troubling is that this page is supposed to show things on a clearance sale! It says so at the top of the page.
 

As to the legality of it (we're getting there, we just had to get through a lot of backstory first), here's the actual law in New York City:

Rules of the City of New York -
Title 6
Department of Consumer Affairs

§5-91 Reductions Based on Advertiser's Own Price; "Formerly," "Regularly," "Reduced," "Percent Off," "Save," and Similar Terms.

(a) Immediately preceding price. If an advertiser uses the words:

          "percent off"
          "formerly .., now ..."
          "reduced"
          "reduced to"
          "regularly..., now ..."
          "now only"
          "save $ ..."
          "was ..., now ...,
          "item now $ ..."

or any similar term implying a reduction from a prior price charged by the advertiser, the price to which the reduced offering price is being compared must be the advertiser's bona fide selling price for that item or service unless the advertiser clearly discloses another basis of comparison or qualification.

(b) Intermediate reductions. If the term "originally," or any similar term, is used in any advertisement, the price stated as the "original" price must be the advertiser's bona fide selling price for the same article or service prior to intermediate reductions, and the price immediately prior to the current reduction must be disclosed, unless intermediate reductions are clearly indicated by the language used.

Example: "Originally $75; then $68; now $65"; "Earlier this year $75; now $65"; "Further reduced to $50."

(c) Comparison not recent. If a claim is based on a past bona fide selling price of the advertiser prior to the recent, regular course of business, the advertiser must clearly disclose that fact.
Example: "Last year $40, now $20."

RELATED
"You Can't Discount The Past, Apple"
(Photo: Getty)

"There's going to be real food inflation in this country," C. Larry Pope, president and chief executive of U.S. beef processor Smithfield Foods Inc., said at the U.S. Agriculture Department's annual outlook conference.

Prices of grain futures have surged lately. For example, wheat futures have more than doubled on the Chicago Board of Trade over the last 12 months. Pope said meat shoppers eventually will pay for the rally because farmers who raise livestock cannot absorb the sharp escalation in feed costs.

Pope said the rip-roaring rallies in corn, soybeans and wheat would be good for farmers, but are "scary" for companies like Smithfield and the rest of the livestock industry.

"I think we need to tell the American consumer that things are going up," he said in a speech. "We're seeing cost increases that we've never seen in our business."

(Thanks to Eric!)

We called Gateway and they laid the blame directly at Best Buy's feet, saying the P-6831FX was "selling like gangbusters," prompting the retail giant to raise the price by $350. We asked Best Buy about the price discrepancy late Wednesday, and the retail giant said they would get back to us. While Gateway offers a series of similar laptops online, called the P-171 series, the P-6831 is available only though Best Buy.

"When is a bargain laptop not a bargain?" [Crave]

I was at Best Buy looking for 'The Fountain' on DVD. I found three copies in the drama section, and three different prices. No tricks here, no collector's / special editions. Just the standard widescreen version at name-your-own-price. Guess they're trying to emulate Radiohead?

(Thanks to Jay!)

I saw this last week in the Harbor Freight store in Casselberry, Florida. I wasn't sure if I could pass up such an amazing deal but, somehow, I was able to exercise restraint.

Here are the new rates:

• PREMIER™ $104.99/mo.;
• LO MÁXIMO™ $104.99/mo.;
• PLUS HD DVR™ $72.99/mo.;
• PLUS DVR™ $62.99/mo.;
• CHOICE XTRA™ $57.99/mo.;
• FAMILIAR ULTRA™ $54.99/mo.;
• CHOICE™ $52.99/mo.;
• FAMILIAR™ $45.99/mo.;
• PREFERRED CHOICE™ $32.99/mo.;
• SELECT $45.99/mo.
  

DirecTV's email to customers:

Effective February 27, 2008, the monthly price of some DIRECTV® programming packages will change.

Please click here (PDF) for pricing information in English and Spanish.

[...]

For seven years running, DIRECTV has had higher customer satisfaction ratings than cable, thanks to loyal customers like you. Thank you for your business.

Sincerely,
DIRECTV, Inc.

Q1 2007 and Historical ACSI Scores [American Customer Satisfaction Index]
(Photo: cmorran123)

I told the manager well that's to bad because I ALREADY PAID FOR IT!!! and if you don't return MY PRODUCT!!! that I PAID FOR!!! that I would call the cops because you are now stealing from me. I will call Weights and Measures. OH YEAH and my attorney.

Well I never thought I would see the day when I would buy an item in a store, I have the item in my hands with my receipt and a Home Depot employee takes the item out of my hands because they are not sure if I can have this item. Sound funny, WELL, ITS NOT!!!

A few months ago I was in a Home Depot shopping and I saw a Power tool (worm drive) on clearance for 49.95 markdown from $199.99. I really wanted this item but did not have the cash on me at the time (just my luck) so I drove home got my credit card and drove back to the store but I was to late, someone had already purchased the item.

So just the other day I was in the Home Depot again and by lucky found the worm drive on the clearance rack unmarked. I took the item to self check-out and the item came up at a penny. I thought, cool I am getting a deal of a life time here. I then PAID for the item and took my receipt. I checked the UPC on the receipt and on the box just to make sure they were a match and they were.

Then a Home Depot employee came up to me from the self check-out and took the worm drive and said I need to check something I'll be right back and walked away from me with the item that I just PAID for. So after waiting for 6 to 7 minutes a manager came up front and told me that I can not have this item because it is on clearance and once the price falls to a penny it is to be markdown and thrown away. I told the manager well that's to bad because I ALREADY PAID FOR IT!!! and if you don't return MY PRODUCT!!! that I PAID FOR!!! that I would call the cops because you are now stealing from me. I will call Weights and Measures. OH YEAH and my attorney.

So after all that, they finally wised up and gave me back the item that I PAID for. I have never had a retail store do something like to me. They made me feel like I was a thief. Like I did something wrong, when all I wanted was to buy a worm drive that I saw on Clearance. (WHAT HAPPEN TO TAKING CARE OF THE CUSTOMER) because you lost another one to LOWES.

Just wanted to let some of the folks living in or traveling in Southeast CT to avoid any of the Sunoco Stations that are owned by "Chucky's".

My wife and I stopped at the Sunoco that is located on Route 1 in Stonington the other night, because they had their lighted sign showing a price of $3.35 a gallon for premium fuel. It was night time and we did not notice until we were halfway thru pumping that the digital readout on the pump read $3.47 a gallon, which is obviously $.12 cents a gallon different.

When we went to complain to the person in the Kiosk, we encountered a very belligerent clerk who basically tried to tell us he knew nothing about the price that was on the huge, lighted sign. Just another example of someone price gouging, but with definitive, and pre-calculated actions to insure he can rip off the most number of people possible. We will never purchase anything from any of the gas stations owned by the "Chucky's" group again!!! Thanks Dave

Governor Rell's Gasoline Price Hotline: 1-800-842-2649.

If you suspect shenanigans are going on, don't just write to us! Tell the people who can really do something about it.

Energy Information [DCP]
(Photo:Ryan McFarland)