╠ Currency is so analogue ╣

So today I faced the horrible endeavor of leaving the house without my handy credit card. I'd grown so used to the convenient that it was an eye opener.

Now as a commerce student my dealing with money is pretty organized, so the loss of the core of my structure threw me off.

The two problems I faced today were first of all being short changed. The second was that I ran out of money because like all other scared people of the world I don't like the idea of carrying excessive amounts of cash. All of which solved by cards. The other thing I however I perhaps wish I could have facedis that cash causes an issue with is as an untraceable transaction, most commonly used to evade centrelink. Unfortunately Woolworths is one of those follow the rule type organizations.

Cash clearly seems to be the inferior product, however due to those hard bent on sticking to the old ways it continues on and will continue on into the far future.

You can tell people to upgrade their TV, their radio, their whatever else you've improved by adding a clock to it. However the more popular the original item, the longer it will take to be phased out. So by that measure does cash currency have a future date of discontinuity? WHat do you all think?

╠ 99c is more expensive than $1 ╣

My endeavor to branch out and sample other markting blogs has gone quite well. One of the first posts to really get me thinking was Nathan Bush of Another Advertising Wanker's post on the terminology of the word expensive. In most dictionaries expensive means that an item is basically high monetary cost for a consumer. Nathan's argument was that it should instead be high perceived monetary cost. I personally think it to be quite apt because the original definition wouldn't class a bread loaf that costs $100 as expensive and converesely a house being sold at half price would still be expensive. So I believe this change to be much more acurate.

The second thing I would like to bring up is that there was a study that was referenced in the TV show of the same name as this blog that stated that people did not trust whole value items and perceived that having a non flat value down to the last cent appeared more thought on and therefore was a better price.

Now what I'd like to raise is cobining the two for low value items. Personally I believe the more thought on price would work against the seller for low cost items especially in an environment where there are more expensive items. Personally I think a value such as $1 is not a high value. For me it is impulse. If I have that gold coin in my pocket if there's something I want I'll just get it.

Non-rounded cents to me appears more to be something that requires thought. You have to take it in and then think about it before you come to the conclusion that it does actually cost $1. Now this isn't a long process but it still subtracts time which hurts the chance of impulse buy.

Now this is jsut my view but what would you prefer? a $1 item or $0.99 item?