Amazon.com Widgets

Should selling items at a loss as a marketing device be prohibited?

  • If it's what the company wants

    I don't see any reason why a company if it wanted to should not be able to sell an item for a loss in order to market the product. They have a right to do this if they want as long as they are not doing anything shady or underhanded.

  • It should not.

    Selling items at a loss as a marketing device should not be prohibited. If a company wants to start selling some of their items at a loss in order to bring in more sales in the long run, then they should be able to do so because that is their right.

  • Selling items at a loss for the sake of marketing should not be prohibited.

    Government has really become the big problem in America. We should be focusing on prohibiting them from butting where they clearly unneeded and unwanted. A manufacturer can easily resolve this by setting new policies for merchants that purchase their product. This is what Apple does with its products to keep businesses (like online auctions) from selling at prices that lower the perceived value of their product line. No government monkey wrenches required.

  • No, it shouldn't

    The people running marketing gimmicks like this know what they're doing, and they have larger ideas behind them. It doesn't matter if it's ten cent chicken wings to get people to buy expensive drinks at the bar or something on a far greater scale, there's no reason to prohibit the practice when it works.

  • Selling items at a loss shouldn't be prohibited

    Selling items at a loss as a marketing device should not be prohibited. This is because of the fact that the market should be free for people to use as they wish. If there is a way to manipulate the market to the advantage of the seller, it should be utilized. Nobody has to buy their things.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.