(08-17-2024, 01:37 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote:

(08-17-2024, 12:41 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: Not always. Prices are also dictated by a companies leverage in the region.   Some small towns or suburbs only have 1 choice locally.

Clarification (as perhaps I didn't in my prior posts): I'm not 100% against higher prices by certain stores, especially in wealthier suburbs where people would absolutely pay higher prices at Publix rather then to ever set foot in a Winn Dixie. I think I see gouging differently than those here OR even perhaps the way Kamala envisions it so I'm open to the many variables that exist --- example:  in PV there is a Winn Dixie 2 miles north of Publix on A1A.  If Publix wants to charge $12/pound for their brand turkey breast whereas Winn Dixie charges $8, so be it if people are willing to pay that.  I'm more focused on the smaller low income towns with a high population of 70+ year olds on a fixed income.  I see gouging as taking advantage of desperate circumstances to increase profits at the expense of the less fortunate (or in the case of hurricanes and such taking advantage of the desperate).

Would a doubling of the price of toilet paper in March 2020 have been a net positive or negative?

I'm not sure anything was stopping them from doubling the price if they wanted to.

But suddenly increasing prices in an emergency is just going to frustrate shoppers, cause them to make extra trips searching for a lower price, cause a lot of bad will, and a similar number of customers go without. Basically everything stays the same except the stores make less money.

This would all be worth it if we were facing a long term shortage of TP. Customer and retailer expectations would adjust and it would be fine long term.

Additional TP was coming within a week. Letting the stores rake in that money during the shortage would have done no one any good besides the stores.

---