Talk:Pricing

message: I think this should be merged with price or moved to price (marketing). --Piotr Konieczny aka Pr The activity of pricing is worthy of attention in its own right. Granted the currest article is a dreadful mish mash. I will try to do some work on this in January - February of 2007. Steven Forth 8 January 2007.
*I agree with Steven Forth in that the activity of Pricing is a professional discipline in an of itself and worthy of an independent article.  Although the pricing function in a business can sometimes be lumped in with Marketing or Accounting, it is increasingly separated into it's own function.  This can be a good thing because it serves as a counter-balance to Marketing's desire to "make the sale" (which can translate to pressure to lower the price) and Accounting's desire to "control cost and increase margins" (which can translate to pressure to increase the price).  Pricing professionals can use a variety of methods to analyze the market and arrive at higher quality pricing.Bmickler (talk) 17:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It would be nice to have some general coverage of pay-as-you-go vs. all-you-can-eat pricing.  I've read that consumers often prefer the latter, even if they would save money by using the former instead. -- Beland 03:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding the "all-you-can-eat" (or, generally speaking, "flat rate") pricing: there is an excellent paper by Andrew Odlyzko that describes the implications of flat rate in telecommunications from postage stamps to the Internet. GregorB (talk) 11:58, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion request 

message: What is the difference? --Traal (talk) 05:31, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surge pricing vs. demand-based pricing 

message: OK, so I've done a bit of an overhaul of this article. I've tried to attend to all the comments on the talk page.
I have imposed a structure by changing some headings and sub-headings, and also creating new headings where appropriate. This imposition of an overall structure was in response to one comment that the article was a 'mish-mash' of topics in a random sequence.  I had to agree with those comments, but hopefully now it is not quite such a 'mish-mash'!
I have added a new section on pricing strategies and expanded the section on pricing tactics (previously called terminology) and tried to include more of the commonly used tactical approaches used in services, retail and B2B. In addition, unfocussed content that was formely in the tactics section has been moved to new headings including 'methods of setting prices' and 'theoretical considerations' of pricing. I have also included lots of images - all sourced from wikicommons and added wikilinks throughout the article in relevant places.  Some copy editing has been done, but more is required to get this up to a reasonable standard. I have addressed the issue of surge pricing by including it in the section on peak/off peak pricing tactics. And, finally I have added copious numers of references - and therefore effected one good faith removal of a tag suggesting that the article contained original resesarch. 
There are still many problems with this article, notably:
* 1. Long unfocussed section on premium pricing - which seems to repeat content contained elsewhere in the article, as well as duplicating content on other pages.
* 2. Methods of setting prices - is a bit confused as a section and has many glaring omissions
* 3. Theoretical considerations  - includes a lengthy discussion of premium pricing (for the third time in the same article) and is repetitive
* 4. The lead section - appears to be completely unrelated to the article content
Wikipedia has such a proliferation of articles on pricing (See the See Also section in the article for an idea), it is difficult to know what to do next without duplicating content that has already been canvassed elsewhere. Suggestions would be most welcome.  BronHiggs (talk) 08:27, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Partial clean-up 

message: Since there are a lot of pricing tactics I don't think the length of that part of the page is not a problem. I would suggest to move the subjects of 
* Methods of setting prices
* Theoretical considerations in pricing
to separate pages on ′′Price_setting′′ and ′′Pricing_theory′′ to improve the accessibility.
Some thoughts on this?
Frank Vogelezang (talk) 07:52, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested split 

message: I agree that the headings "Methods of setting prices" and "Theoretical considerations in pricing" should be moved. I would prefer that they appear earlier in the article, preferably before the section on developing strategies and tactics. For the time being, however, I left these two sub-headings towards the end of the article because they are poorly written, poorly conceptualised and in places, lacking in references or high quality sources. I feel that they have the potential to put readers off. Until these two sub sections can be cleaned up, I would be inclined to leave them where they are.  BronHiggs (talk) 05:06, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Support for previous comment

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Goldilocks pricing. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Cnilep (talk) 01:16, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goldilocks pricing listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: Are there any impacts of psychological cost to consumers.?? 196.249.98.212 (talk) 09:32, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Service marketing