Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)Q

Quicky

@ Quicky @lemmy.world

Posts
21
Comments
143
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • How to get discovered on Mastodon?

    Jump

  • You can follow hashtags in Mastodon tbf

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • I never even realised they were owned by Sony. I’m sure I remember them saying they left Microsoft to have greater control internally. Seems mad to go for more of the same.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • Did they try redeeming it up to 15 times?

  • What does the world think of India?

    Jump

  • You see that everywhere. Even within countries that aren’t classed as developing nations. The UK massively shot itself in the foot with the disaster that was Brexit thanks to nationalistic propaganda and outright lies from campaigners, and US liberals have faced “anti-American” backlash for their views.

  • What does the world think of India?

    Jump

  • To be fair, every country believes their culture is superior in some way, partly because it’s beneficial for governments to instil a sense of nationalism in its citizens. India’s not alone in that.

  • Apple refuses to call Apple Intelligence 'AI'

    Jump

  • This is exactly why, and as simple as it is, it’s brilliant passive marketing. It stealthily implants an association to Apple Intelligence into every product and article that mentions AI, and might even require the author to distinguish their meaning when they use the acronym. They’ve Sherlock’d AI.

  • Removed

    We don't arm Israel like Obama

    Jump

  • If it was serious they didn’t mean it, and if they did it was a parody, and if it was we didn’t understand it, and if we did it wasn’t funny, but thank fuck mean orange man gone.

  • Why didn't Rugby take off in the Indian subcontinent?

    Jump

  • This is likely the best explanation, although there’s plenty of highly physical/athletic sports that are popular in hot countries. Football, arguably the most athletically demanding team sport, is popular in a bunch of places where I’d rather stay in the shade with a beer.

  • Why didn't Rugby take off in the Indian subcontinent?

    Jump

  • Email admin

    Jump

  • Make that 10.

  • Campaigners in the UK Are Planning a Tax-Strike for Gaza

    Jump

  • How would this be possible? How would an individual employed by a company withhold tax from their wages, if they’re paid net? Surely it would need 100,000 self-employed or businesses themselves to withhold tax from HMRC?

  • UK Trial: Pornhub's Chatbot Halts Millions from Accessing Child Abuse Content

    Jump

  • Which led to some amazing protests.

    Weirdly, watching facesitting porn in the UK is perfectly fine, as long as it wasn’t filmed in the UK.

    I can just imagine trying to defend that in court. “Your honour, it’s clear to me that the muffled moans of the face-sittee are those of a Frenchman”

  • Removed

    Gen Z is bringing back landline phones because they think they look ‘cool’: ‘I love to twirl the cord’

    Jump

  • No they’re not, no they don’t.

  • How Mastodon made friends with Meta

    Jump

  • Perfect joke

  • Yeah but how much for 4?

    Jump

  • Yes I’m aware of this, I’m just saying that arbitrarily speculating on the potential original price for 1 item does nothing to change the current actual situation. If the cost was £10 for 1, I wouldn’t have bothered taking a photo.

    Alternatively you could take the viewpoint that Next has already worked out that the price of 1 shirt is a minimum of £8, hence the costings for multiple units. Any price they put over £8 for 1 unit is additional profit, while the expected revenue per unit is £8+n where n is substantially close to zero. Latterly reducing the cost of 1 item does nothing except imply a perceived saving.

    Additionally, the 2x and 3x offerings are not, and were never, discounted. The sticker reduces the price of 1 shirt, but if you were in the market for two, there’s no saving based on when you buy them. There might have been a saving originally, we assume, against the cost of buying 1 twice, but that’s irrelevant if you want two shirts at any point. Obviously the pricing would have been to incentivise the purchase of two when you would potentially only have bought one, so that is the driver for the sale, at which point the price per shirt is £8, and remains £8 per shirt for any multiple purchase, both before and after the sticker price amendment.

  • Yeah but how much for 4?

    Jump

  • Yes - we don’t know what the original price was for 1x. You’re assuming it was more than £8. It could have been £5 - we’ll never know.

    Either way, it doesn’t change the current value proposition for the customer, which is that a bulk purchase is meaningless.

  • Yeah but how much for 4?

    Jump

  • I’m not sure what you’re suggesting was solved. You’re positing scenarios whereas I’m presenting facts - the photo. Which, for the consumer, is mildly infuriating.

  • Yeah but how much for 4?

    Jump

  • Exactly. In which case the 3x price is redundant.

    There is no curve.

  • Yeah but how much for 4?

    Jump

  • Does it though? The moment 2x is £16 , the cost of 1 shirt is £8. Therefore there’s no scaling at 3x. It doesn’t matter how much the starting price was or how much the later prices were, if the 2x price is £16 and the 3x price is £24. The cost of 1 shirt is only ever £8 if you buy more than one, meaning that any pricing variant over 2x is pointless.