Roche or Stop n Shop (Boston: foreclosures, house, buyer)

[Beachcomber4]

Originally Posted by mdovell

"My S&S circular hasn't had coupons in its flyers for who knows how long."

? Mine has had them for years and years now.

Also on the topic of cards the thing to remember is you can always have some other name on it since much of it is really contingent on a email address rather than a physical location.

Where do you live that you have had coupons to clip in your S&S circular for many years? Just curious as when they went to store loyalty cards the justification was no clipping coupons. I was surprised when our area S&S started it up again.

[MikePRU]

Originally Posted by bUU

Read more of the earlier part of the thread and you'll see that Roche Bros. doesn't have customer loyalty cards and they don't give people lower prices. The reality is that comparing today to years ago and trying to make any assertion about what was and what would have been is without merit. Today is today.

Sorry to rewind a little bit, but I missed this response to an earlier post I made.

I'm very aware that Roche Bros doesn't have loyalty cards. I shop in their markets at least once a week. As for them not giving lower prices . . . they have sales all the time and I get the lower price without having to present some ridiculous "loyalty" card. Is Roche as cheap as S&S? No. Do I love that they give me my privacy when I shop and I don't have to carry some ridiculous card when I shop there? Yes. I also like that Roche gives back quite a bit to my local community. They seem to sponsor almost every single charitable event in Needham. If they're taking a little more of money to do that then I'm OK with it.

Also, I don't see how you can say that my statement in regard to my distaste for loyalty cards is without merit. Each chain makes their own decision as to whether or not they will make use of a loyalty card program. No one forces them to use an LC system and some chains do not. Until such time as it is made mandatory for stores to use LC systems and every store in the country does so then my distaste for loyalty cards is very valid and very reasonable.

[bUU]

Originally Posted by konfetka

What values and priorities are you talking about?

The values and priorities that those other people hold.

Originally Posted by konfetka

If someone wants to spend more of their money for service, I say, relax, it's not a vacation, you are just buying food. I would rather spend more of my money for actual goods.

And I respect your values and priorities that prompt you in that direction. They are just as valid as those that motivate people to seek out better quality service.

Originally Posted by konfetka

I am not saying MB's service is bad, it's just known more for prices, then for service. My only problem with it is it can get busy sometimes, so you have to try to go at certain times of the day.

So after reading this thread this morning, we went to church. On the way home, I suggested we have lunch at a local eatery. After lunch, I suggested that we go shopping at Market Basket, instead of our normal S&S, since we were already there - the eatery and Market Basket share the same parking lot - and we were only going in to pick up four things. My wife grumbled, but couldn't escape my logic.

As we're leaving, my wife kept saying to me, "I hate that store." "I hate that store." "I hate that store." She'd rant a little about something (ridiculously narrow aisles given the traffic) and then again "I hate that store." Then another rant (longer waits to check-out) and then again "I hate that store." And so on.

Originally Posted by konfetka

I would be curious to hear what priorities you are referring too?

In that posting I was referring to someone specific, and her details about her priorities would be personally identifying, so I won't be sharing them.

Originally Posted by konfetka

Are you saying they don't treat their workers well?

Again, I won't go into further detail because I don't trust the Internet with such details, especially when they'd point to someone else. But it isn't hard to research "all the grocery stores" and find out how poorly they all treat their employees. Here's one article I found about Market Basket (coincidentally):

Is this any way to treat an injured worker? » Safety News Alert

Whole Foods actually has had a decent reputation as the only chain that does a halfway decent job treating their employees, but even their star has fallen a bit recently. If you think that working at a supermarket is a good job, then talk to a few non-management employees when they're not at work.

Originally Posted by konfetka

I have found most of the same produce at both stores, with the difference being the price.

I took a look while we were there (we even bought russet potatoes for dinner tonight). It was okay. Not great. Not "the same". At least not comparing our Market Basket and our S&S.

Originally Posted by konfetka

I am just curious about what is it that you can find at SS, that you can't find at MB or BJ's?

Are you asking me to give you a detailed list? Should I fill it in in triplicate and have it notarized? I'm relaying my impressions over fifteen years of living here, trying out Market Basket several times over that period of time.

I do have good examples from today: Grillers Prime - Market Basket didn't have any. Perhaps they don't carry it, but there was no one from the store around who wasn't running around like a chicken with the head cut off to ask. Also, our specific toilet paper was only available in higher-priced 4 packs instead of the family-sized and more affordable 16 pack. They also didn't have our brand of sponge, but I think what we bought was comparable, so that's not really a complaint. So out of the four things we went into the store for, they didn't have one, one was over-priced because their array of offerings is limited, and two were okay. Let's call that a 60%. Not a passing grade, but really gosh-darned close.

Originally Posted by konfetka

In the summer, if I want better quality, I wouldn't go to SS, I would go to farmers markets or farms.

I used to feel that way too, but the farmers markets are really inadequate: They have a few things that are decent, and then you still have to go to the supermarket to actually buy produce for the week.

If I want "better" quality, I'll go to Whole Foods.

[bUU]

Originally Posted by MikePRU

I'm very aware that Roche Bros doesn't have loyalty cards. I shop in their markets at least once a week. As for them not giving lower prices . . . they have sales all the time and I get the lower price without having to present some ridiculous "loyalty" card. Is Roche as cheap as S&S? No.

So you've now come full circle and agreed with what you seemed to be preparing yourself to disagree with. What was the point you were trying to make?

The point I was making is that S&S with a loyalty card costs less than Roche Bros. without one. You agree. Stop agreeing with me so disagreeably!

Originally Posted by MikePRU

Do I love that they give me my privacy when I shop and I don't have to carry some ridiculous card when I shop there? Yes.

Paying for higher service. An equally-valid set of priorities.

Originally Posted by MikePRU

I also like that Roche gives back quite a bit to my local community.

They don't do much for us here. Mostly when I see community focus from a grocery around here it is either Whole Foods or (remarkably) Shaw's.

Originally Posted by MikePRU

Also, I don't see how you can say that my statement in regard to my distaste for loyalty cards is without merit.

I think you'll need to re-read your statement and my reply to it, in context, since it seems that you've lost the thread of the discussion. What I said was without merit was comparing today to years ago and trying to make any assertion about what was and what would have been.

[konfetka]

[quote=bUU;27968145]

The values and priorities that those other people hold.

And I respect your values and priorities that prompt you in that direction. They are just as valid as those that motivate people to seek out better quality service.

All human beings try to be rational in their decisions, and while they have different values, assumptions and priorities, which they are entitled to, some of them hold more water then others. You are free to make your own decisions, but we can debate about what is more rational and how to make them better.

So after reading this thread this morning, we went to church. On the way home, I suggested we have lunch at a local eatery. After lunch, I suggested that we go shopping at Market Basket, instead of our normal S&S, since we were already there - the eatery and Market Basket share the same parking lot - and we were only going in to pick up four things. My wife grumbled, but couldn't escape my logic.

As we're leaving, my wife kept saying to me, "I hate that store." "I hate that store." "I hate that store." She'd rant a little about something (ridiculously narrow aisles given the traffic) and then again "I hate that store." Then another rant (longer waits to check-out) and then again "I hate that store." And so on.

That was actually entertaining to read. And I am sure people who dislike MB, feel that way for the same reasons. To that I would respond: Would you pay more money to walk through a wider isle? Would you pay your hard-earned money to save five minutes at check-out? And that's what stores like SS are banking on and charging you for. It's all about the pleasant shopping experience. The presentation. The mouth-watering display of waxed fruit of the identical shape and size. The crispy bright greens under the refreshing mist. The strategically placed bright lights and shiny white floors.

My argument is that to me it is not worth the extra $50-$100 a week, or $200-$400 a month or $2,400+ per year. And MB seems to understand that.

There is a science to navigating MB. Never go during the peak times. Go early in the morning, or late at night before closing. Weekdays a better. Allow plenty of time, don't come if you are in a rush. Don't come stressed out or tired, have a snack before you go to give you enough energy. Don't rush, take your time, be patient, smile to people to relieve tension. Think about something pleasant. Don't go to Stop and Shop, or you will get spoiled by the experience.

Shopping at MB is not easy for everyone. I am generally a very calm and content person, I like to take my time, and I hate rushing, so people don't bother me as much.

But people deal with people on public transport, so why can't they deal with people in a store?

If you still can't deal with it, go to BJ's, the isles are bigger, there are fewer food isles and less food items, but you can be done quicker.

Although I hope in the future they would pay more attention to the design of their stores, because seems like they can hardly deal with how popular they had become.

When I go to SS, no doubt about it, they have taken everything they know about consumer psychology to heart. All their efforts are geared towards justifying their prices.

Personally, I get offended by their prices, knowing I can pay much less for the same thing elsewhere. And I don't want to let them fool me. So as opposed to being ticked by isle width, I am ticked by how much more they want to take from my pocket and put it into their pocket in exchange for the difference in the isle width.

Again, I won't go into further detail because I don't trust the Internet with such details, especially when they'd point to someone else. But it isn't hard to research "all the grocery stores" and find out how poorly they all treat their employees. Here's one article I found about Market Basket (coincidentally):

Is this any way to treat an injured worker? » Safety News Alert

Whole Foods actually has had a decent reputation as the only chain that does a halfway decent job treating their employees, but even their star has fallen a bit recently. If you think that working at a supermarket is a good job, then talk to a few non-management employees when they're not at work.

Looks like it was a poor call on the part of this store's manager. Hopefully the company took it seriously and dealt with the issue. This would not make me want to give more of my money away to SS, though. Do you know how the people are treated, who produced your clothes, your gadgets, your coffee? I bet if you did, you would run out of things to buy. It's nice to be aware about this, but it's almost impossible in the global economy we live in. So let these issues be dealt with by those people and organizations, whose job it is.

How does SS treats it's workers? Apparently in a way that made them want to go on strike in CT in 2010:

Right now, Stop & Shop workers are engaged in brutal contract negotiations. The big boys, the ones running the show from afar, the executives who are so removed from the people they employ that they've never set foot in the stores or shaken the hands of the people who make them rich, try and take benefits away from hard-working Americans. These men and women aren't asking for much -- a raise for a job well done, not to mention the fact that the cost of living continues to rise, and fair health coverage. Stop & Shop is seeking to double the cost of premiums for health care but refuses to offer wage increases (save "bonuses" that add up to only pennies per hour), citing a shortage of funds.
What's interesting is that this "shortage of funds" is coming during a 2.3 percent revenue increase, in the midst of which Stop & Shop has managed to purchase five new Shaw's supermarket stores that they expect current Stop & Shop employees to help transition smoothly into new Stop & Shops. They stress brand and consumer loyalty, something they can't even give to their employees who have been working with them for 25 years. Stop & Shop is the second-largest employer in the state of Connecticut, and without a fair contract 43,000 Nutmeggers and their surrounding New England coworkers will be hurting. The United Food and Commercial Worker's Union, UFCW is working non-stop to negotiate a fair contract for the people it represents. If it weren't for the union giving the men and women at Stop & Shop a voice, we'd have a modern day Triangle Shirtwaist on our hands, except this time no one would die in a fire, they would be forced to work for inadequate wages with zero benefits.
[LEFT]
Read more: Take a stand for Stop & Shop workers - Connecticut Post
[/LEFT]

I took a look while we were there (we even bought russet potatoes for dinner tonight). It was okay. Not great. Not "the same". At least not comparing our Market Basket and our S&S.

Are you asking me to give you a detailed list? Should I fill it in in triplicate and have it notarized? I'm relaying my impressions over fifteen years of living here, trying out Market Basket several times over that period of time.

I really wish I could compare my potatoes and your potatoes. May be we could send pictures to each other. SS is trying to persuade your subconsious by picking the most brightly collored and perfectly shaped food. Usually you also need the latest advancements in bio-technology to achieve that. My version of quality is lack of GMO, pesticides, hormones, antibiotics and food additives. It is the food the spoiles the fastest that is the healthiest. The bigger the size, the more perfect the shape - the more GMO and pesticides.

To me food is a commodity. Organic is organic at SS or MB. And certainly the shades of color or the variations of shape don't justify the difference in price to me.

I do have good examples from today: Grillers Prime - Market Basket didn't have any. Perhaps they don't carry it, but there was no one from the store around who wasn't running around like a chicken with the head cut off to ask. Also, our specific toilet paper was only available in higher-priced 4 packs instead of the family-sized and more affordable 16 pack. They also didn't have our brand of sponge, but I think what we bought was comparable, so that's not really a complaint. So out of the four things we went into the store for, they didn't have one, one was over-priced because their array of offerings is limited, and two were okay. Let's call that a 60%. Not a passing grade, but really gosh-darned close.

It's clear we are not going to agree on this. Like I mentioned I prefer to buy foods with 1 ingredient, and cook from scratch. In that sense SS might offer you more of what you are looking for. I try to shop the perimeter, and avoid the isles full of corporate processed food, for which you are also paying a margin to the corporate food companies, on top of farmers and distribution. My underlying motivation for this is simply that I want to give my kids the purest food possible to set them up with good habits for the healthiest life possible.

Here is a list of food ingredients on Grillers Prime:

TEXTURED VEGETABLE PROTEIN (WHEAT GLUTEN, SOY PROTEIN CONCENTRATE, SOY PROTEIN ISOLATE, WATER FOR HYDRATION), CORN OIL, SUNFLOWER OIL, EGG WHITES, CONTAINS TWO PERCENT OR LESS OF CORNSTARCH, NATURAL FLAVORS FROM NON-MEAT SOURCES, SOY PROTEIN ISOLATE, AUTOLYZED YEAST EXTRACT, SALT, CARAMEL COLOR, ONION POWDER, SPICES, HYDROLYZED VEGETABLE PROTEIN (CORN, WHEAT, AND SOY), GARLIC POWDER, POTATO STARCH, MALTODEXTRIN, DISODIUM GUANYLATE, DISODIUM INOSINATE, SUCCINIC ACID, SUGAR, NONFAT DRY MILK, SOYBEAN OIL, WHEAT FIBER.

I don't want to bore you with a lecture on food. Simply since I wouldn't eat it or give it to my children, out of concern for your well-being I just want to make you aware that soy acts as an endocrine disrupter in a body and 99% of soy and corn in the US is genetically modified, and causes tumors in mice.

If you are interested, you can find plenty of information on this on-line, because it's a whole other topic.

Specific brand of toilet paper and specific sponge? You made me smile again. You are clearly not interested in saving money. You are not picking a car or a house, may be you are over-thinking it. If you want to stop making other people rich, look at it as a commodity and go by the lowest price per unit.

I used to feel that way too, but the farmers markets are really inadequate: They have a few things that are decent, and then you still have to go to the supermarket to actually buy produce for the week.

If I want "better" quality, I'll go to Whole Foods.

Yes you still have to go to the supermarket, but you could supplement it pretty well with farm food in the season. It's hard to argue about comparing the taste of freshly picked strawberries or apples to the supermarket. It tastes better. Food flown from around the world is much older, wastes fuel, contributes to pollution and global warming, and looses more nutrients. Food looses more nutrients the more time goes by from farm to table. Local farms have better variety. In industrial farming variety is eliminated in favor of those that can withstand harvesting equipment and transportation and have a longer shelf life. GMO food is grown only in large factory-style farms, and local small farms try to steer clear of that. You cut out a lot of middle men and extra costs for distribution and transportation. You also help preserve historic farms, open space and keep money in the community, and help save them for future generations.

[jayrandom]

Originally Posted by konfetka

All human beings try to be rational in their decisions, and while they have different values, assumptions and priorities, which they are entitled to, some of them hold more water then others. You are free to make your own decisions, but we can debate about what is more rational and how to make them better.

That was actually entertaining to read. And I am sure people who dislike MB, feel that way for the same reasons. To that I would respond: Would you pay more money to walk through a wider isle? Would you pay your hard-earned money to save five minutes at check-out? And that's what stores like SS are banking on and charging you for. It's all about the pleasant shopping experience. The presentation. The mouth-watering display of waxed fruit of the identical shape and size. The crispy bright greens under the refreshing mist. The strategically placed bright lights and shiny white floors.

My argument is that to me it is not worth the extra $50-$100 a week, or $200-$400 a month or $2,400+ per year. And MB seems to understand that.

There is a science to navigating MB. Never go during the peak times. Go early in the morning, or late at night before closing. Weekdays a better. Allow plenty of time, don't come if you are in a rush. Don't come stressed out or tired, have a snack before you go to give you enough energy. Don't rush, take your time, be patient, smile to people to relieve tension. Think about something pleasant. Don't go to Stop and Shop, or you will get spoiled by the experience.

Shopping at MB is not easy for everyone. I am generally a very calm and content person, I like to take my time, and I hate rushing, so people don't bother me as much.

But people deal with people on public transport, so why can't they deal with people in a store?

If you still can't deal with it, go to BJ's, the isles are bigger, there are fewer food isles and less food items, but you can be done quicker.

Although I hope in the future they would pay more attention to the design of their stores, because seems like they can hardly deal with how popular they had become.

When I go to SS, no doubt about it, they have taken everything they know about consumer psychology to heart. All their efforts are geared towards justifying their prices.

Personally, I get offended by their prices, knowing I can pay much less for the same thing elsewhere. And I don't want to let them fool me. So as opposed to being ticked by isle width, I am ticked by how much more they want to take from my pocket and put it into their pocket in exchange for the difference in the isle width.

Yes! He would pay his hard-earned money for wider aisles and a shorter checkout line. Lots of people would and lots of people do. People pay a premium for many different reasons and many do so rationally. And if you think that Market Basket isn't trying it's best to earn your money just like S+S, you might want to read through your AdBusters one more time.

Originally Posted by konfetka

Looks like it was a poor call on the part of this store's manager. Hopefully the company took it seriously and dealt with the issue. This would not make me want to give more of my money away to SS, though. Do you know how the people are treated, who produced your clothes, your gadgets, your coffee? I bet if you did, you would run out of things to buy. It's nice to be aware about this, but it's almost impossible in the global economy we live in. So let these issues be dealt with by those people and organizations, whose job it is.

How does SS treats it's workers? Apparently in a way that made them want to go on strike in CT in 2010:

Right now, Stop & Shop workers are engaged in brutal contract negotiations. The big boys, the ones running the show from afar, the executives who are so removed from the people they employ that they've never set foot in the stores or shaken the hands of the people who make them rich, try and take benefits away from hard-working Americans. These men and women aren't asking for much -- a raise for a job well done, not to mention the fact that the cost of living continues to rise, and fair health coverage. Stop & Shop is seeking to double the cost of premiums for health care but refuses to offer wage increases (save "bonuses" that add up to only pennies per hour), citing a shortage of funds.
What's interesting is that this "shortage of funds" is coming during a 2.3 percent revenue increase, in the midst of which Stop & Shop has managed to purchase five new Shaw's supermarket stores that they expect current Stop & Shop employees to help transition smoothly into new Stop & Shops. They stress brand and consumer loyalty, something they can't even give to their employees who have been working with them for 25 years. Stop & Shop is the second-largest employer in the state of Connecticut, and without a fair contract 43,000 Nutmeggers and their surrounding New England coworkers will be hurting. The United Food and Commercial Worker's Union, UFCW is working non-stop to negotiate a fair contract for the people it represents. If it weren't for the union giving the men and women at Stop & Shop a voice, we'd have a modern day Triangle Shirtwaist on our hands, except this time no one would die in a fire, they would be forced to work for inadequate wages with zero benefits.
[LEFT]
Read more: Take a stand for Stop & Shop workers - Connecticut Post
[/LEFT]

Here's the thing about unions, they go on strike occasionally. A union that doesn't at least threaten to strike every once in a while is probably not negotiating hard enough on behalf of its members (conversely management that doesn't make the union want to strike every once in a while is probably not negotiating hard enough on behalf of its shareholders). When unions go on strike, they drum up support by writing one-sided opinions and rallying supporters. They often use exaggerated language and make ridiculous, red-herring arguments to inflame the easily confused (whoever wrote "we'd have a modern day Triangle Shirtwaist on our hands" deserves some kind of award). It's a pretty useful tactic and can help win public support, but a union-generated statement right before or during a strike probably isn't something that should be taken as the ground truth, any more than the competing management statement.

You have hit one of the real advantages of Market Basket, though. They aren't likely to find themselves at odds with their union. That mostly because they aren't unionized. Just ask any union member--they definitely prefer you shop non union over patronizing a union establishment that they once had tough negotiations with.

Originally Posted by konfetka

I really wish I could compare my potatoes and your potatoes. May be we could send pictures to each other. SS is trying to persuade your subconsious by picking the most brightly collored and perfectly shaped food. Usually you also need the latest advancements in bio-technology to achieve that. My version of quality is lack of GMO, pesticides, hormones, antibiotics and food additives. It is the food the spoiles the fastest that is the healthiest. The bigger the size, the more perfect the shape - the more GMO and pesticides.

To me food is a commodity. Organic is organic at SS or MB. And certainly the shades of color or the variations of shape don't justify the difference in price to me.

It's clear we are not going to agree on this. Like I mentioned I prefer to buy foods with 1 ingredient, and cook from scratch. In that sense SS might offer you more of what you are looking for. I try to shop the perimeter, and avoid the isles full of corporate processed food, for which you are also paying a margin to the corporate food companies, on top of farmers and distribution. My underlying motivation for this is simply that I want to give my kids the purest food possible to set them up with good habits for the healthiest life possible.

Here is a list of food ingredients on Grillers Prime:

TEXTURED VEGETABLE PROTEIN (WHEAT GLUTEN, SOY PROTEIN CONCENTRATE, SOY PROTEIN ISOLATE, WATER FOR HYDRATION), CORN OIL, SUNFLOWER OIL, EGG WHITES, CONTAINS TWO PERCENT OR LESS OF CORNSTARCH, NATURAL FLAVORS FROM NON-MEAT SOURCES, SOY PROTEIN ISOLATE, AUTOLYZED YEAST EXTRACT, SALT, CARAMEL COLOR, ONION POWDER, SPICES, HYDROLYZED VEGETABLE PROTEIN (CORN, WHEAT, AND SOY), GARLIC POWDER, POTATO STARCH, MALTODEXTRIN, DISODIUM GUANYLATE, DISODIUM INOSINATE, SUCCINIC ACID, SUGAR, NONFAT DRY MILK, SOYBEAN OIL, WHEAT FIBER.

I don't want to bore you with a lecture on food. Simply since I wouldn't eat it or give it to my children, out of concern for your well-being I just want to make you aware that soy acts as an endocrine disrupter in a body and 99% of soy and corn in the US is genetically modified, and causes tumors in mice.

If you are interested, you can find plenty of information on this on-line, because it's a whole other topic.

If you don't want to lecture us about food then don't. Listing out the specific ingredients in a product definitely counts as a lecture. Here is a list of groups for which it is socially acceptable to give unsolicited diet advice:

a) your own minor children
b) your patients* (*if you are a medical professional)

Originally Posted by konfetka

Yes you still have to go to the supermarket, but you could supplement it pretty well with farm food in the season. It's hard to argue about comparing the taste of freshly picked strawberries or apples to the supermarket. It tastes better. Food flown from around the world is much older, wastes fuel, contributes to pollution and global warming, and looses more nutrients. Food looses more nutrients the more time goes by from farm to table. Local farms have better variety. In industrial farming variety is eliminated in favor of those that can withstand harvesting equipment and transportation and have a longer shelf life. GMO food is grown only in large factory-style farms, and local small farms try to steer clear of that. You cut out a lot of middle men and extra costs for distribution and transportation. You also help preserve historic farms, open space and keep money in the community, and help save them for future generations.

In California and the Midwest, farmer's markets are cheaper; even as close as Pennsylvania and New Jersey the roadside farm stands have both great food and great prices. What is about Massachusetts farmer's markets that make them more expensive?

[bUU]

Originally Posted by konfetka

All human beings try to be rational in their decisions, and while they have different values, assumptions and priorities, which they are entitled to, some of them hold more water then others. You are free to make your own decisions, but we can debate about what is more rational and how to make them better.

Only if you're willing to debate rationality on rationality's own basis, i.e., the realm of objective, incontrovertible evidence. The minute you inject personal discretion, the preponderance of your own experience, etc., into the discussion, it isn't a debate about what is more rational - it is you trying to convince others to abide by your personal preference.

Originally Posted by konfetka

That was actually entertaining to read.

I aim to please.

Originally Posted by konfetka

It's all about the pleasant shopping experience.

You can spend double to sit on a beach in Aruba instead of Hilton Head. And many people do.

And they are still rational.

Originally Posted by konfetka

My argument is that to me it is not worth the extra $50-$100 a week, or $200-$400 a month or $2,400+ per year.

So you weren't trying to say that your priorities in this regard are objectively rational. They're a reflection of your personal priorities. Great! We are in complete agreement.

Originally Posted by konfetka

Don't go to Stop and Shop, or you will get spoiled by the experience.

This goes along with never reading about travel to Paris; never allow a friend to take you for a ride in their BMW; and never taste really good chocolate.

Originally Posted by konfetka

If you still can't deal with it, go to BJ's, the isles are bigger, there are fewer food isles and less food items, but you can be done quicker.

We regularly visit BJ's followed by S&S on the way home. They don't serve the same purposes for us.

Originally Posted by konfetka

When I go to SS, no doubt about it, they have taken everything they know about consumer psychology to heart. All their efforts are geared towards justifying their prices.

Personally, I get offended by their prices, knowing I can pay much less for the same thing elsewhere.

Getting offended by prices, which you know are based on the seller expending extraordinary effort to determine what buyers are willing to pay for what they're offering, seems irrational to me. It's a business transaction. It would make more sense to get offended by proxy by cases where the more affordable supermarkets, like Market Basket, deliberately avoid opening in poor neighborhoods. There, someone is doing something prejudicial, worthy of a prejudicial response. (However, even there, it's still just business. Truly, that offense rests on those responsible for the general state of poverty, itself, i.e., all of us collectively, and those who obstruct efforts to have society take actions that would alleviate the injustice, i.e., by offering superior tax-breaks to stores willing to open in such neighborhoods and offer suitably low prices.)

Originally Posted by konfetka

And I don't want to let them fool me.

If you know what is happening, and even know why it is happening, how they heck can you even dream of thinking that you are being fooled?

Originally Posted by konfetka

Looks like it was a poor call on the part of this store's manager. Hopefully the company took it seriously and dealt with the issue. This would not make me want to give more of my money away to SS, though.

Of course: S&S has their own set of offenses. You may want to re-read the paragraph you were replying to. That example was indicative of something common in the industry, today. Remember what that part of the reply was in response to... my friend's contention that there are no longer any grocery stores worthy of respect any more - her contention that they all mistreat their workers.

Originally Posted by konfetka

Do you know how the people are treated, who produced your clothes, your gadgets, your coffee?

Precisely. It is becoming increasingly difficult to live without being a passive contributor to the misery of others. And if you ignore that, or work to inure yourself against your part of the collective culpability, then you're doing yourself, society, and those society fails to protect a gross and arguably immoral disservice. Such situations as what you've pointed out here must continually be a motivator for each of us to take positive action toward making things better for those who make our clothes, grow our food, clean the offices we work in, etc.

Originally Posted by konfetka

So let these issues be dealt with by those people and organizations, whose job it is.

That's an offensive cop-out. Those "people and organizations" will be successful in doing the right thing on behalf of all of us only if we all pitch in our active and consistent support for their good works.

Originally Posted by konfetka

How does SS treats it's workers? Apparently in a way that made them want to go on strike in CT in 2010

Apparently you did fail to read what you replied to. Please do go back and read what I actually wrote.

Originally Posted by konfetka

I really wish I could compare my potatoes and your potatoes. May be we could send pictures to each other.

My potatoes are on their way to a new home.

Originally Posted by konfetka

My version of quality is lack of GMO, pesticides, hormones, antibiotics and food additives. It is the food the spoiles the fastest that is the healthiest.

Can't beat Whole Foods for that. And it costs more money. Remember if it "spoils the fastest" it costs the most to transport from farm to store.

Originally Posted by konfetka

It's clear we are not going to agree on this.

What I am amused about is how vigorously you are trying to insist that the differences don't exist, and at the same time trying to argue that the differences aren't worthwhile. Seems to me that you're throwing whatever you can up against the wall, even if it is contradictory, hoping something will stick.

My main concern in all this all along was the implicit lack of respect for others, evidenced by refusing to acknowledge the rationality of people who make decisions that differ from yours - essentially, the refusal to acknowledge that the people who pick S&S and the people who pick Market Basket can both be reasonable people. Despite your efforts to dispute that, it remains true.

I suggest that the extent to which you would like your preference for Market Basket respected, you find a way to start respecting the decisions S&S shoppers make. You earn disrespect for every measure of disrespect you try to dish out.

[konfetka]

[quote=jayrandom;27989706]

Yes! He would pay his hard-earned money for wider aisles and a shorter checkout line. Lots of people would and lots of people do. People pay a premium for many different reasons and many do so rationally. And if you think that Market Basket isn't trying it's best to earn your money just like S+S, you might want to read through your AdBusters one more time.

Here is what people usually pay for:

The farmer+corporate food manufacturing+transportation+distribution+presenta tion+wider food isles+service+check-out time, multiplied by 52 times a year + extra costs for getting sick from eating processed junk


Here is what I am willing to pay for:

1. The farmer

or

2. The farmer+transportation+distribution X 52 times per year + go on extra vacation with money saved

What do you think is more rational? I know everybody can do whatever they want, I am just trying to provide genuine advice and help you see it for what it is.

If you don't want to lecture us about food then don't. Listing out the specific ingredients in a product definitely counts as a lecture. Here is a list of groups for which it is socially acceptable to give unsolicited diet advice:

a) your own minor children
b) your patients* (*if you are a medical professional)

The most important ingredient in life is health. And the most important ingredient in health is food. You can have different choices about food. But our bodies are the same, and every body will have the same adverse reaction to certain ingredients.


"Let your food be your medicine and your medicine be your food." ~Hippocrates

What is practiced by some health-conscious people today, will be common knowledge tomorrow.

In California and the Midwest, farmer's markets are cheaper; even as close as Pennsylvania and New Jersey the roadside farm stands have both great food and great prices. What is about Massachusetts farmer's markets that make them more expensive?

They are not cheaper, but it's a better value paying for fresh food packed with nutrition, rather then less optimal store food. Actually, there is an even better free option, growing your own!

[konfetka]

[quote=bUU;27991795]

Only if you're willing to debate rationality on rationality's own basis, i.e., the realm of objective, incontrovertible evidence. The minute you inject personal discretion, the preponderance of your own experience, etc., into the discussion, it isn't a debate about what is more rational - it is you trying to convince others to abide by your personal preference.

I am trying to show you evidence based on personal experience.

You can spend double to sit on a beach in Aruba instead of Hilton Head. And many people do.

It's different. You will spend 7 days on that beach. You are spending 30 minutes to an hour in the store. When you come home I would be left with the same tomato (or egg, or potato) to make dinner with for less.

You can spend more in Hilton Head, then Aruba, too. I bet I would spend less money in Aruba, then you at Hilton Head. I would fly in the off-season, and stay at a 2 bedroom time-share with a kitchen, too.

So you weren't trying to say that your priorities in this regard are objectively rational. They're a reflection of your personal priorities. Great! We are in complete agreement.

As I have said in previous post, what do you think is more objectively rational:

Paying for:

The farmer+corporate food manufacturing+transportation+distribution+presenta tion+wider food isles+service+check-out time, multiplied by 52 times a year + extra costs for getting sick from eating processed junk


Or:

1. The farmer

or

2. The farmer+transportation+distribution X 52 times per year + go on vacation to Aruba

This goes along with never reading about travel to Paris; never allow a friend to take you for a ride in their BMW; and never taste really good chocolate.

I wouldn't compare travelling to Paris to visiting a Stop & Shop. I don't go to a store for the experience, I go there to get a tomato, which is the same whether it comes from SS or MB. If I want an experience, I would go to Paris, as I have in the past.

BMW: I look at it the same as grocery shopping. To me a vehicle is a mode of transportation, not a status symbol or a way to pamper yourself. I can still roll down the window and listen to the same song in my minivan, as I used to in my X5. If I want to pamper myself, I'll get a massage.

I am all for chocolate, extra dark please (more antioxidants). And yes, I would try to avoid milk chocolate, not to spoil my taste buds.

Getting offended by prices, which you know are based on the seller expending extraordinary effort to determine what buyers are willing to pay for what they're offering, seems irrational to me. It's a business transaction. It would make more sense to get offended by proxy by cases where the more affordable supermarkets, like Market Basket, deliberately avoid opening in poor neighborhoods. There, someone is doing something prejudicial, worthy of a prejudicial response. (However, even there, it's still just business. Truly, that offense rests on those responsible for the general state of poverty, itself, i.e., all of us collectively, and those who obstruct efforts to have society take actions that would alleviate the injustice, i.e., by offering superior tax-breaks to stores willing to open in such neighborhoods and offer suitably low prices.)

If you know what is happening, and even know why it is happening, how they heck can you even dream of thinking that you are being fooled?

I think MB's strategy is based on lower prices. SS on the other hand is lot's of smoke in the mirrors to squeeze everything they can out of you.

I don't know about poor neighborhoods. MB is certainly in the least wealthy neighborhoods, some middle class and not so much upper class.

There are many lower priced stores in poor neighborhoods: Price Rite, for example is even cheaper them MB. But their quality sometimes is noticeably inferior, but many products are the same, like the cereal you would pay $4 at SS would be $2 at Price Rite.

Precisely. It is becoming increasingly difficult to live without being a passive contributor to the misery of others. And if you ignore that, or work to inure yourself against your part of the collective culpability, then you're doing yourself, society, and those society fails to protect a gross and arguably immoral disservice. Such situations as what you've pointed out here must continually be a motivator for each of us to take positive action toward making things better for those who make our clothes, grow our food, clean the offices we work in, etc.

That's an offensive cop-out. Those "people and organizations" will be successful in doing the right thing on behalf of all of us only if we all pitch in our active and consistent support for their good works.

Whenever possible, but not by giving more of my money to someone else. We don't have a lot of choices in grocery shopping, and it's not worth $3,000 a year to me. MB's offenses seem to be isolated and not as dramatic as others.

What I am amused about is how vigorously you are trying to insist that the differences don't exist, and at the same time trying to argue that the differences aren't worthwhile. Seems to me that you're throwing whatever you can up against the wall, even if it is contradictory, hoping something will stick.

My main concern in all this all along was the implicit lack of respect for others, evidenced by refusing to acknowledge the rationality of people who make decisions that differ from yours - essentially, the refusal to acknowledge that the people who pick S&S and the people who pick Market Basket can both be reasonable people. Despite your efforts to dispute that, it remains true.

I suggest that the extent to which you would like your preference for Market Basket respected, you find a way to start respecting the decisions S&S shoppers make. You earn disrespect for every measure of disrespect you try to dish out.

Don't be offended, I am simply trying to have a discussion out of a desire to share my rational to help other people make better decisions with their money.

If it seems like I am disrespecting your decision about shopping at SS, I am simply trying to break down and shed more light on your assumptions.

For example, if someone who is reading this doesn't want to pay for wider isles, this might be helpful to them.

[bUU]

Originally Posted by konfetka

I am trying to show you evidence based on personal experience.

Rather, you're sharing your personal experience. Considering one's own personal experience to be evidence of anything other than the contrary of an absolute makes no sense. Anecdotal information cannot prove any general case.

Originally Posted by konfetka

When you come home I would be left with the same tomato (or egg, or potato) to make dinner with for less.

I assure you, it is a basic law of physics that if you and I go shopping we will not both come home with the same tomato. And the shopping experience we each have will be different. You can choose not to value these differences, yourself, as a matter of personal preference, but you cannot legitimately assert anything about the value of the differences in the absolute.

Originally Posted by konfetka

I would ...

A lot of what you're posting sounds like you're trying to make it sound like your priorities are better than other people's. They're not. They're just better for you. You really aren't in a position to make categorical appraisals of how well other people's priorities serve them.

Originally Posted by konfetka

As I have said in previous post, what do you think is more objectively rational:

Another problem you're having is that you're injecting your own preconceptions and preconceived notions in as foundational bases (assumed facts) of the questions you're asking. By pre-deciding that your perspective is the only possible rational perspective you're actually blinding yourself to the reality.

So I'll answer the question with all your personal bias removed: Different people have different priorities. There is no "objectively rational" means of comparing options where different priorities apply. Eventually, this fact is going to hit you in your face and you're going to have to live with it.

Originally Posted by konfetka

I wouldn't compare travelling to Paris to visiting a Stop & Shop.

Because it doesn't serve your preconceived notions, no doubt - I don't doubt that you'll reject all reasonable analogies that would lend credence to equal rationality to perspectives other than your own. That doesn't actually make them any less credible.

Originally Posted by konfetka

I don't go to a store for the experience

That's you. Do you admit at least that much - that you're blinding yourself to the actual reality (i.e., the reality that includes everyone else) but refusing to acknowledge and respect their priorities where they vary from yours?

Originally Posted by konfetka

I think MB's strategy is based on lower prices.

I wouldn't be so sure. It is more likely that Market Basket's strategy involves picking a market segment that will make them the most money because it is a segment that the other brands aren't competing for as strongly.

Originally Posted by konfetka

SS on the other hand is lot's of smoke in the mirrors to squeeze everything they can out of you.

It is unreasonable to cast the actions of any of these companies as emotionally-driven actions. The more likely scenario is that they're each acting in a rational manner, seeking to serve their owners' interests in the best manner possible.

Originally Posted by konfetka

Whenever possible, but not by giving more of my money to someone else.

It is a matter of not giving your money to people who are aggressively offensive toward others. Again, you may not value principles as much as money - that's a perfectly reasonable and respectable approach. No one should criticize you or condemn you for it. However, others may make the opposite decision, and their priorities should be respected by you as much as you would want your priorities respected.

Originally Posted by konfetka

MB's offenses seem to be isolated and not as dramatic as others.

Based on what? Your personal preference? I see nothing to indicate that any of the companies are lesser offenders than others, with the exception of Whole Foods. Their transgressions are considered remarkable because they've previously been recognized among the best employers.

Originally Posted by konfetka

Don't be offended, I am simply trying to have a discussion out of a desire to share my rational to help other people make better decisions with their money.

I generally don't really get offended from anything I read online. My point is that your comments seem to imply objective primacy of your perspective instead of the reality, subjective primacy for you.

Originally Posted by konfetka

If it seems like I am disrespecting your decision about shopping at SS, I am simply trying to break down and shed more light on your assumptions.

That didn't work out too well for you because everything you've pointed out was colored by your biased perspective and failed to take into consideration and factor in the perspectives of others. Every day I'm faced with decisions at work, as I design my product for my customers. I think a lot of the decisions I make are downright silly, vis a vis my own perspective, but in the context of building a product for others, people like you perhaps, I need to consider and factor in your priorities, granting them equal respect with my own priorities (as a user of my own product).