Quote:
Originally Posted by SleepyBob
If they are replacing a $50/month cable bill with a $79/year prime streaming bill, it could make a lot of sense.
|
Well, so would replacing the cable bill with the regular $99/year fee; is the extra $1.50 a month a deal-breaker when people with limited funds are assessing priorities?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApK
...or getting pantry items and needed sundries shipped home for free rather than spending time and gas driving somewhere. I can see ways to use it wisely and helpfully.
But yes, it would require one to use good judgment.
|
But don't you think most orders of this type would meet the existing $25 threshold? And the folks who are using food stamps can't use them to buy this stuff at Amazon; they've still got to get to whatever local grocery stores. How does Prime benefit them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjtorres
In that case you wouldn't believe the many "odd" things people with limited funds buy.
This is one demographic that would really benefit from the Prime perks, especially the transportation-challenged. The savings over neighborhood store prices are substantial enough but the value of fast free delivery is not to be underestimated. Just remember, Amazon sells groceries and other essentials not just "luxuries".
This not a bad thing.
|
Is it a hardship to combine/delay orders to meet a $25 minimum?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApK
I understand that the indignation comes from the idea of trying to entice someone who can't or shouldn't be spending money on something to do so anyway, against their best interest.
|
Exactly. It feels like they're trying to con people into buying something they don't need because they're making it a "bargain." If people now who are financially strapped are spending their money on Prime membership, fine--it's their business how they decide to allocate their income even if I think they're foolish. But when Amazon tries to attract more such people to spend their money by cutting the price, as if Amazon is doing them some kind of favor (We're charging you less for something you don't need!), it's distasteful.