Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the jetpack domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /mnt/stor08-wc1-ord1/694335/916773/www.tvhe.co.nz/web/content/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6131

Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the updraftplus domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /mnt/stor08-wc1-ord1/694335/916773/www.tvhe.co.nz/web/content/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6131

Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the avia_framework domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /mnt/stor08-wc1-ord1/694335/916773/www.tvhe.co.nz/web/content/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6131

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /mnt/stor08-wc1-ord1/694335/916773/www.tvhe.co.nz/web/content/wp-includes/functions.php:6131) in /mnt/stor08-wc1-ord1/694335/916773/www.tvhe.co.nz/web/content/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments on: Easter surcharge confusion http://www.tvhe.co.nz/2009/04/17/easter-surcharge-confusion/ The Visible Hand in Economics Wed, 22 Apr 2009 01:14:44 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 By: Easter Craft Ideas for Everyone | Baby and Family http://www.tvhe.co.nz/2009/04/17/easter-surcharge-confusion/#comment-19175 Wed, 22 Apr 2009 01:14:44 +0000 http://www.tvhe.co.nz/?p=3616#comment-19175 […] TVHE » Easter surcharge confusion […]

]]>
By: agnitio http://www.tvhe.co.nz/2009/04/17/easter-surcharge-confusion/#comment-19150 Mon, 20 Apr 2009 03:25:35 +0000 http://www.tvhe.co.nz/?p=3616#comment-19150

Customers pay for food consumed, not time spent in the establishment.

Maybe at McDonalds….

At an actual restaurant if you sell a meal you would generally expect the guest(s) to stay for a certain amount of time.

I accept the demand side story you guys are telling, I just think you are too quick to write off the possible supply side aspect, even if it is is a relatively small part of the reason we witness high prices on public holidays.

My local curry restaurant offers much cheaper prices for take away meals. The unit production cost of this meal is the same as if I dine in yet they offer a much cheaper price. Sure, part of this is likely to be price discrimination given that people who want takeaway meals will generally be more price sensitive, but part of it could also be due to the fact that the restaurant doesn’t need to employ a waiter to look after you for the next 40 mins.

Having worked in hospo for a while I have seen plenty of situations where willing customers have been kicked out of the bar (not because it’s too late or they are too drunk!) because the revenue from drinks they are purchasing won’t cover the bartenders wages for another hour. Given that over this increment the bartenders wages are avoidable the bar shuts. On your logic the bartender is a fixed cost and since the price of a beer exceeds the marginal cost the bar would stay open since they are making a contribution to fixed costs.

Obviously my examples are of some fairly specific marginal situations. Do these justify a full 20% price increase by themselves? probably not.

I’m fairly convinced now that the demand side story is probably the main explanation, I just think the way service based restaurants price and view the incremental nature of their cost structure is quite different from McDonalds which more closely resembles a factory…

]]>
By: insider http://www.tvhe.co.nz/2009/04/17/easter-surcharge-confusion/#comment-19145 Mon, 20 Apr 2009 01:34:51 +0000 http://www.tvhe.co.nz/?p=3616#comment-19145 Go back to when these new wages were introduced. There was a big PR exercise by the hospitality industry representatives to talk up the need for surcharges. It became a self fulfilling prophecy as most cafes picked up the signal. So it was purely a rent seeking exercise and an attempt to shift the whole market in a cartel like manner.

The Road Transport Forum does it all the time when diesel prices rise saying it will drive up transport costs and so signalling its members to follow, and when prices fall it then says that charges won;t fall as fuel only makes up a small part of operators’ costs to try and manage customer expectations and price cutting.

It’s interesting now to see cafe consumers responding and competition emerging.

PS I don’t think McDs did crunch numbers. Changing prices is annoying and they probably just thought it was too much hassle and too brand damaging.

]]>
By: TVHE » Easter surcharge confusion | OurBrownies.com http://www.tvhe.co.nz/2009/04/17/easter-surcharge-confusion/#comment-19126 Sun, 19 Apr 2009 06:48:50 +0000 http://www.tvhe.co.nz/?p=3616#comment-19126 […] the rest here: TVHE » Easter surcharge confusion Tags: browser-privacy, fix-this, from-your, fulfill-your, invalid-request, please-contact, […]

]]>
By: rauparaha http://www.tvhe.co.nz/2009/04/17/easter-surcharge-confusion/#comment-19107 Sat, 18 Apr 2009 04:20:32 +0000 http://www.tvhe.co.nz/?p=3616#comment-19107 @Hone
I disagree. The product sold and priced by the restaurant is a meal. They control the quantity sold the same way any business does: through the price. Customers pay for food consumed, not time spent in the establishment. Pricing strategies depend on marginal costs and revenues, which are not influenced by labour costs. An explanation based on price discrimination and changes in demand over Easter is far more convincing since it draws on a change in marginal revenue to explain the price increase.

]]>
By: rauparaha http://www.tvhe.co.nz/2009/04/17/easter-surcharge-confusion/#comment-19106 Sat, 18 Apr 2009 04:04:09 +0000 http://www.tvhe.co.nz/?p=3616#comment-19106 @What would Hayek say
I think you’re talking about price discrimination, which is essentially what we concluded above. We referred to it as a different elasticity of demand over Easter due to the closure of competing outlets, but it’s the same thing. I’m not sure about the cartel behaviour, though. It’s not necessary to assume that to get the higher prices, and I think it would be hard to sustain in the cafe market due to the ease of entry.

]]>
By: What would Hayek say http://www.tvhe.co.nz/2009/04/17/easter-surcharge-confusion/#comment-19105 Sat, 18 Apr 2009 02:18:05 +0000 http://www.tvhe.co.nz/?p=3616#comment-19105 Ps the first part of above was mostly borrowed from Tim Harford and his book “the undercover economist”.

]]>
By: What would Hayek say http://www.tvhe.co.nz/2009/04/17/easter-surcharge-confusion/#comment-19104 Sat, 18 Apr 2009 02:17:13 +0000 http://www.tvhe.co.nz/?p=3616#comment-19104 There is a story of differential pricing – not unlike going to a coffee shop were you can order 5 sizes of coffee and multiple flavours all for a different price, when the marginal cost of the next size is only 1 cent but the price charged is 20 cents (equals a nice 19 cents profit). What the cafe is doing is enabling you to depart with your income because “you feel special” by eating there on a public holiday.

Now if there was more competition then, maybe you would not see such a significant level of price differential, but then since it is a repeat game dependent on the original starting conditions (govt regulation) the first step was to add a price differential and now there would be strong incentives on all participants to maintain the differential (cartel behaviour). The question would be what size of change in the game is required for the incentives to move from cartel to competition. At the moment I suspect profits from the cartel compensate against any incentive to compete.

]]>
By: Hone http://www.tvhe.co.nz/2009/04/17/easter-surcharge-confusion/#comment-19095 Fri, 17 Apr 2009 22:45:20 +0000 http://www.tvhe.co.nz/?p=3616#comment-19095 The decision variable in question – the main output variable that is truly controllable for the average outlet- is time: whether or not to open, what time to open/close, how quickly you can turn a table over. Definitely not meals. Who actively controls the number of meals they serve on an intra-day basis with the exception of the very trivial “lets stay open 30 more minutes seeing as table 8 just walked in” which could be seen as taking out an option on a couple of extra meals although not the same as controlling the number of meals? Not to mention I have no idea what a “meal” is but if you mean per-head spend this is a random variable with high variability especially w.r.t time.
You can control the number of staff employed too but the fact that costs went up doesn’t miraculously increase productivity so only the very stupid would lower FTEs. Increasing FTEs would hardly seem to be the optimal decision as the marginal cost of an FTE increased thanks to govt regulation.
Deciding whether or not to open is a big call. Before the labour cost increased through government regulation a cafe or restaurant owner would have already figured out how many trading days were needed to cover their overheads (based on assumptions about average variable costs and expected income). Losing a trading day is not trivial. More to the point, trying to forecast earnings to see if you’ll cover the cost shock is a pretty big ask. So for most shutting was a stink plan. So prices went up and I agree that indicates that there are capacity constraints on public holidays. Although it doesn’t definitely mean there are capacity constraints. It could just be a herd effect in which case the supply side of the market may well undergo a rapid opinion shift from surcharges to no surcharges at some point. Following that a few places will go under and there will be fewer outlets than there otherwise would have been and over time the price of eating out will have increased. And everyone is better off?
The question I have is why anyone would care about the surcharges. (De facto) Sector-specific and time-specific cost impost should result in sector-specific and time-specific increases in prices. Shouldn’t it? Why do punters mind paying extra for something that costs extra?

]]>
By: Moz http://www.tvhe.co.nz/2009/04/17/easter-surcharge-confusion/#comment-19077 Fri, 17 Apr 2009 06:06:15 +0000 http://www.tvhe.co.nz/?p=3616#comment-19077 The cafes I saw definitely suffered capacity constraints – there were queues surcharge or no surcharge. Same with accommodation, Easter is the time to see who needs to buy a new “no vacancy” sign. Since most of them can’t sell more product, it’s obviously time to raise prices. The alternative, of increasing capacity costs a lot and when it’ll only be used a few days a year it’s going to have a very high marginal cost. perhaps that explains some of the surcharge… 10% of the seats are only used at Easter.

]]>