Years ago, I read or saw something that the price of goods in a supermarket depended on where the good was located- if it was at eye level, it would be more expensive than if it was on the top or bottom shelf. My recollection on this is hazy at best (comes with age, one supposes!). Two years ago, a client of mine told me that Canadian Tire charged wholesalers and distributors “stocking fees” on products and the price of the stocking fee depended on where the product was. This makes perfect sense since a product at eye level at the front of the store is going to move faster than on the bottom shelf at the back of the store. I went shopping earlier this week and I noticed that the snack bars at the top of the shelf were cheaper than at eye level.

Based upon the above, I have decided to start an experiment to see how much, if any, money I can save by working counter-intuitively from how the supermarket industry wants us to buy. I am going to pick 5 types of goods I usually buy and see what, if any, price difference there is on goods placed at eye level and those placed on the top or bottom shelf. This will allow me to see if I can really save money by using product geography to my advantage in a supermarket.

To compare apples to apples (pun intended), these are my ground rules (please add more if you think my results will help you save money):

1. Only non-perishable goods will count- no yogurt, ice cream, milk etc. etc., prices on these goods change based on a lot more factors other than location of product such as seasonality, gas prices, supply and demand etc. (non-perishable good prices also change on these factors but because they are produced so far in advance of consumption, my assumption is that the effect isn’t as great);
2. Goods have mutliple competitors and there is choice. For example, no one else makes pop like Coca-Cola. Pepsi has a distinct taste and if there was no Coke in the store, I do not buy Pepsi; whereas if there are no Kleenex Tissues, I buy another brand.
3. If the product does not have an ideal and non-ideal location, I will look at non-indeal and even more non-ideal locations.
4. I have to compare at the same store (Soebys in Toronto);
5. I have to compare on the same day (Sunday);
6. I have to compare brand name to brand name-no generic goods allowed; and
7. I am having a real debate on whether to factor in coupon specials and sales into this experiment. Your thoughts would be appreciated.

Here are my 5 items:

1. Snack Bars (like Quaker Chewy Bars)
2. Baked Beans
3. Olive Oil
4. Tissue
5. Shampoo

(1 food staples, 1 food preparatory item, 1 food discretionary item, 2 household goods)

I’ll report once a week on my findings for 4 weeks. The purposes of this experiment again is to see what, if any, money consumers can save by selecting goods at places where the industry prefers you do not buy.

If this goes well, my next experiment is to compare shopping for staples at “ethnic” supermarkets (of which there are a lot in Toronto) with “mainstream” supermarkets. Any suggestions to make this experiment worthwhile for all would be appreciated.