>interestingly, wings were sold at a slight loss. I guess you don't want a whole group to pick a different pizza place just because one person wanted wings.
Shouldn't this logic work in reverse as well? In other words, "they were able to charge more for wings because people wouldn't order from a different place just to save a few bucks on wings"?
to some extent I'm just regurgitating what the owner told me. the guy was a bit neurotic. he would obsessively compare his prices with all the other local takeout places. there wasn't really a cohesive business strategy in the pricing other than "match or beat everyone else". for high volume items like pizza, this meant playing around with the inputs until they were profitable, but he just accepted that he would take a loss on a few infrequently sold items (although he would absolutely lose his shit if you didn't charge someone for an extra side of ranch with wings).
I'm not sure he was completely wrong though. the bulk of the customers were teenagers and working class families, two extremely price conscious demographics. I'm sure a fair chunk of them would actually go somewhere else to save a few bucks on a routine dinner. getting pizza isn't necessarily "going out" to the working families; sometimes it's just the most cost effective way to feed the family that one night that neither parent has time to cook.
Shouldn't this logic work in reverse as well? In other words, "they were able to charge more for wings because people wouldn't order from a different place just to save a few bucks on wings"?