Target plans to cut prices on thousands of consumer basics this summer, from diapers to milk, as inflation cuts into household budgets and more Americans pay closer attention to their spending.

The price cuts, already applied to 1,500 items, will eventually include 5,000 food, drink and essential household goods. Target and other retailers are increasingly catering to customers who are struggling with higher prices for groceries, though inflation has begun to cool. Many of them have switched to private label brands sold by Target and others big retailers, which are typically less expensive than well-known brands.

Target launched one such collection in January called Dealworthy which includes nearly 400 basic items, ranging from clothing to electronics, that can cost less than $1, with most items under $10.

Last week, McDonald’s said that it was planning to introduce a $5 meal deal in the U.S. next month to counter slowing sales and customer frustration with higher pricesWalmart posted strong quarterly sales last week driven by a influx of customers, including households with incomes of more than $100,000, looking for bargains.

  • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    224
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    If this was caused by actual inflation, Target wouldn’t be able to just lower prices on 5,000 items just because we’re struggling to survive. This isn’t inflation. This is unchecked capitalist greed.

    Edit. Fix autocorrect.

      • goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        no it’s never that, just blame the fed for printing money!

        I love how the only point of companies now is to get infinite growth with whatever product they have

        • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          I mean, it’s both, among other things.

          Target would absolutely love to charge $1000 for a carton of eggs, and would if they could, but they can’t. There has always been some ceiling price past which most consumers will simply walk away and go somewhere else. What exactly that number is depends firstly on the actual cost of getting the item in the first place, since no store will sell an item at a loss (unless they expect that to drive greater returns elsewhere), but then on how much money people actually have available to spend, and that very much is influenced by how much money the Fed is printing, among plenty of other things.

          My point here isn’t that corporate greed isn’t a factor, but it’s not a new factor. It’s not like corporations were feeling generous in 2019 and then got in a greedy mood in 2021. They always have and always will charge as much as people are willing to pay, so any changes to what they’re charging should be examined by looking at what other factors might be at play. In this case, they’ve probably realized that they’ve gotten past the point of driving too many customers away.

          Obviously corporate PR will never come out and say “We’re being greedy because fuck you, but we got a little too greedy so please come back”, but that is and always has been the dynamic.

    • HubertManne@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      6 months ago

      sorta my thoughts to. So you could have sold them lower the whole time. Surprise surprise. people buy less as prices rised and prioritize essentials. Banner times for purveyers of food and shelter.

  • catloaf@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    86
    ·
    6 months ago

    Target launched one such collection in January called Dealworthy which includes nearly 400 basic items, ranging from clothing to electronics, that can cost less than $1, with most items under $10.

    So are they really cutting prices, or are they hiking them until it hurts and then introduce a “new brand” of the same stuff in a different box, just with less markup?

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      6 months ago

      Raise the price on everything, rake in profits till they can’t squeeze any more blood out of the stone, then launch their in house brands as loss leaders to gain market share before slowly raises prices to be where name brand was…

      A tale as old as unchecked rampant capitalism with zero regulation

      • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        This is probably partially true but just to note that there’s a lot of factors at play here. Since prices have risen on all items, what is more likely is that the prices are due to manufacturing companies raising them.

        We know that’s true from the government reports, so what target is doing here makes sense. Their volume has become low enough that their margin isn’t making them money. Which is why they increased prices in the first place to try and maintain that margin. Now they want to increase volume on their own products which have higher margin (they don’t have to share) so the prices are guaranteed to be lower.

        This is what we expect of late stage capitalism where most of the grocery store is effectively owned by a small handful of companies (J&J,P&G,General Mills, Tyson, etc.) and the only people able to compete with them are the grocery stores themselves.

        The budget options still aren’t there to help you, but these options will represent the bottom of the market. And since they rely on the consumer choosing the value brand instead, they need to have volume of sales to work. And as we know, that means these products will always be nearer to the cheapest possible price.

        Last note is important: if you observe that even the discount brand prices are beginning to become unaffordable for you and you represent an average consumer, your economy is already failing

  • Veraxus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    6 months ago

    …which means they were intentionally overpriced to begin with.

    Way to bury the lede, AP.

    • spyd3r@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Government enforced lockdowns disrupted production of various goods and destroyed global supply lines by preventing people from working. Prices rose because of market volatility and scarcity, oh, and massive amounts of money printing.

      • Corgisocks@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        COVID disrupted production, or more so many companies expected decreased demand so they adjusted production down but work from home actually caused an excess demand and the market couldn’t adjust. That was true for some goods, not all. Companies noticed that despite the higher prices on disrupted goods, demand didn’t drop, so they used inflation as an excuse to raise prices across the board.

  • Jaysyn@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    6 months ago

    Reminder: The only thing that creates record profits & record “inflation” at the same time is collusion.

    • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Collusion and greed. Don’t forget the greed. They don’t deserve to have us forget the disgusting, abhorrent, unfathomable greed.

  • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    6 months ago

    Price cut doesn’t mean cheap. Target is basically Walmart products at Walgreens prices.

    They used to sell Tim Tams, but ever since they stopped there hasn’t really been a reason to shop there.

    • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’ve found over the past few years that target often beats the prices of walmart on household goods and toiletries. Canning supplies were the first thing I noticed.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      Idk man, Walgreens prices were ridiculous when I tried to go in there last. A half gallon of Milk was something like $8 which would cost less than $4 where I live at Target or Walmart last I knew. They may have jacked the prices up on that day because it was Christmas though. The Christian neighborly thing to do… Use overt greed on food items on a religious holiday to milk the populous out of their last dimes trying to feed their families.

    • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Nah, target has some great shit for cheap. Especially furniture. Their cheap furniture is better than the IKEA/Wayland cheap shit by a long shot. Save with kitchen ware, lots of mid stuff for cheap.

  • thrawn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    6 months ago

    Tangentially, some Target brand stuff really sucks. Anything with moving parts seems quite prone to breaking quickly. The food items I’ve tried are extremely low quality. One such item is their shredded mozzarella.

    Truly, it is the worst mozzarella I can think of. Tasted off and the texture was lightly rubbery. It also would not melt. Before they started botting the reviews (I assume; it is difficult to imagine real humans enjoying it), it was rated poorly on their own site. And still the reviews mention how it simply does not melt and is quite terrible.

    That fateful bag of horror made me start paying closer attention to the quality of Target brand items, and I have found it lacking. The foods I tried were bad— there was also a memorable bag of cookies, dusty in texture and taste. Also their foaming soap dispensers break consistently within months, though they’re otherwise quite nice.

    So as they pivot into store brand, I’d urge you exercise caution trying them. Buy a brand you like as well so you’re not left without, should it prove low quality. Walmart brand stuff is way better but there are far more Targets where I live.

    • abigscaryhobo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’ve often called Target “Walmart without the stigma”. They advertise themselves and nice and clean, but it’s just Walmart with clients that don’t want to be seen going to Walmart.

      • thrawn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Imo the main difference is that Target has tap to pay/QR code payment while Walmart pushes Walmart+’s payment methods. I tried W+ since it was free with one of my credit cards, and it’s still quite inconvenient.

        But otherwise, I largely agree. Targets feel a little nicer and they look better, but that hardly matters. If there were more Walmarts around me I’d go there instead sometimes. As much as I dislike the Waltons, Walmart sometimes has better selections than Target. Truthfully I’m morally for shoplifting from Walmart but don’t like committing crimes myself since there is risk involved.

        • realbadat@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          The clothes are definitely different quality. Walmart also has alternate, lower quality versions of the same products. Literally from the manufacturer with a slightly different product code.

          Ran into that replacing a coffee maker, interestingly enough - almost exactly the same device minus a few features, advertised with the same name, but different from the previous version as well (checked the manufacturers website).

          So I would not personally say the quality is equal, but I also don’t shop at them often either.

    • ares35@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      haven’t had their shredded cheese, but the target store brand grocery items i’ve had lately have been pretty good. and far better than walmart’s (the only store within an hour’s drive of here).

    • HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Oof. I remember buying some store brand pre-shredded mozz once. I can’t remember what store, it was 20 years ago. We were making a few pans of lasagna or manicotti, probably manicotti I was on a manicotti kick back then. I remember after 45 minutes checking back on the pan. The cheese hadn’t melted. It browned. We’re lucky I have a damn good sauce, because crunchy cheese manicotti is an experience I only want to have once. We had guests too.

    • Zorsith
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      I always forget target even has a food/grocery department. I’ve only ever seen it as a clothing or home goods store

    • PraiseTheSoup@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’d like to add that their electric toothbrush replacement heads are also pretty crappy. I’ll just spend the extra and get the real deal next time.

  • seaQueue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    Target realizing they delved too greedily and too deep. Too bad they’ve already awoken shadow and flameHHHHHH shopping at Walmart.

  • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    I went there for hand soap last week end and they didn’t even have a brand I recognized just generic bottles that said “hand soap” and “hand wash”. I couldn’t figure out what the difference was so I got the hand soap one. At least it was claiming to be soap instead of using marketing weasel words.

  • Coach@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Interesting to see how the ruling class shopping at Walmart seems to be the impetus behind lowering prices. Phony inflation nonsense - just a massive fraud.

      • Coach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Where do you see the “ruling middle class”? If you’re going to quote me, at least quote me honestly.