QUESPERIA
Menu

Total Cost

Compare complete costs, not just the most noticeable number.

Connected topics

Contrast

Price Perception

The complete amount paid and the impression a price creates answer different questions.

Sources & further reading

  1. Meta — Fourth-quarter and full-year 2025 results

    Company-wide annual advertising revenue, reported in millions of US dollars; not the profit of a single app.

  2. Apple Developer — Overview of In-App Purchase types

    Official descriptions of consumables, non-consumables and subscription products.

  3. Spotify — Q4 2025 shareholder deck

    Annual Premium revenue of €15,350 million divided by total revenue of €17,186 million gives approximately 89.3%.

  4. Duolingo — 2025 Form 10-K

    The company's explanation of its free-user and paid-subscription model, not proof that each free user is profitable.

  5. Google — Privacy Policy

    Describes Google's own collection, advertising use and sharing practices; does not represent every app.

  6. FTC — June 2024 final order concerning Avast and Jumpshot

    A historical enforcement case. Allegations and final restrictions should not be generalized to all free services.

  7. Morwitz, Greenleaf & Johnson (1998) — Divide and Prosper

    University abstract on partitioned pricing. It does not establish one universal reaction to delivery fees.

  8. Chen & Ngwe (2018) — Shipping Fees and Product Assortment in Online Retail

    HBS Working Paper 19-034. Observational Philippine retailer data from 2012–2016 and a demand model, not a randomized threshold experiment.

  9. Lewis, Singh & Fay (2006) — Nonlinear Shipping and Handling Fees

    Publisher abstract reports additional sales but unprofitable promotions in the retailer studied; not a universal profit result.

  10. Thomas & Morwitz (2005) — A Penny Saved, author-written research summary

    Authors' NYU Stern adaptation of their June 2005 Journal of Consumer Research paper, checked October 27, 2026. Describes pen-price judgments; not purchase behavior. The journal full text was not retrieved.

  11. Anderson & Simester (2003) — Effects of $9 Price Endings on Retail Sales

    Publisher abstract checked October 27, 2026: three retail field studies and context-dependent demand effects. The pilot-price table was not independently inspected, so its exact prices are not reproduced here.

  12. Troll et al. (2024; online 2023) — A Meta-analysis on Just-below Versus Round Prices

    Varied outcomes and heterogeneous effects. Purchase-related measures include intentions, choices and actual purchases; bias adjustments matter.

  13. Fenneman et al. (2022) — Psychological Price Perception and Purchasing Decisions

    Incentivized lottery decisions did not reliably reproduce the tested price-ending effects. This is not a test of every retail context.

  14. Escher et al. (2026) — Precise, Just-below and Round Prices

    Official full-text results and discussion checked October 27, 2026. Two preregistered student experiments distinguish recall from purchase intentions and quality judgments; no statistical reanalysis was performed.