A study by Gedenk & Neslin (2010) revealed an inverted U-shaped relationship between purchase incidence and purchase requirements for multi-buys in price promotions. In other words, price promotions that require lower purchase quantities (e.g., buy 2 and get 20% off) tend to increase purchase incidence, while promotions that require higher quantities (e.g., buy 3, get 2 free) could lead to a decline in purchase incidence.

 A study by Gedenk & Neslin (2010) revealed an inverted U-shaped relationship between purchase incidence and purchase requirements for multi-buys in price promotions. In other words, price promotions that require lower purchase quantities (e.g., buy 2 and get 20% off) tend to increase purchase incidence, while promotions that require higher quantities (e.g., buy 3, get 2 free) could lead to a decline in purchase incidence.

 A study by Gedenk & Neslin (2010) revealed an inverted U-shaped relationship between purchase incidence and purchase requirements for multi-buys in price promotions. In other words, price promotions that require lower purchase quantities (e.g., buy 2 and get 20% off) tend to increase purchase incidence, while promotions that require higher quantities (e.g., buy 3, get 2 free) could lead to a decline in purchase incidence.

 A study by Gedenk & Neslin (2010) revealed an inverted U-shaped relationship between purchase incidence and purchase requirements for multi-buys in price promotions. In other words, price promotions that require lower purchase quantities (e.g., buy 2 and get 20% off) tend to increase purchase incidence, while promotions that require higher quantities (e.g., buy 3, get 2 free) could lead to a decline in purchase incidence.

 A study by Gedenk & Neslin (2010) revealed an inverted U-shaped relationship between purchase incidence and purchase requirements for multi-buys in price promotions. In other words, price promotions that require lower purchase quantities (e.g., buy 2 and get 20% off) tend to increase purchase incidence, while promotions that require higher quantities (e.g., buy 3, get 2 free) could lead to a decline in purchase incidence.

 A study by Gedenk & Neslin (2010) revealed an inverted U-shaped relationship between purchase incidence and purchase requirements for multi-buys in price promotions. In other words, price promotions that require lower purchase quantities (e.g., buy 2 and get 20% off) tend to increase purchase incidence, while promotions that require higher quantities (e.g., buy 3, get 2 free) could lead to a decline in purchase incidence.

 A study by Gedenk & Neslin (2010) revealed an inverted U-shaped relationship between purchase incidence and purchase requirements for multi-buys in price promotions. In other words, price promotions that require lower purchase quantities (e.g., buy 2 and get 20% off) tend to increase purchase incidence, while promotions that require higher quantities (e.g., buy 3, get 2 free) could lead to a decline in purchase incidence.

 A study by Gedenk & Neslin (2010) revealed an inverted U-shaped relationship between purchase incidence and purchase requirements for multi-buys in price promotions. In other words, price promotions that require lower purchase quantities (e.g., buy 2 and get 20% off) tend to increase purchase incidence, while promotions that require higher quantities (e.g., buy 3, get 2 free) could lead to a decline in purchase incidence.

 A study by Gedenk & Neslin (2010) revealed an inverted U-shaped relationship between purchase incidence and purchase requirements for multi-buys in price promotions. In other words, price promotions that require lower purchase quantities (e.g., buy 2 and get 20% off) tend to increase purchase incidence, while promotions that require higher quantities (e.g., buy 3, get 2 free) could lead to a decline in purchase incidence.

 A study by Gedenk & Neslin (2010) revealed an inverted U-shaped relationship between purchase incidence and purchase requirements for multi-buys in price promotions. In other words, price promotions that require lower purchase quantities (e.g., buy 2 and get 20% off) tend to increase purchase incidence, while promotions that require higher quantities (e.g., buy 3, get 2 free) could lead to a decline in purchase incidence.

 A study by Gedenk & Neslin (2010) revealed an inverted U-shaped relationship between purchase incidence and purchase requirements for multi-buys in price promotions. In other words, price promotions that require lower purchase quantities (e.g., buy 2 and get 20% off) tend to increase purchase incidence, while promotions that require higher quantities (e.g., buy 3, get 2 free) could lead to a decline in purchase incidence.

Consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies are increasing prices in an effort to recover margins due to inflationary costs. To illustrate, the ice cream industry in the Netherlands saw an average price growth of 9% in 2022, while the fabric cleaning industry in Sweden experienced an average price growth of 11%. Although scientific research has shown that consumers are willing to pay more for branded products, the ability to keep raising prices to recover margins will eventually reach its practical limits. Eventually, the growth of household incomes will be outpaced by inflation, resulting in reduced disposable income and consumption. Extrapolating from past crises, it is expected that inflation will significantly reduce as a result of a soft landing or a recession (see Exhibit 1).