Display Good Deals in Ugly Fonts

Do you offer a sizable discount?

An ugly or unusual font can help customers notice it:

...the increased effort required to process disfluent price information can lead to deeper information processing. If the advertised price offer represents a good value, it can enhance purchase decisions, even if customers prefer the disfluent display less (Motyka et al., 2016, p. 627)

Across four weeks, researchers alternated the font — Helvetica or Bradley — for a 15% discount on Doritos at a convenience store in the US. Bradley was more difficult to read, yet this font increased conversions by 23 percent (Motyka et al., 2016).

Don't choose an ugly font, per se. Just slightly unusual (e.g., Lobster, Caveat, Bodoni)

Why It Works

• Greater Attention. Customers are forced to read and encode this information in more detail.
• Contrast = Difference. When two things look different, they feel different: Hmm, this discount feels different. Must be a great deal.

Stronger For

• Round Fonts. Angular fonts can intensify the pain of paying because they look physically sharp (though this effect only happened with eastern cultures; Park et al., 2022).
• Existing Desire. Ugly discounts could feel negative for undecided customers: Hmm, do I want Doritos? This price doesn't feel right. Guess I don't want it. But an existing desire will change this mindset by intensifying their attention: Ah, Doritos. How much are they? *looks harder* Oh, great deal. Therefore, try ugly discounts for loyal customers, checkouts, rebates, or any late stage of funnels.

Related Applications

• Add Novelty to Discounts. A 40% discount was more appealing for US participants when it was framed as Pay 60% of the price. But this effect reversed for participants in Hong Kong, a location where this alternative framing was common. They preferred a novel discount of "Get 40% off" (Kim & Kramer, 2006).

• Kim, H. M., & Kramer, T. (2006). “Pay 80%” versus “get 20% off”: The effect of novel discount presentation on consumers’ deal perceptions. Marketing Letters, 17, 311-321.
• Motyka, S., Suri, R., Grewal, D., & Kohli, C. (2016). Disfluent vs. fluent price offers: Paradoxical role of processing disfluency. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44, 627-638.
• Park, J., Velasco, C., & Spence, C. (2022). “Looking sharp”: Price typeface influences awareness of spending in mobile payment. Psychology & Marketing, 39(6), 1170-1189.