Couponing is supposedly an effective way of saving money. I say supposedly, because while couponing may save money, the maximum, average, and ROI upside is minimal. There are diminishing returns to couponing in all times but end-of-life.
Here’s what I mean by this. When you think about your time, it’s often helpful to think in terms of alternatives to contextualize what you end up deciding to do. For instance, we don’t view going to college in a vacuum. We often view returns relative to other courses of action. When I cook, I forgo time doing something else. Recognizing that I have limited capacity means the question is not just objectively whether something is better than doing nothing at all, but compared to what I would otherwise be doing.
Here’s why couponing generally fails the cost-benefit analysis. First, couponing provides limited upside. Let’s say you save 200 out of 400 on your grocery bill. If the amount of time you spent putting in was 20, that nets you approximately ten dollars an hour. Unless you’re not very good at making money, this is probably a low-return on investment. Next, couponing is a cat and mouse game. Those selling goods try to keep coupon opportunities changing so that they can consistently make money. They have every incentive to change up the rules whenever possible, meaning that unless you’re tuned into Stop&Shop HR, you’re probably not going to gain permanent advantage.
Finally, couponing is a low-reward behavior because if you’re able to highly capitalize upon coupons, you’re probably rich to begin with. Most of the time, toilet paper that’s 30 cents cheaper per package isn’t going to be worth your while. Unless, you’re wiping a small nation, or you can store the good inexpensively, which still might not be especially efficient.
Isadore Johnson's Website 