Really? Do you have a source for that? Most of the deals I see are for things like restaurants, which have really slim margins. I'm having trouble understanding how they could give away 75% of their revenue and still come out ahead on the first sale, even with upsells and including customer acquisition in that 75%.
Regardless, it doesn't seem to be completely made up; the guy provides sources and math.
Even given the best intentions, why assume their information is accurate? Aren't public companies incentivized to bias evidence to their utmost favor?
90% seems so high it fails the sniff test but I could easily see how it's a figure passed around internally. I'm just surprised you accept (and now promote) that number as fact.
Can't see how this is true, whether or not someone at Groupon said it was. How can a business who places a deal at a large discount and is paying Groupon a significant cut be making money on the deal itself?
Is the redemption rate of these deals so low that it makes up for the price cut + fee?
