Eggs in grocery store, egg prices

January 29, 2025

©fotofrog via Canva.com

Should Grocers Be Pricing Eggs at a Loss?

Share: LinkedInRedditXFacebookEmail

LaBonne’s, a four-store grocer in Connecticut, has been keeping its prices for Eggland’s Best large eggs at $3.99 a dozen, well below some competitors, as part of a commitment to keeping core food items affordable.

Bob LaBonne Jr., president and CEO, believes positioning his chain as the low-price leader in staples such as eggs engenders customer loyalty. The move also counters the notion that prices at independent grocers are more expensive than big boxes.

He told Grocery Dive, “As a smaller store, you have the image of being high-priced. So the last thing you want to do is confirm that by being overly aggressive on trying to get margins on items.”

By all accounts, LaBonne’s is the low-price leader in its markets. At other grocers near its flagship in Watertown, prices for similar large white eggs were $7.59 a dozen at Price Chopper and $6.99 a dozen at both Stop & Shop and Hannaford, according to online prices as of Wednesday morning.

Closer but still above LaBonne’s prices, a dozen large eggs in Watertown costs $4.49 at Adam’s Hometown Market and $4.59 at both ALDI and Target. Roche Bros.’ cheapest option was a dozen cage-free large white eggs for $4.49, as it doesn’t offer conventional caged eggs.

Egg prices in the U.S. remain at record highs as the bird flu epidemic spreads across the country for the third consecutive year. The outbreak, coupled with facility fires, resulted in the loss of approximately 40 million egg-laying hens nationwide last year, with 43% of those losses occurring in November and December, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Other factors driving up prices include seasonal demand, fueled by holiday baking and colder weather, that has lowered stock levels, as well as the impact of inflation costs for inputs like feed and labor.

A dozen large grade A eggs cost an average of $4.15 in the U.S. in December — a nearly 37% increase from the year before — according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Wholesale prices have risen even higher, with Midwest large eggs costing $7.27 per dozen, as reported by the global commodities tracker Expana.

Grocers often use eggs, along with other essentials such as milk and bread, as “loss leaders,” selling the products at a loss or for less than market value to drive steady traffic.

With the USDA recently predicting that egg prices will shoot up another 20% this year as the nation’s egg-laying population attempts to recover, grocers are deciding how much margin blow to accept as well as whether to place limits on egg purchases, with empty shelves spotted in grocers.

Karen Meleta, a spokeswoman for Wakefern, the parent of ShopRite and other regional grocers, told the New York Times that while the company has tried to maintain prices on eggs, it’s a “difficult thing to balance, particularly given the volatility of the market and the uncertainty resulting from these continued outbreaks.”

Mike Vickers, a manager at Sentyrz Liquor & Supermarket in Minneapolis, told the Associated Press, “It’s the first time in my life that I’ve ever had to be kind of embarrassed on what I’m selling eggs for. And it’s not our fault. We’re paying today $7.45 for a dozen eggs. We’re selling for $7.59. We’re making $0.14. That’s doesn’t pay the bills.”

Ricky Volpe, a professor of agribusiness at Cal Poly State University, told CBS MoneyWatch that using eggs as a loss leader can be beneficial. He said, “You can go on social media and you’ll see someone complaining about an $8 dozen of eggs and then someone else will chime in and go ‘I just got it for $4.’ Well, I absolutely guarantee you that was sold at a loss, and it was sort of a competitive effort to increase foot traffic. Maybe eggs are sold at a loss, but now you’re going to buy your milk and your bread and vegetables, everything else, and those will have the normal profit margins.”

BrainTrust

"Selling eggs at a break-even level makes sense to me if grocers are in a very competitive trading area and the price of eggs at competing stores are much higher."
Avatar of John Karolefski

John Karolefski

Editor-in-Chief, CPGmatters


"This has nothing to do with anybody preaching what a retailer “should” do. It’s a strategic decision every individual retailer has to make for themselves."
Avatar of Jeff Sward

Jeff Sward

Founding Partner, Merchandising Metrics


"If you make up the loss (not just with eggs but across low-priced staples) because of the volume you can drive, this can potentially work as a business model…"
Avatar of Melissa Minkow

Melissa Minkow

Director, Retail Strategy, CI&T


Recent Discussions

Discussion Questions

What advice would you have around the pricing of eggs amid ongoing shortages as well as whether to limit customer purchases?

Are you a fan of using “loss leaders” aggressively?

Poll

12 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Neil Saunders

Grocers should not be selling eggs at a loss for altruistic reasons. They are entitled to make money on eggs, and their current higher prices reflect the current imbalance of supply and demand. The only reasons for selling eggs at a loss are as a marketing tactic to drive in customers or to secure loyalty. And here, each retailer must assess what works best for them.

Brad Halverson
Brad Halverson
Reply to  Neil Saunders

And it really is a local trade area thing. There’s no one size fits all approach, especially when some parts of the country have plenty of eggs, some very little.

Craig Sundstrom
Craig Sundstrom

The dissonance b/w the Poll and Questions shows there’s no right answer here: if “keeping (core) food affordable” is part of your business plan, then profit is but one concern. But not every grocer follows this idea, of course; and even among those who do – or try to – there are probably limits (you can’t incur a loss on every core item, and not everyone would prioritize eggs.)

David Biernbaum

During the current egg shortage, supermarkets should not absorb losses or eat their own profits. The outbreak of bird flu caused the situation. For the time being, we will all have to accept this unfortunate, but temporary, situation. As long as supermarkets have eggs in stock, they will continue to price them accordingly. End of story.

Last edited 11 months ago by David Biernbaum
Melissa Minkow

My first reaction was “no, grocers shouldn’t sell eggs at a loss,” but the more I think about it, the more I think it’s the same strategy as non-grocery retailers selling grocery items because they’re frequency drivers. If you make up the loss (not just with eggs but across low-priced staples) because of the volume you can drive, this can potentially work as a business model, and I do think it makes sense to instead obtain a margin on items consumers expect to have a significant upcharge on them. That said, given the context of there being a shortage, you don’t necessarily want to drive too much volume because of the stockout you’ll cause. So, there’s the supply-demand push-pull here leading me to be torn on the subject. The key though is that whatever pricing strategy a retailer goes with, it should be a transparent one genuinely aimed at helping consumers in ways that are simultaneously beneficial for the retailer. I really don’t ever think a loss for a retailer is a win for the consumer, and vice versa.

Dick Seesel
Dick Seesel

3.99 for Eggland eggs (already positioned as a premium brand) is an extreme example of a loss leader, but the thought process is as old as the grocery business. Think about Thanksgiving pricing on turkeys, and how the tactic draws shoppers filling their carts with other products.
Any grocer trying to create a value perception with its customers would be wise to price eggs aggressively right now.

Gary Sankary
Gary Sankary

“Pricing is at the sole discretion of the retailer.” I learned that little ditty from a vendor back in the day with regard to coercion. That’s not the case here but loss leaders are a strategy that has been around for a long, long time. At the end of the day, it’s up to the retailer to determine their margin and promotional strategies for all of their products, including eggs.

Jeff Sward

This has nothing to do with anybody preaching what a retailer “should” do. It’s a strategic decision every individual retailer has to make for themselves. Loss leaders are nothing new. They can make sense in helping to build and maintain a perception of value at any given retailer. But that value perception is built on a lot more than cheap eggs. So the retailer has a portfolio of products and pricing decisions to manage over the long haul.
The egg section at my local grocer has been half empty for a couple of weeks now. At first I thought it was because I was shopping in the evening. Turns out we have a bit of a supply problem. I’d sure like to hear about a solution to the root problem.

John Karolefski

Selling eggs at a break-even level makes sense to me if grocers are in a very competitive trading area and the price of eggs at competing stores are much higher. It would be wise for grocers to promote the difference because it demonstrates that they are looking out for their customers and therefore building loyalty.

Brad Halverson
Brad Halverson

Grocers must cover target margins in each department with little room for spikes in labor, decline in business or other large surprises. But strategically making margin adjustments to a handful or more items to compete, pass on a deal, or make a value (price or quality) statement is a wise practice.

Hats off to LaBonne’s, in helping customers find eggs at a great price during a time when they could take full margin. Their customers and community will remember this gesture. And it makes the competition look lazy.

Last edited 11 months ago by Brad Halverson
Peter Charness

$3.99 a dozen? Make it up on volume? It’s the basket margin that counts, not a single item. If a $4.00 discount on eggs gets more customers to cross the threshold and fill up their pantries then all is fair in price and promotion

Mark Self
Mark Self

Good luck to the grocers committed to keeping prices low. The “evidence” that selling at a loss helps foot traffic and with it the opportunity to steal customers from competitors is slim at best. Easy for some professor to opine “just sell them at a loss” and get a quote somewhere, in the meantime the grocer still has costs to cover.
How about we have a discussion about the hows and why’s of the avian flu reaction? And from there, discuss how long it will take for the industry to recover from killing millions of chickens, and back to prices that are more affordable. That is the story here.

12 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Neil Saunders

Grocers should not be selling eggs at a loss for altruistic reasons. They are entitled to make money on eggs, and their current higher prices reflect the current imbalance of supply and demand. The only reasons for selling eggs at a loss are as a marketing tactic to drive in customers or to secure loyalty. And here, each retailer must assess what works best for them.

Brad Halverson
Brad Halverson
Reply to  Neil Saunders

And it really is a local trade area thing. There’s no one size fits all approach, especially when some parts of the country have plenty of eggs, some very little.

Craig Sundstrom
Craig Sundstrom

The dissonance b/w the Poll and Questions shows there’s no right answer here: if “keeping (core) food affordable” is part of your business plan, then profit is but one concern. But not every grocer follows this idea, of course; and even among those who do – or try to – there are probably limits (you can’t incur a loss on every core item, and not everyone would prioritize eggs.)

David Biernbaum

During the current egg shortage, supermarkets should not absorb losses or eat their own profits. The outbreak of bird flu caused the situation. For the time being, we will all have to accept this unfortunate, but temporary, situation. As long as supermarkets have eggs in stock, they will continue to price them accordingly. End of story.

Last edited 11 months ago by David Biernbaum
Melissa Minkow

My first reaction was “no, grocers shouldn’t sell eggs at a loss,” but the more I think about it, the more I think it’s the same strategy as non-grocery retailers selling grocery items because they’re frequency drivers. If you make up the loss (not just with eggs but across low-priced staples) because of the volume you can drive, this can potentially work as a business model, and I do think it makes sense to instead obtain a margin on items consumers expect to have a significant upcharge on them. That said, given the context of there being a shortage, you don’t necessarily want to drive too much volume because of the stockout you’ll cause. So, there’s the supply-demand push-pull here leading me to be torn on the subject. The key though is that whatever pricing strategy a retailer goes with, it should be a transparent one genuinely aimed at helping consumers in ways that are simultaneously beneficial for the retailer. I really don’t ever think a loss for a retailer is a win for the consumer, and vice versa.

Dick Seesel
Dick Seesel

3.99 for Eggland eggs (already positioned as a premium brand) is an extreme example of a loss leader, but the thought process is as old as the grocery business. Think about Thanksgiving pricing on turkeys, and how the tactic draws shoppers filling their carts with other products.
Any grocer trying to create a value perception with its customers would be wise to price eggs aggressively right now.

Gary Sankary
Gary Sankary

“Pricing is at the sole discretion of the retailer.” I learned that little ditty from a vendor back in the day with regard to coercion. That’s not the case here but loss leaders are a strategy that has been around for a long, long time. At the end of the day, it’s up to the retailer to determine their margin and promotional strategies for all of their products, including eggs.

Jeff Sward

This has nothing to do with anybody preaching what a retailer “should” do. It’s a strategic decision every individual retailer has to make for themselves. Loss leaders are nothing new. They can make sense in helping to build and maintain a perception of value at any given retailer. But that value perception is built on a lot more than cheap eggs. So the retailer has a portfolio of products and pricing decisions to manage over the long haul.
The egg section at my local grocer has been half empty for a couple of weeks now. At first I thought it was because I was shopping in the evening. Turns out we have a bit of a supply problem. I’d sure like to hear about a solution to the root problem.

John Karolefski

Selling eggs at a break-even level makes sense to me if grocers are in a very competitive trading area and the price of eggs at competing stores are much higher. It would be wise for grocers to promote the difference because it demonstrates that they are looking out for their customers and therefore building loyalty.

Brad Halverson
Brad Halverson

Grocers must cover target margins in each department with little room for spikes in labor, decline in business or other large surprises. But strategically making margin adjustments to a handful or more items to compete, pass on a deal, or make a value (price or quality) statement is a wise practice.

Hats off to LaBonne’s, in helping customers find eggs at a great price during a time when they could take full margin. Their customers and community will remember this gesture. And it makes the competition look lazy.

Last edited 11 months ago by Brad Halverson
Peter Charness

$3.99 a dozen? Make it up on volume? It’s the basket margin that counts, not a single item. If a $4.00 discount on eggs gets more customers to cross the threshold and fill up their pantries then all is fair in price and promotion

Mark Self
Mark Self

Good luck to the grocers committed to keeping prices low. The “evidence” that selling at a loss helps foot traffic and with it the opportunity to steal customers from competitors is slim at best. Easy for some professor to opine “just sell them at a loss” and get a quote somewhere, in the meantime the grocer still has costs to cover.
How about we have a discussion about the hows and why’s of the avian flu reaction? And from there, discuss how long it will take for the industry to recover from killing millions of chickens, and back to prices that are more affordable. That is the story here.

More Discussions