English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I want to place an ad to sell my services. Should I say I have good service at a low price or low cost?

share|improve this question
In addition to the points in the answers, don't say you "have good service". Why would anyone care what kind of service you have? They care what kind of service you provide or offer them. So you want say "I provide good service" or something similar. – David Schwartz Jul 15 '12 at 4:04
up vote 3 down vote accepted

Low price.

Price is what you charge; cost is what the buyer winds up paying, which may be more or less than the price, and in any event is not under your control.

See this paper for entirely too many details about these words, as well as worth and value.

share|improve this answer
In fact, either would suffice for advertising. I've seen plenty of ads for "low-cost" solutions or products, and I somehow knew what they were talking about. – Robusto Jul 14 '12 at 22:33
I agree that it should be "price." In retail lingo, price is the amount of money that a buyer pays for an item. However, you say that "cost" is what the buyer pays, but that isn't so. "Cost" is the seller's expense for obtaining goods to sell, not the buyer's. It seems that you say this in your paper, but your answer is not so clear. However, I am willing to admit that I may have misunderstood you. – Kit Z. Fox Jul 14 '12 at 23:52
That's one interpretation, from the seller's viewpoint. From the buyer's viewpoint it's a different interpretation. And you want to appeal to the buyer's viewpoint in advertising. They don't care how the seller does the accounting. – John Lawler Jul 15 '12 at 3:55
But the simple truth is, if you tell me something will be "low-cost" to me, I assume I won't have to pay a lot. – Robusto Jul 15 '12 at 4:03
If you believe me. I could be lying, of course, which is what marketing is all about. – John Lawler Jul 15 '12 at 4:05

Definitely Low Price over Low Cost.

Low cost implies low quality or the low end solution. Low price implies a bargain.

People get a lot more excited about bargains than products that are cheap because they don't cost much. A low cost good is something that has little value. A low priced good may actually cost less than it's value.

share|improve this answer
The standard usage for goods in your context is always plural. You never buy/sell "a good". Also, it's means it is, not belonging to it. – FumbleFingers Jul 16 '12 at 1:08

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.