Does this make sense to anyone?
If you are an addict and buy drugs at a certain price per amount, let’s say $50 per cop, then one day you say to the dealer,
"I’ve only got $47? I can add that $3 to my next purchase."
You are given the option of lying about paying back the $3, but still paying $50 upon return for the second purchase. If the dealer gives in, then the next time you buy drugs you are more likely to ask for the discount again, even though that original $3 discount is in limbo; it was never agreed to be paid back nor explicitly forgiven. The dealer has shown that he is weak and you can exploit that in the future. However, the second time asking for the discount runs the risk of retaliation. Under both scenarios of lying or not, if you pay $50 for fix number 2, then you are still $3 short of the original agreed upon price. The chances are moderate that you will be given no more discounts, but the purchase will proceed regardless of the $3 not being paid back. A small victory. Had the dealer originally said, “No,” when the $47 purchase was offered, then second time around there certainly would be a drastically reduced chance of receiving a discount that was not granted the first time. Showing that he is stubborn and places high value on that last $3.
If the discount is granted more than twice ($47x2 rather than $47+$50) in a row you could begin to suspect that you have been paying a little over what the dealer is actually comfortable selling each unit for and pressure another discount. The odds are slightly reduced, but still moderately present, that the additional discount will be granted, but it could still be logical that the dealer would be comfortable selling the drugs at $45 per unit, but not necessarily true in practice. Because each time there is a non payment the risk of retaliation grows. If the dealer becomes stubborn at the price of $47 or $50 then, obviously, his marginal utility on the last two or three dollars is worth much more than if the $47 was granted only the first time and you are unlikely to get a further discount.
If, on the third purchase, the $47 price tag is accepted with no payments of any of the previous $3 back, it is a virtual success that $47 is still in the profit range for the dealer, then the fourth time, should you should only offer $45? Or does retaliation of the last 3 non payments of discount coming rushing back and then start the $50 cycle again? If the $47 offer is accepted even after the $45 offer is made then you have met an impasse that, mathematically isn’t likely to break, ever, but you have won a $3 per unit/purchase victory.