ITT vs OFFER

I find the differences between Invitation to treat and Offer very confusing, especially to the ordinary consumer. I believe that ITT is a kind of scapegoat because it gives people and businesses a way out of contracts. A lot of people out there do not have a background in business law and therefore it is a bit unfair to them when companies claim that they never made offers instead it was just an invitation to make a negotiation.

Lets take an example in the case of goods being displayed in the shop with a price tag. Although this is classified as an invitation to treat I still feel that this is an offer. I think that by putting items on display the shop is indirectly saying "these are the items we have to offer and this is the offer price". And i don't get why it is considered an invitation to treat because once the shop declares the price, there is no negotiating, especially in the big supermarkets, as such in my own opinion this does not qualify as an invitation to treat.

Looking back to the world famous cases relevant to this issue, I think that this ITT should be scraped out of law, because it is a clause that strips the innocent and lame man out there out of their hard earned money.