Slashdot Mirror
BudNet Tracks Your Suds
An anonymous reader writes "CNN is carrying a story about Budweiser's national internal sales tracking network called BudNET. It allows Anheuser-Busch to instantly track sales across the country, and 'If Anheuser-Busch loses shelf space in a store in Clarksville, Tennessee, they know it right away.' It brings up some interesting privacy issues, because according to the article 'The last time you bought a six-pack of Bud Light at the Piggly Wiggly, Anheuser servers most likely recorded what you paid, when that beer was brewed, whether you purchased it warm or chilled, and whether you could have gotten a better deal down the street.' Frankly, I don't want Budweiser knowing when I choose to buy their beer versus another brands."
Frankly, I don't want Budweiser knowing when I choose to buy their beer versus another brands.
Just pay with cash and they'll never know it was you!
I think this is a little more paranoia than we need.
If you bought directly from budweiser, they would know what you paid for, if it was cold, etc. So pipe down.
They can't really single out a person, or name a customer, there's no privacy issues here, at all. Just a company doing inventory control, to an extreme.
Runnin' On Empty
They aren't tracking YOU, they are tracking the beer. Unless I'm missing something, they have no way of connecting any one person with any one beer.
Frankly, I don't want Budweiser knowing when I choose to buy their beer versus another brands.
Then, don't buy bud!
The next remark is false. The previous remark is true.
For real. And who cares the they data mine anyway, it's not like they're tracking any one individual's purchases.
"Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott
You know I've bought a lot of embarrassing things at the corner market and haven't even gotten discount coupons for them during check-out at a subsequent visit (a shame). And to the point, I've never gotten any kind of marketing material from Trojans in the mail as a result of having bought ribbed at Safeway, so if someone's correlating my personal information with my condom-purchasing history, they're not being very enterprising (if they were, they'd have sold the information to my wife long ago).
What I'm saying is, there's a tacit assumption in the article that somehow your purchases are correlated with your name. That's more likely to be happening at your credit card company's clearinghouse than at the cashier's station.
There are no karma whores, only moderation johns
Privacy issues because they track their own sales?
I'm a little confused as this isn't really your rights online and anyone that think that it is obviously didn't read the article. This is just and article talking about the information system that Bud uses to track sales of their products. It's a supply chain thing. They're not doing anything devious to go about this, just having people track prices and sales and actually doing something with data.
Anyone can tell you that beer distribution is complicated, this just helps them better their distribution. Take off the tinfoil hats, nothing to see here.
My Slashdot account is old enough to drink...
Not you -- SOMEONE Yes Bud knows when someone purchased their product but they don't know who and unless they have a survey team out, they don't know why. Stuff like this happens all the time and for the most part it tends to make life better for all of us.
Where we have to worry is when a company starts mining all this data and does track it back to an individual person. When a credit card company or polititical/religious/charity organization can pick up the phone and find out what I watched for TV last night and what books I last bought or checked out at the library, that's when we need to be concerned.
And even if personal data-mining is possible it's no guarantee it will be used. For example, the EZ-TAG scanners on the toll roads you take can easilly compute your average speed between toll booths and issue you a speeding ticket if you were speeding but they don't. Why? Because the toll road comissioners would be voted out of office if they allowed that.
I drink beer, I love beer. I love beer so much that I cannot drink bud, because I like to drink BEER.
Thats not snotty IMO, Bud is just crappy "beer". I suppose its a cheap alcohol delivery mechanism, but beer its not.
This whole idea of anonymity is getting out of hand. Guess what? Anonymity never existed and has never been protected by any government. The idea of being anonymous came out of people getting lost in the industrial culture. Before the industrial age, you tended to have few choices on who to buy from, and the store owner knew you and what you bought. He didn't carry anything that you didn't want people to know you bought, because it would soon be getting around if you did buy it. Now we're using computers to pull that all back together, but mostly for the old advantages of knowing how to serve the customer better. Budweiser is not really interested in gossiping with others that you bought a keg, so what's the big deal already?
I know people like the idea of having a protective shroud of mystery surrounding them. I hate to break it to you, but it's just a false sense of security. If you do something worth noticing, you *will* get noticed.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
If I pick up a 6-pack at the local depaneur (7-11, corner store, etc) and pay cash, and the clerk prints out a cheap receipt on a cheap non-networked cash register, Budweiser will STILL know who I am, and if my bear was chilled or warm?
What, do they have a secret network of x-ray thermal spy sats that record all purchases of their product?
This whole article is overblown and exagerated. Not to mention it doesn't apply to many (most?) stores. At least around here. I don't know of too many corner stores around here that ask for your personal info when you buy beer.
It always amazes me that it's the same people that scream and shout about privacy issues that come to websites like this one and continually post responses and journal entries about their stance on issues of political, corporate, and other signifigance. If you think somebody could build a profile about you based on the beer you drink, imagine the profile they could construct by piecing together every post you've ever made to websites on the Internet.
For real. And who cares the they data mine anyway, it's not like they're tracking any one individual's purchases.
Don't want 'em to know who you are? Pay in cash.
Better to crap on the beer than the people drinking it. That's what's snotty. I think Bud is crap, but I won't assume you're trash just for drinking it. Or endorsing it and winning the Daytona 500... (Likewise, disliking NASCAR is just fine, but implying everyone who likes it is dumb-as-nails is snotty)
Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
Taste is purely subjective, I agree. However, thats like calling me a snob because I think cheap ground beef isn't the same quality as prime rib. Bud is very popular, however that doesn't change its brewing practices or its ingredients, which are decidedly inferior.
:-)
I guess it is being a little arrogant, if people really like bud than so be it. I do know people who think "good beer" is disgusting. I usually generalize the meaning of "good" to be quality ingredients and a decent brewing process. Whether or not the recipe is to your liking, at least it was made properly. Bud is factory spewed and made with crappy grain (rice waste products are included to steady the process and make it cheaper.)
Oh well
I think it's a great application of data collection and data mining. They are collecting a load of data, some of it automated, some of it gathered by humans, integrating it, and using it to drive their supply chain. Isn't this a good use of IT?
...
The article is in the wrong category and is misleading, as numerous other people have pointed out.
Why not resubmit with a different category and talk about the novel aspects, like taking what the delivery guys observe about other items on the shelf and the clientelle, and how that gets fed all the way up to marketing plans? That's the real jewel of the article
This privacy stuff is getting out of hand...
It brings up some interesting privacy issues, because according to the article 'The last time you bought a six-pack of Bud Light at the Piggly Wiggly, Anheuser servers most likely recorded what you paid, when that beer was brewed, whether you purchased it warm or chilled, and whether you could have gotten a better deal down the street.'
It does NOT bring up any privacy issues, interesting or not. It's marketing data and there's no personal connection to the consumer whatsoever. Budweiser has a business obligation to determine where and how their product is selling.
Just because they say "you" in the text doesn't mean that "you" are part of the data collected. They're just using a purchase that sounds familiar to "you" to give "you" a frame of reference.
I'm surprised none of the privacy nuts have muttered the words "Ashcroft" or "Bush" in this thread yet, for no good reason, as is usually the case.
RP
The local public utility has been tracking my water usage for years -- and they make me pay them to do it!! Worse than that, the long distance phone company not only tracks my phone calls, but they even track who I call and how long I am on the phone. My grocery store tries to track my grocery buying, but nobody lives at that address. However, Walmart does not have those stupid "shopper cards", so I shop there. Heck, I even think /. even keeps a record of when I respond and what I respond to.
You can't hide!
Are we being overly paranoid here... Unless they are checking and recording ID's at the door to gain Individual buying habits, I don't think this is intrusive, just good business sense. It would seem to me this is why, among other reasons, AB is number one. Inventory control SHOULD be a high priority. Beer, with a definite shelf life, is one business where this would be a benefit to the consumer.
That brings up something I've oft wondered about the more privacy paranoid in the /. crowd. I bet most of us here heavily use debit cards, I know I do, and my bank is sitting on a moutain of data that they could probably make a killing selling to virtually any commercial venture. Are bank privacy policies really solid, is there a federal bank privacy law? I don't hear anyone's paranoid ranting being directed at banks.
Then you have grocer savings cards, I do hear a bit of complaining about those, but nothing near say RFID. Those are personally identifiable as far as I can tell.
"Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott
I'm not doing that because I don't have a problem with aggregate data collection. If my bank wants to sell data to Phillip Morris that leads to the conclusion that most male smokers between 18-30 spend an average of x on ciggarettes in a given week, and my data is part of that I don't care. If they (my bank) post a website with my name, contact info, and what I purchased for how much and when, then I have an issue.
My question is simply why don't you hear complaining about the data banks have access to, yet you hear complaints about something like RFID, which is unlikely to ever be used outside of supply chain and inventory management functions (I'd guess it'll be part of the disposable packaging rather than integrated into the product, or maybe even removable at checkout for reuse). For all the bitching you'd think they were proposing GPS beacons being physically attached to every product.
"Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott