Slashdot Mirror
Online Shoppers Naive About Online Prices
smooth wombat writes "Have you ever been shopping online and noticed the difference in prices for the same item at different stores? Do you realize that not only are the prices different from store to store but they could be different for you compared to someone else who shops at the same store? Nearly 2/3 of adult internet shoppers thought that practice was illegal according to a study (pdf format) conducted by the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. First-time buyers at a retailer could see higher prices than a firm's repeat customers, and retailers may not offer discounts to consumers who buy the same brands regularly without even looking at alternative products on the same site. From the article: 'The Annenberg study was based on results from a telephone survey from Feb. 8 to March 14 of 1,500 adults who said they had used the Internet within the past 30 days. The margin of sampling error was reported to be plus or minus 2.51 percentage points.'"
Somebody please provide a sample site that does this.
Meh.
Only 2/3? I would've guessed that number would be considerably higher, like 4/6 or 8/12 or something...
FTA: They are known within the industry as "bottom feeders" who don't show any brand or merchant loyalty.
The arrogance it takes for an industry to come up with this phrase is just amazing. I think I'm generally more pro-business than most Slashdot readers, and I don't even fall into that category - I'll go with a brand/merchant I've used before even if they are priced a bit higher, if I feel I got good service, because I'd rather deal with a known quantity. But the "bottom feeders" term makes me want to slap some people around.
Perhaps what's really annoying me is that companies don't want to compete and so are doing everything they can to attract their "ideal" customer while saying "screw you" to the other guys. As someone who has been ignored at car dealers on several occasions (usually because of my apparent age or because of the borrowed car I was driving that day), I find the practice of turning customers away arrogant and annoying. Changing prices only makes it worse.
There was a story a few years ago about Amazon charging people different prices on the same items based on the customer's geographical location.
..etc across site, with the cheapest price on top. The information includes shipping costs:
You can use this site to compare prices on books, cds, dvds
http://www.bestbookbuys.com/
You can also blow your cookies and see what the prices are before you sign into your account.
You mean to tell me that everyone doing business on the internet is not Honest?
Interesting coming from someone with a free iPod ponzi scheme ad in their sig....
Monstar L
If you don't like the price that something's being offered at, then you just don't have to buy it.
There's no legal obligation that car dealers have to give everybody the same lowest price that they ever sold a car for.
I'm not sure about the idea mentioned in the article that regular customers will get lower prices though - surely it should work the other way around. You get the customers landed with cheap prices and as they keep coming back you gradually tap them up until their visits start to drop off and then you start to lower them back down.
How prevalent is this practice?
I've experienced price changes within the span of five minutes, or less. I'll be surfing around to sites, comparing prices, and I'll return to a site I've just visited, and they'll increase the price on me [I've never seen a price decrease].
I think they program the software so that the more hits they get on a product page served to your [preset] "cookie", the more they edge the price up on you, figuring, I guess, that you're really interested in the product, and that maybe they can "scare" you into purchasing it [or maybe somehow bleed that extra $10 of profit out of you on account of your insatiable desire for the product]. And no, I don't think this is primarily a supply and demand thing - I think these price change engines are primarily driven by some [previously arcane] theory of marketing psychology. The airline/hotel reservation systems [Expedia, Travelocity, Orbitz] are particularly guilty of this [and, again, I do NOT believe that it is primarily attributable to a finite supply of airline tickets or a finite supply hotel rooms].
And of course, you also have the phenomenon of e.g. different Yahoo stores [different URLs] that have identical ownership [i.e. identical "whois" lookups], and identical inventory [and, typically, identical SKUs], but which offer slightly different prices on the very same items. Or merchants whose "normal" price on an item differs from their "advertised" price at e.g. pricewatch.com.
Generally speaking, these kinds of gimmicks really tick me off, and tend to push me towards a site's competitor [assuming they aren't playing the same damned game] - and it sure doesn't make a damned bit of difference to me whether I purchase that ticket from Expedia, Travelocity, or Orbitz.
Soon after that, I was talking to some acquaintances (who admittedly have more experience and knowledge about classic cars than I do) and was given the impression that I might not have gotten the "deal" I thought I had (based simply on their experience and a verbal description of the vehicle). At first I was dismayed. I felt that I'd been taken, but then I realized, "Hey, wait a minute, nothing has changed. I wanted the car. I was happy with what I paid for it. I'm enjoying the hell out of it. What's the problem."
As it turned out, after having the vehicle actually inspected by an expert I discovered that it was in much better shape than it had a right to be (for being 35 years old) and that all the important VIN numbers matched and that there hadn't been any after-market body or engine modifications to speak of and almost no hidden rust or damage . It turned out that I actually had a better deal than I even thought from the beginning. But regardless I was happy with the purchase and it performed beyond my expectations and I got it for less than what I was willing to pay for it. Why should it upset me if someone else might have been able to get it for less. Good for them! Now this is a little different than buying a new commodity item online - it's a relatively rare and unique, used item - but as long as I got what I was expecting for a price I was happy with, that's what counts. What someone else "might" have gotten a similar (or the same) product for should in no way affect me.
I'm selling my classic class-A motor home. If I sell it in the paper, I want $4,500 for it. I have a friend that expressed interest in it that I quoted $3,000 for it. My wife has a coworker that is in need of one for a very specific thing and is in bad financial straights, I told her I let it go to him for $2,000, no money down and take payments. Should my friend be upset? $4,500 is less than market value and I won't go much lower than that on the open market. If a friend of mine approaches me I'd sell it to them for $3,000 or so. If my neighbor's house burned down I'd give it to them for $1. No-one should feel gypped.
The whole situation reminds me of a time when a coworker got a raise, but was reluctant to discuss it with me because they thought I'd be upset. I said that I was happy for them. They deserved it. They asked why I wasn't angry about it since I hadn't gotten one and I said "Did they take your raise out of my paycheck? Am I suddenly making less money now? Why shouldn't I be happy for you? Nothing has changed for me at all - besides, rich-boy, you buy lunch today"
"terrorism" and "pedophilia" are the root passwords to the Constitution
What you are talking about economists call price discrimination and it is not only not illegal (in most cases)
I would argue that it's possible to interpret the Robinson-Patman Act in a way such that price discrimination like this *is* illegal, in the United States. It may not be prosecuted much, but the law seems pretty broad and could be interpreted to cover this sort of thing.
- Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
"They are known within the industry as "bottom feeders" who don't show any brand or merchant loyalty."
No, lawyers and marketing dicks are the "bottom feeders." the rest of us are just trying to avoid getting screwed by both parties.
There is this one small collectibles shop I go to frequently. On average I spend a couple hundred there a month. The owner decided to start giving me an extra 10% discount since I buy so much. Sounds good to me and I'm about to drop a few hundred there tomorow. Not sure how many others get the discount, but if someone gives you enough business it can make sense to give them a little extra to keep their business and show them you appreciate them.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
If my friend can't understand that, then maybe I need to be more careful choosing friends.
"terrorism" and "pedophilia" are the root passwords to the Constitution