Slashdot Mirror


How To Beat Online Price Discrimination

New submitter Intrepid imaginaut sends word of a study (PDF) into how e-commerce sites show online shoppers different prices depending on how they found an item and what the sites know about the customer. "For instance, the study found, users logged in to Cheaptickets and Orbitz saw lower hotel prices than shoppers who were not registered with the sites. Home Depot shoppers on mobile devices saw higher prices than users browsing on desktops. Some searchers on Expedia and Hotels.com consistently received higher-priced options, a result of randomized testing by the websites. Shoppers at Sears, Walmart, Priceline, and others received results in a different order than control groups, a tactic known as “steering.” To get a better price, the article advises deleting cookies before shopping, using your browser's private mode, putting the items in your shopping cart without buying them right away, and using tools like Camelcamelcamel to keep an eye out for price drops.

163 comments

  1. Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I was trying to shop for resorts on my Linux box here and I got a popup stating, "There's nothing here you can afford.Try Six Flags during the work week."

    True story.

    1. Re:Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Screenshot?

    2. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      And I was trying to shop on my Mac and I got a warning "there's nothing here you can afford because you wasted all your money on an overpriced dumbed down shitty computer. But we will alert you when the next iPhone comes out because we know you'd sell your left testicle to get it (because you wouldn't be a true hipster without the latest Apple gadget/fad).

    3. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you admit you're a hipster?

    4. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Were you angry when the website said your Mac was an "overpriced dumbed down shitty computer"? At least it didn't insult your iPhone you hipster.

    5. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love self-depreciating humor! Macs are good computers, don't beat yourself up about your purchase.

    6. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      No, you were trying to shop on your Windows box and got too distracted trying to slap down popups from the vast wad of Nigerian scam sites that have embedded themselves in your OS and have now reduced its speed to virtually nothing. Time to do a clean install of Windows 7 and pray.

    7. Re:Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by davester666 · · Score: 2

      not true. the number of people using Linux for surfing the web is so small, nobody would bother special casing them.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    8. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Time to get back in your time machine and return to the present.

    9. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you admit you're a hipster?

      Yes..., yes. I need help man! Everything I buy has to have a powerful lowercase 'i' in front of it. I so feel the need to be kewl, I only shop on iBay, and there is no iBay! Help me Obi Wan, you're my only hope!

    10. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn... I have a friend who had to sell both testicles to buy an iPhone5. I wonder how he(?) is going to get an iPhone6.

    11. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      When I make my daily rounds here in town cleaning up terminally-clogged Windows installations as part of my IT service businesses I'm driving a Toyota, not a Delorean.

    12. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This thread makes me feel sad inside.

    13. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iDiot

    14. Re:Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Half of them run Windows in a VM (or otherwise emulate windows) so they can run IE, for the piles of sites written as IE-only.

    15. Re:Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Half of them run Windows in a VM (or otherwise emulate windows) so they can run IE, for the piles of sites written as IE-only.

      I can't remember when I met a site that didn't work and told me to switch to using IE. In fact, it's pretty rare to find a site with obviously borked functionality.

      Examples? Seriously, enough people use non-IE browsers (whatever it is on Macs [not used one for years] / Chrome / Firefox / Opera) and have done for getting on for a decade now that any new site has no choice but to work cross-platform.

      If you're going to bring up the example of your bank, then by implication you're talking about a bank that doesn't update it's security programming for years at a stretch, and that's probably synonymous with a bank you shouldn't be trusting with your money. (I do my banking by going into the branch. It's safer and easier.)

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    16. Re:Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Examples?

      Every Intranet I've ever used. Any company large enough to have a formal intranet on separate systems, also moved slow enough that they were all made in the stone age. Seriously, I've worked for a large telco that had the intranet integrated with everything MS and only on older IE (IE 6), so that they are still using XP now, because they are so slow to react. No, I don't work there anymore.

      Everyone was also denied local admin to their own machine. So if you ran across a site that didn't work in IE, you'd have to submit a ticket for Firefox, and wait two weeks for them to approve your business case for an alternate browser, and install it remotely (which didn't work, because they had the policy to turn off computers every night for power savings, and the policy to only install software after hours, so as to not disrupt work).

      I don't have their list, but they had a "defensive list" of sites that required IE6 (no newer, and no other browser) to justify staying on the old one. Hey, if everyone else coded to standards, IE6 should work, right?

    17. Re:Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that but have you seen the amount of cash that skilled developers make... and a large percentage of them use Linux.

    18. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by Puppet+Master · · Score: 1

      Why is it always the left testicle and not the right one? Is the left somehow more valuable?

      --
      The day Microsoft creates a product that doesn't suck, it will be known as the Microsoft Vaccuum Cleaner!
    19. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Intranets ... oh,I'll switch to using the tablet with a keyboard instead of the phone.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    20. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Who designed this iteration of the mobile interface - I can't read the message I'm replying to. designed for posting bullshit, not content.

      Every Intranet I've ever used.

      The norm is that if we have access to the cliient's intranet, then it will be by taking data on $device$ to an employee, who posts it for us. Since each site gets rigged up and torn down several times a year, that's the level of contact that the client wants with their IT systems. Data comes in to them through a sheep-dip machine, or through email. Data comes to us on $device$ or by email, and we process it on our machine, then send the analyses on down the line.

      Being given access to a client's internal network is pretty uncommon - that's restricted to client employees, if there are any on the job.

      Actually, my current job has given me a client computer and smart card for accessing it. Of course, I don't have VPN access to the client's network, so every week or so I need to go to a local office (I'm lucky, it's an hour on the bus for me; for my opposite shift man, it's a full day of travel.) to wire the machine in, log in, then sit through several hours of downloads and re-boots. It's their global-follow-the-sun system, and since they pay the invoices, they get to choose through which hoops we jump. They pay for our time to jump through their hoops.

      What storage and collaboration systems they have on their intranet, we're not told (we're not actually told about the intranet either, I deduce it'ls existance). It seems to be a total mess of three different, overlapping or competing systems, and in the words of one of my supervisors "I choose not to fight those battles". One of the complications that I do see wash-back from is whether the information I provide has a US stock effect, or not (in which case, unimaginable consequences happen ; I just avoid those areas. Client's problem, not mine.)

      Everyone was also denied local admin to their own machine

      Which is the norm. It took me three years after my employer (1) stopped sending us on jobs with our own printer and (2) locked us to a non-admin account ; to persuade them to allow us to install printer drivers for whatever we found on the site, when we got there. I'd just rape the machine with an NTpsswdCRACK (or whatever it was called ; Petter's Norwegian root/boot CD) and blank the Admin password. Then tell them about it before I got back to the office continent. I don't like raping other people's machines, but if I need to ("NEED"), I'll do it. Many jobs, it was sufficient to make a PDF document and email/ print that.

      I suppose that if you use a network at work (I don't, basically) you migt ave more problems. But most jobs don't need network access. Well ... I suppose it depends - are you a source of data, or do you have to interact with people other than telling them what is happening?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    21. Re:Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      The last page I ran across that absolutely would not load correctly was a Micro$oft support page for Office 2007. Not even their own browser would load it right. On a related note, I really hate having to call Micro$oft support. They actually told me that all Office 2007 keys had expired and the program could not be reinstalled.

    22. Re: Do not browse on a Liinux desktop! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      I only use M$ at work, and for the wife's box. I don't know,or want to know, Win8. All my clients are simply going to skip the 8 generation. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  2. Insight from Bennett Haselton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    As a frequent flyer, I too could benefit from defeating their price tricks, but really before I draw any conclusions of my own I'm wondering do we have any word from Bennett Haselton. Any insight of his would be appreciated on this topic. He's a frequent contributor.

    1. Re:Insight from Bennett Haselton by sideslash · · Score: 1

      do we have any word from Bennett Haselton

      I'd love to see the same: "Brevity is the soul of wit." How 'bout it, Bennett? One word?

    2. Re:Insight from Bennett Haselton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I noticed that hotels.com offered me cheaper prices when I logged on from china and hong kong than if I logged in from sweden.

      Might be worth using a VPN to simulate being from a "poorer" country.

    3. Re:Insight from Bennett Haselton by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately he's too busy trying to come up with algorithms to solve the first-world problems of Burning Man.

    4. Re:Insight from Bennett Haselton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like selling ice in the desert!

    5. Re:Insight from Bennett Haselton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could see something like a distributed social network coming into play here for the solution. I'm just not sure they really know what they need.

    6. Re:Insight from Bennett Haselton by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      I think you mean in the dessert.

    7. Re:Insight from Bennett Haselton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      do we have any word from Bennett Haselton

      I'd love to see the same: "Brevity is the soul of wit." How 'bout it, Bennett? One word?

      Meh.

    8. Re:Insight from Bennett Haselton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I found that if I reach /. with a Google search and don't log in, Bennett's posts are half the length they are when I am logged in. But I still don't read them.

  3. Book directly with the airlines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The flight search middlemen have to take their cut, after all. I got my plane tickets for 75% off this way.

    1. Re:Book directly with the airlines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to always use the middle man sites for search, then book the flight numbers directly with the airline. That was for better customer service, there was never a price difference tho. I've done this many times. At least I never saw one in my experience. Now i just fly southwest always

    2. Re:Book directly with the airlines by Vokkyt · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yeah, this is one I've never really understood. I used to think that you had to use the intermediary sites since when I was younger, my parents either always used agents or third party sites once we got Internet access.

      But when someone pointed me to http://matrix.itasoftware.com/, which just lists flights and prices instead of actually letting you buy, I never went back to the annoying third party sites. I've never really gotten a deal on the third party sites that was any cheaper than just looking up the cost on the informational site and buying the itinerary straight from the airline, nor have the hotel deals been any cheaper or different for me than just booking the hotel independently. I know that my folks like it because it's all of the prep-work done from one site, which is a fair point, but I personally just haven't seen the benefit.

    3. Re:Book directly with the airlines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hunting for the cheapest price online is not how you fly for cheap :)

    4. Re:Book directly with the airlines by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      hunting for the cheapest price online is not how you fly for cheap :)

      Of course not. Chuck Garabedian showed us the way:

      ...You gotta squeeze every penny! You see this tux? I got it cheap, 'cause Roy Cohn died in it! That fancy yacht? A bargain, because it smells like cat pee! And those beautiful women? They used to be men. The point is, you gotta squeeze every penny!

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    5. Re:Book directly with the airlines by davester666 · · Score: 1

      yes, become a radicalized member of ISIS and get a free trip out of the US.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    6. Re:Book directly with the airlines by ram+balak+sah · · Score: 0

      But when someone pointed me to http://matrix.itasoftware.com/ [itasoftware.com] , which just lists flights and prices instead of actually letting you buy, I never went back to the annoying third party sites. I've never really gotten a deal on the third party sites that was any cheaper than just looking up the cost on the informational site and buying the itinerary straight from the airline, nor

    7. Re:Book directly with the airlines by ram+balak+sah · · Score: 0

      But when someone pointed me to http://matrix.itasoftware.com/ [itasoftware.com] , which just lists flights and prices instead of actually letting you buy, I never went back to the annoying third party sites. I've never really gotten a deal on the third party sites that was any cheaper than just looking up the cost on the informational site and buying the itinerary straight from the airline, nor have the hotel deals been any cheaper or different for me than just booking the hotel independently. I know that my folks like it because it's all of the prep-work done from one site, which is a fair point, but I personally just haven't seen the benefit.

    8. Re:Book directly with the airlines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You can get prices on Google Flight search too . They even get you seasonal historical price data , which is useful when you are planning ahead

      The way to use travel sites is to find out the cheapest flight, then book it through a travel site using the travel site branded credit card. Usually that gives you a 3-5% discount (usually usable only on the same site, but some cards give you outright cash).
      Or I must say this was the way to use travel sites, because many airlines, especially international ones will give you less "miles" if you book through a third party site. That is sometimes worth a 5% of the ticket value, negating the cashback on the card.

      Recently the game has moved even further, with airlines cheapening the "worth" of a mile, suddenly making cashbacks on credit cards valuable again.

  4. Contradiction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "For instance, the study found, users logged in to Cheaptickets and Orbitz saw lower hotel prices"

    "To get a better price, the article advises deleting cookies before shopping"

    Ummm, what?

    1. Re:Contradiction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parhaps it only lets them see the info pertaining directly to your own account and not any other cookies you may have, it's also possible that logging in only works on those two sites, but everybody else is best to shop as anonymous.

    2. Re:Contradiction by dunkindave · · Score: 4, Informative

      The article talks about this. They say use a private window, and thereby no cookies, to see what a generic visitor would see, then also look in you regular browser window, and compare the two. Sometimes your cookies may help you get a lower price, in which case use them, and sometimes they may hurt, in which case use the private window that isn't sharing them.

    3. Re:Contradiction by kmoser · · Score: 1

      If the company was smart they'd detect the same IP and put two and two together.

    4. Re:Contradiction by dunkindave · · Score: 1

      While anything like this can always devolve into a cat and mouse game, any of the approaches like tracking IP addresses also comes with problems for the vendors. What about businesses, schools, Starbucks, airports, hotels, etc, that use NAT and so everyone that is behind it have the same IP as far as the website is concerned? Do they see all 10000 Google employees that use the same NAT device as one person so they all get treated badly? Or just because someone in the same hotel searched for a flight (a common event) all the other guests are labeled with that person's characteristics? Some would say the businesses could learn the addresses of such NATs, assuming they aren't dynamic and therefore occasionally change, but there are A LOT of them, so at best only the large ones might get into such a database. And so the cycle of beat the other guy continues.

  5. I can't stand coupons by skids · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sales I don't mind. Sometimes you have to move old inventory. But coupons are just a PITA that only exist to give housewives/househusbands something to do with their time. So online shopping with all its contortions and the web20-ification of advertising just drives me completely up the damn wall. The minute I open a browser to buy something I can feel my stress levels rising and if I'm lucky I'll finish buying it before all the cussing and ranting force me to close the tab before I damage my PC.

    1. Re:I can't stand coupons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If coupons stress you out don't use them. That's the whole point, to charge a different price for the same product to different demographics (eg. Housewives with too much free time). If you find you don't like coupons they probably are not intended for your demographic.

    2. Re:I can't stand coupons by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Interesting

      that only exist to give housewives/househusbands something to do with their time

      Definitely not - they're there to get people to make decisions that they otherwise wouldn't make, usually bad ones.

      People love to get something for nothing. "$1 off a "premium" bag of wavy potato chips! Hell yeah!" No matter that the generic wavy potato chips are still fifty cents less and taste the same - it's a DEAL!

      Kohls is famous for marking up their goods by 300% and then having a 30% off sale. The lines are out the door for "the savings". JC Penney tried to do away with that scheme and nearly went bankrupt. They went back to it this year and are returning to profitability.

      If you don't have a concrete estimate of value for what you're purchasing, you can get wildly abused by the marketeers. That value will be subjective, but you better darn well know what it is if you don't want to get taken. I buy clothes at Kohls, but unless I'm desperate I limit myself to the 70% off clearance rack. That's where I find my valuation meets their prices. YMMV.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    3. Re:I can't stand coupons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If coupons stress you out don't use them.

      And pay more for a product than I have to?

      I generally have no problem with manufacturer coupons. They are independent of the store I am buying from, meaning the store's take from that "sale" is the same as someone who did not use that manufacturers coupon.

      I have a huge problem with a store offering its own coupons. If a store gives me a coupon for 50 cents off an item, then that cuts directly into their take from that sale, which tells me that they are ok with that. And if they are ok with that with a coupon, they should be ok with that without a coupon.

    4. Re:I can't stand coupons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Definitely not - they're there to get people to make decisions that they otherwise wouldn't make, usually bad ones.

      Not always. If you are careful with coupons sometimes you get a nice price reduction. Like recently, got some "premium" toothpaste cheaper than the the cheapest-cheap-cheap toothpaste just because of coupons.

      But I do agree with you that people fail many times at price comparisons.

    5. Re: I can't stand coupons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But it's a loss leader! We're hoping you're going to be tempted constantly throughout your shopping trip by our scientifically placed product placement of heavily marked up items"

    6. Re:I can't stand coupons by firewrought · · Score: 1

      [Coupons are] there to get people to make decisions that they otherwise wouldn't make, usually bad ones.

      In addition, they serve as a form of price discrimination: you can save a nice chunk of change on groceries by taking an hour each week to clip your way thru the Sunday paper, but once you have enough disposable income (and perhaps less leisure time) it's no longer worth it.

      --
      -1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
    7. Re: I can't stand coupons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kohls is the devil. I've only bought some shoes there, after price checking. Wouldn't buy anything else there, ever.

      I try to explain this to people constantly. Those boots, for instance. They raised the price by 10 and when I got to the register they had done super secret coupon just because I'm such a super swell guy that got me my shoes for the exact same price they should have been before kohls jacked up the price.

      Everyone else says "wow that sounds like you got a really great deal!" I explain why I didn't...and then that person hates me.

      If you see a clearance rack, or a sale or anything at kohls you're probably getting screwed. Or at best paying normal retail price. But you will be told two or three times that you have saved soooo much.

    8. Re:I can't stand coupons by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      One important use for coupons is price discrimination. You might be willing to pay up to $1 for a gallon of milk, while a super-rich person might be willing to pay up to $100 if there were no alternative. But because the rich person can buy at the same grocery story as you, the store loses the potential $99 in profit. In a competitive marketprice, loss of profits for the store translates into higher prices for everyone. Coupons are one rough form of adjusting prices - rich people think that collecting coupons is not worth their time, while poor people collect coupons, so poor people pay somewhat lower prices on average.

    9. Re:I can't stand coupons by s0nicfreak · · Score: 1

      There are actually many people who feel superior by not using coupons. They believe coupons are for poor people, or as said above, people with too much free time. Why would the store not take an extra .50 profit from those people, and the people who just don't feel like cutting out the coupon?

  6. say what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Could someone clarify this for me "putting the items in your shopping cart without buying them right away", how will this make the item cheaper? When i put something in my cart i already know how much it is.

    1. Re:say what? by jimbolauski · · Score: 4, Informative

      Supposedly you log in and put the item in your shopping cart and leave the site. Within a couple of days the merchant contacts you with a better price for those items.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    2. Re:say what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh right, didn't think of that cause i've never tried it. Thank you Jimbolauski.

    3. Re:say what? by SpammersAreScum · · Score: 1

      If you put items in your cart and then leave them there without purchasing, many sites have been known to email a discount offer a day or two later, to encourage you to complete the purchase. Sadly, Amazon and NewEgg don't.

    4. Re:say what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well they might not notify you depending on site but you may get a coupon in email of the same or similar product. I know new egg does it.

    5. Re:say what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Several times I have discovered, quite by accident, that if I put something in my cart and leave the site, I'll get an email the next day from the site containing a 10% off code, because they conclude that I must have looked at the total and gotten price shock.

      This tactic also works in real-world stores in parts of the world with negotiating cultures -- go to a small shop in Istanbul, spend several minutes looking at an item, then turn and walk out. There's a good chance the shopkeeper will call after you and offer some kind of a discount.

    6. Re:say what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      My company does this. If you put your items in the shopping cart and then leave them without buying, we have three email "triggers" that remind you those items are there. The first email just reminds you, the second offers a % discount, and the third offers a % discount + free shipping.

      Presumably, you have to have a registered account with working email address.

    7. Re:say what? by nevalaih · · Score: 1

      OP here. Decided to finally create an account. What i have noticed is that when i order something from myprotein.com I get an email after a couple of days saying something along the line of "hey, you might like these too" and/or a discount coupon. Annoys the hell out of me to receive the coupon _after_ i placed the order, and usually it's only valid for a short time (IIRC) so I never get to use them.

    8. Re:say what? by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --Amazon does this sometimes if you put things on your Wishlist. Much of the time though, they coupon/discount something you've already bought one of - which is kind of useless for high-dollar items, since you're not likely to buy another one any time soon unless it's a gift for someone else.

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  7. Steering? by Khyber · · Score: 0

    Displaying one price to a person while displaying a different price for a second person is what I would classify as false advertising.

    Especially if they're in the same area, shopping the same store. Being logged in or not should have zero effect on the price.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    1. Re:Steering? by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For each person, they're displaying a price at which they'll sell to that person.

      What part of this is "false"?

      Do you also consider frequent-buyer discounts, loyalty programs, and targeted electronic coupons to be "false advertising"?

    2. Re:Steering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you get the price that they advertise to you, how is it false? It's like offering cheaper drinks on ladies night. Just because you aren't part of what ever group that they offer a discount to, doesn't make it false advertising.

    3. Re:Steering? by MPBoulton · · Score: 1

      Sadly advertising and pricing are not required to be universal - as a retailer you aren't telling the person a lie about the price, you're just not telling them that you are likely to sell the item for more/less to the next customer. Whether this is a moral practice of course is an entirely different question.

    4. Re:Steering? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Well, what are the bounds of this before it becomes illegal?

      OK, you're a frequent customer, and I'm willing to give you a discount. Sure, fine.

      Now, imagine someone charges you 10% more because you're not white. That's obviously going to be pretty illegal, one would think.

      If the mechanism for this, or the fact that it's even happening isn't transparent, then it's fairly arbitrary.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    5. Re:Steering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no problem, as long as they disclose how they determined the price. "That person" has a way of violating the ADA and certain civil rights amendments. "Screen reader active in your browser? Higher price."

    6. Re:Steering? by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 1

      That's an interesting point. I think you'd have a hard time demonstrating discrimination against a protected class, though.

    7. Re:Steering? by MPBoulton · · Score: 1

      Agreed, but using your example I suspect that retailers will only charge some black people 10% more, along with some white people, based on their purchase history. This wouldn't be illegal. However as this area of marketing and price discrimination becomes more sophisticated and retailers have more data, I can see a future where, due to a few factors, a protected group would end up with universally higher prices from a store from a statistically significant sample. It is just a matter of time before someone does this experiment and retailers start squirming.

    8. Re:Steering? by CauseBy · · Score: 1

      "Do you also consider frequent-buyer discounts, loyalty programs, and targeted electronic coupons to be "false advertising"?"

      I don't know about false advertising but what I don't like about those programs is that they transfer money from my pocket to the pockets of people who I don't think deserve my money. They are a way for people who don't like to jump through hoops to subsidize the lifestyles of people who do like to jump through hoops.

      I try to avoid companies with those types of programs, but of course its hard. My best way is to use the local grocery store that doesn't have a card. Often it's simply impossible to both buy what I want and also not get burned by those programs.

      Any company that makes me feel like a chump is on my shit list and I try not to buy from them anymore. Bilking me for more money than your other customers is a top way to make me feel like a chump.

    9. Re:Steering? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      " It's like offering cheaper drinks on ladies night. Just because you aren't part of what ever group that they offer a discount to, doesn't make it false advertising."

      No, that makes it discrimination.

      Let's take two people and have them shop on the internet right next to each other so they can see the other persons screen. Same computer systems, same browser, same store. Everything is the same, down to having never bought anything from the store so there is no prior business relationship incentive in play. There is only one difference - one person is logged in, the other is not.

      They go to the same item. The person logged in is told $4.99. The person not logged in is told $6.99

      You can bet money the person not logged in, having no logically-based disadvantage versus the other person, is not going to be happy about that at all.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    10. Re:Steering? by pla · · Score: 1

      No, that makes it discrimination.

      Although most people don't realize this - Discrimination doesn't break the law, except when done against a very small list of federally protected groups.

      Giving senior citizen discounts? Cool. Giving non-senior discounts? Crime! "Ladies' night"? Kosher. "Mens' night"? Treif! Scholarships for blacks? Awesome! Scholarships for whites? You gonna get raped, son.

      Unless Amazon specifically has code in place to detect screen readers or "old people typing" or Christian-themed plugins, they can charge whatever the hell they want, moment by moment.

    11. Re:Steering? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      What part of this is "false"?

      Better yet, what part of that is "advertising"? They're not calling the product to your attention, they're telling you what the product you're already aware of costs.

    12. Re:Steering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although most people don't realize this - Discrimination doesn't break the law, except when done against a very small list of federally protected groups. [...] Unless Amazon specifically has code in place to detect screen readers or "old people typing" or Christian-themed plugins, they can charge whatever the hell they want, moment by moment.

      That's nice. I still have a right to complain about it.

    13. Re:Steering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not the same AC, but there is a difference between a "Ladies Night" drink special, and your online shopping cart example. Not arguing the rightness/wrongness of either, only that they are not comparable.

      With the "Ladies Night" example, the difference in price and the reason for it is right there in the open. I know full well that other people will pay less than me, and why, and that there is nothing I can do about it.

      With the online shopping cart example, I have no idea what I am paying relative to anyone else, no idea if I could do something differently to get a better price.

      Again, I am not arguing that one is right and the other wrong. I am simply saying that the two are not comparable.

    14. Re:Steering? by pla · · Score: 1

      That's nice. I still have a right to complain about it.

      Yes, you can. And they can discriminate against you for complaining about price discrimination. :)

    15. Re:Steering? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "Ladies' night"? Kosher

      Nope. State courts in California, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have ruled that ladies' night discounts are unlawful gender discrimination under state or local statutes.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    16. Re:Steering? by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      My best way is to use the local grocery store that doesn't have a card.

      if you want to save money on groceries just shop at Aldi's if there is one near you (there probably is if you live in the eastern US). cheaper than walmart by at least 25% and no shopping card needed.

      just make sure to bring a quarter for the cart unlocker and throw a few reusable bags in your car or scavenge any empty carboard trays off the shelves because they don't bag and you have to buy bags if you want them (6 cents no biggie)

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    17. Re:Steering? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      It depends upon how the price is presented. If the price presented is as being 'the price of the product' as in the price to all customers or the price of the product to that person. Obviously if you are not declaring that the price is not the product price to all customers but specific price to that person, that you are fraudulently misrepresenting the nature of that price and how it was achieved.

      The big lesson here, is when it is so easy to get a price on the internet don't get just one but get at least three from similarly reliable providers. Size of company is of course no measure of reliability as the modern trend of throwing as many lawyers as needed at unhappy customers to try to silence them as well as spending huge amounts on deceitful advertising to try drown out complaints that get past the lawyers, is now normal business tactic, ahh, the benefits of deregulation, 'NOT'.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    18. Re:Steering? by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      They are offering a product at a proposed cost. How is this not advertising?

  8. no one does anything. by nimbius · · Score: 4, Interesting

    'steering' exists in meatspace, and most consumers actively embrace it. Take the average supermarket. High value items are placed at the edges of the aisles so you'll see them first. floor tiles are set in different sized to influence your cadence and ultimately how long you spend in a particular section. the 'landing zone' of a supermarket features specially illuminated produce first, typically directly in the path of locomotion. loyaty cards belch coupons for related goods and services the grocery store wishes to 'move' that may be of a lower or higher price point. milk in the front of the store costs more than milk in the back, and its tagged and tracked through the payment system differently. Baskets are commonly difficult to find and carts have since 1970 increased 60% in size in order to induce the shopper to buy more.

    bars and resaraunts do this as well. by pricing well drinks closer or identically to call drinks, the bar discourages patrons with less income. happy hour is cheaper than saturday night, and cheaper still than valentines evening.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:no one does anything. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Giant Eagles (local chain) have actually started putting in smaller carts. Like, quarter the size of a regular one. I much prefer these ones to the bigger ones, though that is partially because their wheels haven't fallen apart yet.

    2. Re:no one does anything. by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 1

      milk in the front of the store costs more than milk in the back, and its tagged and tracked through the payment system differently.

      Where in the world are you shopping? At the only store I frequent (Kroger) with front-and-back milk displays, it's all the same brand, same packaging, same barcode. If the barcode is the same, there's no way for the checkout system to detect where it came from and alter the price.

      Now, I do notice that the milk they put up front is older (has an earlier expiration date). That just seems like sensible inventory management to me.

    3. Re:no one does anything. by NJRoadfan · · Score: 1

      Its a trap!

      The smaller carts are to force the basket-taking shoppers into taking something bigger.

  9. Nothing new by MPBoulton · · Score: 2

    This has been going on for a very long time, but those who have used Skyscanner (and found prices rise the more searches they run from their IP address) will know that deleting cookies alone isn't anywhere near enough. I have tested this myself years ago and had different prices for the same long haul flight on my PC using home router vs. mobile phone using cellular data. Rather than booking the flight over cellular data I waited a few days and the price on my PC returned to normal. Does anyone have any other ways (elaborate or otherwise) around this problem? Why is it fair that the IT illiterate have to pay a premium for goods?

    1. Re:Nothing new by RDW · · Score: 1

      Does anyone have any other ways (elaborate or otherwise) around this problem?

      Have you tried shopping behind 7 proxies..?

    2. Re:Nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you go through 9 proxies, they end up paying you!

    3. Re:Nothing new by Zynder · · Score: 1

      Only in Soviet Russia.

  10. um, BIG difference omitted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    we (wife/I) own three vehicles: an 08 Odyssey (kids), an 07 ES350 (her primary) & a 13 IS350C (my primary).

    if we go to a restaurant in my convertible instead of van & matre dei recommends the surf & turf special that's fine, if they add $20 to the "market price" b/c the valet tipped them off (& gets $5 kickback) that should be criminal! TFA sounds a lot more like the later...

    1. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 2

      Ok... fair enough, but why?

      Why should it be criminal? You use your knowledge of the marketplace to get the best deal you can. In your example, the business is using its knowledge of the marketplace to get the best deal it can.

      If you're suggesting that a business must sell at the same price to everyone, well, that has its own issues. Sounds simple, until you get into all the "what ifs".

    2. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem comes when choosing how to discriminate. Maybe a mexican business owner decides to charge $1000 for tacos to asians but $1 for mexicans. If any form of discrimination is legal then it could easily devolve to racism and other targeting that would be very difficult to prove. The business owner can claim to use some other method of discrimination.

    3. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by CauseBy · · Score: 1

      It should be illegal if most people don't like it. That's how laws improve society. Why should it be illegal to play loud music in populated areas during the night? For no other reason than that's what people prefer.

      I'm not convinced that this issue meets that threshold, but maybe it does.

    4. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      It should be illegal if most people don't like it.

      That alone shouldn't be enough...

      After all, if "most people" want to discriminate against a minority group, that should be ok, right?

      The idea is that the laws should protect everyone and not just turn into mob rule. Just because 51% of the people vote yes for something doesn't make it right.

      We had slavery in the US once, it was "legal". That doesn't make it "right".

    5. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a common interest in a working market. A working market requires informed participants, and to that end transparency isn't optional. At least in my country, restaurants for example are required to display the menu outside, and it has to list the prices. This is to avoid a situation where the patron only sees the prices when he's already in a situation where he feels obliged to order. This rule also prevents "upcharging". With online shopping becoming the norm for many items, it may be a good idea to make shops list prices independently of the individual customer (i.e. by uploading prices to a price registry).

    6. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by tsqr · · Score: 1

      He didn't say he hated anyone; he said he had experience with being discriminated against based on appearance-based assumptions. You seem to be suggesting that a moderately successful person should be OK with being gouged. Pretty screwed up, if you see a difference between "he looks rich, let's rip him off (he can probably afford it)" and "he looks poor, let's spit on him (he's probably used to it)."

    7. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by swb · · Score: 1

      We had slavery in the US once, it was "legal". That doesn't make it "right".

      As it turns out, "most people" didn't like competing against slave labor in the labor market or against giant slave-staffed plantations for farmland.

      It's cute that you think that slavery ended because the populace and the government felt high-minded and righteous about it.

    8. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Why should it be criminal? If you don't think the surf & turf is worth an extra $20, DON'T BUY IT. Gee, that was hard to solve.

    9. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by CauseBy · · Score: 1

      "After all, if "most people" want to discriminate against a minority group, that should be ok, right?"

      Every law discriminates against minority groups, so you'll need to be specific. For instance, laws against murder discriminate against the minority of people who ever murder.

      Anyway, whether a certain form of discrimination is "ok" is a value judgement. What I'm saying is that if most people want a law, then that's a good enough reason to have it. In America, we have different levels of what "most" means in different circumstances, but there is no law that can't be passed if enough-most people want it. And that is as it should be.

    10. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by CauseBy · · Score: 1

      I think you mistakenly replied to the wrong comment; it doesn't seem to be related to what I said. For instance, I never used the word "right", so any discussion of rightness and wrongness isn't related to my comment.

      Here, though, I'll reply to you: in a democracy legal action is legitimized by consensus. We can judge the consensus as good or bad, but sufficient consensus is what we require to take action. In America and many places we require a majority for most things and supermajorities of different sizes for some rare things. If a sufficient consensus wanted to return to slavery then you and I might agree that isn't "right" but that would be a legitimate democratic action.

      Luckily we don't need to equate every single law with "a return to slavery". A regulation which keeps prices consistent between customers might be good or bad but we can safely say that only a fucking moron would equate it to slavery.

    11. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every law discriminates against minority groups, so you'll need to be specific. For instance, laws against murder discriminate against the minority of people who ever murder.

      In this context within the US (since slavery in the US was used as an illustrative example), "minority" usually informally equates to "protected class". The set of recognized protected classes here does not include "potential murderers". Further, a narrower sense of the word "discriminate" applies in this context, in contrast with the generalized meaning of the word, as in "a discriminating collector of film memorabilia". I really should not have to argue those points, but I'll just assume you're not being intentionally obtuse.

      What I'm saying is that if most people want a law, then that's a good enough reason to have it...there is no law that can't be passed if enough-most people want it. And that is as it should be.

      I find this to be a fundamentally disturbing view, so much so that it is difficult to believe that this is not an exceptionally well-crafted troll. Perhaps the most common response would be to argue that your assertions are akin to support for "tyranny of the majority", but I'll try a different counter-argument.

      Can you accept the concept of an unjust law? If you cannot, then there is nothing more to discuss - you are on some level a broken human being, perhaps even an authoritarian or statist. However, if you accept that a law can be unjust, it is difficult to see how passage of such a law, by whatever majority or super-majority, can be rationally viewed as "that is as it should be". To be clear, reasonable people can disagree on what is unjust, or immoral, or unethical, and so on. But if you can agree that there are some concepts that nearly all would identify as being unjust (or immoral, etc.), the counter-argument stands with respect to that set of concepts generally held as such.

      In case you might respond that if nearly all hold a concept to be unjust, then no such law could pass, I'll provide a counter-example beforehand. Nearly all of us might agree that persons should not be imprisoned solely based on ethnicity. However, we might still pass a law that violates that for one specific group, say for example, the Japanese during WWII. (I'm aware that Japanese internment wasn't implemented in that way, but it's a familiar snippet of US history simplified into an example solely for this discussion.)

      - T

    12. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      That is NOT as it should be. Wrong is wrong, evil is evil, and no vote turns evil into good.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    13. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't want to express an opinion about the subject at hand. As has been said multiple times it's complicated. I would, however, like to point out your reading comprehension fail. Fly was responding to AC who did, in fact, mention a minority. Namely the elite rich. I mean we are always talking about how 80% of the world's wealth is controlled by the 1% right? Minority doesn't always imply what you think it does.

    14. Re:um, BIG difference omitted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then I'm screwed up. I see taking money from someone and insulting the other. Insults are free. Money is not. You can sit here all day and call me a dirty nigger but don't dare take my hard earned paycheck.

  11. shouldnt this be illegal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how is this differant than a physical store charging differant prices based on physical trates like skin color or gender? They are discriminating against people who arent savvy enough to game the system...seems shadey at best and pretty illegal to be honest.

    1. Re:shouldnt this be illegal? by quetwo · · Score: 2

      Because they aren't changing the price based on skin color, disability, or any of the other protected classes. They are doing it to non-protected classes of people, which is which swell and dandy -- according to the law.

    2. Re:shouldnt this be illegal? by dunkindave · · Score: 1

      It is more like a food chain charging a higher price for food in an airport or across from the sports stadium than they do at their general locations. They are using market information to adjust prices in order to maximize profit - exactly what a business is expected to do. In this case, they are using information they have about the consumer, such as previous buying decisions to gauge desire, and adjusting the offered price in an attempt to maximize the sale price. Legally, as long as they do not knowingly use information regarding a protected class as a criteria then they aren't breaking any laws (using where the person/connection is coming from, say a rich area versus a poor area, is still debatable if it is legal - some precedent says yes and some says no). Many or most people still feel these practices are shady.

    3. Re:shouldnt this be illegal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, they could arguably fall foul of some disability discrimination laws - e.g.
      - Different prices are based on PC vs Mac vs Tablet, or on browser type, and (e.g.) blind people mostly use a particular browser type, or use PCs more than Macs (or vice-versa) or use tablets more or less, because of which has the best screen reader support etc.

      This is *indirect* not *direct* discrimination - but none the less *some* but not *all* disability discrimination laws explicitly forbid it.
      In those jurisdictions you would need to typically show some reasonable evidence that the price discrimination by browser/hardware/whatever *does* affect protected classes disproportionately (even if not uniformly) - and then you would typically win your case.

    4. Re:shouldnt this be illegal? by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      But there is still the disparate impact of their actions even if entirely unintentional which could make this practice illegal.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    5. Re:shouldnt this be illegal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      how is this *differant* than a physical store charging *differant* prices based on physical *trates* like skin color or gender? They are discriminating against people who *arent* savvy enough to game the system...seems *shadey* at best and pretty illegal to be honest.

      What should be illegal are your poor English skills. Your teachers should be brought up on charges.

    6. Re:shouldnt this be illegal? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Metadata, baby! Once they geolocate you they will presume much about your skin color, age, etc.

      A guy from the Gold Coast will see different prices than a guy on the South Side.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    7. Re:shouldnt this be illegal? by quetwo · · Score: 1

      You would need to prove that 80% of those discriminated against were of a particular protected class. There is no way you could do this.

      There is case law (I don't remember the particular case name, sorry), where a city had to close down a sidewalk in front of a school for a month for road construction. A person in a wheel chair sued the city because they were unable to reach the handicap ramp in the front of the building (but they were still able to get to the zero-barrier entrance on the side of the building). Since the city didn't go out of their way to discriminate against a particular class of people (they inconvenienced everybody), they didn't win the case. Now, had they only shut down the sidewalk immediately in front of the ramp, the results would have been different.

    8. Re:shouldnt this be illegal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is more like a food chain charging a higher price for food in an airport or across from the sports stadium than they do at their general locations.

      No, it isn't. In your example, the location of the store changes. In the online world, the store is always in the same place. I simply got to it via a different route.

  12. Comparison shopping is the only way by timeOday · · Score: 3, Insightful
    If you want a good price, you generally have to work for it, which means looking around, and waiting. Little tricks like deleting your cookies will never make a dent - how do you know they didn't decide last night to start charging "nobodies" more?

    Markets keep getting more and more efficient, and that means there are fewer and fewer "tricks," by which I mean consistently getting a better price without working at it.

    None of which is to say you "ought" to work for lower prices - how much is your time worth? You could almost always save another dime by waiting and looking more. Just check a few different products at a few different sites, and you will do OK. Don't settle into a rut, like "oh I have Amazon Prime so I just get everything from them," unless the convenience is worth getting milked.

    1. Re:Comparison shopping is the only way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially with Amazon Prime. Almost all of the Prime items I've seen are more expensive than the non-Prime versions of the same thing. Normally the difference is close to what the actual shipping costs would be. Those fucking bastards (why are bastards fucking an insult?).

  13. Instead by Charliemopps · · Score: 5, Funny

    Instead, how about we just fix the problem outright....

    Setup 3 computers.
    1 with a white guy
    1 with a black guy
    1 with a woman

    make sure the appropriate people are logged in, not logged in, have cookies, etc...

    Show the price differences.
    Snap a picture, smiling white guy, sad black guy and woman...
    Post it to twitter and let the general public make their usual incorrect inference.

    Watch the hilarity ensue and the entire idea of variable pricing die in fire.

    1. Re:Instead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I took your advice, but as I was alone at home, I had to approach the matter in a different way. First, I took a smiling selfie of myself at the computer with a low price option. Then I dressed in drag and took another selfie at the computer with a higher price showing. Finally, I blacked up and took a selfie with the highest offered price showing. However, for some reason posting these images to Twitter did result in public outrage, but not directed at the website!

    2. Re:Instead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is modded funny? How about informative? Your typical liberal internet dweller with no job (because of "the man, dude") and too much free time will spend hours reposting and being outraged. It will get posted to reddit and upvoted to the top. Then, the real media, who just scan reddit for stories, will pick this up because the new liberal media mantra is "if it is an injustice to a minority, it leads".

    3. Re:Instead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. This isn't limited to "liberals". There are a ton of "conservative" blogs railing against the sins of government and perpetuating the image of a do-nothing liberal. Evidently you visit those sites often.

  14. No Haggle ! by redelm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This looks like the electronic equivalent of haggling in a shop [bazaar]. Contrast this with the [anglo] best-price, take-it-or-leave it across multiple competitors. As a consumer, I vastly prefer the latter. As a seller I might prefer haggling (tied customers), but only if I have power when I buy (often I'm as tied).

    A consumer negotiating with a seller is a grand delusion. The seller knows far more about their costs and market demand than you ever can. They spend their careers at it. All you can do is walk away, hopefully there are competitors. IMHO, this is the great different between First- and Third-World economies -- competition in the former, and very-restricted (cronyism) in the latter.

    So I stay away from anything that looks like haggling (even MiR). That is my only choice.

    1. Re:No Haggle ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All about that price, 'bout that price, no haggle.

    2. Re:No Haggle ! by CauseBy · · Score: 1

      Well done. Here's the reference for anyone who doesn't get it.

    3. Re:No Haggle ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look, dude, if anyone doesn't get it, they don't want to watch a music video to figure it out.

      How many people do you think don't know about the #1 song on the Billboard 100? Maybe you should post the #2 or #3 song too? In case people haven't heard them.

    4. Re:No Haggle ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... he said, on a site full of nerds who never leave the basement.

    5. Re:No Haggle ! by joe_frisch · · Score: 1

      Agreed, and the problem with haggling is that it takes time. If I buy a $300 piece of electronics, it is not efficient for me to spend $100 of my time to reduce the price by $50. Unfortunately if it is possible to track individual purchasers habits, vendors can continue to increase the prices those consumers see until they are essentially forced to waste time price comparing.

      Of course it won't be an "increase", Instead the "list" price will be $1000, and people will get varying discounts depending on how much price comparing they do. People who compare a lot, must not value their own time, and are more likely to only accept a low price. People who don't compare probably place a high value on their time and are willing to pay more.

      This has the positive effect of effectively reducing wealth disparity, but the very large negative effect of providing an incentive for people to spend a large amount of time in a non-productive activity (price comparing). Its great for vendors, but bad for the overall efficiency of the economy.

    6. Re:No Haggle ! by Zynder · · Score: 1

      That haggling is the worst thing I hate about car shopping. When is a dealer going to start selling cars where I don't need to haggle?

    7. Re:No Haggle ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CarMax is a no-haggle dealership with 120+ locations. My experience buying from them was painless and quick. Their service (repairs) wasn't so great, but I imagine that can vary wildly by location. No BS haggling is company policy at all of their locations though.

    8. Re:No Haggle ! by Antonovich · · Score: 1

      Hear, hear! Never heard that song and never heard of the singer. Not only do not all of us live in an Anglo-Saxon country but I'd venture that a lot of us neither watch MTV nor listen to commercial radio (at least the kind that plays "modern" music). I just looked up the Billboard 100 and I recognised 11 of the artists - half of those I have only heard of and couldn't name a song, though I've no doubt heard some of the artists whilst waiting in line somewhere. And hearing a pop song every 6 months or so is nice - it keeps one in touch with the youngin's

  15. Prices change based on how you get there by dunkindave · · Score: 4, Interesting

    An example of this price-adjusting practice is when we needed to order an advertising banner for my wife's business. I did a little Google searching and found halfpricebanners.com had what we wanted at a good price so we used them. A couple months latter we needed another banner so I went to their website and was surprised by the price it quoted for exactly the same kind of banner - about double as before. Being the Internet nerd I am, I surmised something was going on so I went back to Google and did the same kind of search I had done before which again produced their link. Sure enough, if I go to their site from Google (not just from their ad, even the organic listing) then their prices are half of what is offered to people who go straight to their website. From then on we always used Google first to get the "Google discount".

    1. Re:Prices change based on how you get there by CauseBy · · Score: 1

      I've been in similar situations. Legality aside, I don't like that practice and a handful of times I've taken the time to email the company and tell them why I decided to use their competitor. Sometimes it has cost me a small or medium amount of money, but I wouldn't let my feelings cost me a large amount of money.

      The question I leave you with is, why don't you think you'd get an even better price by going through Lycos or HotBot? Personally I feel like a chump when I realize I'm being charged more for the same product, and I try not to transact with people who make me feel like a chump.

    2. Re:Prices change based on how you get there by rsborg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      An example of this price-adjusting practice is when we needed to order an advertising banner for my wife's business. I did a little Google searching and found halfpricebanners.com had what we wanted at a good price so we used them. A couple months latter we needed another banner so I went to their website and was surprised by the price it quoted for exactly the same kind of banner - about double as before. Being the Internet nerd I am, I surmised something was going on so I went back to Google and did the same kind of search I had done before which again produced their link. Sure enough, if I go to their site from Google (not just from their ad, even the organic listing) then their prices are half of what is offered to people who go straight to their website. From then on we always used Google first to get the "Google discount".

      See, that's what gets me - the situation should be reversed - if you're a loyal customer you should be paying the same or less. The store should invest in upselling the loyal customer on upgrades or volume purchases, but double price for the same item just because you are using their site - that's just rude.

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    3. Re:Prices change based on how you get there by dunkindave · · Score: 1

      See, that's what gets me - the situation should be reversed - if you're a loyal customer you should be paying the same or less. The store should invest in upselling the loyal customer on upgrades or volume purchases, but double price for the same item just because you are using their site - that's just rude.

      I think what they are trying to do is the same way many companies use a low first-time rate to try to entice people to try their product so they get to know it with the hope that they will then become a loyal customer (and paying full price). This company is assuming that if you got there from a Google search, then you are shopping and they want to introduce themselves. The problem here is twofold. First, they don't let you know that you are getting a special first-time deal so you get massive sticker shock when you come back. Second, if you figure it out and come back through Google you get the same half-off discount again so it negates the "first time is discounted" philosophy, namely they did the implementation badly, and it make it seem like they are trying to gouge their repeat customers (which maybe they are).

      Either way, when people find out that the price is higher if they use their cell phone versus their computer, or use Safari versus IE, or use a Mac versus Windows, or search for a more expensive version then search for a cheaper one versus the other way, it makes people feel victimized and cheated. The reality is people have always been pawns to be used and manipulated by businesses, it is just that when you catch them doing it it makes you angry.

    4. Re:Prices change based on how you get there by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 1

      Loyal customers don't use halfpricebanners.com. Their market is 100% based on price. The low price from Google is probably below cost.

    5. Re:Prices change based on how you get there by s0nicfreak · · Score: 1

      This only works if your average customer is buying enough to make giving them deals worth it. Most small businesses probably don't need enough banners to make it worth it.

    6. Re:Prices change based on how you get there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a loyal customer, so they needn't gifts or discounts to catch your eye, they already got you.
      Solution: Don't be loyal, always compare prizes.

      Trusting is a common and very useful behavior. When you trust, you save a lot of time for double-checking. So we search for trustworthy relations for not having to double-check every movement. As everybody (more o less) wants the same there is certain reciprocity.

      The problem is that a company is not human being. They needn't to be loyal to you and they won't. They are not a small shop run by human. Think of them as psychopaths. Forget any fair behavior from them. Don't get misled by advertising with smiles faces or donations to X. They don't care, they are a blind machine for making money.

  16. Home Depot backfired if that's the case by magarity · · Score: 2

    At a HD I asked for something that I couldn't find and the employee said it was online only. I checked it with my phone and compared to Amazon. Right there in their store I ordered if from Amazon due to lower price. If HD is charging mobile users more, I suspect I'm not the only shopper who takes a few seconds to compare elsewhere.

    1. Re:Home Depot backfired if that's the case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that I can reject the product if it isn't what I thought I ordered, or even bring it back to the local HD for a refund if I don't like it. Amazon involves shipping, fees, and waiting for the credit to appear.

    2. Re:Home Depot backfired if that's the case by rsborg · · Score: 2

      Except that I can reject the product if it isn't what I thought I ordered, or even bring it back to the local HD for a refund if I don't like it. Amazon involves shipping, fees, and waiting for the credit to appear.

      Not a big fan of Amazon, but it's often a bigger pain to bring an item back to a physical store. Their return process is pretty streamlined and trouble-free. I haven't had fees on returned items and they credit the account very quickly.

      I've since moved on to Google Shopping express as my go-to for whatever I can find there first, but I definitely prefer Amazon over Home Depot.

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  17. Possibly Flawed Study by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The price difference may be due to supply and demand. I've noticed several times that right after buying something online, the price will change within the same day. Example; bought some items at amazon and the price dropped a couple bucks right after the purchase was made and before it was shipped. This has happened several times, and the price change for the same item was across all suppliers at amazon.

  18. Time for a Firefox plugin ? by Alain+Williams · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How difficult would it be for a firefox plugin to alter HTML headers like HTTP_USER_AGENT & HTTP_REFERER to convince the sales site that you are a poor student ? The on-line sites will howl - but if it is OK for them to profile to charge me more, then I believe that it is OK for me to game them.

    1. Re:Time for a Firefox plugin ? by Falos · · Score: 1

      They'll howl posturingly. They'll make noise about "deceptive user practices" (to say nothing of their own) but won't really care about whatever small fraction of savvy people are doing it.

      Well, as long as it requires enough savvy. If it becomes extremely easy or automated, they'll start putting actual resources behind the noise.

      Tweak a couple of words and the above two paragraphs become "same shit new day" about ignoring the clever few who dodge the suckertraps.

    2. Re:Time for a Firefox plugin ? by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      might finally see some momentum against online tracking when people realize it can be used to rip them off.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  19. Metashopper in 3... 2... 1... by ZipK · · Score: 2

    How long until someone offers a service that explores multiple paths to a particular item (mobile, customer, non-customer, cleared cookies, items-in-cart, etc.) at a particular retailer and provides the best price?

    1. Re:Metashopper in 3... 2... 1... by bazorg · · Score: 2

      A quick search in the Firefox Add-on collection shows this guy here: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

      I haven't tried it yet, but on their marketing blurb says that "users of X, y, z.... should try PriceBlink". This suggest to me that there's already quite a few add-ons that work for shoppers. Time to give them all a try!

    2. Re:Metashopper in 3... 2... 1... by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 1

      Meh just forge your cookie and set your own price.

  20. train ticket pricing in France by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A few months ago there were reports of how the website from the French rail company was increasing the price of the ticket in your basket to make you feel you had to buy before it would increase even more.

  21. poor farmer by ram+balak+sah · · Score: 0

    mode, putting the items in your shopping cart without buying them right away, and using tools like Camelcamelcamel to keep an eye out for pric webdesigne www.yoginetindia.com

  22. Metashopper in 3... 2... 1... by ram+balak+sah · · Score: 1

    you have to buy a car web site

  23. ghhhhhhhhh by ram+balak+sah · · Score: 1

    But when

  24. PrefBar! by antdude · · Score: 1

    http://prefbar.tuxfamily.org/ could do that. ;)

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  25. No biggie, ya right! by Zynder · · Score: 1

    If that 6 cents were no biggie, then why does Aldi make you pay it? If that quarter for the buggies were no biggie then why do they make you pay it? Is it going to be a biggie when they start making you pay for a cashier instead of using a self checkout? I bet you didn't think your friendly Aldi tip was going to turn in to such a biggie huh? :)

    1. Re:No biggie, ya right! by ultranova · · Score: 1

      If that 6 cents were no biggie, then why does Aldi make you pay it?

      6 cents is no biggie. 6 cents * n customers is. Furthermore, why should those who who bring their own bags subsidize those who don't?

      If that quarter for the buggies were no biggie then why do they make you pay it?

      Most likely it's not a payment but a safety deposit: put the buggie where you got it and you get your quarter back. It's a pretty effective way of making people clean up after themselves.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    2. Re:No biggie, ya right! by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      yea you get it back when you return the cart, never any carts in the lot.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  26. Amazon Prime and the Fucking Bastard by Zynder · · Score: 1

    You're right about the price being about the same but what you failed to remember is that I'll get it in 2 days. When you go with a non-Prime vendor, you might get it in 2 days, but it'll probably be 3 or 4 depending on the USPS. What I've noticed quite often is a shipping charge (even free) usually means it's coming from China so you're going to wait much longer. I've even bought an item that was Prime and had it replaced with a shipped from China version which I promptly called Amazon about and made them refund me the purchase. Even if you and timeOday believe I'm getting milked, I can still get a 24pack of toilet paper cheaper on Prime than going to Walmart, so that is one hell of a milking I'm getting, lol.

    Now about bastards who fuck: The following statement is a hypothesis and only an hypothesis based on semi-solid rectal science. The author does not believe he is better than a bastard. Reader discretion is advised!
    Being called a bastard is supposed to be an insult spouted off by those who think they are more righteous and better than you. One typically insults a lesser person to make themselves feel better but most importantly to remind said lesser that they are scum, will always be scum, and should wallow in their misery. So the premise is that a bastard should be unhappy. You know what makes me happy? Fucking. So you see, two bastards fucking are probably enjoying themselves and we just can't have that can we? Better to remind them that their mother's were whores and they need to get back to the self loathing as soon as possible.

  27. I should have patented when I had the chance! by BillX · · Score: 1

    Counter-predatory-pricing botnets: It's only a matter of time.

    --
    Caveat Emptor is not a business model.
  28. Camelcamelcamel by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    How does Camelcamelcamale avoid itself being fooled by the same tactics described here?