Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How 'Grinch Bots' Are Ruining Online Christmas Shopping (nypost.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the stealing-Christmas dept.

Yes, U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer actually called them "Grinch bots." From the New York Post: The senator said as soon as a retailer puts a hard-to-get toy -- like Barbie's Dreamhouse or Nintendo game systems -- for sale on a website, a bot can snatch it up even before a kid's parents finish entering their credit card information... "Bots come in and buy up all the toys and then charge ludicrous prices amidst the holiday shopping bustle," the New York Democrat said on Sunday... For example, Schumer said, the popular Fingerlings -- a set of interactive baby monkey figurines that usually sell for around $15 -- are being snagged by the scalping software and resold on secondary websites for as much as $1,000 a pop...

In December 2016, Congress passed the Better Online Ticket Sales (BOTS) Act, which Schumer sponsored, to crack down on their use to buy concert tickets, but the measure doesn't apply to other consumer products. He wants that law expanded but knows that won't happen in time for this holiday season. In the meantime, Schumer wants the National Retail Federation and the Retail Industry Leaders Association to block the bots and lead the effort to stop them from buying toys at fair retail prices and then reselling them at outrageous markups.

10 of 283 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah.... but.... by gfxguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The shoppers are idiots, and they largely get what they deserve - anyone paying more than retail is exacerbating the problem, but god forbid your child doesn't get the latest gadget for Christmas. Anyone who has paid more than retail for a gaming system, or anything else that will eventually be available for the retail cost, is NOT A VICTIM, they are the PROBLEM.

    --
    Stupid sexy Flanders.
    1. Re:Yeah.... but.... by msauve · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Spoken like a non-parent. Look its fine to say all that but the problem comes when Tiny Tim..."

      As a former parent of small children, it's fine to teach them about advertising and fads. If they still want X in a year, fine, otherwise there's a life lesson about marketing, peer pressure, and temporality to be taught, which is far more valuable than a Cabbage Patch doll or Pet Rock.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    2. Re:Yeah.... but.... by antifoidulus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They actually are creating problems not only for consumers but for manufacturers and retail outlets as well. I think a lot of people are missing the asymmetric risk aspect of what these things are doing. Most retail outlets have relatively generous return policies meaning that bots buying up tons of these items assume almost no risk, if they can't scalp them they simply return them for a full refund.

      Meanwhile retail outlets and especially manufacturers are stuck in a shitty situation. They can order/produce more to meet "demand"(even though the bots may still be able to sap up all the supply) but if they overshoot they simply cannot return the "unused" product for a full refund, they have to sit on the unsold inventory until it sells(if it does).

      --
      Monstar L
    3. Re:Yeah.... but.... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There are plenty of solutions to these problems that do not require new federal laws.

      1. They could change return policies on an item-by-item basis. Plenty of websites already do this.
      2. They could require that scarce items be ordered as part of a larger order with a minimum purchase amount.
      3. They could only display scarce items to online customers that have a qualified ordering history.
      4. They could limit how many scarce items can be ordered by shipping address.
      5. They could charge higher prices, and then adjust those prices downward on a daily or hourly basis until the inventory is cleared.

      None of these solutions require help from Chuck Schumer.

    4. Re:Yeah.... but.... by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Democrats like Chuck Schumer are the reason that Trump will be reelected.

      I suspect you overestimate voters. They don't like all big important but abstract talk like deficit, climate change, or net neutrality. Most have only the dimmest of understanding what that is and prefer politicians tackle "real problems" like the pothole out front.

      "Those damn hackers are ruining christmas!" is totally something that will appeal to useful idiots.

      FFS, the republican side isn't running on real solutions to real problems either. "War on Christmas" resonates deeply with a lot of Trump voters, and there is (much to my dismay) no war on Christmas.

  2. Color me cynical but by Snotnose · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have to wonder who wrote Schumer's BOTS act. cuz you know damned well neither he nor his staff don't understand the issue, let alone legislate it. It was written by lobbyists who paid the most the Chucky's attention.

  3. Better idea... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's try something novel - if you can't find it in stores, just don't buy it.

    Trust me, your little darlings aren't going to be scarred for life.

    And even better, the so-called Grinch-bots will then be left holding the toys when noone is willing to pay $1K price tags for a $15 toy....

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    1. Re:Better idea... by Nutria · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Trust me, your little darlings aren't going to be scarred for life.

      A metric fuck-load of people need to learn this.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  4. Re:Arbitrage by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem is, it's an artificial scarcity. It's not as if our industrial capacity is maxed out, it's just that demand if focused on a small part of the year and re-tooling takes time.

    Compounding that, it only takes a few kooks willing to pay those crazy prices to make the venture pay for the scalpers. A lot of product gets left on the shelf even in the midst of huge demand. That is, an inefficient market.

  5. Perhaps We Should Give This a Little More Thought by Hercules+Peanut · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I sympathize with many of you who are concerned about free market manipulation and the relative unimportant nature of toy sales. Your not wrong. When it comes to toys for children, we can solve this "problem" with a little wisdom and self control.

    However, let's look at this like technology people (slashdot, right?). Toys today could be something else tomorrow?

    Those mandatory for school TI calculators?
    Chemicals necessary to produce certain kinds of 3D print material used in every household?
    Important drugs that are hard to produce?
    Preparation H?!? (Hey,when you need it and it is not there, then you will understand)

    I'm not sure if this is possible today, but when I think about how the market has changed over the past 10 or 20 years and imagine how it might change over the next 10 or 20, I'm not sure this "abuse" is going to be limited to rich people and their spoiled children's toy fetishes. When I combine a little imagination with the history of technology and its evolution, this practice makes me a little nervous.

    I don't know if Schumer has thought about this or even cares, but shouldn't we give it a little more thought before discounting this out of hand?

    How could bots disrupt the free market and legitimately hurt people by limiting access to stuff?