Hasn’t the travel, cruise and holiday industry been doing this for decades now?
Most companies that sell products do this in some form. The only thing that’s secret about it is the particular process and code, since that’s confidential company info.
A few years ago I remember speaking with a Walmart GM about this sort of thing, and they mentioned how their site in their region would receive price updates after their volume, revenue, staffing, supply chain logistics to their site, etc., were analyzed. Admittedly, I don’t know if they had real analysts or machine learning, or a mix of the two (likely both, since it was 5 or 6 years ago).
A key point to this is that most businesses selling things buy most of their products from suppliers, who have their own pricing mechanisms - which causes downstream businesses to adjust accordingly.
We’ll see it down to the minute in B&M storefronts soon as well. The local Superstore and Walmart already have digital price tags on shelves. Milk could go up $0.50/L between the time you grab it off the shelf and then finish shopping to hit the checkout.
A bunch of people buying cookies? Oh, better raise that price by $1.50/box
That sounds extremely problematic for consumers when the price can be change so easily. I would be hesitant to buy anything from there knowing that I may spend a lot more money from picking the item of the shelf and the cash register.
I have a feeling that wouldn’t be legal.
When I had to change price tickets, from memory, the lower prices went into effect that morning, but any price increases wouldn’t go into effect until the next day?
The customer always receives the lower price, and I didn’t get screamed at when I hopped back on the cash register.
It’s generally not illegal to raise your prices or set your prices at what your competitors are charging. There are variety of factors that influence a price of an item.
The issue is that the FTC is alleging that the algorithm artificially boosted prices and keeping the prices that high when competitors matched the price.
While it’s not outright collusion on price fixing, it does reek of using monopolistic practices to fatten the bottom line.
I really can’t believe its legal to charge more or less based on a customers location, or probably other data about us. This seems like such a fucking problem.
According to the Journal, Nessie would inflate prices and monitor whether other retailers, like Target, would follow suit. If the competing retailers maintained the lower price, the algorithm would automatically revert Amazon’s to its normal price.
Isn’t this how retail pricing always works?
Price fixing is when sellers conspire to increase prices beyond what normal competition would support. The fact that the algorithm reduces the price below competitors’ when it detects they are not following a corresponding increase means it’s not price fixing.
what normal competition would support.
Maybe it’s the overall price of something else that’s not shown
Tech Giants Settle Wage-Fixing Lawsuit
That did happen.
What’s perceived as competitors can be allies to accomplish common goals. Though they settled the lawsuit, it’s not like this got put out of practice. They refined it
What happens when another retailer runs the same algorith? One tests the waters with a price hike, the other sees it and matches. The first detects the corresponding increase and maintains the increased price. Rise repeat.
I’m other words, this could be price fixing because making a temporary increase and seeing if competitors will match the increase is sending a signal to competitors that Amazon is willing to increase price if others match. The fact that they revert to a lower price doesn’t absolve them from price fixing, it just means the negotiation to collude failed.
The fact that the only factor in play is whether the competitors also increase price makes it blatantly obvious that the increase has nothing to do with supply and demand.
I don’t think you understand what price fixing is. Adjusting prices to market competition is not price fixing. This same concept can also lower prices if another vendor is selling the same item for less.
For instance, Amazon frequently will lower prices to match chewy and Walmart
I don’t think you understand what’s happening. Amazon’s algorithm is not just increasing price to match competitors. They are temporarily increasing price beyond competitors to see if competitors will also increase their price. This is different because there is no original market force impetus for the price increase, they are just seeing if both they and a competitor can coordinate to make a permanent price increase.
Arbitrarily interesting a price to see if you’re competitors will also increase is not adjusting to market competition. It’s testing the waters for colluding on price. It’s literally sending a signal that Amazon is willing to increase if others will match. Whether the agreement is made in secret or done in public using “plausibly deniable” price increases makes no difference.
Only issue is the automated fashion in which it’s done. It means they can easily push prices up and up and up to extract every last penny they can from buyers.
Greed is no longer something that you have to work at, if you have a desire to fuck people over you’re just a button away from doing it.
Meanwhile secret algorithm: price *= 1.1
Scamazon