3 ms·
Agreed, however thats a poor example. Your purchases are tracked via loyalty programs, which you are compensated for with a reduced price on goods.
by imwillofficial 6y ago
Agreed, however thats a poor example. Your purchases are tracked via loyalty programs, which you are compensated for with a reduced price on goods.
- hedora 6y agoBut, they hiked prices when the loyalty programs started in my area. At the very least, there’s a moral hazard of double dipping (charge normal margins for loyalty card users, double margins for everyone else).
- shalmanese 6y agoYou don't have access to the alternate universe where they didn't introduce a loyalty program to compare prices. Grocery prices go up naturally due to inflation so it's impossible to disentangle. Groceries are also one of the most price sensitive items people buy and grocery stores run on incredibly thin margins so it's dubious to believe that a grocery story has much control over their pricing, independant of a loyalty card. If they could raise prices after the introduction of a card to increase total profits, why couldn't they have done it before then? Far more likely is that they're using the extra revenue from the card to lower prices for you and gain market share from their competitors but the lower prices are swallowed up by general price increases.
- jsnell 6y agoPeople who don't sign up loyalty programs and other similar schemes have shown that they aren't price sensitive. They're the ideal segment to fleece via price discrimination.
- whimsicalism 6y agoI don't understand why that makes it a poor example?
- imwillofficial 6y agoThe original comment I was referring to mentioned that paying for a service does not free you from tracking, and used groceries as an example. That is a poor example because you are being compensated for your opting in to tracking. A better example would be something you pay for, and you’re still tracked with no compensation. Does that answer your question?