4 ms·

They are naming different prices for different people. You walk into a bar and the guy in front of you orders a beer for $5. Looks good, so you order the same

They are naming different prices for different people. You walk into a bar and the guy in front of you orders a beer for $5. Looks good, so you order the same thing. The bartender says, "For you it's $10." Do you feel fairly treated?

paxys 5y ago
This is already happening for literally everything that you buy. And no, I don't care whether someone else paid less or more than me for something or got it for free. If I don't think the price is fair then I'll say no and move on.
abraham 5y ago
They aren't charging people different amounts, they're testing waitlist signup interest at different amounts. Presumably once they gauge interest a single level will be applied to everyone.
- gilrain 5y ago
  In the mean time, people are being charged different amounts. They are literally charging different people different amounts. You might think that isn't a big deal, but how can you insist it isn't the case?
  - whelming_wave 5y ago
    How can I sign up for a subscription, then? I seem to have missed it on the page.
  - edu 5y ago
    They're are not charging anything to anybody yet, you can get in the waitlist and answer a survey which explicitly asks if you think the price is to high, fair or to low. Moreover next to the price there's a disclaimer that the "Price is subject to change". To me it seems that they're just running an experiment to determine what's the price they should put to the service, which seems smart and correct.
clusterfish 5y ago
Except you're not ordering anything here,just looking at an ad mentioning the expected price, subject to change.
moosebear847 5y ago
If you sold ice cream on the street and needed to figure out how to become profitable, would you be so opposed to trying out selling at $5 one day and $7 the next? Or would this be too unfair to the people that paid $5? It's the intent I guess. The bartender story seems to imply a bad reason for the discrepancy (some type of unfair discrimination), while in this case it's to find out if you can charge more to eg capture back more of the value people are getting from you. Which doesn't seem so bad.
- webmaven 5y ago
  Testing different prices on different days doesn't give you as much confidence (price sensitivity can vary by day of the week, weather, etc.). Then there are tests that would be hard to run even on different days, like doubling your nominal price and splashing a "today only 50% off" or "buy one get one free" offer. Real-world price testing is so much harder to pull off, it isn't as common, which is part of the reason web A/B tests seem jarring when the curtain is pulled back.
- nly 5y ago
  You have the benefit with ice cream of a functioning market. You can look at hundreds of competitors across similar towns with a little research

paxys 5y ago

This is already happening for literally everything that you buy. And no, I don't care whether someone else paid less or more than me for something or got it for free. If I don't think the price is fair then I'll say no and move on.

abraham 5y ago

They aren't charging people different amounts, they're testing waitlist signup interest at different amounts. Presumably once they gauge interest a single level will be applied to everyone.

gilrain 5y ago
In the mean time, people are being charged different amounts. They are literally charging different people different amounts. You might think that isn't a big deal, but how can you insist it isn't the case?
- whelming_wave 5y ago
  How can I sign up for a subscription, then? I seem to have missed it on the page.
- edu 5y ago
  They're are not charging anything to anybody yet, you can get in the waitlist and answer a survey which explicitly asks if you think the price is to high, fair or to low. Moreover next to the price there's a disclaimer that the "Price is subject to change". To me it seems that they're just running an experiment to determine what's the price they should put to the service, which seems smart and correct.

clusterfish 5y ago

Except you're not ordering anything here,just looking at an ad mentioning the expected price, subject to change.

moosebear847 5y ago

If you sold ice cream on the street and needed to figure out how to become profitable, would you be so opposed to trying out selling at $5 one day and $7 the next? Or would this be too unfair to the people that paid $5? It's the intent I guess. The bartender story seems to imply a bad reason for the discrepancy (some type of unfair discrimination), while in this case it's to find out if you can charge more to eg capture back more of the value people are getting from you. Which doesn't seem so bad.

webmaven 5y ago
Testing different prices on different days doesn't give you as much confidence (price sensitivity can vary by day of the week, weather, etc.). Then there are tests that would be hard to run even on different days, like doubling your nominal price and splashing a "today only 50% off" or "buy one get one free" offer. Real-world price testing is so much harder to pull off, it isn't as common, which is part of the reason web A/B tests seem jarring when the curtain is pulled back.
nly 5y ago
You have the benefit with ice cream of a functioning market. You can look at hundreds of competitors across similar towns with a little research