13 ms·
> Unfortunately, the business logic underlying much of this personalization remains a mystery. Price discrimination appears, at first glance, to be about maxim
by lorddoig 12y ago
> Unfortunately, the business logic underlying much of this personalization remains a mystery.
Price discrimination appears, at first glance, to be about maximising profit, but really it's about clearing the market.
Say you're a cinema, and you set your list price for a ticket at £10. 20 adults show up and buy the tickets and are happy. Then 10 students show up, scoff, and go home - they weren't willing to go above £7. The market has not cleared: you'd be happier with £70 from them than the nothing you've got, and the students would be happier being £70 worse off but having seen the film. Neither party got what they wanted, no trade occurred, and no economic value was created.
The situation could be improved so that everybody gets what they want without harming anybody else: set a student rate at £7. Students get to see the films and your cinema makes more money - everyone is as happy as they could be.
In this example, the criteria for price discrimination is discovered by intuition, existing knowledge of students, maybe surveys. But even this isn't ideal - what about that one really tight student who buys pasta in 20kg bags and who values a trip to the cinema at £4? Ideally you want their £4 and they want to see the film - but how to cater for them without shooting yourself in the foot by making the student price £4 across the board?
Until the advent of the internet and fancy algorithms that could at least try to understand you, you couldn't. But today maybe we can.
Everyone has their own "true" valuation for a given product (not how much they think it should be worth, but how much they're willing to pay), and if you're a supplier with a magic ball which can divine this with 100% accuracy then you're as well selling your product at 1p over cost if that's your customer's true valuation. Again: they get the product they wanted and you get profit you couldn't have had any other way, and everyone's as happy as they can be.
But we don't have magic balls, and you can't ask someone for their true valuation because suddenly you'll find yourself knee-deep in a bartering game of bullshit and lies. Your only option is to try to divine it somehow.
This is what these guys are doing. And it's a good thing. To say "this is wrong and it should stop" is incredibly selfish - with reference to the example above, an equivalent statement might be "Yes I'll pay £10 to see this movie, but only if those students don't get a discount, which I implicitly understand to mean robbing you, dear cinema owner, of £70, and those students of the chance to see this hot new flick, even though both of those things are fuck all to do with me."
If you're a habitual bargain hunter (not out of necessity, more as a personality trait) and you're feeling affronted by this then all you need do is take a cue from these companies and adjust your tactics to suit the 21st century. Googling around may have done you proud up til now, but the world has moved on. I daresay that once you've mastered the art of using a VPN, user agent spoofing, and possibly the cultivation of a set of dishonest consumer profiles, you may find you'll save even more money in the face of this new enemy.
- rosser 12y agoStudent pricing at the cinema is disanalogous to the way price discrimination is done on the internet. In the former case, the fact that students (and children and seniors and, and, and) pay a different price than others is clearly disclosed to everyone. Online, it's not.
- altern8 12y ago...and it makes sense. Also, IMHO the thing isn't about people with PCs paying less, but people using Macs getting charged more.
- lorddoig 12y agoThe only way transparency affects the optimality of a price discriminating system is possibly by screwing the whole thing up by creating resentment. This doesn't happen so much for cinema tickets as children/students/OAPs are more (almost universal) stages of life that we can all relate to as opposed to groups based on some trait. No matter how pissed off people get about finding out that they paid more than someone else, it has absolutely no bearing on the mathematics which shows this to be the optimal (for both producers and consumers) way to allocate scarce resources.
- icelancer 12y agoFor a single-shot game, perhaps. But in iterative games, not even close. Expected value is a far more complex calculation than that.
- lorddoig 12y agoGame theory doesn't come into the optimality of this. Sure you could write out a single sale as a game between producer and consumer, but it's a long way around to get the same numbers out. An iterative game to buy something - what would that be? Extended bartering? I already explained that. I don't understand where expected value comes into it, it's not that kind of analysis.
- wodenokoto 12y ago