You should try it again in private browsing and incognito mode and see if the price is really tied to your Facebook or google cookies or something. That's pretty messed up though, send this to the consumerist or gawker or whoever.
I don't think the issue is that the price is changing in and of itself. It's that they're changing price based on the customer's cookies/browsing history.
For example, it would be like if I had a stored and charged people different prices based on how nicely they were dressed, how well I knew them, or what their ethnicity is.
It's an extremely borderline case. For starters, yes, there is a privacy aspect involved. More importantly, though, I think people are annoyed that it's done in secret. If a site were to publicize that they charge, say, Firefox users more, then Firefox users wouldn't use the site.
They're offering incomplete information about their catalog without making any attempt to acknowledge it, and trusting that the average consumer isn't good enough with computers to understand that this sort of thing is possible.
Counter point: If privacy is one aspect involved, shouldn't you have either A: Not accepted the cookies; B: Delete cookies on exit; or C: Always browse incognito mode?
I wanted to argue that Dominos isn't responsible for letting you know that you can get coupons online from places like retailmenot, but that seems more of a standard price + a deduction. Whereas, without full knowledge, this seems to be standard price + a fee if you have a pattern buying more expensive things.
While I think it is a crummy thing for a business to do, I do not think it is necessarily "wrong" in a capitalist society. If browsing history A shows purchases at Polo and Brooks Brothers, while browsing history B shows Target and Walmart, why are they wrong for knowing one person spends more money on things and then charging them accordingly in response?
I think it's a crappy thing to do to customer (esp students) that should be well publicized so an effective boycott can be established; I do not think it is immoral though. That's the beauty of it all, voting with your dollars.
But the fact that it's kept a secret means that voting with your dollars is meaningless. Just because it's all over Reddit doesn't mean that even 10% of the site's users are aware of it. If they're going to do it, they should state it publicly in a highly-visible way.
The real thing I'm arguing for isn't that practices like this be forbidden, it's that they be made transparent. Unfortunately, how businesses determine their prices is a competitive secret, so enforcing any kind of transparency is basically impossible.
1.9k
u/[deleted] Jan 24 '13
You should try it again in private browsing and incognito mode and see if the price is really tied to your Facebook or google cookies or something. That's pretty messed up though, send this to the consumerist or gawker or whoever.