@Radicalrad wrote: ...the entire point of the exercise is not to create a better product but to figure out, based on consumer buying habits (a person's data), how to extract the maximum price for any given product from minute to minute. This is bad (as in unethical and immoral) use of data even if it is genius.
@Radicalrad, This does strike me as bad. If I buy something for a certain price at a certain place, it would seem unfair if someone got a better price at that same time and place. But I'm okay with charging more for shipping if I'm further away from the factory. I'm okay with paying more than someone else if I'm more well-off (progressive tax, school lunches). It seems hard to know where to draw the line ethically, and virtually impossible to police. How can morally upstanding companies compete with the dubious ones?
I liked the article; I especially enjoyed the historical tidbits, like the fact that setting a fixed price only dates back to the 1860's. And love the bit about GM:
“Pontiac … for the poor but proud, Oldsmobile for the comfortable but discreet, Buick for the striving, Cadillac for the rich.” The policy—“a car for every purse and purpose,” GM called it—was a means of customer sorting,
Thanks for the discussion, and the panel 🙂