 |
|
|
|||||
Surveillance pricing has dominated headlines recently. Delta Air Lines announcement that it will use artificial intelligence to set individualized ticket prices has led to widespread concerns about companies using personal data to charge different prices for identical products. As The New York Times reported, this practice involves companies tracking everything from your hotel bookings to your browsing history to determine what youre willing to pay. The reaction has been swift. Democratic lawmakers have responded with outrage, with Texas Representative Greg Casar introducing legislation to ban the practice. Meanwhile, President Donald Trumps new chair of the Federal Trade Commission has shut down public comment on the issue, signaling that the regulatory pendulum may swing away from oversight entirely. Whats missing in this political back-and-forth is a deeper look at the economics. As a business school professor who researches pricing strategy, I think the debate misses important nuances. Opponents of surveillance pricing overlook some potential benefits that could make markets both more efficient and, counterintuitively, more equitable. What surveillance pricing actually is Surveillance pricing differs from traditional dynamic pricing, where prices rise for everyone at times of peak demand. Instead, it uses personal databrowsing history, location, purchase patterns, even device typeto charge a unique price based on what algorithms predict youre willing to pay. The goal is to discover each customers reservation pricethe most theyll pay before walking away. Until recently, this was extremely difficult to do, but modern data collection has made it increasingly feasible. An FTC investigation found that companies track highly personal consumer behaviors to set individualized prices. For example, a new parent searching for baby thermometers might find pricier products on the first page of their results than a nonparent would. Its not surprising that many people think this is unfair. The unintended progressive tax But consider this: Surveillance pricing also means that wealthy customers pay more for identical goods, while lower-income customers pay less. That means it could achieve redistribution goals typically pursued through government policy. Pharmaceutical companies already do this globally, charging wealthier countries more for identical drugs to make medications accessible in poorer nations. Surveillance pricing could function as a private-sector progressive tax system. Economists call it price discrimination, but it often helps poorer consumers access goods they might otherwise be unable to afford. And unlike government programs, this type of redistribution requires no taxpayer funding. When Amazons algorithm charges me more than a college student for the same laptop, its effectively running a means-tested subsidy programfunded by consumers. PBS NewsHour featured a segment on the Delta Air Lines news. The two-tier economy problem In my view, the most legitimate concern about surveillance pricing isnt that it exists, but how its implemented. Online retailers can seamlessly adjust prices in real time, while physical stores remain largely stuck with uniform pricing. Imagine the customer fury if Targets checkout prices varied by person based on their smartphone data: There could be chaos in the stores. This digital-physical divide could also create unfair advantages for tech-savvy companies while leaving traditional retailers behind. That would raise fairness considerations for consumers as well as retailers. This is related to another force that could limit how far surveillance pricing can go: arbitrage, or the practice of buying something where it is cheaper and selling it where it is more expensive. If a system consistently charges wealthy customers $500 for items that cost poor customers $200, it creates opportunities for entrepreneurial intermediaries to exploit these price gaps. Personal shopping services, buying cooperatives, or even friends and family networks could arbitrage these differences, providing wealthy customers access to the lower prices while splitting the savings. This means surveillance pricing cant discriminate too aggressivelymarket forces will erode excessive price gaps. Thats why I believe the solution isnt to ban surveillance pricing entirely, but to monitor how its put in practice. The regulatory sweet spot The current political moment offers a strange opportunity. With Republicans focused on AI innovation and Democrats fixated on bans, theres space for a more sophisticated position that embraces market-based redistribution while demanding strong consumer protections. In my view, smart regulation would require companies to disclose when personal data influences pricing, and would prohibit discrimination based on protected characteristics such as race, color, or religionand this list needs to be created extremely carefully. This would preserve the efficiency benefits while preventing abuse. Surveillance pricing based on desperation or need also raises unique ethical questions. Charging a wealthier customer more for a taxi ride is one thing; charging someone extra solely because their battery is low and they risk being stranded is another. As I see it, the distinction between ability to pay and urgency of need must become the cornerstone of regulation. While distinguishing the two may seem challenging, its far from impossible. It would help if customers were empowered to report exploitative practices, using mechanisms similar to existing price-gouging protections. A solid regulatory framework must also clarify the difference between dynamic pricing and surveillance-based exploitation. Dynamic pricing has long been standard practice: Airlines charge all last-minute travelers higher fares, regardless of their circumstances. But consider two passengers buying tickets on the same dayone rushing to a funeral, another planning a spontaneous vacation. Right now, airlines can use technology to identify and exploit the funeral attendees desperate circumstances. The policy challenge is precise: Can we design regulations that prevent airlines from exploiting the bereaved while still allowing retailers to offer discounts on laptops to lower-income families? The answer will determine whether surveillance pricing becomes a tool for equity or exploitation. Aradhna Krishna is a Dwight F. Benton professor of marketing at the University of Michigan. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
As economic uncertainty deepens, the rush for gold continueswith prices for the precious metal topping $4,300 for the first time this week. The going price for New York spot closed at a record $4,326 per troy ounce on Thursday. Futures also traded as high at more than $4,344 per troy ounce Thursday, before falling below the $4,300 mark Friday morning. Still, gold is up significantly over the last week, marking one of its best weeks to date. Gold sales can rise sharply when anxious investors seek a safe haven for their money. For the U.S., the latest gains arrive amid the now weekslong government shutdown and ongoing trade wars abroadwith President Donald Trump most recently threatening to place much higher tariffs on China, before appearing to walk back those potential new levies as unsustainable. Still, his barrage of other import taxes has already strained economies worldwide. Meanwhile, the prospect of lower interest rates is also making gold a more attractive investment. Why are gold prices going up? Gold futures are up nearly 60% since the start of 2025trading at about $4,268 per troy ounce, the standard for measuring precious metals, as of around 11:45 a.m. Friday. Thats up from around $2,670 at the beginning of January. Silver has seen an even bigger percentage jump year to date. Silver futures are up about 70%, trading at over $50 per troy ounce Friday morning. A lot of the rise boils down to uncertainty. Interest in buying metals like gold typically spikes when investors become anxious. Much of this year’s economic turmoil has spanned from Trumps trade wars. Since the start of 2025, steep new tariffs the president has imposed on goods coming into the U.S. from around the world have strained businesses and consumers alikepushing costs higher and helping to weaken the job market. As a result, hiring has plunged while inflation has inched back up. And more and more consumers are expressing pessimism about the road ahead. The U.S. government shutdown adds to those anxieties. Key economic data has been delayedand scores of federal employees are already feeling the effects of furloughs and working without pay as long as the shutdown lasts, which has no immediate end in sight. The Trump administration also moved to use the shutdown to conduct mass firings, although a judge temporarily blocked such action. Separately, analysts have pointed to continued weakness of the U.S. dollar and renewed rate cuts from the Federal Reserve. Last month, the Fed cut its key interest rate by a quarter-pointand projected it would do so twice more this year. Investments in gold have also been driven by other factors over time. Over recent years, there’s been strong gold demand from central banks around the worldparticularly amid heightened geopolitical tensions, such as the ongoing wars in Gaza and Ukraine. And on Wall Street this week, several regional banks saw sharp losses amid scrunity over quality of loans, although recovery seemed to be steadying the market on Friday. Meanwhile, investors appeared to be distancing themselves from riskier assets like cryptocurrencywith bitcoin, for example, down 2.67%. Will rising gold prices make jewelry more expensive? Many jewelry merchants and dealers have increasingly reported surges in customers looking to check the value of gold they ownsometimes opting to melt or sell family heirlooms to cash in on the precious metal’s rising price. At the same time, those in the market for gold jewelry may be feeling sticker shock if they cant afford certain products anymoreparticularly if it’s something impacted by both rising material costs and tariffs. Larger retailers like Pandora and Signet have acknowledged these headwinds in recent earnings calls. Is gold worth the investment? Advocates of investing in gold call it a safe havenarguing that the commodity can serve to diversify and balance your investment portfolio, as well as mitigate possible risks down the road as a hedge against rising inflation. Some also take comfort in buying something tangible that has the potential to increase in value over time. Still, experts caution against putting all your eggs in one basket. And not everyone agrees gold is a good investment. Critics say gold isnt always the inflation hedge many claimand that there are more efficient ways to protect against potential loss of capital, such as derivative-based investments. The Commodity Futures Trade Commission has also previously warned people to be wary of investing in gold. Precious metals can be highly volatile, and prices rise as demand goes upmeaning when economic anxiety or instability is high, the people who typically profit from precious metals are the sellers,” the commission noted. Gold demand escalates mercury poisoning warnings The frenzy for gold has also resulted in health and environmental consequences with officials pointing to riing demand for mercury, a toxic metal that is key in illegal gold mining worldwide. Mercury is widely used to separate gold during artisanal or small-scale mining. But it pollutes water, accumulates in fish, makes its way into food and builds up in peoples bodies, leading to neurological and developmental harm. Even small-scale exposure can carry serious risks putting in danger workers who rely on the industry, as well as residents in affected areas more broadly. The Associated Press has reported about the effects of mercury poisoning tied to gold mining in countries like Senegal, Mexico and Peru, among other parts of the world. By Wyatte Grantham-Philips, AP Business Writer
Category:
E-Commerce
A blood test for more than 50 types of cancer could significantly boost early detection and speed up diagnosis, according to a new study. Made by U.S. pharmaceutical company Grail, the Galleri test aims to find fragments of DNA in a persons blood that can indicate the presence of a cancerous tumor. Among the cancers that the test can detect, many have no current screening programs. The PATHFINDER 2 study included more than 36,000 people aged 50 and older who had no cancer symptoms. In participants who were followed for more than a year, the test caught some 40.4% of cancer cases. For those who got a positive result on the Galleri test, 61.6% of them went on to be diagnosed with canceran improvement over previous trials of the test. The results were presented on Saturday at the European Society for Medical Oncology meeting in Berlin, and have yet to be published in a peer-reviewed journal. Boosting cancer diagnosis In the study, the Galleri test, when combined with already existing screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancers, yielded a more than seven-fold increase in the cancer detection rate, according to Grails president Josh Ofman in a press release. Galleri also detected many cancers which dont have standard screening tests, including notoriously hard to diagnose forms of the disease, such as ovarian and pancreatic cancer. More than half (53.5%) of the cancers detected by the test were stage I or II, according to Grail. And the test was also able to predict the origin of the cancer accurately 92% of the time, according to the study. Promising results Grail says the blood test could save lives through early detection. The companys president of biopharma, Sir Harpal Kumar, told the BBC that the results were compelling. “The vast majority of people who die from cancer do so because we find their cancers too late, he said. But other experts cautioned that more research is needed before the test is ready for primetime, Sky News and the BBC reported, with one expert telling the BBC more work would be required to “avoid overdiagnosing cancers that may have caused harm.” The test is currently being trialed in England in 140,000 people, with results expected next year, according to the BBC.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||