An FYI to folk booking tickets online: if you notice price jumps between the first time you look and when you are ready to book, delete cache and empty cookies.
-
@CStamp same for train tickets. too many people looking at the same tickets changes the price. the many people could be you looking again and again...
sometimes it´s cheaper to book until the next city across the boarder because their are cheaper EU travel tickets.
mobile apps tend to be more expensive then using a desktop. apple used to be more expensive because people buying apple products have more money.
It's worth differentiating the two classes of system. Demand-based pricing is fairly normal: if you can't meet demand, you need to reduce it somehow and putting up the price is how markets normally work.
Personalised pricing is about trying to pick the highest price that you, individually, are willing to pay. This is predatory behaviour and should be 100% illegal.
20+ years ago, these systems were great because they'd do demand pricing. They'd aim to have planes close to 100% full, so they'd increase the price if the flight was popular and lower it for unpopular flights. When you went to a dozen travel agents and looked at the same flight, they'd each put a lock on the flight to make sure that they could actually sell it to you. This would cause a strong demand signal and so the price would start. After a few days, they'd all release their lock, which the back-end system would interpret as a sudden drop in demand and lower the price to make up for it. If you timed it correctly, you could buy when the prices suddenly dropped.
-
@CStamp Try not flying.
@CStamp
For a funeral is of course something different. I would not try to withold anyone from attending a funeral.My plea is to people planehopping for leisure. Stay at home, do something for your community, help the poor and your local economy.
-
It's worth differentiating the two classes of system. Demand-based pricing is fairly normal: if you can't meet demand, you need to reduce it somehow and putting up the price is how markets normally work.
Personalised pricing is about trying to pick the highest price that you, individually, are willing to pay. This is predatory behaviour and should be 100% illegal.
20+ years ago, these systems were great because they'd do demand pricing. They'd aim to have planes close to 100% full, so they'd increase the price if the flight was popular and lower it for unpopular flights. When you went to a dozen travel agents and looked at the same flight, they'd each put a lock on the flight to make sure that they could actually sell it to you. This would cause a strong demand signal and so the price would start. After a few days, they'd all release their lock, which the back-end system would interpret as a sudden drop in demand and lower the price to make up for it. If you timed it correctly, you could buy when the prices suddenly dropped.
@david_chisnall @coba @CStamp I guess personalised pricing is in fact how markets normally work.
The seller tries to get as much as possible from the buyer in exchange for the product.
Think about bargaining, or discounts, or reduced product properties aimed at buyers that would not pay a higher price. -
An FYI to folk booking tickets online: if you notice price jumps between the first time you look and when you are ready to book, delete cache and empty cookies. The airline deleted their post a short time later because someone was being too helpful.
-
@david_chisnall @coba @CStamp I guess personalised pricing is in fact how markets normally work.
The seller tries to get as much as possible from the buyer in exchange for the product.
Think about bargaining, or discounts, or reduced product properties aimed at buyers that would not pay a higher price.@Kraemer_HB
No, not normally for endconsumers. We go to a supermarket and are all offered the exact same price. Similarly, phone and electricity companies publish their rate sheets and basically everyone gets the same price. Same goes for restaurants, bars, cafes. -
@david_chisnall @coba @CStamp I guess personalised pricing is in fact how markets normally work.
The seller tries to get as much as possible from the buyer in exchange for the product.
Think about bargaining, or discounts, or reduced product properties aimed at buyers that would not pay a higher price.I think we're using two meanings of the word 'markets'.
That's certainly true in markets as physical things where people have stalls and other people come to bargain.
It's not true in markets as economists view them. A functional market (in the economics sense) requires that the buyer have complete information (which is why they usually require explicit intervention to actually work and why anyone who claims a deregulated market will solve things is normally asking permission to rip people off). In such a market, if seller A is offering a product at a high price to buyer B and a low price to buyer C, this is an opportunity for arbitrage. Buyer C can buy and then sell to buyer B at a cost somewhere between the two. Run this for multiple iterations and the price that A will sell to both B and C will converge.
And that's a desirable feature of a market. Seller A will eventually end up with a price that maximises their revenue while meeting the demand of both B and C. B and C will both get the goods at a fair price.
The problem here is that there's significant information asymmetry. If I go into a shop and see a price label, I know that this is the price that they sell to everyone. If I go to a web site, I don't know whether I'm seeing the price for me or the price for everyone. The seller can buy a lot of information about me from brokers and can adjust their prices as they wish. And that means that this isn't a functioning market unless you introduce regulation to prevent this kind of manipulation.
-
@CStamp I worked in the business and there is not a single solution. For example, some booking systems increase the price based on the total number of the queries. Clearing the browser and going through reservation as the new customer would not help at all.
@filipslusarski @CStamp what is wrong about having a fixed price for a flight?
-
@CStamp same for train tickets. too many people looking at the same tickets changes the price. the many people could be you looking again and again...
sometimes it´s cheaper to book until the next city across the boarder because their are cheaper EU travel tickets.
mobile apps tend to be more expensive then using a desktop. apple used to be more expensive because people buying apple products have more money.
-
An FYI to folk booking tickets online: if you notice price jumps between the first time you look and when you are ready to book, delete cache and empty cookies. The airline deleted their post a short time later because someone was being too helpful.
@CStamp hope the social media intern that replied that is safe
-
An FYI to folk booking tickets online: if you notice price jumps between the first time you look and when you are ready to book, delete cache and empty cookies. The airline deleted their post a short time later because someone was being too helpful.
@CStamp better tip: turn JS, caching and cookies off so you don't get fucked.
-
An FYI to folk booking tickets online: if you notice price jumps between the first time you look and when you are ready to book, delete cache and empty cookies. The airline deleted their post a short time later because someone was being too helpful.
@CStamp Thanks for the tip!
-
@kkarhan @CStamp @Bundesverband idk about Germany, in Spain it happens. Try to search several times for the same flight, its price should go up. If you try tell me because it would be interesting to know if it depends on the country
@luckychronic @kkarhan @CStamp @Bundesverband you can exploit this too - about 10 min before I need to go I start checking bolt and uber and then stop and give algorithm some time to give me the best price;)
-
I think we're using two meanings of the word 'markets'.
That's certainly true in markets as physical things where people have stalls and other people come to bargain.
It's not true in markets as economists view them. A functional market (in the economics sense) requires that the buyer have complete information (which is why they usually require explicit intervention to actually work and why anyone who claims a deregulated market will solve things is normally asking permission to rip people off). In such a market, if seller A is offering a product at a high price to buyer B and a low price to buyer C, this is an opportunity for arbitrage. Buyer C can buy and then sell to buyer B at a cost somewhere between the two. Run this for multiple iterations and the price that A will sell to both B and C will converge.
And that's a desirable feature of a market. Seller A will eventually end up with a price that maximises their revenue while meeting the demand of both B and C. B and C will both get the goods at a fair price.
The problem here is that there's significant information asymmetry. If I go into a shop and see a price label, I know that this is the price that they sell to everyone. If I go to a web site, I don't know whether I'm seeing the price for me or the price for everyone. The seller can buy a lot of information about me from brokers and can adjust their prices as they wish. And that means that this isn't a functioning market unless you introduce regulation to prevent this kind of manipulation.
@david_chisnall @coba @CStamp Sure, you talk about markets that are functional, desirable and creating a fair price.
It's more a normative model that economists described in the past two centuries, especially applicable to financial markets, dealing in goods that are abstract from the real world, financial instruments.
When real markets don't fit to the model some people demand that the state intervenes. But that's a question of power. -
I think we're using two meanings of the word 'markets'.
That's certainly true in markets as physical things where people have stalls and other people come to bargain.
It's not true in markets as economists view them. A functional market (in the economics sense) requires that the buyer have complete information (which is why they usually require explicit intervention to actually work and why anyone who claims a deregulated market will solve things is normally asking permission to rip people off). In such a market, if seller A is offering a product at a high price to buyer B and a low price to buyer C, this is an opportunity for arbitrage. Buyer C can buy and then sell to buyer B at a cost somewhere between the two. Run this for multiple iterations and the price that A will sell to both B and C will converge.
And that's a desirable feature of a market. Seller A will eventually end up with a price that maximises their revenue while meeting the demand of both B and C. B and C will both get the goods at a fair price.
The problem here is that there's significant information asymmetry. If I go into a shop and see a price label, I know that this is the price that they sell to everyone. If I go to a web site, I don't know whether I'm seeing the price for me or the price for everyone. The seller can buy a lot of information about me from brokers and can adjust their prices as they wish. And that means that this isn't a functioning market unless you introduce regulation to prevent this kind of manipulation.
@david_chisnall
I know what you mean, but it's really not that economists do not view or analyse markets such as I was describing them. They would explain to you, that there is a demand curve that goes down with higher prices and a supply curve that goes up with increasing prices. The market price is at the intersection of the two. This is how e.g. the price of stock is found at the stock market. -
@david_chisnall
I know what you mean, but it's really not that economists do not view or analyse markets such as I was describing them. They would explain to you, that there is a demand curve that goes down with higher prices and a supply curve that goes up with increasing prices. The market price is at the intersection of the two. This is how e.g. the price of stock is found at the stock market.@david_chisnall
Furthermore, I do not agree that price discrimination is bad per se ("predatory").E.g. if you have only 10 seats left for a certain train connection, the uniform price per seat might be 150 EUR. For the train company it may be financially beneficial to sell 8 tickets at 150 and to keep two tickets unsold.
But they might have fulfilled more people's transportation needs by selling the remaining two tickets to someone who would afford only 100 EUR.
-
@david_chisnall
Furthermore, I do not agree that price discrimination is bad per se ("predatory").E.g. if you have only 10 seats left for a certain train connection, the uniform price per seat might be 150 EUR. For the train company it may be financially beneficial to sell 8 tickets at 150 and to keep two tickets unsold.
But they might have fulfilled more people's transportation needs by selling the remaining two tickets to someone who would afford only 100 EUR.
@utrenkner @david_chisnall @coba @CStamp In reality, the "uniform price" from the example (150€) would be changed by coupons, discounts, bonus programs, premium versions ("1st class"), bundles and so on, differentiating the price as well as the product.
Hard to argue why that must conform to a model for financial markets instead, where needs are only present in form of searches for investment opportunities. -
@filipslusarski @CStamp what is wrong about having a fixed price for a flight?
@yoshimura @CStamp Higher demand means tickets can be sold even with the higher price.
-
@utrenkner @david_chisnall @coba @CStamp In reality, the "uniform price" from the example (150€) would be changed by coupons, discounts, bonus programs, premium versions ("1st class"), bundles and so on, differentiating the price as well as the product.
Hard to argue why that must conform to a model for financial markets instead, where needs are only present in form of searches for investment opportunities.@Kraemer_HB
Coupons, bonus programs etc. are not directly connected to my "willingness to pay".@coba mentioned "apple used to be more expensive because people buying apple products have more money." And this is how I understood this discussion: Should the company be allowed to differentiate the price based on the (perceived) willingness to pay of an individual.
-
An FYI to folk booking tickets online: if you notice price jumps between the first time you look and when you are ready to book, delete cache and empty cookies. The airline deleted their post a short time later because someone was being too helpful.
@CStamp Yes the airlines have been doing this for some time now. I use DuckDuckGo as my browser and search for cheapest flights through Kayak or similar, then book my flight on the airline's website.
-
@Kraemer_HB
Coupons, bonus programs etc. are not directly connected to my "willingness to pay".@coba mentioned "apple used to be more expensive because people buying apple products have more money." And this is how I understood this discussion: Should the company be allowed to differentiate the price based on the (perceived) willingness to pay of an individual.
@utrenkner @david_chisnall @coba @CStamp What a company perceives in searches for a train or flight connection seems to be a need for transportation.
Consumers feel ripped of if their need drives prices higher.
They pay only if they are willing to.
I argue that markets and prices are not as transparent as in ideal models. Neither are needs, the need for transportation is embedded in a fuzzy conglomerate of other needs it is weighed against.
The need for an Apple is not the need for a PC.
