Would That This Were True

Over at Gizmodo, they have an article titled, "Dems Want to Ban Surveillance Pricing at Big Grocery Stores," which discusses a bill submitted by Senators Ben Ray Luján (D-NM) and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) to ban personalized digital price gouging by grocery stores.

Call me a cynic, but I think that this is more about extorting campaign donations to water down or kill the proposal than anything else.

Sen. Ben Ray Luján, a Democrat from New Mexico, and Sen. Jeff Merkley, a Democrat from Oregon, introduced legislation Thursday that would ban so-called surveillance and surge pricing in grocery stores. Officially known as the Stop Price Gouging in Grocery Stores Act of 2026, the Senate legislation is modeled on a 2025 bill in the House.

The new bill would require stores to disclose their use of facial recognition technology and would ban electronic shelf labels (ESL) in large grocery stores. ESLs are controversial because they allow retailers to change the price of a given item remotely, opening up the possibility that they could be tied to algorithms which raise and lower prices based on conditions in the store or who’s trying to buy something. 

Hypothetically, stores can charge different prices at different times of day or rely on different inputs, right down to personalizing the price based on an individual who was looking at a given item, spotted with facial recognition tech. The concern is that factors like race, gender, and income level could be used to determine how much people are charged. A 2025 study found that Instacart was charging customers different prices for the same products, sometimes as much as 23% more. A few weeks after the study received negative press coverage, Instacart announced it was pulling the plug on its AI-powered pricing.

………

The Biden administration launched an investigation into surveillance pricing in 2024 with FTC chair Lina Khan initiating a study on the ways it may harm U.S. consumers. But after President Donald Trump took power in 2025, his administration killed the study. 

I am not suggesting that either Senator Luján or Merkley are doing this solely to extract campaign donations from large retailers.  For all I know, they are completely sincere about this.

What I am suggesting is that the Democratic Party establishment (There is no Democratic Party establishment) is planning to use this proposal as a way to extort campaign donations from the industry., and once they get their vigorish, they will kill or emasculate the legislation.

Maybe I Can Buy the World's Smallest Violin on Amazon

Saks, the failing retailer once known as Saks 5th avenue, is filing for bankruptcy, and Amazon is fighting this, because it will make its $457,000,000.00 investment worthless. (Wiping out stockholders is a feature, and not a bug of corporate bankruptcy.

It seems that Amazon bought into the less than successful acquisition of Neiman Marcus,  with the hope of selling overpriced crap with a high end name.

Pardon me while I clean my screen. 

Amazon wants a federal judge to reject Saks Global's bankruptcy financing plan, writing in court papers the beleaguered department store "burned through hundreds of millions of dollars in less than a year" and failed to hold up their agreement.

When Saks acquired Neiman Marcus for $2.7 billion in December 2024, Amazon invested $475 million into the venture on the grounds the retailer would start selling its products on Amazon's website and the tech company would offer technology and logistics expertise.

………

As part of the deal, Saks launched a branded "Saks at Amazon" storefront on the e-commerce company's website featuring a range of luxury fashion and beauty items. It also agreed to pay a referral fee for Saks-branded goods sold on the platform, guaranteeing at least $900 million in payments to Amazon over eight years.

In its filing, Amazon argued that Saks' bankruptcy financing plan harms the company, and other creditors, because it saddles parts of the Saks corporation with new debt that it previously didn't have. It also pushes Amazon further down the pecking order in terms of repayment, which reduces the amount it could potentially be repaid during the proceedings, the e-commerce company said in the filings.

Amazon's argument is basically, "How dare they go bankrupt without us having the opportunity to suck them dry for a decade first."

That's some sweet, sweet schadenfreude. 

When You Treat Your Customers Like Criminals

Only criminals are your customers.

Case in point, Walgreens backtracking on its program of locking up everything on their shelves: 

In a challenging retail landscape, Walgreens Boots Alliance shared plans to revamp its strategy in a Q1 2025 earnings call. Despite reporting a 23% year-over-year decline in adjusted EPS to $0.51, the pharmacy giant outperformed expectations, buoyed by robust cost management and strength in U.S. pharmacy services. CEO Tim Wentworth emphasized the company’s commitment to a “retail pharmacy-led turnaround,” underpinned by strategic store closures, enhanced customer engagement, and a renewed focus on health and wellness offerings.

The company plans to close approximately 450 additional stores in 2025, noting that the stores that remain open outperform the ones designated for closure by approximately 250 basis points. Wentworth also acknowledged the ongoing struggle with shrink as a “hand-to-hand combat battle.” After reporting a 52% increase in shrink, or lost inventory, in 2020 and 2021, Walgreens invested in increased security that proved to be “largely ineffective.” And while many drug stores have taken to locking up commonly looted goods, Wentworth admitted, “When you lock things up…you don’t sell as many of them. We’ve kind of proven that pretty conclusively.”

Gee, ya think?

Bullsh%$

So I came across this story about the adoption of electronic shelf labels, which allows for price changes to be changed in a matter of seconds.

The technology is fairly simple, but the application of this technology is concerning.

Basically this technology is tailor made for price gouging (they like to call it surge pricing).

Of course, they claim that they would never do that:

Grocery store prices are changing faster than ever before — literally. This month, Walmart became the latest retailer to announce it’s replacing the price stickers in its aisles with electronic shelf labels. The new labels allow employees to change prices as often as every ten seconds.

“If it’s hot outside, we can raise the price of water and ice cream. If there's something that’s close to the expiration date, we can lower the price — that’s the good news,” said Phil Lempert, a grocery industry analyst.

No, Mr. Lempert, it is not good news, it is evidence that you have no human decency.

It's price gouging, and it is a contemptible and morally indefensible business practice, and I guarantee you that it will be used to adjust prices based on things like protected demographic status, i.e. race, because that is already what happens in things like the Gypsy cab companies and vacation rental apps.

………

As higher wages make labor more expensive, retailers big and small can benefit from the increased productivity that digitized shelf labels enable, said Santiago Gallino, a professor specializing in retail management at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School.

That is a legitimate reason to adopt a system, there will be significant labor savings, at least if the systems are sufficiently reliable and have sufficient battery life,  The application looks very well suited to something like E-Ink, which only draws power when the display is changed.

But then, Mr. Gallino veers into the realm of corporate ass-kissing bullsh%$:

While the labels give retailers the ability to increase prices suddenly, Gallino doubts companies like Walmart will take advantage of the technology in that way.

“To be honest, I don’t think that’s the underlying main driver of this,” Gallino said. “These are companies that tend to have a long-term relationship with their customers and I think the risk of frustrating them could be too risky, so I would be surprised if they try to do that.”

No. Mr. Gallino.  If a technology gives the business an opportunity to generate a few more pennies of profit from abusing their customer, business will use this to abuse their customer.

Just look at the interminable automated voice mail systems.

They turn customer service into agony, but it saves some money, but it reduces customer support costs, and reduces the number of customers who make claims or make refunds, so it's everywhere.