A new opinion piece by Market Institute President Charles Sauer in RealClearMarkets argues that policymakers should resist efforts to ban personalized pricing, warning that government intervention would undermine consumer choice and market efficiency.
As retailers like Kroger and Walmart adopt digital shelf labels, critics have raised concerns over so-called “surveillance pricing.” Sauer argues that the more accurate term is personalized pricing—the use of voluntarily shared consumer data to better match prices with individual purchasing behavior and demand.
“If businesses are allowed to perfect the use of personalized pricing, it can result in a system where stores can maximize profits by matching prices with an individual consumer’s demand for the product.”
Rather than violating consumers’ rights, Sauer notes that personalized pricing relies on information consumers choose to provide in exchange for discounts and rewards. Just as importantly, shoppers always retain the freedom to reject a price and purchase elsewhere.
The article also examines the growing push by state lawmakers to prohibit personalized pricing, highlighting new laws in Maryland and pending legislation in California. Sauer warns that these efforts would substitute government mandates for voluntary market transactions while reducing innovation and competition.
Read Charles Sauer’s full RealClearMarkets commentary to learn why personalized pricing is best addressed through consumer choice—not government regulation.
0 Comments