Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Online Shopping Site Glitch Slashes Prices for Happy Social Customers

posted by martyb on Wednesday February 06 2019, @07:42PM   Printer-friendly
from the you-get-what-you-give dept.

An Anonymous Coward writes:

It's 2019 and still retailers haven't quite got a grip on their online shopping websites. Coles, a large supermarket in Australia, sold products with deep discounts due to a glitch until the company found the problem and restored the system. This story comes with a modern twist with users going to social media to spread the word about the glitch on the site so others can quickly take advantage. The store was able to get ahead of the surge in online shoppers and cull some of the carts, but not before the front runners picked up their discount goods.

Oh, look, a good use for social media. What are we up to, 5, or 6 now? =)

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Online Shopping Site Glitch Slashes Prices for Happy Social Customers | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 30 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday February 06 2019, @08:28PM (9 children)

    by takyon (881) <takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org> on Wednesday February 06 2019, @08:28PM (#797373) Journal

    People on sites like Slickdeals pile on whenever a price mistake is found, but usually the retailer ends up cancelling all of the orders. I guess Coles is just dumb or slow to notice because they have a large inventory.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday February 06 2019, @09:17PM (8 children)

    by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday February 06 2019, @09:17PM (#797410)

    Coles is in Australia, and so it is constrained by the law.

    If they advertise a price they have no choice but to honour it. They are also arseholes, so of course they will attempt to wriggle out if they can.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by FatPhil on Wednesday February 06 2019, @09:28PM (5 children)

      by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Wednesday February 06 2019, @09:28PM (#797415) Homepage
      If the Oz system is based on the UK system, which would be far from surprising, then they do not have to honour advertised prices, as advertised prices are an "invitation to treat" - i.e. they are giving you the opportunity to offer that amount of money for the good/service, and when you do, they get the choice whether they want to take you up on that offer. Of course, automated systems are unlikely to have an agent that will refuse the price it itself advertised, I would consider that a gross design flaw. However, see my post nextthread...
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday February 06 2019, @10:03PM (4 children)

        by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday February 06 2019, @10:03PM (#797435)

        The Australian consumer protection laws are not based on the UK system.

        Source: I live in New Zealand, and we based our Consumer Guarantees Act on the Aussie model.

        • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday February 07 2019, @12:00AM (3 children)

          by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Thursday February 07 2019, @12:00AM (#797502) Homepage
          Thanks all who responded with clarification. Upmods delivered. I know that we gave a lot of precedent to the colonies' legal systems, and it's remarkable how much of that remains to this day, but on this one my cautiously-held presumption was wrong. Info filed away in case of later use.
          --
          Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves

          • (Score: 3, Funny) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday February 07 2019, @12:13AM (2 children)

            by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Thursday February 07 2019, @12:13AM (#797511)

            Thanks for responding like an adult, and not turning the conversation into the usual shouting match.

            • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday February 07 2019, @01:34PM (1 child)

              by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Thursday February 07 2019, @01:34PM (#797745) Homepage
              Well, my initial posts were questioning and conditional on stated unsure assumptions, so I was hardly going bombastically into this thread! I'm happy to learn. The more I hear about them, the more the antipodes appeal.
              --
              Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves

              • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday February 07 2019, @07:39PM

                by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Thursday February 07 2019, @07:39PM (#797910)

                Yeah, well, I don't care what everyone else says, I think you're all right kid.

    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday February 06 2019, @11:38PM (1 child)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday February 06 2019, @11:38PM (#797495) Journal

      Not exactly. The law requires the advertised price to not be misleading, but allow for clerical unintended errors - in which case, the price at checkout may be corrected without punishment for the seller (as long as they apply the corrections on the advertised price and don't rely on such 'errors' as a selling method). Of course, the buyer may refuse a corrected price before transaction (and the transaction is cancelled), but once the transaction is done at the advertised price, the seller can't ask for the difference.

      Coles adopted a voluntary policy (scroll to 'our promise on price scanning) [coles.com.au] which says 'if advertised price is lower for a single item, you get your item free. For multiple items, only the first one is free'.
      If the law was as strict as you describe, that policy would be illegal.
      (I'm too lazy to search for Woolies, ALDI, aso - but I doubt they don't do something similar)

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford

      • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday February 07 2019, @12:02AM

        by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Thursday February 07 2019, @12:02AM (#797503)

        OK, my mistake.

        In New Zealand businesses must sell a product for the advertised price, even if it is an error. I was under the impression that our consumer protection stuff was pretty much a copy of yours.

        Every now and again there are stories of people getting $50 laptops and such because of some mistake made by a store.