By editorial@silicon.com, 23 October 2000 00:10
COMMENT Years ago, price comparing meant traipsing around from one shop to another, risking wasted time and wasted petrol. But not anymore. For many items, especially the books, CDs, electrical goods and other gifts commonly purchased online, price comparison now takes the form of dot-com services such as kelkoo, shopsmart and pricerunner. However, recent bricks-and-mortar manoeuvring has jeopardised the status of these services. High-street electrical retailer Currys recently threatened to sue pricerunner.com for posting its prices on its comparison-shopping site. Last week, pricerunner.com claimed Currys backed down, but only after several lawyers and analysts told silicon.com that - amazingly - there is no precedent to say whether retailers have the right to refuse to give out pricing information. Any case could come down either on the side of a retailer claiming it holds proprietary information, or a comparison service, playing the 'prices in the public domain' card. Most comparison-shopping services need a critical mass of suppliers who are willing to play ball if they are to give a decent service, maintain user traffic and not become a dot-gone. If a major retailer - whether from the world of clicks or the world of bricks, or indeed from both - withholds information, there's a problem. It's not surprising Pricerunner held firm. It also claimed - and Currys also denies - it had staff expelled from Currys' premises. In the absence of a legal precedent, firms should be wary of poor PR and co-operate with internet-based price comparison firms. These new companies might not all make it - and in the US there have already been casualties - but withholding information smacks of having uncompetitive prices to hide. And if the law comes down in favour of price 'ownership', buyers will have something else to beware of.
In order to post a comment you need to be registered and logged in.
Log in or create your silicon.com account below