• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Loyalty / Reward Cards

Hey Ninja! Yep - I've been away but I'm back now - what are you doing in France?

Back on topic - I saw this thing on the BBC where credit card companies monitor your spending habits so that if you suddenly make a large purchase in, say Italy, they put a stop on the card until they have verified that the card has not been stolen!

It's all a bit 'Big Brother' when you think about it...
 
Emmy Mallow said:
.....credit card companies monitor your spending habits so that if you suddenly make a large purchase in, say Italy, they put a stop on the card until they have verified that the card has not been stolen!
Click to expand...

They must hate me - my spendings is eratic and all over Europe...
 
Emmy Mallow said:
Hey Ninja! Yep - I've been away but I'm back now - what are you doing in France?

Back on topic - I saw this thing on the BBC where credit card companies monitor your spending habits so that if you suddenly make a large purchase in, say Italy, they put a stop on the card until they have verified that the card has not been stolen!

It's all a bit 'Big Brother' when you think about it...
Click to expand...

Well, its a case of Big Brother vs Security. I have friends who have been phoned by credit card companies asking them if they have been on a holiday to, say, Japan recently. Friend has been nowhere further from home than Bognor so replies "no." Credit card company reveals that serious expenditure has taken place on the card from Japan and quickly sorts it out thus leading to no financial loss.

I think it is a great thing that credit card companies will phone up and check on irregular unusual transactions. They only do it to aid security for the card holder - nothing "Big Brother" about that.

As for poor Ninja - his (or her) expenditure will have no pattern and, should his card be stolen and taken on a spending joy-ride, then they will not pick up on this - check what is happening - and would struggle to prevent any financial loss.

Remember - the credit companies are seriously only doing things like that to protect your security - not to infringe your civil rights. It is like when a cashier or barman checks your note to ensure it is not a fake. It is a security measure which protects us all.
 
ninja said:
His :)
Click to expand...

I didn't like to presume. The Emma Peel sign-off suggested a bloke with great taste - but then I remembered that she was a huge icon for young women during that era.
 
I'd be quite happy to go a step further and have ID cards. Imagine a card that could be swiped that contained, your personal details, medical history, criminal record, driving details etc...
It would make things a hell of a lot easier and if you had nothing to hide then you'd not have a problem.

Of course there is the problem of manipulation or evil-doing but if there was some kinda secure way it could be maintained I'd have no qualms.
 
Loyalty/Reward Cards

I've just started using my new Nectar card and I have to say I'm pretty chuffed with it. Not only do I earn points on online shopping, but when I buy thigns in between my online orders, it remembers them and adds them to my usual shopping list online.

That does frighten me a bit though.

I'm sure they are mainly just a way to keep track of customers and I'm not fooled that I'm getting a particularly good deal with the 'points' I'm earning, but I figure I may as well get something out of the money I'm ploughing into them.

So I got to thinking, so what if they know what I order and what I buy? Does it really matter? Surely it can only benefit me? My shopping experience will gradually become tailored to my needs, or at least, the needs of the majority. To apply it to email, it would mean more emails about Dorothy Perkins latest collection and less emails trying to convince me that my girlfriend will leave me because my penis is too small.

I guess I feel the same way about the ID card issue, if I'm not up to anything dodgy, why should I care if they can track me down, read my bank statements and my telephone bill?

I fill out surveys, I think that's the only real way to change the world we live in, through my power as a consumer. Politics doesn't really have much meaning any more, it's just run by the ones who offend the least people, rather than the inspiring ones who will get things done, or however that quote goes!

So do you think I ought to be concerned about these permitted invasions into my privacy? Can it have any effect on me other than helping service providers answer my needs? Is it just about the principle, that these people shouldn't be able to see into our lives?
 
I don't think you should be concerned no. Why should we care if Sainsbury's knows what loo paper we use; the man in the shop over the road knows what ice cream I like, and I have no qualms about that.
The only reason I object to the ID card scheme is because it's a huge waste of public money, since it doesn't work in other countries, why should it work here? (Particularly as so many of the quietly bolshy British will just refuse to go along with it, rather like the poll tax fiasco).
The only snag with filling in surveys is you get more junk mail, but then some people like junk mail.
 
I work in retail and know of no sinister scheme behind loyalty cards, they are mainly used to figure out which products appeal to which sorts of customers.
Having said that i dont hold any reward/store cards (apart from my company discount card) due to the high volume of junk mail they generate, and because im basically a very paranoid person...
 
I used to work at Experian when all this was taking off. I'm not sure what the logistics are now, but the jist of the whole thing at the time was to obtain demographics on consumer habits according to postcode. That way, supermarkets (who hired Experian to facilitate the info gathering)could target people within certain postcodes with vouchers and deals which reflected their shopping habits, and to make them carry on shopping there. Simple as that really.
 
In Nancy Werlin's excellent thriller, *The Killer's Cousin,* the protagonist moves to Boston where the local supermarket automatically issues him a store points card (not affiliated with a credit card), and he almost subliminally hooks up with a citywide network of card swappers who are uncomfortable with market tracking and are deliberately out to confound the system. It becomes a subtle motif in the story, that he's connected to hundreds of strangers in a mildly subversive activity, and he always looks to see whose points he's building that day. If it seems, when you read it, that Boston women are more likely to be mildly subversive than men, it's because she used a lot of her writing friends and women are overrepresented in the YA market.

If "they" can't track what I'm buying, the job of that jackass who is employed solely in running ahead of me and making sure nothing I want, no matter how obvious or useful, is in the store will be much harder. (You think I'm joking, and I sort of am, but come shopping with me sometime! I can spend hours of frustration looking for exotic things like white blouses with breast pockets and being laughed at by store personnel for knowing what I want instead of being led by their superior judgement of what I need. :roll: )

The U.S. Government, and who knows who else, is developing sophisticated "data mining" systems to allow them to invade our privacy on the supposition that we are, or could be, or would be if we dared, terrorists. Who knows what they'll decide to look for, how they'll interpret it, or what they'll decide constitutes terrorist activity? We're talking about the people who turned a fuzzy picture of a trailer into weapons of mass destruction aimed at D.C.

And you don't have to do anything wrong to want your privacy. Supposing you're on the school board. Your niece is a classic animation collector, and you spot The Ultimate Bambi DVD, with interviews with all the animators and outtakes and other cool features. You snap it up and make her ecstatically happy - job well done. However, you live in deer hunting country, and two-thirds of the people in your district loathe, despise, and fear Bambi as a tool of the mushy liberals who want to take their guns away and teach their children to hug trees. (Again, you think I'm joking, but oh I could introduce you to people!) You don't want to take their guns away and you couldn't from your position on the school board anyway, but this does you no good when the news that you bought That Movie leaks out.

See what I mean?

I personally buy so little that I normally ignore point reward systems anyway. The only ones I use are the little cards issued by the indy bookstore, where they punch off dots around the edges every time you make a purchase, and when the card is full it's worth $15 on the next purchase. It's low tech, it doesn't track what books I bought, and I buy books in sufficient numbers that I don't lose the card before I can turn it in.
 
i have a sainsburys card... mainly cos when harry was small we always seemd to be buying packs of nappies (they did good biodegradable ones).. but we usualy went shopping there with our mate who almost exclusively bought booze... so our shopping record shows nappies and whisky...
 
sidecar_jon said:
so our shopping record shows nappies and whisky...
Click to expand...

That's probably enough to get a social services investigation off the ground nowdays. ;)

I have no loyalty cards for obvious reasons.
 
Nice link Entia.

I doubt this guy will mess up the demographic though, its oly one card in millions.

Anyone ever been asked to supply their name and address at the checkout?
My company asks customers to do this from time to time along with a total spend, its quite common for staff to forget to ask then fill up sheets at the end of their shift with random postcodes/amounts.
 
That's high-tech card swapping on those links. Nancy's character would quietly swap with the person next to him in line at the checkout; in one scene, a checkout girl smoothly pulls the switch for them. Basic, low-tech, simple, untrackable (presuming the Present Administration gets any funky ideas), and community friendly.

The purpose of doing this would not be to screw the store particularly; just to keep the database from reflecting any reality about you and other reluctant trackees.
 
I'd understood that thinks lik the Nectar card wer problematic as they compile data from a number of sources allowing them to build up a relatively detailled profile of you and your shopping habits. These then get passed on to their various 'partners'.

Even Big Balls Blunkett thinks its a bad thing:

Blunkett concern on loyalty cards

There should be more checks on the use of information collected through supermarket loyalty cards, Home Secretary David Blunkett has suggested.

In a speech, Mr Blunkett said the cards produced key details about people's shopping habits but were accepted because they were run by private firms.

People should not distrust ID cards because they are a state idea, he said.

But the loyalty card firm Mr Blunkett used to illustrate his point described the comparison as "pretty extreme".

'Real issue'

In a speech to the Institute for Public Policy Research, Mr Blunkett ridiculed a newspaper story which had suggested the compulsory ID cards could allow the government to track how everybody shopped.

It is a really good opportunity to start debating what is know about us, by whom, who supervises it and how we can get a grip on it
David Blunkett
Home Secretary
Click to expand...

Holding up a Nectar card, he said people voluntarily signed up to allow such details to be collected through such loyalty cards by private firms.

"There is a real issue about how that should be overseen and supervised," said Mr Blunkett.

He suggested broadening the debate about the "very limited access to and use of information in terms of ID cards" to look at protecting privacy in such cases.

"It is a really good opportunity now to start debating what is known about us, by whom, who supervises and oversees it and how we can get a grip on it," he said.

The minister challenged the idea that if government was proposing something like ID cards it must be "inherently wrong" and would lead to "oppression" while whatever private firms knew about people was regarded as perfectly legitimate.

We do not know what toothpaste people use, nor do we want to
Rob Gierkink
Nectar
Click to expand...

Mr Blunkett later said he had no loyalty cards himself and had borrowed the Nectar card to illustrate his point.

On the Home Office website the home secretary is quoted as saying loyalty cards can be used to show the size of households, eating habits, whether people worked and what toothpaste they used.

'No comparison'

But Loyalty Management UK (LMUK), which runs Nectar, accused Mr Blunkett of making "blatantly inaccurate" claims.

Chief executive Rob Gierkink told BBC News the company did not pool information about specific purchases and only held details such as the total amount spent when a card was used.

"We do not know what toothpaste people use, nor do we want to," he said.

Individual retailers in the scheme could determine what items were bought in their stores, he said, but it was not shared with other companies.

Brian Sinclair, LMUK's client services director, said he was surprised Mr Blunkett had linked voluntary store loyalty cards to mandatory ID cards.

"He seems to have missed the point of consumer choice," he argued.

Customers with complaints about information collected in loyalty card schemes can currently go to the information commissioner.

Orwellian?

Protesters from campaign group NO2ID greeted Mr Blunkett as he arrived for the speech by burning an ID card bearing his photo.

Organiser Mark Littlewood said: "It's not hysterical to be talking about an Orwellian society and a total surveillance state.

"We are all extremely concerned that the government is establishing an enormous database on all 60 million of us which will link together a vast amount of information on us."

But Mr Blunkett suggested the group's stunt would push up public support for ID cards from its current level of 80%, according to opinion polls.

Mr Blunkett said the ID card plan added little costs to what was already being done in creating a database for passports holding biometric details such as iris scans and fingerprints.

Political failure?

Such a database would prevent people travelling to America having to pay $100 on every visit for a biometric visa, he suggested.

The cards were not a panacea for everything but could help stop terrorists using multiple identities, clamp down on illegal working and ensure people from overseas did not get free NHS treatment without being entitled to it, he said.

Mr Blunkett promised a watchdog would keep tabs on the information put on the new database and on who was allowed to access the details.

The scheme would be worthwhile if it reinforced identity and citizenship, he said. If not, he would "be remembered as one of the biggest political failures that Britain has ever produced".


-----------------------
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/u ... 018939.stm

Published: 2004/11/17 17:41:39 GMT

© BBC MMIV
Click to expand...
 
Emperor said:
I'd understood that thinks lik the Nectar card wer problematic as they compile data from a number of sources allowing them to build up a relatively detailled profile of you and your shopping habits. These then get passed on to their various 'partners'.

Even Big Balls Blunkett thinks its a bad thing:

Blunkett concern on loyalty cards

There should be more checks on the use of information collected through supermarket loyalty cards, Home Secretary David Blunkett has suggested.

In a speech, Mr Blunkett said the cards produced key details about people's shopping habits but were accepted because they were run by private firms.

People should not distrust ID cards because they are a state idea, he said.

But the loyalty card firm Mr Blunkett used to illustrate his point described the comparison as "pretty extreme".

'Real issue'

In a speech to the Institute for Public Policy Research, Mr Blunkett ridiculed a newspaper story which had suggested the compulsory ID cards could allow the government to track how everybody shopped.

It is a really good opportunity to start debating what is know about us, by whom, who supervises it and how we can get a grip on it
David Blunkett
Home Secretary
Click to expand...

Holding up a Nectar card, he said people voluntarily signed up to allow such details to be collected through such loyalty cards by private firms.

"There is a real issue about how that should be overseen and supervised," said Mr Blunkett.

He suggested broadening the debate about the "very limited access to and use of information in terms of ID cards" to look at protecting privacy in such cases.

"It is a really good opportunity now to start debating what is known about us, by whom, who supervises and oversees it and how we can get a grip on it," he said.

The minister challenged the idea that if government was proposing something like ID cards it must be "inherently wrong" and would lead to "oppression" while whatever private firms knew about people was regarded as perfectly legitimate.

We do not know what toothpaste people use, nor do we want to
Rob Gierkink
Nectar
Click to expand...

Mr Blunkett later said he had no loyalty cards himself and had borrowed the Nectar card to illustrate his point.

On the Home Office website the home secretary is quoted as saying loyalty cards can be used to show the size of households, eating habits, whether people worked and what toothpaste they used.

'No comparison'

But Loyalty Management UK (LMUK), which runs Nectar, accused Mr Blunkett of making "blatantly inaccurate" claims.

Chief executive Rob Gierkink told BBC News the company did not pool information about specific purchases and only held details such as the total amount spent when a card was used.

"We do not know what toothpaste people use, nor do we want to," he said.

Individual retailers in the scheme could determine what items were bought in their stores, he said, but it was not shared with other companies.

Brian Sinclair, LMUK's client services director, said he was surprised Mr Blunkett had linked voluntary store loyalty cards to mandatory ID cards.

"He seems to have missed the point of consumer choice," he argued.

Customers with complaints about information collected in loyalty card schemes can currently go to the information commissioner.

Orwellian?

Protesters from campaign group NO2ID greeted Mr Blunkett as he arrived for the speech by burning an ID card bearing his photo.

Organiser Mark Littlewood said: "It's not hysterical to be talking about an Orwellian society and a total surveillance state.

"We are all extremely concerned that the government is establishing an enormous database on all 60 million of us which will link together a vast amount of information on us."

But Mr Blunkett suggested the group's stunt would push up public support for ID cards from its current level of 80%, according to opinion polls.

Mr Blunkett said the ID card plan added little costs to what was already being done in creating a database for passports holding biometric details such as iris scans and fingerprints.

Political failure?

Such a database would prevent people travelling to America having to pay $100 on every visit for a biometric visa, he suggested.

The cards were not a panacea for everything but could help stop terrorists using multiple identities, clamp down on illegal working and ensure people from overseas did not get free NHS treatment without being entitled to it, he said.

Mr Blunkett promised a watchdog would keep tabs on the information put on the new database and on who was allowed to access the details.

The scheme would be worthwhile if it reinforced identity and citizenship, he said. If not, he would "be remembered as one of the biggest political failures that Britain has ever produced".


-----------------------
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/u ... 018939.stm

Published: 2004/11/17 17:41:39 GMT

© BBC MMIV
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Do loyalty cards invade our privacy?

By Martha Buckley
BBC News

According to David Blunkett there's no need for us to be scared of his national identity cards as they will be no worse than the loyalty card schemes we sign up to voluntarily.

As he waved a Nectar card around during a speech on Wednesday, the home secretary said it was high time someone looked into the way personal information stored by such schemes.

But how much information do loyalty cards really store about us and is it fair to compare them to state ID cards?

According to Loyalty Management UK, which runs the Nectar - the country's biggest loyalty scheme - the cards are not nearly as sinister as Mr Blunkett made out.

The government wants ID cards containing biometric data such as fingerprints and iris scans to be compulsory by 2013.

These would hold information on everything from medical details, benefits entitlement and criminal records, which could be accessed by police and other authorities.

The voluntary Nectar scheme, on the other hand, collects strictly limited personal information and data on shopping habits and is governed by the 1988 Data Protection Act.

Basic data, such as name, address, gender and contact details, is provided voluntarily by Nectar collectors when they sign up.

Members can also choose whether or not to provide additional information such as how many people there are in their household, how many cars they own and where they shop.

Not only do we not collect information on what brand of toothpaste you're buying but to be honest, we don't care
Brian Sinclair
Click to expand...

After this, each time the card is used to collect points, details of the date, location and points earned - but not what was actually bought - will be sent to Nectar.

The information is stored in one of the country's largest databases but is not sold on or shared with companies outside the scheme.

Instead, it is used to target Nectar collectors with offers designed to encourage them to collect more points and to tempt them into using the sponsors' shops and businesses.

What the data will be used for is explained on the Nectar registration form and those who object can tick a selection of opt-out boxes.

Brian Sinclair, Loyalty Management UK's client services director, says: "Not only do we not collect information on what brand of toothpaste you're buying but to be honest, we don't care."

"We do not capture information about what's actually in people's shopping baskets, though others may do."

However, member companies, such as Sainsbury's may also use the scheme to collect more detailed information on the products customers buy, which they will use for marketing purposes.

A Sainsbury's spokeswoman said: "Sainsbury's does know what you are buying but we do not use this information to target people on an individual basis.

"Instead it goes into a database, which we can use to see whether, for example, customers in a certain area like buying healthy food, or look at what kind of products are popular with women aged 20 to 30.

"We might then decide to send out customer offers to people in those categories."

Loyalty Management UK estimates Nectar is one of some 160 loyalty schemes operating in the UK - not all of which may be as scrupulous about what they do with the data they collect.

Mr Sinclair said: "We are the biggest in the marketplace and as such I think we have to be the most protective and careful about how we use our customers' information.

"To try and make a comparison between mandatory state-run ID cards and a voluntary loyalty scheme is pretty extreme."

He says the firm works closely with the Information Commissioner, who regulates data protection rules.

I wish we could trust the Home Office to be as alert to privacy concerns as some of the supermarkets, and that's saying something
Simon Davies
Click to expand...

Since the 1998 Data Protection Act came into force in has been illegal for companies to sell on people's details without their consent or for uses other than those they were originally told about.

Often this simply means companies ask people to tick a box to say if they do not want their details passed on.

Simon Davies, director of campaign group Privacy International, says the home secretary's comparison of loyalty cards to compulsory identity cards is "ridiculous".

He said: "The loyalty card system is as close as we get to a genuinely voluntary system.

"There are few some sneaky tricks involved on the part of the supermarkets, at least, but in general, there's been a trend to limit the amassing of the information because it's a false economy.

"What companies are looking for is actually loyalty. They want people to shop at their stores consistently. It's a very simple equation and I haven't got a problem with that."

"I believe the big loyalty schemes are relatively paranoid about breaching the Data Protection Act because if they did, they would lose their customers' trust and would be such big targets for campaigners.

We should be creating a climate in which customers are more aware and more empowered and learn to see their personal information as a valuable resource
Susanne Lace
Click to expand...

"I wish we could trust the Home Office to be as alert to privacy concerns as some of the supermarkets, and that's saying something."

Mr Davies said he was most concerned about the Information Commissioner's lack of power to enforce data protection laws and make sure people's personal information is not being traded illegally.

Susanne Lace, senior policy officer at the National Consumer Council, was more wary.

She said: "From my research I have found people do not know much about how their information is dealt with and how it's handled. They are not very aware of what is going on but when you ask them about privacy, they are concerned about it.

"David Blunkett says now is a good time to start debating what is known about us and I think he's right. It is a good time."

She said: "The Information Commission actually regulates the Data Protection Act but it needs stronger powers and more resources. Almost every organisation in the country stores some kind of information about its customers or staff, so it is a huge job.

"I don't think firms do enough at the moment to let people know about what they are doing with their information. They should be more upfront and provide ongoing chances for people to choose what information they would like to be used.

"We should be creating a climate in which customers are more aware and more empowered and learn to see their personal information as a valuable resource."

-----------------------
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/uk/4020023.stm

Published: 2004/11/19 02:30:42 GMT

© BBC MMIV
Click to expand...
 
Blunkett hopes that by comparing ID cards to loyalty cards he'll persuade us that it's a great idea. What he conveniently overlooks is that key word- voluntary.
I make a very useful amount of money with my loyalty cards. Yes i know that the points money is included in the prices, and that there's no such thing as a free lunch, but in this case the people without the loyalty cards are paying for most of my lunch. :D
 
Peni said:
And you don't have to do anything wrong to want your privacy. Supposing you're on the school board. Your niece is a classic animation collector, and you spot The Ultimate Bambi DVD, with interviews with all the animators and outtakes and other cool features. You snap it up and make her ecstatically happy - job well done. However, you live in deer hunting country, and two-thirds of the people in your district loathe, despise, and fear Bambi as a tool of the mushy liberals who want to take their guns away and teach their children to hug trees. (Again, you think I'm joking, but oh I could introduce you to people!) You don't want to take their guns away and you couldn't from your position on the school board anyway, but this does you no good when the news that you bought That Movie leaks out.
Click to expand...
Some Americans see Bambi as a subversive threat? That's truly terrifying.
 
beakboo said:
I don't think you should be concerned no. Why should we care if Sainsbury's knows what loo paper we use; the man in the shop over the road knows what ice cream I like, and I have no qualms about that.
The only reason I object to the ID card scheme is because it's a huge waste of public money, since it doesn't work in other countries, why should it work here? (Particularly as so many of the quietly bolshy British will just refuse to go along with it, rather like the poll tax fiasco).
The only snag with filling in surveys is you get more junk mail, but then some people like junk mail.
Click to expand...

What I object to in filling out surveys is that they always want to know your annual income, whether you are a house owner, etc. I suppose they want to know what sector of society in which to categorise you, but I leave these sections blank when they have no relevance to the item/service the survey relates to.

Carole
 
One complaint I read about loyalty cards was specifically aimed at Tesco, who denied it. The idea was that they were using Clubcards to keep track of what you bought. When they discovered something was popular, they'd send out vouchers offering free/cheap trials of equivalent, but more expensive/luxury items, so you'd try them. After they felt the populace had started moving towards the slightly more expensive option, just drop the cheaper line so they only have the more expensive one left. The idea being to increase the cost of consumer's taste and thus their profit, which certainly sounds evil ;)

The people who's website talked about that (I forget the URL) I believe simply rotated supermarkets instead of cards, so that they'd get part of their shopping in one, part of their shopping in another, and rotate what they got where, so as to skew the database.
 
Colin said:
The people who's website talked about that (I forget the URL) I believe simply rotated supermarkets instead of cards, so that they'd get part of their shopping in one, part of their shopping in another, and rotate what they got where, so as to skew the database.
Click to expand...
I do that anyway. Tesco's think that I live on Daddies ketchup and lamb flavour Iams. Just as well Waitrose don't have a loyalty card, they'd have me down as a sausage crazed alcoholic. :twisted:
 
More worryingly, have you ever looked at the names on the 'sample' store cards (on placards and leaflets)? The surname on both Homebase and Tesco's ones is Mason. :roll:
 
Hi ho, hi ho, off to work we go!

The commercial data collected by loyalty cards has a lot in common with the data collected, legitimately or illegitimately, by cookies and various forms of adware, spyware and identity theft programmes.

The use to wich this data can be put ranges from the innocuous to the diabolical. Depends on who gets the data and what they do with it. (Even honest databases can be stolen by data-thieves.)

I would read the privacy disclaimer very carefully before signing up for any thing. Some merchants use data internally only and some will sell to third parties, including marketing firms that will sell to almost anybody.

I read the webpage of a private company in the US that can turn publically avalable and data-mined data into a voting intention map that is accurate on the household by household basis--in other words, that jar of pickles you buy at the tony Deli around the corner might be revealing that you vote for Ralph Nader when combined with other data.

This is the danger of data-mining--patterns can be found which you don't even notice in your own life. THEY can literally know more about you than you do!

I read a book some years ago, entitled The Clustering of America , about the categories in which marketers divided the American population at the time of writing. There were dozens and trust me, they were pretty detailed portraits of the most common types of people. People that you meet on the street everyday. The amount of data collected has skyrocketed since then, and the ability of marketing companies and others to pinpoint an invidiual in a sea of statistics is growing, even when data is collected anonymously.

If you are the only gay couple in your block who votes Republican and owns a pit-bull, it won't be all that hard to guess who bought the dog-food, gay porno mags, and I Love Bush bumpersticker on their VISA card on October 23, 2004, or vice versa, to pinpoint where that person lives, even without access to your personal information.

I mostly avoid loyalty cards because they are a nuisance--they slow down transactions, overflow my wallet and card holder, and they're mostly there to sell me stuff I don't need, don't want and probably can't afford, whether by targeting advertising more accurately or by encouraging me to spend for the discount or benefits offered.

There are more efficient ways to collect data--the cash registers can do that. There are also more efficient ways to target big spenders or loyal customers. And there are certainly more efficient ways to provide low-cost, quality goods and services.

Even if I am losing money by not having certain loyalty cards, I object to them and avoid them. I'd sooner have lower prices and better service without the risk and without the hassle.
 
I also avoid using them for the same practical reasons. Most of the innovations introduced at the checkout in recent years - loyalty cards, cashback, chip and pin - just seem to make the queues move even slower. The most valuable thing we have is time - and I'm sick of mine being wasted stuck in a queue behind some dimwit who wants to know exactly how many reward points they've amassed, or is umming and ahhing about how much cashback they want.
 
if i have to shop at shops which use these cards, i just send the receipts to a friend back home, so she can add the pionts to her cards :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top