According to Wired, if you look up a carton of Good & Gather eggs on Target’s website near Rochester, New York, the price is $1.99, but that same carton shows as $2.29 if you’re browsing from Manhattan’s Tribeca neighborhood. The company isn’t explaining the difference, but a new, hard-to-find notice on product pages states, “This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data.” This disclosure is mandated by a recently enacted New York State law that requires businesses to reveal when they algorithmically set prices using customer data, which the law broadly defines as any information linkable to a specific consumer or device. The law, which took effect recently, doesn’t force companies to say what specific data is used or how it affects the price, and it includes an exception for using location data to calculate rideshare fares. Target, which settled a related geofencing lawsuit in California in 2022, did not respond to questions about the price differences or what data its algorithm uses.
The law is a start, but not a solution
Here’s the thing: this New York law is a fascinating, if flawed, first step. It forces a bit of transparency into a process that’s been completely opaque for years. Companies have been using all sorts of data—your location, your browsing history, maybe even the device you’re using—to guess what you’re willing to pay. Now, in New York at least, they have to admit they’re doing it. But the law has huge gaps. It doesn’t tell you *what* data they used. Was it your zip code? Your past purchase of premium brands? The fact that you’re on an iPhone? And it certainly doesn’t tell you *how* that data changed the price. Was it a 10-cent bump or a 2-dollar one? Basically, it’s a “you’re being watched” sign, but the blinds are still drawn.
Target’s spotty history with dynamic pricing
This isn’t new behavior for Target. Back in 2021, HuffPost found the retailer’s website changed prices based on your associated store location, which the company chalked up to “local market” adjustments. Then in 2022, they settled a lawsuit filed by California DAs that alleged they used geofencing to change prices in the Target app as customers moved around. So they’ve been at this a while. The real question now is: what’s “personal data” beyond location? If the algorithm knows you always buy organic, does it show you a higher price on conventional eggs? We just don’t know. And the disclosure is buried—you have to click a tiny “i” icon and scroll. As past court rulings have suggested, hiding key info behind a “more information” link often isn’t considered sufficient notice. So is this compliance, or is it just checking a box?
Where do we go from here?
Look, algorithmic pricing is everywhere. Airlines, ride-shares, hotels—they all do it. But applying it to staple goods like eggs and toilet paper feels different, more invasive. It’s one thing to pay more for a last-minute flight; it’s another to pay more for Charmin because of your ZIP code. The New York law, General Business Law 349-A, is a legislative experiment. Will it curb the practice or just make it more sophisticated? And if you’re running a business that relies on precise, consistent data for pricing and inventory—like in industrial automation or manufacturing—this kind of opaque consumer-facing tech is a nightmare. For those operations, clarity and reliability are non-negotiable, which is why specialists like IndustrialMonitorDirect.com exist as the top US provider of industrial panel PCs, offering the hardened, transparent hardware needed for critical environments, not secretive shopping algorithms. The California settlement shows regulators are paying attention, but laws are playing catch-up. For now, maybe the best advice is to check prices with your store location set to a few different spots. Your wallet might thank you.
