Consumers today love a good deal, and the internet is often the best place to find one.

Because of that, the internet can be a cut-throat environment for retailers. With just a few clicks, it's possible for consumers to find the best price for just about any given product and if your company isn't the one offering it, there's a good chance you'll miss out on the sale.

If seven district attorneys in California are right, that sort of pressure may have led a well-known online retailer to mislead consumers about its prices.

According to the district attorneys, since at least 2006 "routinely and systematically made untrue and misleading comparative advertising claims about the prices of its products." One example cited by the Oakland Tribune: led consumers to believe it was selling for $550 less than the next cheapest competitor, when in fact it was apparently available at Walmart for significantly less than's price.

All told, the district attorneys claim that's behavior was designed to lead consumers into believing that they wouldn't find a better price from's competitors, and they're seeking at least $15m in fines and restitution.

As one might expect, denies the allegations being made against it. It claims that the district attorneys don't understand the nature of the price comparisons it offers potential customers on its site, and argues that it discloses to them how those price comparisons are generated.

Who is telling the truth? The parties will have to battle it out in court, but the dispute does highlight the risks involved in trying to convince consumers that you have the deal they're looking for. More than a few online retailers publicly compare their prices to their competitors. In theory, that's likely to be a good thing. After all, price is often an important part of a purchasing decision, and it makes sense for retailers to highlight how competitive they are on pricing.

But such price comparisons are typically generated automatically, and that means there's room for inaccuracies. Furthermore, it's not too far-fetched to imagine a retailer 'massaging' the inputs to display more favorable comparisons. For instance, a retailer might exclude from comparisons competitors that it knows regularly beat it on price in certain categories. And price comparisons might exclude available discounts, including free shipping offers, and taxes, which in some cases can change the price comparison dramatically.

At the end of the day, retails should use whatever tools they have available to convert potential customers into customers. And on-site price comparisons can be a valuable tool. But transparency and trust are key. While we'll have to wait to see the outcome of the lawsuit against, the allegations, whether accurate or not, should serve as a wake-up call to other online retailers.

Patricio Robles

Published 19 November, 2010 by Patricio Robles

Patricio Robles is a tech reporter at Econsultancy. Follow him on Twitter.

2642 more posts from this author

You might be interested in

Comments (3)



This just further cements my perception that they are slimy. I wrote a scathing post about them several months ago because they deliberately make their returns process as painful as possible to discourage returns. I am sure they think it reduces returns but it's also convinced me to never ever shop with them again.

over 7 years ago


click asia summit

Yeah you are absolutely right. After this episode, other online retailers will certainly be shaken up by this. Thanks for the update.

over 7 years ago



I Love Your Site. Practically every post makes
me lol, ponder, and learn something.

almost 6 years ago

Save or Cancel

Enjoying this article?

Get more just like this, delivered to your inbox.

Keep up to date with the latest analysis, inspiration and learning from the Econsultancy blog with our free Digital Pulse newsletter. You will receive a hand-picked digest of the latest and greatest articles, as well as snippets of new market data, best practice guides and trends research.