NODE a4a3534eDEMOGRAPHICS v. ANONYMITY
Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>Tue, 4 Jun 1996 07:32:53 +0800
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SANDY SANDFORT
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
C'punks,
At 07:19 AM 6/3/96 +0200, "Senator Exon" wrote:
>... demographic data on big spenders is worth more than
>anonymous cash from people who buy packages of gum. Much
>more.
A true, but irrelevant. The correct dichotomy is between
demographic data on big spenders and anonymous big spenders.
Yes, it would be nice to have demographics on everyone, but
demographics are secondary to sales.
>An economy of big spenders is worthless unless they're in
>your store. The cards give evidence of who spends in your
>store, so you target your advertisements accordingly.
Of course, there are other ways to get demographics and
other ways to target advertising and other ways to get
big spenders into your store.
>I also shop only with cash, here and elsewhere.
>Double-blinded e-cash will be the only way to go, if it
>ever is the way to go.
And I bet they don't turn down your cash just because it
contains no demographic data. Thus demonstrating the
pragmatism of the market with regard to anonymity.
S a n d y
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NODE 9f43b6b7Re: DEMOGRAPHICS v. ANONYMITY
jonathon <grafolog@netcom.com>Tue, 4 Jun 1996 17:34:47 +0800
On Mon, 3 Jun 1996, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
Not Sandy, but somebody else wrote:
> >I also shop only with cash, here and elsewhere.
> >Double-blinded e-cash will be the only way to go, if it
> And I bet they don't turn down your cash just because it
> contains no demographic data. Thus demonstrating the
If that purchase is for more than $5K, they will turn
down your cash, unless you also provide
#1: Your name
#2: Your Address
#3: Proof of Identity.
Reason: _current_ IRS Requirements.
xan
jonathon
grafolog@netcom.com
**********************************************************************
* *
* Opinions expressed don't necessarily reflect my own views. *
* *
* There is no way that they can be construed to represent *
* any organization's views. *
* *
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
* *
* http://members.tripod.com/~graphology/index.html *
* *
***********************************************************************