In the jargon of the grocery industry, this means the buttons can be "supplier funded" - Procter & Gamble probably pay Amazon a reasonable portion of the cost of the button, as a marketing method.
In the jargon of the grocery industry, this means the buttons can be "supplier funded" - Procter & Gamble probably pay Amazon a reasonable portion of the cost of the button, as a marketing method.
I'd like to see a configurable button that orders, say, the cheapest paper towels that have at least a 4-star rating. The suppliers probably wouldn't be happy about the competition though.
That said, it's almost impossible to imagine that a future where Dash is successful doesn't contain configurable buttons like the ones you describe - they probably just won't be free.
You're not the target market. Some people exhibit strong brand loyalty for some stuff. In the UK you'll get people saying that baked beans must be Heinz and no other brand.
I tend to agree with you. I want a button I can push to order the cheapest washing detergent. But that gets complicated. Do I mean actual cheapest price at the till, or do I mean cheapest per wash? Does that mean I want to buy a huge 15 litre tub of industrial detergent?
> that have at least a 4-star rating.
Amazon ratings are already sub-optimal. I could imagine a time when all P&G employees have to buy P&G products from Amazon, and have to give high star ratings, in order to help fix the ratings. Perhaps I'm just overly cynical.
..but the point is that these people can _choose_ to exhibit such loyalty.
This is well-studied and understood. People can stick with a brand for years, until suddenly they change it for another and completely forgot about the other.
The dash seems like just another convenient lockin
Hadn't thought of that angle at all. Enlightening comment!
Sounds like a win / win for both P&G and Amazon...