U.S. patent application number 13/754620 was filed with the patent office on 2014-07-31 for system and method for price matching and comparison.
This patent application is currently assigned to Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.. The applicant listed for this patent is Chad Fox, Paul Hatch, Joseph Mejstrik, Melisa Rodriguez. Invention is credited to Chad Fox, Paul Hatch, Joseph Mejstrik, Melisa Rodriguez.
Application Number | 20140214518 13/754620 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 51223941 |
Filed Date | 2014-07-31 |
United States Patent
Application |
20140214518 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Hatch; Paul ; et
al. |
July 31, 2014 |
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PRICE MATCHING AND COMPARISON
Abstract
A method and system for providing a consumer comparative pricing
data from at least two merchants is discussed. In one aspect of the
invention a customer of a merchant queries a database containing
time and location specific pricing data for competitors of the
first merchant. If the query shows that the customer could have
purchased the same item or items for a lower price at a competitor,
the first merchant awards the customer an on-line credit that is
redeemable at the merchant. In another aspect, a consumer uploads
an image of a competitor's receipt. The item specific data on the
receipt is converted to UPC codes on an item by item basis. These
UPC codes are then compared against the merchant's pricing database
and the consumer is provided data set comparing the prices the
consumer paid to the prices the consumer would have paid had the
consumer shopped at the merchant.
Inventors: |
Hatch; Paul; (Bentonville,
AR) ; Fox; Chad; (Bentonville, AR) ;
Rodriguez; Melisa; (Bentonville, AR) ; Mejstrik;
Joseph; (Bentonville, AR) |
|
Applicant: |
Name |
City |
State |
Country |
Type |
Hatch; Paul
Fox; Chad
Rodriguez; Melisa
Mejstrik; Joseph |
Bentonville
Bentonville
Bentonville
Bentonville |
AR
AR
AR
AR |
US
US
US
US |
|
|
Assignee: |
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Bentonville
AR
|
Family ID: |
51223941 |
Appl. No.: |
13/754620 |
Filed: |
January 30, 2013 |
Current U.S.
Class: |
705/14.34 ;
705/26.64 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G06Q 30/0225 20130101;
G06Q 30/0234 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
705/14.34 ;
705/26.64 |
International
Class: |
G06Q 30/02 20060101
G06Q030/02 |
Claims
1. A computer implemented method for providing a merchant's
customer with a redeemable credit based on a difference in purchase
price, the method comprising the steps of: Storing in a first
electronic database data related to a customer's purchasing
transaction at said merchant wherein said data includes the date of
the transaction, the price of at least one item purchased in the
transaction, and a transaction specific identifier that is printed
on the receipt that is given to said customer; Storing in a second
electronic database date specific pricing data for items sold by at
least one competitor of said merchant; Receiving a request to
compare the price paid by said customer at said merchant with the
price of the identical item as advertised by one or more of
merchant's competitors on the date of said customer's transaction;
Retrieving said customer's purchase data from said first database
and comparing said customer's data with pricing data from said
second database; Identifying any item purchased by said customer
which was offered for sale at a lower price by at least one of said
merchant's competitors on the date of said customer's transaction;
Calculating the difference between the price paid by the customer
at said merchant and the identified lowest price offered by one of
said merchant's competitors; and Awarding the customer a redeemable
credit at said merchant for the calculated difference in price.
2. The method according to claim 1 further comprising the step of
providing the customer with item by item cost comparison data along
with notification of the award of redeemable credit.
3. A method according to claim 1 in which the step of receiving a
request from said customer comprises having the customer submit a
transaction specific identifier.
4. A method according to claim 3 wherein said system portal is
selected from the group consisting of mobile applications, social
media portals, the merchant's website and a point of sale
portal
5. A method according to claim 1 wherein the step of storing in
said first and second databases comprises identifying and storing
at least one item specific characteristic for each item.
6. A method according to claim 5 wherein said at least one item
specific characteristic is a uniform product code.
7. A method according to claim 5 wherein the step of comparing said
customer's data from said first database with pricing data from
said second database comprises the steps of Searching said first
database and identifying a specific characteristic for an item
purchased by said customer at said merchant; Searching said second
database for an item having the same specific characteristic and
identifying such an item; and Comparing the price associated with
said item in said first database with any prices associated with
said item in the second database.
8. A method according to claim 1 wherein said redeemable credit is
in the form of a credit made to an online account.
9. A method according to claim 1 wherein said redeemable credit is
applied at the point of sale.
10. A computer implemented system for providing a merchant's
customer with a redeemable credit based on a difference in purchase
price, the system comprising: A first electronic database that
stores purchase data generated by a customer's purchasing
transaction at said merchant wherein said data includes the date of
the transaction, the price of at least one item purchased in the
transaction, and a transaction specific identifier that is printed
on the receipt that is given to said customer; A second electronic
database that stores date specific pricing data for items sold by
at least one competitor of said merchant; A portal for receiving a
request from said customer to compare the price paid by said
customer at said merchant with the price of the identical item as
advertised by one or more of merchant's competitors on the date of
said customer's transaction; A data comparison engine that is
capable of retrieving said customer's purchase data from said first
database and comparing said customer's data with pricing data from
said second database and identifying any item purchased by said
customer which was offered for sale at a lower price by at least
one of said merchant's competitors on the date of said customer's
transaction; A price calculation engine that is capable of
calculating the difference between the price paid by the customer
at said merchant and the identified lowest price offered by one of
said merchant's competitors; and An award module that is capable of
automatically awarding the customer a credit that is redeemable at
said merchant for the calculated difference in price.
11. The system according to claim 10 wherein the system provides
the customer with item by item cost comparison data along with
notification of the award of redeemable credit.
12. A system according to claim 10 in which the portal queries the
customer for said transaction specific identifier.
13. A system according to claim 12 wherein said portal is selected
from the group consisting of mobile applications, social media
portals, the merchant's website and a point of sale portal.
14. A system according to claim 10 wherein said first and second
databases associate at least one specific characteristic with each
item.
15. A system according to claim 14 wherein said at least one item
specific characteristic is a uniform product code.
16. A system according to claim 14 wherein said data comparison
engine is further capable of Searching said first database and
identifying a specific characteristic for an item purchased by said
customer at said merchant; Searching said second database for an
item having the same specific characteristic and identifying such
an item; and Comparing the price associated with said item in said
first database with any prices associated with said item in the
second database.
17. A system according to claim 10 wherein said redeemable credit
is in the form of a credit made to an online account.
18. A system according to claim 10 wherein said redeemable credit
is in the form of a credit that is applied at the point of
sale.
19. A computer implemented method for providing price comparison
data to a consumer, the method comprising the steps of:
Electronically receiving an image of a retail receipt issued by a
first merchant, said receipt containing purchase data wherein the
purchase data contained on said receipt comprises (1) the date of
the purchase, (3) the location of the purchase, (3) a price for at
least one purchased item, and (4) at least one item specific
characteristic for each purchased item; Transcribing at least one
item specific characteristic for each item listed on said receipt;
Matching at least one transcribed item specific characteristic for
each item to a UPC code based on a set of matching criteria thereby
obtaining a first merchant UPC code list containing at least one
item listed on said receipt; Identifying a second merchant store
location that is closest to the location of the purchase from the
first merchant; Searching said second merchant's pricing database,
identifying UPC codes and prices for items sold at said second
merchant store location that match the UPC codes on said first
merchant UPC code list; Presenting the consumer a data set
comprising (a) a list of items purchased at said first merchant,
(b) the price for items purchased at said first merchant, and (c)
the price offered by the second merchant for at least one item
purchased at said first merchant.
20. A computer system for providing price comparison data to a
consumer, the system comprising: An intake module for receiving an
electronic image of a retail receipt issued by a first merchant,
said receipt having purchase data for at least one item; A
transcription module for converting said purchase data to a machine
readable format; A UPC matching module for assigning a UPC code to
said at least one item identified on said receipt: A pricing
database for a second merchant, said pricing database containing
UPC and price data for items sold by said second merchant, said UPC
and price data being searchable on a location specific basis; A
search engine with access to said second merchant pricing database
that compares the UPC codes associated with the receipt with
location specific UPC codes for the second merchant, identifies any
matching UPC codes, and collects second merchant pricing data for
the matched UPC codes; and A data compilation module that presents
the consumer a data set comprising (a) a list of items purchased at
said first merchant, (b) the price for items purchased at said
first merchant, and (c) the price offered by the second merchant
for at least one item purchased at said first merchant.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0001] The present invention relates generally to computer
software, and more particularly to a merchant based method and
system for providing product price comparison and other information
to a consumer. One aspect of the invention includes a merchant
based price matching method and system for providing a redeemable
credit to a customer if that customer could have purchased an item
for a lesser price at another merchant. Another aspect of the
invention is to invite the customers of competitors to use the
invention to compare the prices they paid at the competitor with
the prices at the merchant.
[0002] One problem frequently encountered by merchants is the
inability to fully engage with customers and create "customer
loyalty" through traditional advertising. Currently, many merchants
attempt to gain and retain customers via advertising campaigns that
highlight low prices for specific items for a given period of time:
a typical "sale" price. This type of advertising campaign works
well for shoppers that are interested in that particular item but
have little effect on those customers that are not interested in
that item.
[0003] Therefore some merchants also advertise themselves as being
"the low cost leader" or "not being undersold" or "always having
low prices" in an attempt to instill within a consumer's mind a
positive perception that goes beyond shopping for a specific "on
sale" item. This approach to advertising often has negative to
mixed results as JCP Penney discovered in 2012 due to customers
needing the "on sale" "hook" to bring them into a store.
[0004] Merchants need a way to combine both marketing concepts to
achieve maximum return on their marketing investments. To
accomplish this goal a merchant needs a tangible, interactive
system and method of providing "continuing education" to existing
and potential customers regarding cost savings that the customer
could have obtained had he/she shopped at the merchant instead of
at a competitor. It is one thing to advertise that Merchant A is
the "low cost leader" but it is quite another to show a consumer,
on an item-by-item basis, that the consumer could have saved "X"
dollars had they bought all of their items at Merchant A instead of
Merchant B.
[0005] In addition, a merchant needs an interactive system and
method to prove they are the "low cost" leader and thus neutralize
any "on sale" incentives offered by their competitors. One such
system would incorporate a typical "ad match" guarantee but be
entirely online and provide a customer a rebate in the form of a
credit that can be used for subsequent purchases. Such a system
would create loyalty among customers in several ways. First, the
customer experiences exceptional convenience. The customer knows
that there is no need to travel to another store to save money or
carry sales circulars into a store as proof of a lower sales price.
Second, the customer still receives the psychological benefits of
participating in advertised "sales" because all "sale" prices are
valid at one merchant. Third, the customer receives tangible
evidence in the form of a redeemable credit proving that the
merchant really "will not be undersold".
[0006] Because such a system and method will be used by the general
public it must be simple to use and require minimum input and
thought from shoppers, particularly those who do not enjoy shopping
and do not have the time to engage in time consuming cost
comparisons.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0007] In one aspect, the invention is a computer implemented
method for providing a merchant's customer with a redeemable credit
based on a difference in purchase price. The method comprises the
steps of storing in a first electronic database data related to a
customer's purchasing transaction at the merchant. The stored data
includes the date of the transaction, the price of at least one
item purchased in the transaction, and a transaction specific
identifier that is printed on the receipt that is given to the
customer. The method also includes storing in a second electronic
database date specific pricing data for items sold by at least one
competitor of the merchant.
[0008] The customer submits an electronic request (e.g., via a
webpage) for the method of the invention to query the databases and
compare the price paid by the customer at the merchant with the
price of the identical item as advertised by one or more of the
merchant's competitors on the date of the customer's transaction.
The method retrieves the customer's purchase data from the first
database and compares the customer's data with pricing data from
said second database containing the competitor pricing data. The
method identifies any item purchased by the customer which was
offered for sale at a lower price by at least one of the merchant's
competitors on the date of the customer's transaction.
[0009] The method then calculates the difference between the price
paid by the customer at the merchant and the identified lowest
price offered by one of the merchant's competitors on the date of
the customer's transaction. The customer then receives a redeemable
credit at said merchant for the calculated difference in price. [We
may also want to include that it provides information about when
the merchant's prices were lower than its competitors' advertised
prices.--Paul]
[0010] Another aspect of the invention is a computer implemented
system for providing a merchant's customer with a redeemable credit
based on a difference in purchase price. The system according to
the invention comprises a first electronic database that stores
purchase data generated by a customer's purchasing transaction at
the merchant. The stored purchase data comprises the date of the
transaction, the price of at least one item purchased in the
transaction, and a transaction specific identifier that is printed
on the receipt that is given to said customer, among other data
desired by the merchant.
[0011] The system also comprises a second electronic database that
stores date specific pricing data for items sold by at least one
competitor of the merchant.
[0012] A portal (e.g., a webpage) is provided for receiving a
request from the customer to compare the price paid by the customer
at the merchant with the price of the identical item as advertised
by one or more of the merchant's competitors on the date of the
customer's transaction.
[0013] A data comparison engine retrieves the customer's purchase
data from the first database and compares the customer's data with
pricing data from the second database and identifies any item
purchased by the customer which was offered for sale at a lower
price by at least one of the merchant's competitors on the date of
the customer's transaction.
[0014] The system's price calculation engine calculates the
difference between the price paid by the customer at the merchant
and the identified lowest price offered by one of the merchant's
competitors. The calculated difference is provided to an award
module that is capable of automatically awarding the customer a
credit equal to the calculated difference that is redeemable at the
merchant.
[0015] A further aspect of the invention is a computer implemented
method for providing price comparison data to a consumer. The
method comprises the steps of electronically receiving an image of
a retail receipt issued by a first merchant, wherein the receipt
contains purchase data and wherein the purchase data comprises (1)
the date of the purchase, (3) the location of the purchase, (3) a
price for at least one purchased item, and (4) at least one item
specific characteristic for each purchased item.
[0016] Selected purchase data, including at least one item specific
characteristic for each item listed on said receipt is then
transcribed and placed into a machine readable format in a data
file.
[0017] The method then matches at least one transcribed item
specific characteristic for each item to a UPC code based on a set
of matching criteria thereby obtaining a first merchant UPC code
list containing at least one item listed on the receipt.
[0018] The second merchant store location that is closest to the
location of the purchase from the first merchant is identified. The
second merchant's pricing database, which contains the second
merchant's UPC codes and prices, is searched to identify the UPC
codes on the first merchant UPC code list that are sold at the
closest second merchant store. If UPC code matches are found the
consumer receives a data set comprising (a) a list of items
purchased at said first merchant, (b) the price for items purchased
at said first merchant, and (c) the price offered by the second
merchant for at least one item purchased at said first
merchant.
[0019] A still further aspect of the invention is a computer system
for providing price comparison data to a consumer. The system
comprises an intake module for receiving an electronic image of a
retail receipt issued by a first merchant wherein the receipt
contains purchase data for at least one item. The system also has a
transcription module for converting the purchase data to a machine
readable format. A UPC matching module assigns at least one UPC
code to at least one item identified on the receipt to create a
first merchant UPC code list.
[0020] The system includes a pricing database for a second
merchant. The second merchant pricing database contains UPC and
price data for items sold by a second merchant. The database is
searchable on a location specific basis. A search engine conducts
the search of the second merchant pricing database to compares the
UPC codes associated with the first merchant's receipt with
location specific UPC codes for the second merchant. The search
engine identifies any matching UPC codes and collects second
merchant pricing data for the matched UPC codes.
[0021] A data compilation module receives the data from the search
engine and presents the consumer a data set comprising (a) a list
of items purchased at the first merchant, (b) the price for items
purchased at the first merchant, and (c) the price offered by the
second merchant for at least one item purchased at the first
merchant.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0022] These and other more detailed and specific features of the
present invention are more fully disclosed in the following
specification, reference being had to the accompanying drawings, in
which:
[0023] FIG. 1A is representative of a retail receipt from one
merchant.
[0024] FIG. 1B is a representative retail receipt from a second
merchant.
[0025] FIG. 2 is a schematic of one possible system according to
the invention.
[0026] FIG. 3 illustrates a webpage that could serve as an entry
portal to the method and system of the invention that provides a
redeemable credit to customers.
[0027] FIG. 4 illustrates a webpage that could serve as an entry
portal to the method and system of the invention that provides a
redeemable credit to customers.
[0028] FIG. 5 illustrates a webpage showing price matching results
of the method and system according to the invention.
[0029] FIG. 6 illustrates a webpage entry portal for a price
comparison system and method according to the invention.
[0030] FIG. 7 illustrates a possible consumer experience as the
consumer uploads a receipt to the price comparison system and
method.
[0031] FIG. 8 illustrates a possible consumer experience after the
consumer uploads a receipt to the price comparison system and
method.
[0032] FIG. 9 is a flow chart illustrating the price comparison
system and method according to the invention.
[0033] FIG. 10 illustrates a possible consumer experience where the
consumer receives the results of the price comparison system and
method according to the invention.
[0034] FIG. 11 illustrates a possible consumer experience where the
consumer receives the results of the price comparison system and
method according to the invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
[0035] In the following description, for purposes of explanation,
numerous details are set forth to provide an understanding of one
or more embodiments of the present invention. Furthermore, the
following detailed description is of the best presently
contemplated mode of carrying out the invention. The description is
not intended in a limiting sense, and is made solely for the
purpose of illustrating the general principles of the invention.
The various features and advantages of the present invention may be
more readily understood with reference to the following detailed
description taken in conjunction with the accompanying
drawings.
[0036] While the invention is described with respect to various
embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the
art that various changes in detail may be made therein without
departing from the spirit, scope, and teaching of the invention.
Accordingly, the invention herein disclosed is limited only as
specified in the claims.
[0037] In one broad aspect, the invention is a computer implemented
system and method for matching a competitor's sales price and
automatically providing a merchant's customer with a redeemable
credit based on the difference in sales price. More specifically,
the invention determines whether a customer who purchased an item
at the merchant could have purchased the same item for a lower
price elsewhere. If the customer could have purchased the identical
item elsewhere at a lower price the invention provides the customer
a credit for the price difference. The credit can be used during a
subsequent purchase at the merchant.
[0038] Stated alternatively, the invention compares the prices
listed on a customer's receipt with the prices for identical items
sold at competitors. If the customer could have purchased the item
at a competitor for a lesser price, the customer receives a credit
for the price difference.
[0039] In preferred embodiments the redeemable credit takes the
form of a credit to an online account created by the customer at
the merchant. Such credits are often referred to as "e-cards" and
are similar to online gift certificates known in the art.
[0040] The price matching aspect of the invention is best described
in the context of a typical shopping experience. Thus, the
description begins with a customer purchasing one or more items at
a merchant that practices the invention. Turning now to the
drawings, where like numerals refer to like parts or elements, FIG.
1A represents a typical retail receipt used in the practice of this
aspect of the invention. Such receipts are presented to retail
customers upon completion of a purchase. Receipts such as the one
shown in FIG. 1A contain a significant amount of data regarding the
purchase ("purchase data"). Purchase data typically includes the
location of the purchase 10 (if the merchant has multiple
locations) the date and time of the purchase 12, a list of
individual items purchased 14, the price paid for each item 16, and
an abbreviated identifier for each item 18, among other data.
[0041] The receipts utilized in the practice of the invention
contain a transaction specific identifier, 20. The transaction
specific identifier 20 (typically a numeric or alpha-numeric code)
is created as part of the purchase data that is generated with each
transaction and is unique to each transaction. All data generated
and related to the customer's purchase is keyed to the transaction
specific identifier 20 for later retrieval as discussed in more
detail below.
[0042] Turning now to FIG. 2, the method according to the invention
includes the step of storing in a first electronic database 22 the
purchase data related to a customer's purchasing transaction at the
merchant 19. The stored purchase data includes data found on the
receipt including the date of the transaction 12, at least one
item-specific characteristic for each item (e.g., price, 16;
abbreviated name, 18; etc.), and a transaction specific identifier
20. Other item-specific characteristics that can be stored (or that
is retrievable from other databases) include the stock keeping unit
number (SKU), a uniform product code (UPC) 24, a detailed
description of the item (e.g., Mack's Earplugs 12 count),
manufacturer's name, and any other data related to the item that is
desired by the merchant. All of this data is stored in the first
electronic database 22 in a searchable format (or is retrievable
from other databases) and is keyed to the transaction specific
identifier 20.
[0043] The method and system also involves storing date specific
pricing data for items sold by at least one competitor of the
merchant in a second electronic database date 26. As with the first
electronic database 22 containing the merchant's data, the second
electronic database containing competitors' data is designed to
permit searching, identification, and retrieval of at least one
item specific characteristic for each item contained in the
database.
[0044] The concept of creating a database of competitors' pricing
data for comparison purposes is not new. For example, U.S. Pat. No.
7,198,192 discusses collecting a database of pricing information
for a number of merchants. However, the concepts discussed in the
prior art primarily rely on merchants voluntarily submitting
pricing data to such a database (as in the '192 patent) or
collecting the data piecemeal from individual shoppers, etc.
[0045] Neither approach works well in the real world. A merchant
typically considers its entire pricing structure and data to be
confidential business information and/or a trade secret. Similarly,
reliance on piece-meal submissions from consumers is unworkable
because there is no reliable way to conduct quality control on the
submissions and there is a large potential for false or fraudulent
submissions to manipulate the price matching process.
[0046] Currently, if a merchant desires accurate price comparison
data for a competitor someone must manually gather that information
(e.g., review sales circulars or send people to stores to gather
prices) and/or supplement that data with various automated price
gathering techniques (e.g., "web crawlers", etc.). Even if the
competitor raw price data collected manually or via automated
techniques is accurate, that data must still be organized and
cross-referenced to obtain a searchable database.
[0047] For example, UPC codes are theoretically the same across
merchants and could serve as a quick way to cross-reference items
at different merchants. However, someone must still match a UPC
code with a competitor's price. Sometimes this process can be
automated and accomplished by a computer. Sometimes it cannot.
Similarly, UPC codes are not always available and are sometimes not
included in sales circulars. If UPC codes are not available then
non-standardized or merchant specific identifiers (e.g., SKUs or
abbreviated descriptions or pictures of the item in a sales
circular) are used to identify specific items and what they
cost.
[0048] The availability of UPC codes still does not remove all
issues regarding matching a competitor's prices to specific items.
Some merchants may have a special packaging arrangement with a
manufacturer that requires a distinct UPC code. Thus, a 16 oz
plastic bottle of Heinz ketchup sold at Target might have a UPC
code that is different from a 16 oz plastic bottle of Heinz ketchup
sold at Walgreens although both may have the same price.
[0049] There is also a temporal component to the price comparison
databases used in the practice of the invention that complicates
matters. Assuming that one is able to accurately identify a
competitor's non-UPC coded item or even a UPC coded item (e.g., a
16 oz bottle of Heinz ketchup), merchants regularly offer short
term "sales" for those items. This means that data points in the
price comparison database must be continually monitored and updated
to account for short term "sales" and regular price changes.
[0050] In short, compiling a reliable, accurate and timely database
of comparative price data for a plurality of merchants is an
onerous task and requires substantial resources. Very few merchants
have the resources to do this. Historically, when merchants need
comparative pricing data most merchants hire a third party (e.g.,
The Nielsen Company) to gather and organize that information.
However, for ease of discussion and description it is assumed that
the second electronic database 26 utilized in the practice of the
invention is assembled and maintained by the merchant that utilizes
the invention. If a third party database is used the system is
modified to allow the merchant access to the third party
database.
[0051] At some point after the initial purchase, the merchant
receives a request from its customer to compare the prices paid by
the customer at the merchant with the advertised prices of
identical items at one or more of the merchant's competitors on the
date of the customer's transaction. As shown in FIG. 2, the request
is generated at a system portal 28 that provides the customer
access to the invention. The portal 28 can be any type of interface
that provides a customer access to the system. Examples of such
interfaces include a dedicated webpage 30 managed by the merchant
or mobile apps 32 such as those used on iPhones and Android cell
phones. Links to the system via a merchant's social media portal
(e.g., Facebook) can be utilized as well. FIG. 3 is an exemplary
screenshot of a webpage portal 30 that provides a customer access
to the price matching aspect of the invention. Mobile apps or
social media page links providing an analogous interface can be
used as well.
[0052] In a preferred practice of the invention a customer obtains
access to the invention through an online account with the
merchant. Such online accounts for online shopping are common in
the industry and need not be discussed in detail here.
[0053] Returning to FIG. 3 the portal 30 invites the customer to
create an account or login to an existing account, 34. FIG. 4 is an
example of a portal entry page 30 after an existing customer has
logged into the system. Once the customer is logged into the system
the invention requires certain information from the customer.
[0054] The input data required of a customer can vary depending on
how a merchant's database is set up or other factors (e.g.,
marketing studies). For example, a portal could be arranged to
require the customer to manually enter various pieces of data from
the customer's receipt (e.g., location of store 10, date of
purchase 12, individual UPC codes 18, and prices 16). However,
requiring entry of that much data greatly diminishes customer
interest and use. Generally speaking, usage of an online system is
inversely proportional to the amount of data a user is required to
provide.
[0055] Therefore, in one embodiment of the price matching aspect of
the invention the customer only need submit the transaction
specific identifier 20 to initiate the practice of the invention.
One method of submitting a transaction specific identifier 20 is
graphically illustrated in FIGS. 3 and 4. The transaction specific
identifier 20 ("TC#") is a data point in the portal's data entry
box 36. As noted previously, all of the data associated with the
customer's purchase is electronically stored and keyed to the
transaction specific identifier 20. Thus, providing the transaction
specific identifier 20 gives the system a key to access, sort, and
retrieve all of the purchase data contained in the first electronic
database 22.
[0056] As with any online portal, it may be possible to
automatically generate and submit fake transaction specific
identifiers 20 in an attempt to fraudulently obtain redeemable
credits at a merchant. Therefore, in more preferred embodiments of
the invention, the system also requests information that is
specific to the customer's purchase such as the receipt date 12
and/or the total cost shown on the receipt as shown in the data
entry box 36 in FIGS. 3 and 4.
[0057] The customer submits the required transaction specific
identifier and any additional required receipt purchase data and
the resulting request for price comparison goes to a data
comparison engine 38. The manner in which the electronic request
reaches the data comparison engine 38 can vary with the specific
architecture of the merchant's system. FIG. 2 illustrates one
possible architecture in which requests from mobile apps 32 are
routed through a load balancer 40 prior to passing through a
firewall 42. Requests from webpage portals or social media portals
are gathered in a front end website server pool 44 prior to passing
through the firewall. Preferably all data is transmitted via https
protocols.
[0058] In the architecture shown in FIG. 2, once the requests are
received and pass through the initial firewall they are scanned by
a bank of proving servers 48 to confirm that they are legitimate
requests. For example, the submitted transaction specific
identifiers 20 are checked against a list of known transaction
specific identifiers. If there is no match (or another error is
identified) a message 49 returns to the customer notifying the
customer that the input data is invalid and to try again. If the
submitted request passes the checks of the proving servers 48, the
request is passed on to the data comparison engine 38.
[0059] The method of the invention continues by retrieving the
customer's purchase data from the first database 22 and comparing
the customer's data with competitor's pricing data from the second
database 26. The retrieving and comparison is accomplished by the
data comparison engine 38.
[0060] Alternatively, the request to compare prices can occur at
the point of sale cash register 19. In this embodiment, the cash
register 19 functions as the portal that accesses the system. The
request to compare prices is initiated by the customer or is
automatically initiated at the point of sale. As shown in FIG. 2,
the purchase data generated by the point of sale cash register 19
is stored in a first electronic database 22. The data network that
transfers the data to the first electronic database 22 can send the
purchase data directly to the data comparison engine 38 or
indirectly via the data network or indirectly via the data network
that links the first database 22 with the data comparison engine
38.
[0061] The data comparison engine 38 is capable of retrieving the
customer's purchase data from the first database 22, retrieving
competitors' price data from the second database 26 (or receiving
such data if a 3.sup.rd party database is used), comparing the
customer's data with pricing data from the second database 26, and
identifying any item purchased by the customer which was offered
for sale at a lower price by at least one of the merchant's
competitors on the date of the customer's transaction.
[0062] The mechanics of the data comparison process can and very
likely will vary from merchant to merchant and system to system
based upon the hardware and software used in any particular
merchant's IT system. For example, one merchant may choose to build
the invention using a Microsoft based operating system. Other
merchants may utilize a UNIX based operating system. Thus, the
programs and commands that actually pull the data and make price
comparisons are not critical to the description of the invention
and are well within the skill of programmers that work in the
retail area. The following price comparison discussion will focus
more on the process and problems that are somewhat unique to the
retail arena.
[0063] Upon receipt of the price comparison request from the
customer, the data comparison engine 38 queries the first
electronic database 22 to retrieve purchase data associated with
the customer's purchase at the merchant. In preferred embodiments,
the transaction specific identifier 20 is used to efficiently
retrieve this information. The information retrieved includes at
least one item specific characteristic (e.g., a UPC code) and the
price of each item that the customer purchased.
[0064] Once the customer's purchase data is retrieved, the data
comparison engine 38 queries the second electronic database 26 to
retrieve at least one competitor's prices for the items purchased
by the customer. The retrieval of the competitor's pricing data can
be more difficult than the retrieval of the merchant's data.
[0065] For example, one purpose of the invention is to provide a
customer with a "real time" price matching function. In other
words, the price matching is preferably based on the prices offered
by competitors on the date (and preferably at the time) of the
customer's original purchase. Thus, the invention is unlike other
price comparison/guarantee inventions such as the one discussed in
U.S. Pat. No. 7,606,731 which provides a forward looking price
matching function based on the merchant's own price fluctuations.
(e.g., a merchant gives a customer a rebate if the merchant lowers
the price on an item within a set period of time after the
customer's purchase). Accordingly, and as mentioned previously, all
of the gathered competitive price information in the second
database 26 should be organized and searchable by date (and
preferably by time).
[0066] In addition, the second electronic price database 26 should
be searchable by numerous item-specific identifiers. For example,
searching competitor's prices based on UPCs may provide a very
efficient method for price comparison, assuming that the UPCs are
truly uniform for the item at issue. As noted above, UPCs may or
may not be uniform for certain products. Thus, in preferred
embodiments of the invention the data contained in the second
electronic database 26 is searchable and suitable for
cross-reference by multiple identifiers such as product name, size,
and manufacturer, among other item-specific characteristics.
[0067] The process of matching items stored in both databases may
include utilizing a set of criteria in which all or only a subset
of the criteria need be met before finalizing the comparative data
set for price matching purposes. For example, the search engine may
make a first attempt at item matching by comparing merchant UPC
codes with competitor UPC codes and then confirming the match based
on secondary data such as item name and size. If there is no UPC
match then the search engine can run a secondary search based on
the item's manufacturer, name, size, SKU, etc. (e.g., Heinz,
ketchup, plastic squeeze bottle, 12 oz.). If the matching criteria
are met (e.g., 3 of 4 or 5 of 6 identifiers match) the item's price
is pulled from the second database 26 for price matching purposes.
If the search engine does not locate a match for a particular item
the search can continue but the customer is notified that the
invention was unable to identify a competitor's price for that
item. This may be a common occurrence due to the fact that many
items (e.g., a hat having the local high school football team's
logo) may be sold only at one merchant or location.
[0068] In addition, the second electronic database 26 should be
searchable by geographic area. Pricing for identical items can vary
based upon location due to transportation costs and other factors.
Thus, the method and system according to the invention should be
capable of sorting the price data in the second electronic database
26 based on geographic area (e.g., within 10 miles of the original
purchase). In preferred embodiments of the invention geographic
limitations form part of the criteria utilized by the search engine
38 to match prices.
[0069] At the completion of the search and if the appropriate
matching criteria are met, the method of the invention continues by
individually identifying items purchased by the customer which were
offered for sale at a lower price by at least one of the merchant's
competitors on the date of the customer's transaction and within a
predetermined geographical area.
[0070] The difference between the prices paid by the customer at
the merchant and any lower prices offered by one of the merchant's
competitors is calculated. If the price match is run against more
than one competitor and more than one competitor offers an item for
a lower price, the lowest of the identified prices is used to
calculate the price differential. The price differentials are
calculated and totaled by a price calculation engine. The price
calculation engine could comprise a separate server programmed to
receive the price data from the data comparison engine 38 server.
Alternatively, the price calculation engine could be a subroutine
executed by the data comparison engine 38 server. In FIG. 2 the
price calculation engine is conducted by the hardware and software
that make up the data comparison engine 38.
[0071] An optional but preferred add-on to the method according to
the invention is to calculate the item by item savings that the
customer realized by shopping at the merchant instead of at the
merchant's competitors. In other words, the invention also provides
the customer with item by item price data for items where the
merchant undersold the competition. Such data can be totaled and
provided to the customer as the "total savings" achieved by
shopping at the merchant instead of at competitors. This function
of the invention provides substantial support for marketing efforts
that are centered on claims that the merchant is "the low cost
leader". An example of this option is discussed below in relation
to FIGS. 4 and 5.
[0072] For those items where the merchant did not offer the lowest
price, the calculated total price differential for those items is
sent to an award module that is capable of awarding the customer a
credit that is equal to the calculated total price differential.
This credit is redeemable when the customer makes a subsequent
purchase at the merchant. Just as with the price calculation
engine, the award module could comprise a separate server
programmed to receive data from the price calculator engine and
generate the credit. Alternatively, the award module could be a
subroutine executed by the data comparison engine 38 server. The
architecture of the merchant's on-line account system will
influence how the credits are awarded to the customer and those
skilled in the art are capable of designing the award module to
best fit within the overall system architecture utilized by a
particular merchant.
[0073] FIG. 2 illustrates one possible arrangement of the award
module. In FIG. 2 the award module is conducted as a subroutine by
the servers that run the data comparison engine 38. Assuming that
an award is calculated and due to the customer, the award module
notifies the customer via email 56 that the price matching process
is complete and that the customer should login to his/her account.
The email can contain additional information such as notification
that a credit has been awarded, a direct link to the customer's
online account, or other marketing material.
[0074] If a credit was awarded, the credit is electronically posted
to the customer's account as an "e-card" 58a or other form of
redeemable credit. For embodiments where the price comparison is
initiated at the point of sale 19, the customer can have the option
of applying the credit at the point of sale as represented by line
58b in FIG. 2.
[0075] FIGS. 3-5 illustrate an exemplary use of the invention as
seen by the customer. FIG. 3 is a sample log-in page where the
customer enters the required data including the transaction
specific identifier 20 and initiates the request for price
comparison. FIG. 4 is an alternative start page that could be
viewed by a returning customer after the customer has logged into
his/her online account. The start page shown in FIG. 4 provides a
graphical history and running total of the "credits" accumulated by
the customer. FIG. 4 also provides a "savings to date" entry which
includes a running total of the price difference calculations for
items where the merchant had the lower price as compared to its
competitors.
[0076] FIG. 5 represents a possible webpage design for displaying
the results of a particular price match request. A graphical
representation of the customer's original receipt showing an item
by item list of prices is presented and identified as element 48.
Summary columns showing individual differences in price and total
savings/credit are identified as elements 50 and 52, respectively.
Also illustrated in FIG. 5 are optional components to the method
and system such as awarding customers credits by sharing the
merchant's price matching system with others via social media
programs such as Facebook and Twitter, 54.
[0077] In preferred embodiments, the merchant provides additional
links on the award results page that enable a customer to delve
deeper into the price comparison process. For example, a
"comparison details" link (not shown) could provide the customer
access to a spreadsheet showing each competitor that was part of
the price matching process and the prices for each item at each
competitor. Any number of graphical representations can be added as
well (e.g, line charts, pie charts, etc.) to enhance the price
saving message that underlies the practice of the invention.
[0078] Turning now to another aspect of the invention, the
invention allows a merchant to directly educate a competitor's
customers regarding the merchant being "the low cost leader". In
this aspect of the invention, a competitor's customer (as opposed
to the merchant's customer as in the price matching aspect of the
invention) submits a copy of a receipt from a competitor to a
merchant's price comparison system. The merchant's system compares
the prices paid by the consumer at the competitor with the prices
the consumer would have paid at the merchant. The consumer then
receives a data sheet showing price differences between the
merchant and the competitor on an item by item basis.
[0079] In the following detailed description for this aspect of the
invention the term "first merchant" is synonymous with the term
"competitor" and the term "second merchant" is synonymous with the
merchant that practices this aspect of the invention. One
embodiment of this aspect of the invention is a computer
implemented system and method for providing price comparison data
to a consumer. The method comprises several steps involving
collecting price data, comparing price data and reporting results
to the consumer via a portal similar to that used in the price
matching aspect of the invention.
[0080] The price comparison method according to the invention is
initiated by the consumer creating an image of a receipt from a
first merchant (e.g., taking a picture with a mobile phone or
scanning the receipt using a commercial scanning device) and
uploading the image to the second merchant's website along with
contact information from the consumer (e.g., email address) and any
other information required by the practitioner of the invention
(e.g., demographic data).
[0081] The system is designed to accept a plurality of image files
such as jpegs and tiffs or any other image file type that is
currently in use or may be developed. The images are uploaded to
the system via a portal 20 such as those previously described. For
purposes of the detailed description it is assumed that a consumer
that utilizes the invention possesses the knowledge necessary to
save an image taken by a portable device (e.g., a smartphone) and
upload it to a webpage using standard software.
[0082] FIG. 6 illustrates a webpage that could serve as an entry
portal to the method and system of the invention that provides a
consumer with price comparison data. Social media portals or mobile
apps may also serve as points of entry to this aspect of the
invention.
[0083] As noted previously, is important to remember that the
information found on receipts is not standardized across the retail
industry. For example, the abbreviated descriptions (elements 18 in
FIG. 1) can vary from merchant to merchant. Some merchants may
place an item's UPC code on the receipt while others use a SKU
number. However, in the practice of the invention it is preferred
that the purchase data contained on the receipt contain (1) the
date of the purchase, (2) the location of the purchase, (3) a price
for at least one purchased item, and (4) at least one item specific
characteristic for each purchased item (e.g., Elements 16, 18, and
24 of FIGS. 1A&B discussed previously).
[0084] FIGS. 7 and 8 further illustrate how a consumer initiates
this aspect of the invention. After uploading the receipt 20, the
consumer is provided a preview of the image to confirm upload. FIG.
8 is a webpage thanking the consumer for using the invention and
notifies them that the price comparison process is underway and
that they will receive their results in due course.
[0085] FIG. 9 provides a flow chart for the price comparison aspect
of the invention. After the consumer initiates the process by
uploading and submitting the receipt at the entry portal (box 1),
the receipt image 20 and the consumer's contact information (e.g.,
email address) are sent to an intake module where the image is
assigned a unique identification number and is date stamped (box
2). A data file is created that contains the receipt image and the
unique identification number. This data file then flows through the
rest of the process where additional data is added to the data file
in a machine readable and searchable format.
[0086] The form of the data file is not critical to the practice of
the invention. For example, attaching the image file to an Excel
spreadsheet which is then transferred from point to point through
the process is an acceptable method of practicing the invention. As
with the other aspects of the invention any data transfer,
especially those between the invention and the consumer, should use
a secure protocol for privacy concerns. Similarly, in preferred
embodiments the customer's contact information is not added to the
image data file and remains in the intake module. The removal of
the customer contact information is not necessary to practice the
invention but is a preferred practice for general customer privacy
reasons. This is especially true if any of the individual steps of
the invention are performed by third-party contractors.
[0087] Box 3 of FIG. 9 represents one of several validation steps
in the process. The term validation, as used herein, means that the
data file undergoes an internal quality control check to make sure
that the file, process, or data are functioning properly and
suitable for further processing. For example, immediately after the
image is uploaded it is checked to see if it is in a form that is
supported by the system (e.g., a jpeg) and is capable of being
opened and read. This validation step can be automated, done
manually or some combination of the two. This step (along with the
other steps) can be part of a system implemented solely by the
merchant or it can be out sourced to third party vendors.
[0088] The next step in the process, represented by box 4 in FIG.
9, is to transcribe the purchase data contained in the receipt and
organize it into a form that can be searched by a computer program.
At this time, manual transcription of receipt data is preferred to
improve the quality and accuracy of the data provided to the
consumer. In most instances this will occur offshore to reduce
costs.
[0089] Eventually, it is believed that optical characters
recognition (OCR) will be used to scan the images of the receipts,
transcribe them, and organize the data necessary to practice the
invention. Currently OCR technology is not at the point where it
can consistently and accurately recognize data that is printed on
all retail receipts. This is due to several factors such as the
poor print found on many receipts, consumers wrinkling receipts as
they are placed in pants pockets, etc., and poor images.
[0090] The transcription step is followed by a quality control step
represented by box 5 in FIG. 9. It should be noted that the
activities the occur in boxes 4 and 5 can be combined in one step
but are discussed separately here to better highlight the
progression of the method according to the invention.
Alternatively, the entire price matching aspect of the invention
can be combined in one system and done in one "step."
[0091] As the transcription process takes place various data points
are checked for validity and compatibility with the remaining
process steps. For example, if the date of the receipt is too old
for a legitimate comparison, the data file is flagged for closer
review later in the process. Similarly, if the price of an item
appears disproportionately low (e.g., a HDTV for $1) the data file
is flagged. If the price of an item or items is unreadable the data
file is flagged. If the image was too poor for transcription the
data file is flagged. The flagging criteria can be set by each
entity that practices the invention.
[0092] Data files that are flagged are reviewed to determine the
relative scope of the data file deficiencies. If there are too many
deficiencies (e.g., multiple items not transcribed) or if there is
a major deficiency (e.g., unable to identify store name or purchase
date) the data file is removed from further processing. The data
file with its unique identification number is returned to the
intake module (box 2) where it is combined with the consumer's
email address. The consumer then receives a message (via email or
other electronic message) notifying the consumer that their request
was terminated. The reason for termination can be added to the
message sent to the consumer.
[0093] Box 6 represents the UPC matching step of the invention. As
noted in the discussion of the price matching aspect of the
invention, the data contained on retail receipts is not uniform
across merchants. Thus, in many instances a straight transcription
of the retail purchase data provides little indication regarding
what the product actually was. For example, FIG. 1B lists "stain
pen" as an item with a store specific SKU beside it. Is this a TIDE
brand pen or a CLOROX brand pen? What size is the pen? Unless one
has a database containing item and price data for the merchant in
question it would be difficult to make an accurate price comparison
with any other merchant just based on the receipt data.
[0094] Therefore, the price comparison aspect of the invention also
utilizes competitor's pricing data contained in the second
electronic database 26 discussed in the price matching aspect of
the invention. After the receipt purchase data is transcribed and
added to the data file, the data file is electronically transferred
to a UPC matching module (box 6) which contains, is connected to,
or has access to the second electronic database 26. The UPC
matching module also contains a suitable CPU or other computerized
hardware necessary to conduct machine implemented search and data
comparison of the second electronic database 26.
[0095] The data in the data file is computer searchable (e.g., text
entered into an Excel spreadsheet) and is compared to the data
found in the second electronic database 26 to match the item or
items printed on the first merchant's (competitor's) receipt to a
UPC code. This matching process can occur using both automated and
manual means. For example, if the receipt purchase data found in
the data file contains the first merchant's name and a SKU, the UPC
matching module, which is electronically searchable, executes the
appropriate algorithm and pulls the UPC code associated with that
merchant's SKU. If the SKU is not available an algorithm based on
keywords can match UPC codes to item specific purchase data in much
the same manner as the data comparison engine 38 utilized in the
price matching aspect of the invention.
[0096] As with the price matching aspect of the invention,
determining a "match" between item and UPC code can be based on a
set of criteria chosen by the practitioner of the invention. If 3
of 4 or 4 of 5 criteria match (e.g., merchant name, item name,
size, SKU, price, location), the item is matched to a UPC code
which is added to the data file in a searchable format.
[0097] If the UPC matching module fails to match an item contained
in the data file with a UPC code the data file is so noted. For
example, the entry "no match found" is entered into the data file
which is presented to the consumer if desired.
[0098] Alternatively, manual review of the data file and manual
price matching can occur. Manual review and matching can be used
randomly as a quality control measure for the automated searches or
it can be used more frequently in an attempt to eliminate or reduce
the number of "no match found" entries. For example, a human may be
able to match a description and price contained in the purchase
data with a picture of an item found on a sales circular and then
match the sales circular to a UPC code.
[0099] Regardless of the method utilized to obtain UPC code data,
at the end of the UPC matching module (box 6) the data file
contains a list of UPC codes that are matched to one or more items
contained on the first merchant's receipt on an item by item basis
("the first merchant UPC code list"). The data file, containing the
first merchant UPC code list is then forwarded to a price matching
module represented by box 7.
[0100] The price matching module is a computer operated search
engine similar to the UPC matching module and the same CPUs and
hardware that are used in the other searching/matching steps of the
invention can run the price matching functions as well.
Alternatively, the price matching function can run on separate
servers, hardware, and software. In FIG. 9 the price matching
module is identified as a separate box to highlight this aspect of
the invention.
[0101] The price matching module uses a computerized system to
match the first merchant UPC code list to UPC codes contained in
the second merchant's pricing database. The algorithms utilized in
the price matching module search the second merchant's pricing
database to locate the second merchant's store that is closest to
the first merchant's store where the items were purchased. Once the
closest second merchant store is located the first merchant UPC
code list is compared with the UPC codes sold at that store,
preferably on the date of the consumer's purchase. If UPC matches
are found, the second merchant's prices associated with those
matched UPC codes are added to the data file.
[0102] The data in the data file is then organized and compiled in
a price comparison module (box 8). As with the other modules, this
module comprises a CPU, hardware, and software necessary to read
data contained in the data file and perform the necessary
mathematical calculations and data presentations. This module may
be a stand alone module or it can be conducted by any of the
computer hardware and software utilized by the other modules.
[0103] The price comparison module calculates the number of
compared items and the item by item price difference between the
first merchant's prices and the second merchant's prices for each
item. Other mathematical calculations such total savings or percent
savings, etc., desired by the practitioner merchant are performed
and the results are added to the data file. The price comparison
module also takes the price comparison data and places it in a form
suitable for delivery to the consumer. For example, the price
comparison data can be placed in a text file, Excel spreadsheet,
html file, etc.
[0104] The price comparison data is then transferred to a delivery
module (box 9) that matches the price comparison data and the
unique identification number to the consumer's email address which
was separated from the data file in the intake module. The delivery
module notifies the consumer that the price comparison process is
complete and that the consumer can view the results.
[0105] In preferred embodiments of the invention the consumer is
directed to view the results by logging onto the second merchant's
website to reinforce the psychological tie between the second
merchant and lower prices. Alternatively, the results can be sent
via any electronic means including but not limited to email and in
any form desired by the practitioner.
[0106] FIG. 10 is an illustration of an email notifying the
consumer that the price comparison results are ready and available
for viewing by logging onto the merchant's website. FIG. 11 is an
illustration of one possible presentation of the price comparison
data organized and compiled in the price comparison module (box 8).
In preferred embodiments the data set presented to the consumer
comprises (a) a list of items purchased at the first merchant, (b)
the price for items purchased at the first merchant, and (c) the
price offered by the second merchant for at least one item
purchased at the first merchant, among other data parts of
information. The data shown in FIG. 11 is in a html format and
contains social media links such as those that are standard in
merchant's online marketing strategies.
* * * * *