EDS Pushing A Cart That Counts Calories

Written by Evan Schuman
October 11th, 2007

EDS in Europe this week <a href="">floated the idea of a smartcart that would analyze nutritional information of goods as consumers were considering them for purchase.

"Shoppers want barcode readers on their trolleys (shopping carts) to calculate the nutritional content and tell them when they have blown their calorific budget," EDS’s Sion Roberts, director of consumer industries and retail, <a href="">told Reuters. Setting aside for the moment whether consumers really want to know, the bigger question is whether retailers and consumer goods manufacturers would want to pay to let them know.

For some specialty stores that focus on the especially health-minded consumer, it could be a nice plus. But this would have to be funded by larger chains that make a healthy amount of their profit on impulse items, which strongly to be high-calories. When was the last time you saw broccoli or spinach used as an impulse come on?

Roberts’ comment also raises a practical issue. In the United States, consumers tend to purchase for a family and for a week’s supply, as opposed to parts of Europe where purchasing for today’s meals today is more common. When purchasing for several people and perhaps dozens of meals, how is the cart to calculate when a “caloric budget” has been blown?

To be fair, this report is based on consumer surveys so taking the leap from what consumers tell a survey taker they want and what they actually want—or what they’ll actually use—is dangerous. And even if consumers truly want it and would actually use it, would it be enough of a lure to get them to switch retail preferences? Only when we get to that final stage will this start to—maybe—look interesting to larger retail chains.

The report also speaks to the consumer interest in having less packaging and EDS raises the question of whether widespread use of this nutritionally-nagging smartcart would enable a reduction in packaging. In the U.S., I find that unlikely as the packaging is for all to see. Even if the carts were rolled out and somehow cornered the market with a 90 percent marketshare, that would still leave far too many non-smart-carted consumer out there that would need to see the labels.

Let’s be candid. Manufacturers and many retailers like the labels—with their tiny fineprint that few bother reading and even fewer properly interpret—as they are. Healthy is expensive and to compete on price, many retailers need to embrace less healthy options. Does this mean that a healthy margin means an unhealthy product? Not always, but it happens far too often for this concept to be embraced in the U.S..


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.