Smartphone screen showing varying Instacart prices with red highlights frustration and a blurred grocery shelf background

Instacart Ends Price-Testing Program After Consumer Reports Finds Shoppers Saw Multiple Prices

Instacart has announced it will immediately terminate a price-testing program that had caused shoppers to see different prices for the same item.

The Program’s Purpose

Instacart’s price-testing service was introduced in 2023 to help retailers learn how customers respond to varying price points. The company said retailers could set their own prices on the delivery website, and that Instacart would not add its own dynamic or surveillance pricing. Instead, the service offered random price variations to customers.

Consumer Reports Investigation

A report from Consumer Reports, Groundwork Collaborative, and More Perfect Union found that nearly 75 % of grocery items were shown at multiple prices. The study highlighted a Safeway dozen of Lucerne eggs in Washington, D.C., where customers saw one of five prices: $3.99, $4.28, $4.59, $4.69, or $4.79.

Grocery shelf holds Lucerne eggs with varied price tags and nearby bread and milk.

Instacart’s Blog Response

In a Monday blog post, Instacart said, “At a time when families are working exceptionally hard to stretch every grocery dollar, those tests raised concerns, leaving some people questioning the prices they see on Instacart.” The post also stated, “That’s not okay – especially for a company built on trust, transparency, and affordability.”

Commitment to Transparency

Instacart added, “Trust is earned through clarity and consistency,” and promised that customers would no longer have to second-guess the prices they’re seeing. The company clarified that the price-testing services were not dynamic pricing or surveillance pricing, and that the random variations were the only method used.

Immediate Effect

The company confirmed that the price-testing service would end effective immediately. Instacart declined to disclose how many customers were affected, but said retailers would still be able to set distinct prices at different brick-and-mortar locations.

FTC Settlement Context

Last week, Instacart agreed to pay $60 million in customer refunds to settle federal allegations of deceptive practices. The Federal Trade Commission had accused the company of falsely advertising free deliveries and failing to clearly disclose service fees that could add up to 15 % of an order.

Company’s Position on the Settlement

Instacart denied wrongdoing and said it reached the settlement to move forward and focus on its business. The company’s blog reiterated its commitment to clarity, saying, “Customers should never have to second-guess the prices they’re seeing.”

What the Price-Testing Looked Like

During the experiment, some shoppers saw a slightly higher price while others saw a slightly lower price for the same item. The random nature of the variations meant that no customer could predict the price they would receive.

Retailer Perspective

Retailers who participated in the program had the ability to offer different prices at various physical locations. Instacart clarified that it would not support any item price testing services from now on, but retailers could still set their own prices on the delivery website.

Key Takeaways

  • Instacart ends its price-testing program after a study revealed shoppers saw multiple prices for the same product.
  • The company cites a $60 million refund settlement with the FTC as part of broader trust-building efforts.
  • Retailers retain the ability to set prices on Instacart, but the random price-variation feature is discontinued.

The decision reflects Instacart’s response to consumer concerns and regulatory scrutiny, aiming to restore confidence in the platform’s pricing practices.

Author

  • I’m Emily Carter Reynolds, a Philadelphia-based journalist specializing in crime, public safety, and the justice system. I’ve spent most of my career reporting on the intersection of law enforcement, community safety, and the real-life consequences of crime. My work is grounded in accuracy, empathy, and a firm belief that responsible crime reporting should inform—not inflame.

Leave a Comment

Comments

No comments yet. Why don’t you start the discussion?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *