I’m thinking of opening a supermarket with a pricing model adapted from another industry.

It would save customers the hassle of shopping the old-fashioned way, item by item. And it would introduce them to products they otherwise might never try.

It would work like this: All items would be gathered into bundles, so you’d have fewer decisions to make.

Say you wanted a roast beef. Instead of just buying it and then hunting for your next item, you’d buy the bundle that included roast beef. With the meat, you’d get shampoo, floor wax and cupcakes – plus a few things from aisles you never go down, like a quart of oil for your car and a DVD of a movie you saw last year.

To make this work, I need a monopoly. So I’ll get your local government to make me the only supermarket in town.

I know what you’re thinking: To get the necessities, you’ll have to pay for lots of things you don’t want.

Good for them, not you

But it wouldn’t work that way, trust me. By bundling products, I could guarantee higher sales for goods not many people want. That means I could get big discounts from suppliers. And I’ll share these savings with you. Promise.

In fact, by guaranteeing buyers for stuff people don’t want, I would encourage producers to come out with lots of new products. Some would be good.

So you see, by forcing unwanted products down your throat, I’d be doing you a favor!

Well, so much for my plan. Among its many flaws: It bucks the broad trend in our economy, which is to give consumers more choice and control, not less.

Perhaps you guessed: My model is the cable TV industry, which clings to its outmoded business plan, requiring that we buy channels in bundles.

FCC favors a la carte

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin told the Senate his staff would soon release a report saying consumers would be better off if they could buy channels a la carte – one-by-one – or in groups based on themes.

That put the cable industry into an uproar. They argue that bundling helps support start-up channels until they build audiences, which happens as surfers stumble onto new programming. And the industry says a la carte pricing would reduce programming diversity.

I don’t think so. Under the current system, somebody – the cable company or program producer – has to subsidize startup programs. With a la carte pricing, the marketplace would find a way to finance entrepreneurs, just as it does for all the other products.

Indeed, I suspect cable companies are over-reacting. A household that budgets $100 a month for cable today might continue to do so under a la carte pricing, but it would direct the money to programs it really wanted.

Unfortunately, the FCC isn’t empowered to impose a la carte pricing; it would likely take an act of Congress, which probably won’t do anything without a lot of pressure from voters. So if you’re sick of paying for channels you don’t want, tell your congressman.

—

(Jeff Brown is a business columnist for The Philadelphia Inquirer. E-mail him at brownjphillynews.com.)

—

(c) 2005, The Philadelphia Inquirer.

Visit Philadelphia Online, the Inquirer’s World Wide Web site, at http://www.philly.com/

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.

AP-NY-12-05-05 0617EST