« The Washington Post confuses readers about seasonal adjustments | Main | Neat reads 8 »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Erin Jonaitis

Can we really infer fraudulent intent here, though? I would expect errors in the customer's favor to be corrected more quickly than errors in the store's favor, even if everyone involved is honest, because nobody will get penalized or fired for making an error in the store's favor -- which probably makes them less attentive.

I also notice the New York Post article didn't say anything about the frequency of undercharging!

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Business analytics and data visualization expert. Author and Speaker. Currently at Columbia. See my full bio.

Next Events

Feb: 11 JMP Explorers Seminar, Marlow, UK
Streaming link

Apr: 10-12 INFORMS Analytics Conference, Orlando, FL

Apr: 21 UMSL Digital Media Marketing Conference, St. Louis

Past Events

See here

Future Courses (New York)

Spring: Statistical Reasoning & Numbersense, rSQUAREedge (4 weeks)

Summer: Applied Analytics Frameworks & Methods, Columbia (6 weeks)

Junk Charts Blog

Link to junkcharts

Graphics design by Amanda Lee


  • only in Big Data