> There are two things Papa Johns doesn’t like to see<p>There are three things. Papa Johns also hates to see well compensated employees. They've been successfully sued several times for wage theft, they were forced to stop their “no-poach” policies which prevented franchise owners from hiring workers at other Papa Johns restaurants in an effort to keep wages down, and they insisted that if they had to provide health insurance to their workers they'd pass that cost onto consumers rather than spend a penny of the $87 million in gross profit they were making.
> The idea is to reach hungry consumers by “knowing what is in their fridge without being too creepy,” said Carrie Drinkwater, chief investment officer at Carat.<p>What she means is that they want to do it subtly enough so people aren't creeped out, because when it's put like that it really <i>is</i> creepy.
This has been in the pipeline for a while now. This is an NYT article from 2012 talking about how Target were, well, targeting women they thought were pregnant based on their shopping habits because that's one of the few points in life when people's shopping habits are maleable: <a href="https://archive.is/CUo8O" rel="nofollow">https://archive.is/CUo8O</a>
Is this a submarine article[1] by instacart to sell their consumers data? feels like a glowing review of the data. And why would papa jhons accept to be a part of this campaign?<p>[1] <a href="https://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html</a>
All american fridges contain at least 20% expired condiments, by volume.
Not all condiments actually go bad when they expire though. I’m convinced somewhere there’s perfectly edible ketchup from the dinosaurs era somewhere.
As a reminder people should practice safe eating by using condiments that aren't expired.
idea is to reach hungry consumers by “knowing what is in their fridge without being too creepy,” lol I think they forgot to realize this is incredibly unsettling and creepy
Companies have been targeting people with ads when they think they're the most vulnerable for ages. What's bold about this is how not at all subtle it is. "We know there's no food in your fridge. Order a pizza!" seems like something that should make people uncomfortable.
It's just good utilization of marketing budget.
Instacart users should be upset about their data being packaged up and sold. Or maybe there should be half-decent privacy laws that protect them. Otherwise you just get this corporate-orwellianism.<p>Anyways, I wonder if instacart can predict political affiliation. I bet their data scientists have at least tried.
> Instacart users should be upset about their data being packaged up and sold.<p>Instacart users should have been upset about that while reading Instacart's privacy policy prior to signing up and refused to use the service in the first place. Having their data being packaged up and sold was something every user already agreed to.
Half decent data privacy laws are wildly overdue.<p>My other thought is that companies like Papa John’s that make shitty products are most likely to engage in desperate growth tactics like this.<p>You know what helps tempt people into ordering pizza? Making good pizza.<p>The problem is that it’s cheaper to purchase analytics and serve an ad for “pizza” at the literal moment the viewer is out of groceries.<p>I wonder if their fancy analytics can also tell them how many of these customers regret not just buying groceries after they finish their Papa John’s.
Every fridge between mine and the nearest Papa Johns would need to be empty before I'd consider eating there.
I find everything about this upsetting. This level of targeted manipulation should be illegal.<p>It seems like the only way to avoid it is to only shop in person and to stick to mom and pop stores that can’t afford to do all these shenanigans, while also avoiding ads like the plague.