NYC study finds some evidence of gender price differences, but it certainly isn’t systematic or widespread

The New York City Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) recently published a first-ever study on gender pricing in NYC titled “From Cradle to Cane: The Cost of Being a Female Consumer.” The DCA analyzed “nearly 800 products with clear male and female versions from more than 90 brands sold at two dozen New York City retailers, both online and in stores,” and found that “on average, women’s [and girl’s] products cost 7% more than similar products for men [and boys].”

Specifically: the gender price differences were on average 7% more for girl’s toys and accessories, 4% more for girl’s clothing, 8% more for women’s clothing, 13% more for female personal care products, and 8% more for female senior/home health care products. The main conclusion of the DCA study is that “women are paying thousands of dollars more over the course of their lives to purchase similar products as men.”

The first specific item highlighted in the report (see Figure 1, page 7, and the top graphic above) is the Radio Flyer “My First Scooter” pictured above from Target. According to the DCA, the girl’s scooter was priced at $49.99, twice the price of the boy’s scooter at $24.99. Target explained the price difference as a “system error” and the prices for both models (boy’s and girl’s) are now both $24.99 (see bottom graphic above). But that initial “finding” of NYC retailers engaging in widespread gender “price gouging” – by as much as 100% in the scooter example – sets the tone of the report and supports their conclusion that women are regularly taken advantage of by retailers in the form of higher prices, which then costs them thousands of extra dollars over their lifetimes from “cradle to cane.”

A few comments:

1. As Christina Sommers asked on Twitter: “What if parents are willing to spend more on daughters than sons? Is that bias against girls–or boys?” Good question….

2. Using some of the same or similar items analyzed by the DCA, I’ve done my own non-exhaustive price comparisons below at both Target. com and Walmart.com for six different items. For those items, and for many others I looked at, I really couldn’t find any evidence of gender price differences.

3. If there are examples of gender price differences, I would conclude that those are isolated cases, and are certainly not as widespread and systematic as the DCA study suggests. And in many cases it might not be a fair, “apples to apples” analysis for the DCA to compare prices by gender for general clothing categories like dress shirts, dress pants, shirts, socks, underwear, etc. Perhaps there are differences in styling and detail that make women’s clothing more expensive because it’s more expensive to manufacture?

4. To the extent that there are gender price differences for some items, perhaps the solution is not greater government oversight and regulation from the DCA and Mayor de Blasio, but increased competition, e.g. allowing Walmart to operate in NYC. It’s no secret that NYC Mayor de Blasio “doesn’t want Walmart in NYC.” According to the mayor, “I have been adamant that I don’t think Walmart — the company, the stores — belong in New York City, and I continue to feel that way.”

Here are my six examples demonstrating that if gender price differences do exist, they certainly aren’t systematic and certainly aren’t widespread, based on some of my own research today online and at the St. Paul Target store!