In a new limited series, we explore what going into a luxury store is like these days. Despite the seemingly inviting interiors and attentive service, it is not always a pleasant experience

Cartier is in the news: They had been hacked. Reuters has just reported that the Richemont-owned luxury jewellery company told customers via email that the brand’s website was compromised and some client data was stolen. One would assume that the data collected is protected as tightly as the jewellery Cartier sells. But, it is not certain if the company feels that data must be safeguarded with a similar level of rigor, albeit with different security methodologies. Cartier claimed that “limited client information”, such as names, e-mail addresses and countries, had been obtained by an “unauthorised party [that had] gained temporary access to our system.” They stated that “the affected information did not include any passwords, credit card details or other banking information.” They did not say anything about purchase history. Or, if customers’ concerns are assuaged by their assurance.

As with everything else these days, the act of shopping, even in person, has become inextricably linked with the collection of data. This, retail managers, told us isn’t just a byproduct of technology or the convenience of its availability; it’s a “deliberate strategy” by retailers to enhance the shopping experience, optimize operations, and drive sales. But, increasingly, it seems more the latter: strategies to increase transactions. While luxury retailers especially will always couch their data collection efforts in terms of “improving customer experience” and “operational efficiency”, the underlying motivation for most of them, especially publicly traded ones or those with aggressive growth targets, is the bottom line: sales and profitability.

As with everything else these days, the act of shopping, even in person, has become inextricably linked with the collection of data

Without doubt, retailers see the shopper as data. The minute you walk into a store, everything about you can be seen through the lens of data. You are a walking set of data! This is no exaggeration. The evolution of retail technology has transformed the physical store into a vast data collection centre, mirroring much of what happens online. Retailers are not just observing; they are actively measuring, tracking, and analysing almost every aspect of your in-store journey. In the old days, the point-of-sale systems were the fundamental data collection points. Every transaction is recorded, linking purchases to customers if identifiable payment methods, such as credit cards, are used. What you bought, how much you spent, how you paid, when and at what time are known and recorded. This has been the “gold standard” for understanding your buying habits.

But, increasingly, more insidious methods are added: CCTV and video analytics, for examples. Strategically placed in-store cameras are not only installed for security. Advanced camera systems with AI-powered video analytics can count people entering or exiting, analyse queue lengths and wait times (but stores do not really do anything about those), track paths and movements within the store (one of the technologies used is heatmap generation), even identify demographics (age or gender) and, apparently, sometimes even mood, though this, unsurprisingly, raises significant ethical concerns and is usually regulated. As one regular shopper told us recently with palpable disgust, “I really don’t need any store to know that I just had a quarrel with my husband and am revenge-shopping.”

Sure, ‘tracking’ has become pervasive, especially online shopping, whether with Amazon or Fairprice. But, while visiting physical stores is reported to be declining, the use of methodologies to monitor and tap shopper behaviour is no less prevalent. In fact, precisely because online shopping provides such granular data, brick-and-mortar retailers are aggressively adopting similar strategies to remain competitive and understand their loyalty-indeterminate customers. Online retailers have a significant advantage in understanding customer journeys and preferences through clicks, browse histories, and conversions. Physical stores traditionally lacked this depth of insight beyond simple POS data. Modern in-store tracking aims to close this gap, creating a more holistic, “omnichannel” (forgive the jargon) view of the shopper, whether purchases are made or not.

Most, if not all, luxury stores have the habit of coaxing customers to “register” (or to have “an account”) with their respective brands. While this is unnecessary and impacts the anonymity of shopping that one could once enjoy, the practice is pervasive. There is actually a word for it: “clienteling”. It is explicitly designed to collect customer data by incentivising you to identify yourself at point of entry and at checkout. This builds a rich profile of your individual purchase history and preferences. It also allows the sales associates/advisors (known as SAs) to create a detailed profile of you. The level of detail in these profiles can be astonishingly comprehensive, sometimes surpassing what you may have revealed to your spouse. When we say “detailed”, we are not exaggerating. It is, as we have been told repeatedly, a strategic imperative for luxury brands. The retailer’s knowledge is explicitly focused on your consumption habits, preferences, and, perhaps more importantly, the triggers for luxury purchases. A spouse’s knowledge is broader, but may not zero in on these specific economic behaviours.

The level of detail in these profiles can be astonishingly comprehensive, sometimes surpassing what you may have revealed to your spouse

This level of detailed profiling highlights the tension between personalised service and individual privacy. For many luxury consumers, the ‘white glove’ service of suited staff is a significant part of the value proposition or the “experience”, even if beneath that is the discreet siphoning of one’s personal data. However, it requires a conscious trade-off of anonymity and an acceptance that their purchasing and lifestyle data will be meticulously cataloged and analysed. In fact, the days of walking into a luxury boutique spontaneously, making an unplanned purchase, and leaving without a trace are largely gone. Customers, therefore, have to trust the brand to protect their data, which, as the Cartier hack demonstrates, is not always foolproof.

The pertinent question for the consumer is, at what point does personalized service cross into intrusive surveillance? The future of physical retail will depend not just on the collection of the requisite data, but on doing so ethically and transparently, and with robust security measures to win consumer trust. You are, doubtlessly, a valuable source of information, and luxury retailers continue to refine their methods to extract even more data and utilize it to achieve their commercial objectives. While data collection is now fundamental in all forms of retail, the expectation for its protection must evolve alongside its alarming ubiquity. The ‘white glove’ service, however appreciable, must not become a veneer for a pervasive data collection operation that serves the brand’s bottom line first, and foremost.

File photos: Chin Boh Kay for SOTD