DE10031109A1 - Automatic goods price optimization method for goods suppliers, involves summing up final intermediate prices calculated for every supplier, to estimate final price for every supplier - Google Patents

Abstract

The individual goods/services (W1-W3) or the data sets relevant to the goods/services are assigned to every supplier (A1-A3). The total of a rough intermediate price is estimated, by summing up the prices in each discount table (R1-R3). The final intermediate prices for every supplier, are estimated based on the total of rough intermediate price. A final price is estimated for the supplier, by summing up the final intermediate prices.

Description

I. Field of application

The invention relates to a method for automatically optimizing the Final price of a basket of goods or services from several Providers are offered who are a in terms of pricing Offer discounts, especially for telecommunication services.

The following are the abbreviations TK for "telecommunications (s)" and TK-D used for "telecommunications services". The term "goods" or "Shopping cart" is not limited to physical goods, but includes all kinds of goods as well as services, including TK-D.

II. Technical background

Basically, the customer as a customer is always faced with the problem as he is for a specific shopping cart, which he repeats once or repetitively Unit of time required - comparable or identical quality of the individual goods from different providers, so that the goods can only be Differentiate price - by choosing a provider or distributing the Shopping cart to different defined providers - the optimal total Final price for this cart.  

The user of TK-D also faces this problem in the meantime very large number of providers of TK-D. This problem is simple Unit price comparisons cannot be resolved if the individual provider Offer discounts, i.e. discounts that are only available at Reaching a certain volume or volume per unit of time accepted goods or services and therefore effective retrospectively become.

Especially telecommunications customers who are switching to one or more New providers of TK-D are considering a pre-calculation, i.e. one simulative calculation, the settlement price, i.e. total final price for her Telecommunications volume with a particular provider or use of a provider mix.

Such a simulative calculation to determine the cheapest Provider or provider mixes must also be that of the individual providers take into account the discounts offered. Usually the simulative Calculation using the customer's original telecommunications data performed, which over a defined larger period, for example one billing month, sufficient for the user and for each individual Telephone call or other use of the telecommunications provider, for example for data transmission, with regard to the consumption-relevant data such as time and duration, responsible extension of the customer's PBX, at least the destination local network, in particular the destination number and in particular at least indications regarding the provider used for this, better its clear identification, the used TK-D to be recorded.

Such simulative calculations with in particular an original amount of data of the customer with whom a data record of a product or service, in particular corresponds to a single telephone call, in particular with the help of an EDP System carried out automatically, with the individual provider usually  several different tariffs in each case and additionally, partly in each tariff offer different discounts.

For simulative calculations, in which the consumption-relevant data in the Rule record by record, or by summarized record Packages, linked to the tariff-relevant parameters of the individual providers and from this simulative settlement prices of the individual providers or one Combination of providers must also be determined, so to speak Subsequent discounting according to the offers for the conditions set at individual discount levels are taken into account to get a realistic price comparison.

Common discount systems are:

basic discount

The provider receives the normal final price of the Total volume of TK-D used, for example individually negotiated discount of X%. Since the settlement of the TK-D usually takes place at fixed time intervals, such as a calendar month Basic discount determined in this interval, but is usually not on reaching a minimum turnover in this or one of them deviating time interval, but is achieved for the whole Volume granted. The basic discount can also be determined by additional conditions be restricted, e.g. B. apply only to domestic connections.

standard discount

Here, too, there is a discount by a fixed percentage, applied to the discountable volume allocated to a discount scale. It a minimum volume per unit of time must have been exceeded beforehand, for the standard discount to occur, however, this minimum volume can also be zero  his. In this case, the structure of the standard discount corresponds the basic discount, but the model of the basic discount is also required, all possible combinations of this basic discount and other discounts to be able to represent mathematically.

Additive discount

Separate discount rates apply for individual volume levels. Example: up to volume n1 (always per time unit) there is no discount for which Volume from n1 to n2 a discount of X1%, for the volume n2 to n3 a discount of X2% etc.

Total amount discounts

With increasing volume per unit of time, an increasing discount is granted, which is then always applied to the total volume.

example

A total volume of 10,000, - is reached within a unit of time, in which 8,000, - discountable volume are included, while 2,000, - non-discountable are.

Graduation of the discount with standard discount and total amount discount

According to the standard discount: 10% discount from 8,000.00 (between 5,000.00 and 10,000, -) = 800, - So you have to pay 10,000, - minus 800, - 9200, -.

According to the total amount discount: 15% discount from 10.000, - (from 10,000.00) = 1,200.00. So you have to pay 10,000 minus 1,200 8800, -.

On the one hand, this list of discount rates is not a conclusive list development, and on the other hand it is partly used by the individual providers Scheme, but with different percentage reductions and volumes limit, also different for the individual tariffs of the same provider, are used, and in addition, the providers have different margins conditions (e.g. mutual exclusion or parallel effect various discounts).

Geometrically, this means that the distribution of a (variable) Volume of goods / services on one or more of a variety of available providers with regard to the costs incurred three-dimensional, mountain-like structure results. The search for the cheap The final price corresponds to the search for the deepest depression in a given one total volume (usually per unit of time), which is from the customer needed, i.e. asked.

The problem is that there are unique mathematical calculation methods like they are otherwise used for the optimization calculation, so-called called local minima as they described the sinks in the three-dimensional Represent mountains, usually can no longer leave.  

III. Presentation of the invention a) Technical task

It is therefore the object of the present invention to provide a method with which the optimally low final price for a basket of goods / services across several providers despite their admission of only retrospectively effective Discounts will be possible. In particular, this method is said to be based on usual IT systems can be carried out automatically.

b) solving the problem

This object is solved by the features of claims 1 and 5. benefit adhesive embodiments result from the subclaims.

In particular, the problem is solved in that the simple and complex procedures are used side by side, the simple The method in particular can serve to take into account the number of Reduce providers in complex procedures by excluding the most expensive provider.

In the following, instead of telecommunications services (TK-D) generally spoken of goods / services, since the inventive Methods not only on TK-D, but on every kind of goods / services are applicable.

The simple method is to find the many individual goods you want entire shopping cart first to summarize the product groups To drastically reduce the number of units to be handled. In doing so those goods which - regarding a single provider - the conditions of a certain discount scale of this provider, summarized. This  Distribution of the entire shopping cart is for the same shopping cart for everyone Provider performed.

The goal is a clear assignment. So if a commodity Would meet the conditions of different discount scales from the same provider, must have a clear decision criterion (preferred discount scale etc.) be created. Another option is to start with the Discount scales, which can therefore apply cumulatively to a certain product, redefined as replacement discount scales so that the newly created replacement Discount scales never cumulative, but only individually, i.e. selectively, on one Goods can apply.

The exception is the basic discount, which is in addition to one of the other discount Species can be applied.

example

A provider offers an additive discount, the customer also has this provider a general basic discount of 5% on all services agreed.

The creation of selective and non-cumulative discount scales - with the exception of the Basic discounts - is also too with the complex method described later prefer.

For the goods divided into the respective discount scales for each provider Groups become raw intermediate prices for these product groups by adding up of the individual prices of the goods are determined from the product groups. This raw Intermediate prices are then determined using the discount scale characteristic discount discounted at final intermediate prices per goods group within each provider.  

Adding up these final intermediate prices results in a per provider Final price.

This shows which provider is the cheapest provider of the whole Shopping cart considering the discount is when the total volume of the shopping cart is awarded to a single main provider.

For providers who do not offer all the goods in demand, they will not offered goods alternatively assigned to one of the other providers, who then appear as a secondary provider alongside the main provider. With regard to the Sub-providers can then have several alternatives side by side, whose intermediate prices are also determined in each case.

The discount scales will of course be added to the raw intermediate prices of these corresponding sub-providers applied.

In particular, by defining the number reduction from providers to a certain number or by a certain percentage the expensive providers are eliminated. For the shortlist of the remaining Cheaper providers can then in particular those described below complex optimization method are used, but also with all Available providers works.

In addition, the goods to be treated or partial baskets can be according to their respective raw prices - starting with the most expensive goods or Partial baskets - sorted and treated in this order. Through the thus usually larger price differences between the different Providers crystallize the cheaper providers faster and it less non-optimal branch paths need to be calculated. This is at both methods possible.  

Basically, methods like the one described below are complex Method known as decision tree process. The graphically represented The branching tree should only provide clarity when carried out manually facilitate and serves in the present case to explain the procedure, which is in automated form, for example when carried out by means of a Computers and a corresponding program, of course, without that visualization of a branching tree takes place. The single ones In this case, branch cells or end cells are storage locations with a certain memory content. The content is set according to a mode compared with each other. The branches represent choices.

The complex method is based on the desired total shopping cart Step by step by adding more goods or part-baskets to compile, and at every stage of the shopping cart to determine the current price of the shopping basket (= memory content of the cell).

It is now not only the content of end cells of the same level of expansion Shopping cart compared with each other, but also with such content from End cells, and thus intermediate prices, the lower expansion level of the Cart, i.e. branching level of the tree.

This going back to lower branching levels and branches that end there enables u. a. the consideration only has a later impact Rabattierungsmodelle. The discount is taken into account by the fact that for the total volume of the discount applied to the shopping cart sets already when determining intermediate prices, in which this The size of the shopping cart has not yet been reached, applied, and if necessary only retrospectively to the actual volume of a provider the corresponding discount is reduced be or by the for the branching reached = level of expansion Shopping cart actually valid discount rate is used.  

A simplification is achieved in that the desired total Shopping cart is not composed of individual goods, but from Partial baskets, each containing goods that have the same discount scale correspond to certain provider. A certain commodity may be with one Provider clearly only a discount scale and possibly also a basic discount be assignable. This does not have to be the corresponding or even identical discount scales of the individual providers. In addition, goods are allowed a goods basket, the same at a first provider Discount scales belong to another provider not to two or distribute several discount scales.

An additional simplification and thus a reduction in computing effort can be - in deviation from the usual decision tree procedure - achieve by setting the discount for the last one to Cart added goods or the last added Partial basket of the now enlarged total volume of the basket of the previous Add existing scope regarding the final shopping cart price deducted, with the amount of the shopping cart end price, the this previous scope would have been with the same provider that had the last one, added goods sub-package or goods was assigned as a source of supply.

c) working examples

The two methods are explained in more detail below with reference to the figures explained. Show it:

FIG. 1 flowchart the simple method,

Fig. 2 and 3 Procedure of the complex method, and

Fig. 4 partial baskets of the complex method.

According to FIG. 1, the individual goods W1, W2. , a specific discount scale R1, R2, RX, RX + 1, RY, RY + 1.. of the individual providers A1, A2, A3. , assigned. The individual discount scales are defined and delimited from each other in such a way that within one provider, e.g. B. A1, a single item, e.g. B. W3, exclusively a discount scale, e.g. B. R1, can be assigned.

The case that a basic discount could also be applicable is not intended here be taken into account.

Correspondingly, definitive boundary conditions that do not overlap each other to differentiate the individual discount groups from each other be present and the corresponding characteristics for the individual goods be known.

After creating the commodity groups (WG's) per provider A1, A2. , be for the individual commodity prices raw intermediate prices determined, for which none Discounting is taken into account. The individual raw intermediate prices per product group will then be discounted the relevant discount scale subject and a discounted raw intermediate price for this product group, e.g. B. WG (R1) determined. Summed up per provider, this results in a final price for the Shopping cart per provider, which also contains the discounts of this provider are taken into account, where applicable after adding up to the final price A further discount must be taken into account that applies to the discounted Final intermediate prices were not yet applicable. By comparing the Final prices of the individual providers A1, A2. , it becomes obvious which provider the offers the entire shopping cart at the cheapest price.

In practice, the problem often arises that certain goods are not are offered by all providers.  

So if it turns out that provider A1 is in principle the cheapest provider is, however, the goods W2 and W3 of the shopping basket are unable to offer, so must at the final price, which results for the provider A1 and yes the goods W2 and W3 does not include nor the unit price of the goods W2 and W3, as of offered to other providers at best, can be added because these providers then act as secondary providers.

The goal is to minimize the number of secondary providers, preferably wise to keep at zero. Depending on the setting of preferences, either lowest all-inclusive price including goods W2 and W3 or lowest possible number of main and secondary providers required, however, result different prices everywhere, which is calculated depending on your preference become.

In the event of utilization or simulative advance calculation of the settlement The price of telecommunications services are the goods, e.g. B. individual telephone calls, i.e. telecommunication connections, in the form of a data record. The individual providers A1, A2, A3 including the tariffs offered by the providers and within the tariffs or tariff Discount levels R1, R2, R3 offered across the board are stored in databases.

By linking the call-related data with the tariff-related Data are the individual prices of the goods, e.g. B. W1 (R1) of A1 calculated that then by adding up within a discount scale, i.e. product group Raw intermediate price of this product group WG (R1) result.

FIGS. 2a to 2c and FIGS. 3 and 4 show the ongoing development according to the complex method using the decision tree according to the modified decision tree method.

The required shopping cart is started, starting with the first item W1 builds by adding more goods W2, W3. , . until the ge  Desired final size of the shopping cart, for example including the goods WX, is reached.

Instead of individual goods W1, W2 ,. , , can also use this complex method Partial baskets W1 ', W2' ,. , , be carried out what the computational effort and thus reduced time expenditure.

In FIG. 4 is shown how the individual product component baskets are defined.

In doing so, for all providers to be considered (in the example case is of three Providers A1-A3) all relevant tariffs of these providers are shown. In the example, only one tariff is relevant per provider, namely discount R1 of Provider A2, discount RN of provider A1 and discount RX of provider A3.

These different discounts from different providers partially overlap in terms of definitions and boundary conditions. It is thus possible to define sub-baskets of goods, in the present example W1'-W7 ', so that each sub-basket contains only those individual items which, on the one hand, can be assigned to the same discount scale from a particular provider, but, on the other hand, cannot be assigned to different discount scales from another provider. In the representation used in Fig. 4 according to set theory, each goods contains partial basket, for. B. W2 ', goods which each have the same assignments to the starting quantities R1, RN, RX:
W2 'is therefore, for example, the partial goods basket that can be assigned to both R1 (A2) and RN (A1), but not RX (A3).

For the subsequent application of the complex method, the following information must be known for each product part basket determined in this way and must be carried along with the corresponding product part basket, again illustrated using the example of the shopping basket W2 ', during the implementation of the method:

• - Which discounts from which provider does this goods basket fall? (e.g. W2 ' falls under both R1 (A2) and RN (A1)).
• - What is the total amount of goods and therefore the maximum achievable discount level of these individual affected discounts? z. B. R1 (A2) achieves the highest possible discount level if all four of them get it defining sub-baskets W1 ', W2', W4 ', W5'; for RN (A1) The same applies analogously to the sub-baskets W2 ', W3', W5 ', W6'.

If you work with individual goods instead of partial goods baskets, they must Both of the information explained above are also known for each individual item his. Therefore, only individual goods are mentioned in the following, but what each could also be the goods basket defined above.

In the example, three providers are assumed, with the result that that from every branch point, including the starting point, to which none at all Goods are present in the shopping cart, usually three branches go out according to the three ways to add the next one to the shopping cart goods, for example W1, from the three different suppliers A1, A2 or A3 available.

Every cell, be it a branch cell or an end cell of a branch or Branches from which no further branching contains next to the Scope of goods and the provider from whom the respective goods were purchased was also the price of the shopping basket defined in this way, the shopping basket price.

The normal decision tree procedure is now to repeat after each branch (= inclusion of a new product / goods basket in the goods basket) by comparing them at the same branching level (= same extent of goods in the shopping cart) determine which cell has the lowest shopping cart Price, and only to branch from this cell to the next  Expansion stage of the shopping basket (= inclusion of the next goods / parts basket, z. B. W2).

In order to take account of the discounts, the price of the goods W1 is set at the maximum discount possible for every possible provider. With regard to the goods W1, if it were obtained from the provider A2, this means (see FIG. 4) that a discount according to the discount R1 of this provider A2, under which the goods W1 or W1 'falls, would be expected as if this provider A2 would have to deliver all the maximum possible goods or partial goods baskets W1 ', W2', W4 ', W5', all of which fall within this tariff R1.

According to FIG. 4, the goods basket W1 'would not fall into any discount with the other providers A1 and A3, but would nevertheless be offered by them, so that these other providers according to FIG. 2a would actually also be available as providers.

As shown in FIG. 2a, this leads, for example, on the first branching level, in which only the goods W1 are in the shopping cart, to the double-framed cell of the content W1 (A2) having the cheapest shopping cart price compared to the end cells present up to that point , namely W1 (A1) and W1 (A3).

Accordingly, branching continues from this cheapest cell, as can be seen in FIG. 2b.

It must now be determined which of the end cells has the lowest shopping cart price, and for this purpose all end cells in FIG. 2b are compared with one another with regard to their shopping cart prices, i.e. not only those of the branching level W1 + W2, but also not at the moment more followed end cells of all previous stages W1.

Several different results can occur in this comparison:
Either the triple-framed cell at the actually highest branching level W1 + W2, namely W1 (A2) + W2 (A1) is the cell with the cheapest shopping cart price. Since this determined cheapest cell is at the highest possible branching level so far, branching from here again takes place by including the goods W3 in the shopping cart (branching level W1 + W2 + W3), as shown in FIG. 2c, which in theory is again from the three providers A1, A2 and A3 could be delivered, but in practice is not offered by provider A3 and therefore only two branches, namely purchase via provider A1 or A2, are available. For the time being, there are therefore only two end cells at this branching level W1 + W2 + W3.

The above-described comparison of the end cells according to FIG. 2b could, however, also have led to the result that the cell W1 (A1) lying on the branching stage W1 has the lowest basket price. In this case, however, it is determined that this cell W1 (A1) is not at the highest possible branching level to date. Therefore, from this cell, which is initially the cheapest, framed three times in FIG. 3a, a branch is branched out according to FIG. 3b by receiving the goods W2 via the three possible sources of supply A1, A2, A3 from this cell W1 (A1).

It is then checked whether the new end cells generated in this way are on the highest possible branching level, in this case W1 + W2.

By comparing either all end cells or only the one on the highest Branch cells (W1 + W2) lying end cells is now determined which End cell has the lowest shopping cart price.

This is, for example, the quadruple-framed cell W1 (A2) + W2 (A1) in FIG. 3b. It is now checked again whether this cell is at the highest possible branching level. Since this is the case, the next item is taken from here to the next higher branching level. Is advanced in this way until the shopping cart reaches the desired size, e.g. B. WX, after the last comparison of the end rows and checking whether the resulting cheapest end cell is at the highest branching level, it immediately results which goods W1, W2. , of the shopping cart as a whole from which provider A1, A2, A2 must be obtained in order to purchase the shopping cart at the lowest possible total price.

At the same time, however, after each comparison of the current end cells, it must also be checked whether the highest possible discount initially accepted for the last goods received is still applicable:
Using the example of the situation according to FIGS. 2a and 2b in conjunction with FIG. 4, it is known from FIG. 2b that the goods or the goods basket W2 or W2 '- in contrast to the goods W1 or W1' - are not from the provider A2 , but should now be obtained from provider A1.

However, it is clear that in Fig. 2a on branching level W1 the highest possible discount granted to goods W1 (see Fig. 4) was wrongly granted, because the maximum amount of the discount R1 (A2) there can no longer be reached, because is not shown in FIG. 2b is now known that the product W2 and the goods basket portion W2 'from the other providers A1 is to be based, so offered A2 and thus when R1 Use (A2) more.

In this discount R1 (A2) the maximum amount W1 '+ W4' + W5 'can still be reached, and this new maximum discount must now be taken as a basis in Fig. 2a at branching level W1, which means that the shopping cart price in cell W1 ( A2) changes subsequently.

Accordingly, the comparison in Fig. 2a, which cell has the lowest goods basket price, must be carried out again with this new cell content.

This can lead to the same result as in the first comparison in Fig. 2a, namely that W1 (A2), despite the approach of the new maximum discount rate, is still the lowest shopping cart price, so that it is to be continued according to Fig. 2b ,

However, the result could also change in that one of the other end cells in FIG. 2a presents itself as the cheapest cell content, and the end cell would then have to be operated on as described above.

A special feature when considering the subsequent discounts represent the additive discounts.

Theoretically, for every new product or Parts basket the valid, gradually effective additive discount rate be used, but in the future the information will also be carried along which scope of goods and which additive discount level within the Additive discounts have already been achieved with every provider. To make this relatively large Do not always carry the amount of information with you and include it in the calculation Having to view, can simplify additive discounts with a average discount rate. This can be the arithmetic Average between the lowest and the highest achievable additive discount level - for a given total shopping cart - or it can be another calculation an average discount rate can be selected for this, for example the integral calculation of an average discount rate under consideration View the scope of goods at each of the additive discount levels.

Claims (13)

1. Procedure for automatically optimizing the final price of the total amount of goods / services offered by at least two providers, in particular of telecommunications services (TK-D), for which a discount is offered by the providers (A1, A2...) according to defined discount scales (R1, R2.. RX, RX + 1..), characterized in that as a simple method

• a) the individual goods / services (W1, W2..) or the data records corresponding to these goods / services (W1, W2) are assigned to the discount scales (R1, R2..) of each provider (A1, A2..) Conditions they meet,
• b) for the goods / services (W1, W2..) of the total quantity listed in a discount scale (R1, R2..) of each provider (A1, A2..) a raw intermediate price in each of the discount scales (R1, R2 .) is determined by adding up,
• c) from these raw intermediate prices by applying the discount of the respective discount scale (R1, R2..) final intermediate prices for each discount scale (R1, R2..) of each provider (A1, A2..) are determined and
• d) a final price per provider is determined for each provider (A1, A2..) by adding up the final intermediate prices.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that when assigning a product / service (W1, W2..) each product only in each case a discount scale (R1, R2..) - especially in addition to a granted one Discount scale in the form of a basic discount - per provider (A1, A2..), In particular  the cheapest discount scale (R1, R2 ...), the conditions of which it fulfills, per Provider is assigned. 3. The method according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that Goods / services (e.g. W3, W7) that a provider (e.g. A1) as Main provider does not offer, via one or more secondary providers (A2, A3..), especially about the smallest possible number of secondary providers, according to the simple method regarding sub-provider intermediate prices and in addition to the final price of the incomplete shopping basket of the main provider (A1) listed or at a total final price across multiple providers for one Shopping cart to be added. 4. The method according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that several alternative sub-provider final prices over the total amount of not goods (W3, W7) offered by the main provider (e.g. A1) can be determined. 5. A method for automatically optimizing the final price of the total amount of goods / services required, in particular of telecommunications services (TK-D) offered by at least two providers, in which the providers (A1, A2) offer a discount according to defined discount scales (R1 , R2. .RX, RX + 1..), Characterized in that a decision tree method is used as a complex method, the decision tree being defined as follows:

• - Each branch cell or end cell contains a shopping basket (W1 + W2 + W3...), which contains at least one goods, including the assignment of which goods are obtained from which provider (W1 (A2) + W2 (A1)) and the resulting shopping cart price,
• - each cell is assigned to only one branch,
• - Each further branching level corresponds to the inclusion of an additional item (e.g. W4) in the previous shopping cart (e.g. W1 + W2 + W3)
• - the number of branches originating from each cell represents the number of suppliers (A1, A2, A3...) of the goods, in particular this newly added goods (e.g. W4),

so that the cheapest shopping cart price can be determined automatically by the following steps:

• a) Execution of the next branch for the next goods (WN) only from the cell in which the basket price of the goods (W1 + W2 +... + WN-1) was lowest
• b) Comparison of the shopping cart prices of all end cells of the branching tree, even if fewer than N goods are contained in the respective shopping cart or the end cell
• c) if the lowest basket price (WKP) at a branching level <N, z. B. on (N-2), from this cell carry out a branching analogous to a) with subsequent comparison analogous to b) until branching level N is reached,
• d) if the lowest basket price WKP can be found at branching level N, branch from this currently cheapest cell to the next branching level (WN + 1) with subsequent comparison according to b),

So that after reaching the desired shopping basket size WX and a last comparison according to step b), the end result is the cheapest shopping basket price WKP (X), stating the respective source of supply (provider A1, A2, A3) for each product (e.g. W1 (A2) + W2 (A1)..) Results. 6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that the assignment of the goods to the individual discount scales of the individual providers already at the individual branching levels or only when they are reached Final scope of the shopping cart WX before the final comparison of the shopping cart Prices are carried out and taken into account.   7. The method according to any one of the preceding method claims for the complex method, characterized in that
The discount is taken into account by the fact that the desired final state of the shopping cart (WX) is not composed of individual goods (W1, W2...) but of partial goods baskets (WTK1, WTK2..) and each new branching level is composed of a new goods basket (WTKN) A basket of goods (e.g. WTK1) contains those goods / services (e.g. W1, W3, W7) or the data records corresponding to these goods / services that meet the conditions of the same discount scale (e.g. R2) from one provider (e.g. A1) are sufficient, and
in particular the conditions of the corresponding or identical discount levels of the various providers (A1, A2, A3..), that is to say (R2 (A1), R2 (A2), R2 (A3)..) and
in particular, do not spread over several different discount levels from one of the other providers. 8. The method according to claim one of the preceding method claims to the complex method, characterized in that when calculating the shopping basket prices (WKP) from the respective providers offered, relevant discount is taken into account. 9. The method according to any one of the preceding claims complex method, characterized in that The discount is taken into account by looking at the current one Branching level (e.g. N) the discount is already applied, which at the known final size (WX) of the shopping cart.   10. The method according to any one of the preceding claims complex method, characterized in that the discount when calculating the basket prices it is taken into account that at the respective branching level (e.g. N) Discount is applied to this current shopping basket (WN) would be relevant. 11. The method according to any one of the preceding claims complex method, characterized in that not only when considering the discount within a shopping cart the supply route of the individual goods (W1, W2...) already recorded in each cell is taken into account by a certain provider (A1, A2..), but above in addition, the assignment of the individual goods to the respective discount scales (R1, R2.., RX..) Of the individual providers (A1, A2..) Within the scope of up to branching level (N) already reached the maximum possible discount. 12. The method according to one of the preceding method claims complex method, characterized in that the discount is taken into account in that the unit price is a new one Added goods (WN) or a goods basket (WTK-N) from Total price of the shopping cart (Σ WN) the price of the before the new added goods of existing shopping cart (Σ WN-1) with the one Value that the previous shopping basket size (Σ WN-1) is subtracted from same supplier (e.g. A2) from whom the last item (WN) was assigned with regard to the reference. 13. Procedure for automatic optimization of the final price of at least two offered, required total amount of Goods / services, in particular of telecommunications services  (TK-D), where the providers (A1, A2) offer a discount according to defined Discount scales (R1, R2...) Or (RX, RX + 1..) Are granted, characterized in that the simple method according to claim 1 and the complex method according to Claim 5 are used in addition, and in particular with the help of simple method, a limited number of cheap providers is determined that then when using the complex method as exclusive Providers are used.