DukeSpace

Call for Prices: Strategic Implications of Raising Consumers' Costs

DukeSpace

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Desai, Preyas en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2011-06-21T17:30:59Z
dc.date.available 2011-06-21T17:30:59Z
dc.date.issued 2010 en_US
dc.identifier.citation Desai,Preyas S.;Krishnamoorthy,Anand;Sainam,Preethika. 2010. Call for Prices: Strategic Implications of Raising Consumers' Costs. Marketing Science 29(1): 158-174. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0732-2399 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10161/4422
dc.description.abstract Many consumer durable retailers often do not advertise their prices and instead ask consumers to call them for prices. It is easy to see that this practice increases the consumers' cost of learning the prices of products they are considering, yet firms commonly use such practices. Not advertising prices may reduce the firm's advertising costs, but the strategic effects of doing so are not clear. Our objective is to examine the strategic effects of this practice. In particular, how does making price discovery more difficult for consumers affect competing retailers' price, service decisions, and profits? We develop a model in which a manufacturer sells its product through a high-service retailer and a low-service retailer. Consumers can purchase the retail service at the high-end retailer and purchase the product at the competing low-end retailer. Therefore, the high-end retailer faces a free-riding problem. A retailer first chooses its optimal service levels. Then, it chooses its optimal price levels. Finally, a retailer decides whether to advertise its prices. The model results in four structures: (1) both retailers advertise prices, (2) only the low-service retailer advertises price, (3) only the high-service retailer advertises price, and (4) neither retailer advertises price. We find that when a retailer does not advertise its price and makes price discovery more difficult for consumers, the competition between the retailers is less intense. However, the retailer is forced to charge a lower price. In addition, if the competing retailer does advertise its prices, then the competing retailer enjoys higher profit margins. We identify conditions under which each of the above four structures is an equilibrium and show that a low-service retailer not advertising its price is a more likely outcome than a high-service retailer doing so. We then solve the manufacturer's problem and find that there are several instances when a retailer's advertising decisions are different from what the manufacturer would want. We describe the nature of this channel coordination problem and identify some solutions. en_US
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.publisher INFORMS en_US
dc.relation.isversionof doi:10.1287/mksc.1090.0498 en_US
dc.subject price advertising en_US
dc.subject channel coordination en_US
dc.subject retailing en_US
dc.subject free-riding en_US
dc.subject information en_US
dc.subject competition en_US
dc.subject business en_US
dc.title Call for Prices: Strategic Implications of Raising Consumers' Costs en_US
dc.title.alternative en_US
dc.description.version Version of Record en_US
duke.date.pubdate 2010-2-jan en_US
duke.description.endpage 174 en_US
duke.description.issue 1 en_US
duke.description.startpage 158 en_US
duke.description.volume 29 en_US
dc.relation.journal Marketing Science en_US

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record