Competition and price discrimination in the market for mailing lists

Borzekowski, Ron; Thomadsen, Raphael; Taragin, Charles

doi:10.1007/s11129-009-9050-7

Cited by 24 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 35 publications

(25 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…good case, they show that …rms set one cost-based tari¤ for each good and o¤er a lump-sum discount to consumers who buy both goods 6 .…”

Section: Mussa and Rosen 1978 And Maskin And Riley 1984) Consumers Amentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, Bonatti (2011) lets buyers with stronger brand preferences also have stronger vertical 6 Speci…cally, the two goods i = 1; 2, have symmetric marginal costs, ci. Consumers again exhibit independent horizontal and vertical heterogeneity, but horizontal heterogeneity is now expanded to include an independent location parameter for each good, fx1; x2g.…”

Section: Independent Heterogeneitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nonlinear Pricing and Tariff Differentiation: Evidence from the British Electricity Market

Davies¹,

Price²,

Wilson³

2014

The Energy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Liberalisation of the British household electricity market, in which previously monopolised regional markets were exposed to large-scale entry, is used as a natural experiment on oligopolistic nonlinear pricing. Each oligopolist offered a single two-part electricity tariff, but inconsistent with current theory, the two-part tariffs were heterogeneous in ways that cannot be attributed to explanations such as asymmetric costs or variations in brand loyalty. Instead, the evidence suggests that firms deliberately differentiated their tariff structures, resulting in market segmentation according to consumers’ usage.

show abstract

“…good case, they show that …rms set one cost-based tari¤ for each good and o¤er a lump-sum discount to consumers who buy both goods 6 .…”

Section: Mussa and Rosen 1978 And Maskin And Riley 1984) Consumers Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Independent Heterogeneitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Nonlinear Pricing and Tariff Differentiation: Evidence from the British Electricity Market

Davies¹,

Price²,

Wilson³

2014

The Energy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Johnson and Myatt (2003) demonstrate such a trade-off in a theory paper. In the price discrimination literature, Seim and Viard (2004) demonstrate that competition can increase the number of calling plans offered by phone companies, whereas Borzekowski et al (2009) find that competition leads mailing-list companies to offer more versions of their products.…”

Section: Competition Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Empirical Analysis of Assortment Similarities Across U.S. Supermarkets

2010

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An empirical analysis of assortment similarities across U.S. supermarketsHwang, M.; Bronnenberg, Bart; Thomadsen, R. General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.-Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research -You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain -You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright, please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. T his paper examines pairwise assortment similarities at U.S. supermarkets to understand how assortment composition and size are related to underlying factors that describe local store clientele, local competitive structure, and the retail outlets' characteristics. The top-selling items, which cumulatively make up 50% of sales, are sold at nearly every store, but other items are viewed as optional. We find that, within states, supermarkets owned by the same chain carry similar assortments and that the composition of their clientele and the presence of competing stores have effects on assortment similarity that are an order of magnitude smaller than ownership structure. In contrast, we find that, across states, supermarkets owned by the same chain do version their assortment. We explain this difference using extant work on the minimal efficient scale of supermarkets and on local demand effects. Furthermore, we investigate the distribution and role of regional brands. We find that regional brands are primarily distributed by small regional chains or independent stores. "Value" regional brands are primarily distributed by supermarket firms without store brands, whereas the distribution of "premium" regional brands is unrelated to the presence of store brands. We discuss our findings in the context of modeling assortment decisions and manufacturers designing distribution policies.

show abstract

“…Johnson and Myatt (2003) demonstrate such a tradeoff in a theory paper. In the price discrimination literature, Seim and Viard (2004) demonstrate that competition can increase the number of calling plans offered by phone companies, while Borzekowski, Thomadsen and Taragin (2008) find that competition leads mailing list companies to offer more versions of their products.…”

Section: Competition Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Determinants of Assortment Composition and Assortment Size at U.S. Supermarkets

2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper empirically investigates the determinants of supermarkets' assortments at U.S. supermarkets. We first observe that, across several product categories, the top selling items which cumulatively make up 50% of sales are viewed as core products which are sold at nearly every store. However, once the product is not a top seller, stores start to view stocking the products as optional. We then study how assortment composition and assortment size are related to underlying factors that describe local store clientele, local competitive structure, and the retail outlets' characteristics. From an analysis covering four important product categories, we find that corporate and ownership structure of retail stores are the most important drivers of differences in assortment composition across stores. We also find that supermarkets tailor their assortment by considering relevant local demographic dimensions or the stores around them, but this effect is an order of magnitude smaller than that of ownership structure and other store characteristics. From the large chain-level effects on assortment, we conclude that marginal assortment decisions are mostly cost driven, and are made at the corporate level. We discuss our findings in the context of manufacturers designing distribution policies.

show abstract

Competition and price discrimination in the market for mailing lists

Cited by 24 publications

References 35 publications

Nonlinear Pricing and Tariff Differentiation: Evidence from the British Electricity Market

Nonlinear Pricing and Tariff Differentiation: Evidence from the British Electricity Market

An Empirical Analysis of Assortment Similarities Across U.S. Supermarkets

The Determinants of Assortment Composition and Assortment Size at U.S. Supermarkets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About