IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v102y2021ics0305048320306848.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Daily-deal market with consumer retention: Price discrimination or quality differentiation

Author

Listed:
  • Tang, Yao
  • Chen, Rachel R.
  • Guan, Xu

Abstract

In the daily-deal market, a local-service seller contracts with an online platform to acquire and retain new consumers via two marketing strategies: price discrimination (PD) wherein the seller designs a lower price in the daily-deal market for the same level of product quality and quality differentiation (QD) wherein the seller provides a lower product quality and thus a lower price in the daily-deal market. Our paper investigates the underlying mechanisms of these two distinctive strategies by highlighting the retention behavior of new consumers. The retention behavior is built upon product quality offered in the daily-deal market, with a higher quality inducing more advantageous consumer retention. We first show that the seller adopts the PD (QD) strategy if consumer retention is arbitrarily profitable (unprofitable), i.e., consumer retention shows high (low) sensitivity to product quality or decays slowly (rapidly) over time. We then find that the seller's optimal strategy shifts from QD to PD as the profitability of consumer retention increases. Moreover, we uncover the strategic role of platform's agency fees when consumer retention is moderately profitable in which sufficiently high or low agency fees motivate the seller to adopt the PD strategy, whereas middle agency fees lead to the adoption of the QD strategy. Our results have useful implications for the daily-deal industry and cater to the increasing number of offline sellers engaged with online platforms to extend their selling channels.

Suggested Citation

  • Tang, Yao & Chen, Rachel R. & Guan, Xu, 2021. "Daily-deal market with consumer retention: Price discrimination or quality differentiation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:102:y:2021:i:c:s0305048320306848
    DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2020.102330
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048320306848
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.omega.2020.102330?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brent Kitchens & Anuj Kumar & Praveen Pathak, 2018. "Electronic Markets and Geographic Competition Among Small, Local Firms," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 928-946, December.
    2. Tianxin Zou & Bo Zhou & Baojun Jiang, 2020. "Product-Line Design in the Presence of Consumers’ Anticipated Regret," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(12), pages 5665-5682, December.
    3. Schmalensee, Richard, 1981. "Output and Welfare Implications of Monopolistic Third-Degree Price Discrimination," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(1), pages 242-247, March.
    4. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
    5. Zike Cao & Kai-Lung Hui & Hong Xu, 2018. "When Discounts Hurt Sales: The Case of Daily-Deal Markets," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 567-591, September.
    6. Simon Cowan, 2012. "Third-Degree Price Discrimination and Consumer Surplus," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(2), pages 333-345, June.
    7. Takanori Adachi, 2005. "Third-Degree Price Discrimination, Consumption Externalities and Social Welfare," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 72(285), pages 171-178, February.
    8. Zhang, Guoquan & Shang, Jennifer & Yildirim, Pinar, 2016. "Optimal pricing for group buying with network effects," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 69-82.
    9. Serguei Netessine & Terry A. Taylor, 2007. "Product Line Design and Production Technology," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 101-117, 01-02.
    10. J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 1998. "Product Line Design for a Distribution Channel," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 156-169.
    11. Iñaki Aguirre & Simon Cowan & John Vickers, 2010. "Monopoly Price Discrimination and Demand Curvature," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1601-1615, September.
    12. (Catherine) Zhang, Jie & Savage, Scott J. & Chen, Yongmin, 2015. "Consumer uncertainty and price discrimination through online coupons: An empirical study of restaurants in Shanghai," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 43-55.
    13. Wong, Hartanto & Lesmono, Dharma & Chhajed, Dilip & Kim, Kilsun, 2019. "On the evaluation of commonality strategy in product line design: The effect of valuation change and distribution channel structure," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 14-25.
    14. Varian, Hal R, 1985. "Price Discrimination and Social Welfare," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(4), pages 870-875, September.
    15. Daniel P. O'Brien, 2014. "The welfare effects of third-degree price discrimination in intermediate good markets: the case of bargaining," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 92-115, March.
    16. Ming Hu & Xi Li & Mengze Shi, 2015. "Product and Pricing Decisions in Crowdfunding," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 331-345, May.
    17. Eric T. Anderson & James D. Dana, Jr., 2009. "When Is Price Discrimination Profitable?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(6), pages 980-989, June.
    18. Francisco Galera & Markus Kinateder & Pedro Mendi, 2014. "The cost effect in third-degree price discrimination," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 113(2), pages 175-186, October.
    19. Upender Subramanian & Ram C. Rao, 2016. "Leveraging Experienced Consumers to Attract New Consumers: An Equilibrium Analysis of Displaying Deal Sales by Daily Deal Websites," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(12), pages 3555-3575, December.
    20. Mantian (Mandy) Hu & Chu (Ivy) Dang & Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 2019. "Search and Learning at a Daily Deals Website," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 609-642, July.
    21. J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 2004. "Communication Strategies and Product Line Design," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 304-316, January.
    22. Liang Guo & Juanjuan Zhang, 2012. "Consumer Deliberation and Product Line Design," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 995-1007, November.
    23. Tommaso Valletti & Jiahua Wu, 2020. "Consumer Profiling with Data Requirements: Structure and Policy Implications," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(2), pages 309-329, February.
    24. Jiahua Wu & Mengze Shi & Ming Hu, 2015. "Threshold Effects in Online Group Buying," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(9), pages 2025-2040, September.
    25. Ming Zhao & Yulan Wang & Xianghua Gan, 2016. "Signalling effect of daily deal promotion for a start-up service provider," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(2), pages 280-293, February.
    26. Holmes, Thomas J, 1989. "The Effects of Third-Degree Price Discrimination in Oligopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(1), pages 244-250, March.
    27. Hui Li & Qiaowei Shen & Yakov Bart, 2018. "Local Market Characteristics and Online-to-Offline Commerce: An Empirical Analysis of Groupon," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 1860-1878, April.
    28. Lingling Zhang & Doug J. Chung, 2020. "Price Bargaining and Competition in Online Platforms: An Empirical Analysis of the Daily Deal Market," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 687-706, July.
    29. K. Sridhar Moorthy, 1984. "Market Segmentation, Self-Selection, and Product Line Design," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(4), pages 288-307.
    30. Jochen Reiner & Bernd Skiera, 2018. "Helping Merchants to Assess the Profitability of Deal-of-the-Day Promotions," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 48(3), pages 247-259, June.
    31. Simone Marinesi & Karan Girotra & Serguei Netessine, 2018. "The Operational Advantages of Threshold Discounting Offers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(6), pages 2690-2708, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Yu & Li, Minqiang & Feng, Haiyang & Feng, Nan, 2023. "Which is better for competing firms with quality increasing: behavior-based price discrimination or uniform pricing?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    2. Niu, Baozhuang & Chen, Lingyun & Wang, Jingmai, 2022. "Ad valorem tariff vs. specific tariff: Quality-differentiated e-tailers’ profitability and social welfare in cross-border e-commerce," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    3. Niu, Baozhuang & Bao, Jinxiao & Cao, Bin, 2022. "Retailer's make-or-buy decision for remanufactured products under in-house yield uncertainty," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    4. Yao Tang, 2023. "A product strategy for daily deal campaigns utilizing demand expansion and consumer leakage," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 1861-1883, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yao Tang, 2023. "A product strategy for daily deal campaigns utilizing demand expansion and consumer leakage," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 1861-1883, September.
    2. Anderson, Simon P. & Celik, Levent, 2015. "Product line design," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 517-526.
    3. Takanori Adachi & Noriaki Matsushima, 2014. "The Welfare Effects Of Third-Degree Price Discrimination In A Differentiated Oligopoly," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(3), pages 1231-1244, July.
    4. Yao Tang & Xu Guan, 2022. "Seller Organization and Percentage Fee Design in the Daily Deal Market," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1287-1302, December.
    5. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Christian Wey, 2020. "Third-Degree Price Discrimination in Oligopoly When Markets Are Covered," CESifo Working Paper Series 8785, CESifo.
    6. Zhang, Yu & Huang, Min & Tian, Lin & Cai, Gangshu George & Jin, Delong & Fan, Zhiping, 2023. "Manufacturer’s product line selling strategy and add-on policy in product sharing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 308(3), pages 1332-1343.
    7. Dirk Bergemann & Benjamin Brooks & Stephen Morris, 2015. "The Limits of Price Discrimination," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(3), pages 921-957, March.
    8. E. Glen Weyl & Michal Fabinger, 2013. "Pass-Through as an Economic Tool: Principles of Incidence under Imperfect Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(3), pages 528-583.
    9. Ioannis Stamatopoulos & Christos Tzamos, 2019. "Design and Dynamic Pricing of Vertically Differentiated Inventories," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(9), pages 4222-4241, September.
    10. Han, Jun & Weber, Thomas A., 2023. "Price discrimination with robust beliefs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(2), pages 795-809.
    11. Wong, Hartanto & Kim, Kilsun & Chhajed, Dilip, 2021. "Reducing channel inefficiency in product line design," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 232(C).
    12. Xiao Huang & Dan Zhang, 2020. "Service Product Design and Consumer Refund Policies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(2), pages 366-381, March.
    13. Francisco Galera & Pedro Mendi & Juan Carlos Molero, 2017. "Quality Differences, Third-Degree Price Discrimination, And Welfare," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(1), pages 339-351, January.
    14. Simon Cowan, 2016. "Welfare-increasing third-degree price discrimination," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(2), pages 326-340, May.
    15. Palsule-Desai, Omkar D. & Tirupati, Devanath & Shah, Janat, 2015. "Product line design and positioning using add-on services," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 16-33.
    16. Zibin Xu & Anthony Dukes, 2019. "Product Line Design Under Preference Uncertainty Using Aggregate Consumer Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 669-689, July.
    17. Xiao, Tiaojun & Xu, Tiantian, 2014. "Pricing and product line strategy in a supply chain with risk-averse players," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 305-315.
    18. Chen, Yongmin & Schwartz, Marius, 2012. "Beyond price discrimination: welfare under differential pricing when costs also differ," MPRA Paper 43393, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Francisco Galera & Pedro Garcia-del-Barrio & Pedro Mendi, 2019. "Consumer surplus bias and the welfare effects of price discrimination," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 33-45, February.
    20. Takanori ADACHI, 2022. "Recent Advances in the Theory of Third-Degree Price Discrimination: A Brief Survey," Discussion papers e-22-006, Graduate School of Economics , Kyoto University.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:102:y:2021:i:c:s0305048320306848. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.