IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxecpp/v48y1996i3p492-98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Seniority Seating at the Royal Opera House

Author

Listed:
  • Frank, Jeff
  • Smith, Eric

Abstract

This paper examines lotteries and seniority queues as forms of commodity bundling price discrimination. There are good and bad seats, and two types of potential purchasers. Offered the choice of a high-priced good seat and a moderately-priced bundle of good and bad seats, customers self-select into high and low valuation types. For single-period purchases, the bundle is a lottery over good and bad seats. For repeated purchases, monopolists such as the Royal Opera House can do better by setting up a seniority allocation system. Copyright 1996 by Royal Economic Society.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank, Jeff & Smith, Eric, 1996. "Seniority Seating at the Royal Opera House," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 48(3), pages 492-498, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxecpp:v:48:y:1996:i:3:p:492-98
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0030-7653%28199607%292%3A48%3A3%3C492%3ASSATRO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-H&origin=bc
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Robert Scott & Jannett Highfill, 2001. "Mixed bundling with profit and sales objectives," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 7(2), pages 243-252, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:oxecpp:v:48:y:1996:i:3:p:492-98. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/oep .

    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.