IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02909685.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Quality and price personalization under customer recognition: A dynamic monopoly model with contrasting equilibria

Author

Listed:
  • Didier Laussel

    (AMSE - Aix-Marseille Sciences Economiques - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - AMU - Aix Marseille Université - ECM - École Centrale de Marseille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Ngo Van Long

    (Department of Economics [Montréal] - McGill University = Université McGill [Montréal, Canada], Hitotsubashi Institute for Advanced Study)

  • Joana Resende

    (Universidade do Porto = University of Porto)

Abstract

We present a model of market hyper-segmentation, where a monopolist acquires within a short time all information about the preferences of consumers who purchase its vertically differentiated products. The firm offers a new price/quality schedule after each commitment period. Lower consumer types may have an incentive to delay their purchases until next period to obtain a better introductory offer. The monopolist counters this incentive by offering higher informational rents. Considering the dynamic game played by the monopolist and its customers, we find that there is always a Markov perfect equilibrium (MPE) in which the firm immediately sells the good to all customers, offering the Mussa-Rosen static equilibrium schedule to first time customers (and getting full commitment profits). However, if the commitment period between two offers is long enough, there is another MPE with gradual market expansion. Contrary to the Coasian result for a durable-good monopoly, we find that in both equilibria the profit of the monopolist increases (and the aggregate consumers surplus decreases) as the interval of commitment shrinks. The model yields policy implications for regulations on collection and storage of customers information. (C) 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Suggested Citation

  • Didier Laussel & Ngo Van Long & Joana Resende, 2020. "Quality and price personalization under customer recognition: A dynamic monopoly model with contrasting equilibria," Post-Print hal-02909685, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02909685
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jedc.2020.103869
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amit Pazgal & David Soberman, 2008. "Behavior-Based Discrimination: Is It a Winning Play, and If So, When?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(6), pages 977-994, 11-12.
    2. Mason, Robin, 2000. "Network externalities and the Coase conjecture," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1981-1992, December.
    3. Driskill, Robert & McCafferty, Stephen, 2001. "Monopoly and Oligopoly Provision of Addictive Goods," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 42(1), pages 43-72, February.
    4. Narayana R. Kocherlakota, 2005. "Zero Expected Wealth Taxes: A Mirrlees Approach to Dynamic Optimal Taxation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(5), pages 1587-1621, September.
    5. Maestri, Lucas, 2017. "Dynamic contracting under adverse selection and renegotiation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 136-173.
    6. Laussel, Didier & Van Long, Ngo & Resende, Joana, 2015. "Network effects, aftermarkets and the Coase conjecture: A dynamic Markovian approach," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 84-96.
    7. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1986. "Using Cost Observation to Regulate Firms," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 614-641, June.
    8. Myerson, Roger B, 1979. "Incentive Compatibility and the Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(1), pages 61-73, January.
    9. Yuxin Chen & Ganesh Iyer, 2002. "Research Note Consumer Addressability and Customized Pricing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 197-208, November.
    10. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 2000. "Customer Poaching and Brand Switching," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(4), pages 634-657, Winter.
    11. Lisa N. Takeyama, 2002. "Strategic Vertical Differentiation and Durable Goods Monopoly," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 43-56, March.
    12. Thisse, Jacques-Francois & Vives, Xavier, 1988. "On the Strategic Choice of Spatial Price Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(1), pages 122-137, March.
    13. Alessandro Acquisti & Hal R. Varian, 2005. "Conditioning Prices on Purchase History," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 367-381, May.
    14. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
    15. Mikhail Golosov & Aleh Tsyvinski & Nicolas Werquin, 2014. "A Variational Approach to the Analysis of Tax Systems," NBER Working Papers 20780, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Inderst, Roman, 2008. "Durable goods with quality differentiation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 100(2), pages 173-177, August.
    17. Maskin, Eric S & Newbery, David M, 1990. "Disadvantageous Oil Tariffs and Dynamic Consistency," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 143-156, March.
    18. Mikhail Golosov & Aleh Tsyvinski, 2006. "Designing Optimal Disability Insurance: A Case for Asset Testing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(2), pages 257-279, April.
    19. Mikhail Golosov & Aleh Tsyvinski, 2007. "Optimal Taxation with Endogenous Insurance Markets," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(2), pages 487-534.
    20. Mikhail Golosov & Narayana Kocherlakota & Aleh Tsyvinski, 2003. "Optimal Indirect and Capital Taxation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(3), pages 569-587.
    21. Laussel, Didier & de Montmarin, Maxime & Van Long, Ngo, 2004. "Dynamic duopoly with congestion effects," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 655-677, May.
    22. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2017. "Optimal Taxation and Human Capital Policies over the Life Cycle," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(6), pages 1931-1990.
    23. Chongwoo Choe & Stephen King & Noriaki Matsushima, 2017. "Pricing with Cookies: Behavior-Based Price Discrimination and Spatial Competition," Monash Economics Working Papers 07-17, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    24. Simon Anderson & Alicia Baik & Nathan Larson, 2023. "Price Discrimination in the Information Age: Prices, Poaching, and Privacy with Personalized Targeted Discounts," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(5), pages 2085-2115.
    25. Reinganum, Jennifer F & Stokey, Nancy L, 1985. "Oligopoly Extraction of a Common Property Natural Resource: The Importance of the Period of Commitment in Dynamic Games," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 26(1), pages 161-173, February.
    26. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1988. "The Dynamics of Incentive Contracts," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(5), pages 1153-1175, September.
    27. Karp, Larry, 1996. "Depreciation erodes the Coase Conjecture," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 473-490, February.
    28. Simon Board & Marek Pycia, 2014. "Outside Options and the Failure of the Coase Conjecture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(2), pages 656-671, February.
    29. Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2003. "Multiproduct Quality Competition: Fighting Brands and Product Line Pruning," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 748-774, June.
    30. Kumar, Praveen, 2006. "Intertemporal price-quality discrimination and the Coase conjecture," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(7-8), pages 896-940, November.
    31. Mikhail Golosov & Maxim Troshkin & Aleh Tsyvinski, 2016. "Redistribution and Social Insurance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(2), pages 359-386, February.
    32. Lederer, Phillip J & Hurter, Arthur P, Jr, 1986. "Competition of Firms: Discriminatory Pricing and Location," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(3), pages 623-640, May.
    33. Bond, Eric W. & Samuelson, Larry, 1987. "The Coase conjecture need not hold for durable good monopolies with depreciation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 93-97.
    34. Emmanuel Saez & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2016. "Generalized Social Marginal Welfare Weights for Optimal Tax Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(1), pages 24-45, January.
    35. Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2018. "The determinants of product lines," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 49(3), pages 541-573, September.
    36. Anderson, Simon & Baik, Alicia & Larson, Nathan, 2015. "Personalized pricing and advertising: An asymmetric equilibrium analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 53-73.
    37. Francesco Nava & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2019. "Differentiated Durable Goods Monopoly: A Robust Coase Conjecture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(5), pages 1930-1968, May.
    38. Bulow, Jeremy I, 1982. "Durable-Goods Monopolists," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(2), pages 314-332, April.
    39. J. A. Mirrlees, 1971. "An Exploration in the Theory of Optimum Income Taxation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 38(2), pages 175-208.
    40. Nancy L. Stokey, 1981. "Rational Expectations and Durable Goods Pricing," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(1), pages 112-128, Spring.
    41. Coase, Ronald H, 1972. "Durability and Monopoly," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 143-149, April.
    42. J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 1999. "Dynamic Competition with Customer Recognition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(4), pages 604-631, Winter.
    43. Yuxin Chen & Chakravarthi Narasimhan & Z. John Zhang, 2001. "Individual Marketing with Imperfect Targetability," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 23-41, November.
    44. Ngo Long, 2015. "Dynamic Games Between Firms and Infinitely Lived Consumers: A Review of the Literature," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 467-492, December.
    45. Kydland, Finn E & Prescott, Edward C, 1977. "Rules Rather Than Discretion: The Inconsistency of Optimal Plans," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(3), pages 473-491, 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. Didier Laussel & Ngo Van Long & Joana Resende, 2022. "Dynamic monopoly and consumers profiling accuracy," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 579-608, August.
    2. Didier Laussel & Ngo Van Long & Joana Resende, 2023. "Profit Effects of Consumers’ Identity Management: A Dynamic Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3602-3615, June.
    3. Didier Laussel & Ngo Van Long, 2022. "Quality differentiation in durable goods monopoly always yields strictly positive profits," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 42(2), pages 546-552.
    4. Didier Laussel & Ngo Long & Joana Resende, 2022. "Asymmetric Information and Differentiated Durable Goods Monopoly: Intra-Period Versus Intertemporal Discrimination," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 574-607, June.
    5. Didier Laussel & Ngo Van Long, 2021. "Quality Differentiation in Durable Goods Monopoly Always Yields Strictly Positive Profits," CESifo Working Paper Series 9331, CESifo.

    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. Didier Laussel & Ngo Van Long & Joana Resende, 2019. "Quality and Price Personalization under Customer Recognition: A Dynamic Monopoly Model," CIRANO Working Papers 2019s-03, CIRANO.
    2. Didier Laussel & Ngo Long & Joana Resende, 2022. "Asymmetric Information and Differentiated Durable Goods Monopoly: Intra-Period Versus Intertemporal Discrimination," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 574-607, June.
    3. Didier Laussel & Ngo V. Long & Joana Resende, 2020. "The curse of knowledge: having access to customer information can reduce monopoly profits," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(3), pages 650-675, September.
    4. Didier Laussel & Ngo Van Long & Joana Resende, 2022. "Dynamic monopoly and consumers profiling accuracy," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 579-608, August.
    5. Beccuti, Juan & Möller, Marc, 2021. "Screening by mode of trade," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 400-420.
    6. Ngo Long, 2015. "Dynamic Games Between Firms and Infinitely Lived Consumers: A Review of the Literature," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 467-492, December.
    7. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2020. "Dynamic Taxation," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 801-831, August.
    8. Buehler, Stefan & Eschenbaum, Nicolas, 2021. "Dynamic Monopoly Pricing With Multiple Varieties: Trading Up," Economics Working Paper Series 2113, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    9. Didier Laussel & Joana Resende, 2022. "When Is Product Personalization Profit-Enhancing? A Behavior-Based Discrimination Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 8872-8888, December.
    10. Didier Laussel & Ngo Van Long & Joana Resende, 2021. "Asymmetric Information and Differentiated Durable Goods Monopoly: Intra-Period Versus Intertemporal Price Discrimination," CESifo Working Paper Series 9294, CESifo.
    11. Didier Laussel & Joana Resende, 2022. "When Is Product Personalization Profit-Enhancing? A Behavior-Based Discrimination Model," Post-Print hal-03740642, HAL.
    12. Stole, Lars A., 2007. "Price Discrimination and Competition," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 34, pages 2221-2299, Elsevier.
    13. Yiquan Gu & Leonardo Madio & Carlo Reggiani, 2019. "Exclusive Data, Price Manipulation and Market Leadership," CESifo Working Paper Series 7853, CESifo.
    14. Rodrigo Montes & Wilfried Sand-Zantman & Tommaso Valletti, 2019. "The Value of Personal Information in Online Markets with Endogenous Privacy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 1342-1362, March.
    15. Zhijun Chen & Chongwoo Choe & Noriaki Matsushima, 2020. "Competitive Personalized Pricing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(9), pages 4003-4023, September.
    16. Juanjuan Zhang, 2011. "The Perils of Behavior-Based Personalization," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 170-186, 01-02.
    17. Long, Ngo Van, 2019. "Financing higher education in an imperfect world," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 23-31.
    18. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    19. Flavio Pino, 2022. "The microeconomics of data – a survey," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 49(3), pages 635-665, September.
    20. Bergemann, Dirk & Pavan, Alessandro, 2015. "Introduction to Symposium on Dynamic Contracts and Mechanism Design," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PB), pages 679-701.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Coase conjecture; Markov perfect equilibrium; Customer information; Monopoly; Informational rent;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies
    • L15 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Information and Product Quality

    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:hal:journl:hal-02909685. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.