IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lvl/lacicr/1335.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Noisy Learning and Price Discrimination: Implications for Information Dissemination and Profits

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine Gendron-Saulnier
  • Marc Santugini

Abstract

We study third-degree price discrimination in the presence of uninformed buyers who extract noisy information from observing prices. In a noisy learning environment, price discrimination can be detrimental to the firm and beneficial to the consumers. On the one hand, discriminatory pricing reduces consumers’ uncertainty, i.e., the variance of posterior beliefs upon observing prices is reduced. Specifically, observing two prices under discriminatory pricing provides more information than one price under uniform pricing even when discriminatory pricing reduces the amount of information contained in each price. On the other hand, it is not always optimal for the firm to use discriminatory pricing since the presence of uninformed buyers provides the firm with the incentive to engage in noisy price signaling. Indeed, if the benefit from price flexibility (through discriminatory pricing) is offset by the cost signaling quality through two distinct prices, then it is optimal to integrate markets and thus to use uniform pricing.

Suggested Citation

  • Catherine Gendron-Saulnier & Marc Santugini, 2013. "Noisy Learning and Price Discrimination: Implications for Information Dissemination and Profits," Cahiers de recherche 1335, CIRPEE.
  • Handle: RePEc:lvl:lacicr:1335
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cirpee.org/fileadmin/documents/Cahiers_2013/CIRPEE13-35.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gallo, Fredrik, 2010. "To Segment or Not to Segment Markets? A Note on the Profitability of Market Segmentation for an International Oligopoly," Working Papers 2010:5, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    2. Friberg, Richard, 2001. "Two monies, two markets?: Variability and the option to segment," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 317-327, 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. Mirman, Leonard J. & Salgueiro, Egas M. & Santugini, Marc, 2014. "Noisy signaling in monopoly," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 504-511.
    5. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, December.
    6. Catherine Gendron-Saulnier & Marc Santugini, 2013. "The Informational Benefit of Price Discrimination," Cahiers de recherche 13-02, HEC Montréal, Institut d'économie appliquée.
    7. Richard Friberg, 2003. "Common Currency, Common Market?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(2-3), pages 650-661, 04/05.
    8. Friberg, Richard & Martensen, Kaj, 2001. "Endogenous Market Segmentation and the Law of One Price," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 471, Stockholm School of Economics.
    9. Kyle, Albert S, 1985. "Continuous Auctions and Insider Trading," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(6), pages 1315-1335, November.
    10. Chien-Ping Chen, 2009. "A Puzzle or a Choice: Uniform Pricing for Motion Pictures at the Box," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 37(1), pages 73-85, March.
    11. Richard Friberg, 2003. "Common Currency, Common Market?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 0305, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Philipp Maier, 2010. "An Analysis Of International Price Differentials On Ebay," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 28(3), pages 307-321, July.
    2. Simon P. Anderson & Régis Renault, 2011. "Price Discrimination," Chapters, in: André de Palma & Robin Lindsey & Emile Quinet & Roger Vickerman (ed.), A Handbook of Transport Economics, chapter 22, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Kupper Gerd & Willems Bert, 2007. "Arbitrage in Energy Markets: Competing in the Incumbent’s Shadow," Energy, Transport and Environment Working Papers Series ete0707, KU Leuven, Department of Economics - Research Group Energy, Transport and Environment.
    4. 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.
    5. Morten Hviid & Greg Shaffer, 2012. "Optimal low-price guarantees with anchoring," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 393-417, December.
    6. Einer Elhauge & Barry Nalebuff, 2017. "The Welfare Effects of Metering Ties," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 68-104.
    7. Thierry Foucault & Laurent Fresard, 2019. "Corporate Strategy, Conformism, and the Stock Market," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 32(3), pages 905-950.
    8. Dirk Bergemann & Alessandro Bonatti & Tan Gan, 2022. "The economics of social data," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 53(2), pages 263-296, June.
    9. Yukihiko Funaki & Harold Houba & Evgenia Motchenkova, 2020. "Market power in bilateral oligopoly markets with non-expandable infrastructures," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(2), pages 525-546, June.
    10. Kale, Jayant R. & Loon, Yee Cheng, 2011. "Product market power and stock market liquidity," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 376-410, May.
    11. Richard Friberg, 2003. "Common Currency, Common Market?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 0305, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    12. Atanu Lahiri & Rajiv M. Dewan & Marshall Freimer, 2013. "Pricing of Wireless Services: Service Pricing vs. Traffic Pricing," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 418-435, June.
    13. Fabian Herweg & Daniel Müller, 2014. "Price Discrimination in Input Markets: Quantity Discounts and Private Information," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 124(577), pages 776-804, June.
    14. Giovanni Cespa, 2008. "Information Sales and Insider Trading with Long‐Lived Information," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(2), pages 639-672, April.
    15. Arnaud Diemer, 2001. "Discrimination par les prix et concurrence imparfaite, les apports de Joan Robinson," Innovations, De Boeck Université, vol. 14(2), pages 55-65.
    16. Leonard J. Mirman & Egas M. Salgueiro & Marc Santugini, 2014. "Learning in a Perfectly Competitive Market," Cahiers de recherche 1423, CIRPEE.
    17. Li, Youping, 2013. "Timing of investments and third degree price discrimination in intermediate good markets," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 316-320.
    18. Lagerlof, Johan & Frisell, Lars, 2005. "Eliciting Demand Information through Cheap Talk: An Argument in Favour of Price Regulations," CEPR Discussion Papers 5343, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Marina Glushenkova & Marios Zachariadis, 2014. "Understanding Law-of-One-Price Deviations across Europe Before and After the Euro," University of Cyprus Working Papers in Economics 01-2014, University of Cyprus Department of Economics.
    20. Aguirre Pérez, Iñaki, 2011. "Multimarket Competition and Welfare Effects of Price discrimination," IKERLANAK info:eu-repo/grantAgreeme, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Discriminatory pricing; market segmentation; monopoly; quality of information; learning; uniform pricing; third-degree price discrimination;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • 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

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:lvl:lacicr:1335. 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: Manuel Paradis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cirpeca.html .

    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.