IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpio/0512013.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Technology Timing and Pricing In the Presence of an Installed Base

Author

Listed:
  • Qiu_Hong Wang

    (Department of Information Systems, National University of Singapore)

  • Kai-Lung Hui

    (Department of Information Systems, National University of Singapore)

Abstract

This paper studies a vendor.s timing and pricing strategies to tackle its own installed base when selling a newly improved product. We characterize the market with either a partly- or fully- covered installed base, consumers. relative willingness to pay for the newly improved version of the product, and their relative payoffs from delayed purchase. Instead of using the conventional assumption of constant consumer reservation price, we propose that if consumers already own an existing (old) version of a durable product, their willingness to purchase the newly improved version would increase over time. This effect, interweaving with consumer heterogeneity on valuation of quality and purchase history, may enable perfect intertemporal price discrimination (Salant 1989). We find that upgrade pricing may not be able to differentiate consumers with different purchase history when consumer heterogeneity is sufficiently high. Instead, the vendor would maximize its profit through intertemporal price discrimination, delayed product introduction, or pooling pricing. By overcoming the intractability of studying delayed product introduction in a market with heterogeneous consumers, this study analytically confirms Fishman and Rob.s conjecture (2000) that heterogeneity in consumers. valuation of quality may discourage a vendor to launch a new product. Particularly, consumers. anticipation of future price reduction can lead to delayed product introduction even when the extent of quality improvement embodied in the new product is high.

Suggested Citation

  • Qiu_Hong Wang & Kai-Lung Hui, 2005. "Technology Timing and Pricing In the Presence of an Installed Base," Industrial Organization 0512013, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpio:0512013
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 55
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/io/papers/0512/0512013.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel A. Levinthal & Devavrat Purohit, 1989. "Durable Goods and Product Obsolescence," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 35-56.
    2. Stephen W. Salant, 1989. "When is Inducing Self-Selection Suboptimal for a Monopolist?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 104(2), pages 391-397.
    3. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1998. "Upgrades, Tradeins, and Buybacks," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(2), pages 235-258, Summer.
    4. Juan Ruiz, 2003. "Another Perspective on Planned obsolescence: is there really too much Innovation?," Industrial Organization 0302001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. A. Michael Spence, 1980. "Multi-Product Quantity-Dependent Prices and Profitability Constraints," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 47(5), pages 821-841.
    6. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
    7. Fishman, Arthur & Gandal, Neil & Shy, Oz, 1993. "Planned Obsolescence as an Engine of Technological Progress," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 361-370, December.
    8. Michael Waldman, 2003. "Durable Goods Theory for Real World Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 131-154, Winter.
    9. Taylor, Curtis R., 2002. "Private Demands and Demands for Privacy: Dynamic Pricing and the Market for Customer Information," Working Papers 02-02, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    10. Spence, Michael, 1977. "Nonlinear prices and welfare," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 1-18, August.
    11. Jeremy Bulow, 1986. "An Economic Theory of Planned Obsolescence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(4), pages 729-749.
    12. Laura J. Kornish, 2001. "Pricing for a Durable-Goods Monopolist Under Rapid Sequential Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(11), pages 1552-1561, November.
    13. Waldman, Michael, 1997. "Eliminating the Market for Secondhand Goods: An Alternative Explanation for Leasing," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(1), pages 61-92, April.
    14. K. Sridhar Moorthy & I. P. L. Png, 1992. "Market Segmentation, Cannibalization, and the Timing of Product Introductions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(3), pages 345-359, March.
    15. Devavrat Purohit, 1994. "What Should You Do When Your Competitors Send in the Clones?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 392-411.
    16. Coase, Ronald H, 1972. "Durability and Monopoly," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 143-149, April.
    17. In Ho Lee & Jonghwa Lee, 1998. "A Theory of Economic Obsolescence," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 383-401, September.
    18. Nancy L. Stokey, 1979. "Intertemporal Price Discrimination," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 93(3), pages 355-371.
    19. Waldman, Michael, 1996. "Durable Goods Pricing When Quality Matters," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 69(4), pages 489-510, October.
    20. Kai-Lung Hui & Qiu-Hong Wang, 2005. "Delayed Product Introduction," Industrial Organization 0503011, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Michael Waldman, 1993. "A New Perspective on Planned Obsolescence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(1), pages 273-283.
    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. Jiri Strelicky & Kresimir Zigic, 2013. "Software Upgrades under Monopoly," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp478, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.

    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. Qiu-Hong Wang & Kai-Lung Hui, 2017. "Technology Mergers and Acquisitions in the Presence of an Installed Base: A Strategic Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 46-63, March.
    2. Michael Waldman, 2004. "Antitrust Perspectives for Durable-Goods Markets," CESifo Working Paper Series 1306, CESifo.
    3. Gerstle, Ari D. & Waldman, Michael, 2016. "Mergers in durable-goods industries: A re-examination of market power and welfare effects," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 677-692.
    4. Eric Brouillat, 2015. "Live fast, die young? Investigating product life spans and obsolescence in an agent-based model," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 447-473, April.
    5. Baojun Jiang & Lin Tian, 2018. "Collaborative Consumption: Strategic and Economic Implications of Product Sharing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1171-1188, March.
    6. Eric Brouillat, 2011. "Durability of consumption goods and market competition: an agent-based modelling," Post-Print hal-00780254, HAL.
    7. Evrim Dener, 2011. "Quality uncertainty and time inconsistency in a durable good market," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 104(1), pages 1-24, September.
    8. Utaka, Atsuo, 2008. "Pricing strategy, quality signaling, and entry deterrence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 878-888, July.
    9. Galiani, Sebastian & Jaitman, Laura & Weinschelbaum, Federico, 2020. "Crime and durable goods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 146-163.
    10. Tian Xia & Richard Sexton, 2010. "Brand or Variety Choices and Periodic Sales as Substitute Instruments for Monopoly Price Discrimination," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 36(4), pages 333-349, June.
    11. 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.
    12. Banerjee, Sumitro & Soberman, David A., 2013. "Product development capability and marketing strategy for new durable products," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 276-291.
    13. Sumitro Banerjee & David A. Soberman, 2013. "Product development capability and marketing strategy for new durable products," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-13-01, ESMT European School of Management and Technology.
    14. Waldman, Michael, 1997. "Eliminating the Market for Secondhand Goods: An Alternative Explanation for Leasing," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(1), pages 61-92, April.
    15. Kai-Lung Hui & Qiu-Hong Wang, 2005. "Delayed Product Introduction," Industrial Organization 0503011, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Kutsoati, Edward & Zabojnik, Jan, 2005. "The effects of learning-by-doing on product innovation by a durable good monopolist," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(1-2), pages 83-108, February.
    17. Cerquera Dussán, Daniel, 2007. "Durable Goods, Innovation and Network Externalities," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-086, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. Tóbiás, Áron, 2018. "Non-linear pricing and optimal shipping policies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 194-218.
    19. Judith Chevalier & Austan Goolsbee, 2009. "Are Durable Goods Consumers Forward-Looking? Evidence from College Textbooks," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(4), pages 1853-1884.
    20. Hoppe, Heidrun C. & Lee, In Ho, 2003. "Entry deterrence and innovation in durable-goods monopoly," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1011-1036, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    New product introduction; intertemporal price discrimination; delayed product introduction; installed base; upgrade policy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L - Industrial Organization

    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:wpa:wuwpio:0512013. 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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.