IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Product price and performance level in one market or two separated markets under various cost structures and functions

  • Qian, Li
Registered author(s):

    Market characteristics, including intrinsic demand and customer sensitivity on price and product performance level, are distinct at different markets. Comparisons of various product development strategies in one market or two geographically separated markets are conducted for three classes of products: development intensive products (DIPs) with constant unit cost, marginal cost-intensive products (MIPs) with constant fixed cost, and marginal and development intensive products (MDIPs) with non-constant unit cost and fixed cost. Results show that larger demand size, less customer sensitivity on price and/or more sensitivity on performance level lead to more profit, a higher sale price and a not-lower product performance. The customer reservation or the saturation performance level should be generally adopted though the optimal performance level does exist occasionally. Unit cost and/or fixed cost must increase in performance at an increasing rate for the existence of one optimal performance level. Due to the impact of demand size, one high-end (low-end) MDIP or DIP could be introduced into one low-end (high-end) market at a different price if the demand size is significantly large in the low-end market. For DIPs, offering one niche high-end product is not worse than offering the low-end product into two markets. For MIPs with negligible fixed cost, the product line strategy is not worse than the standard product development strategy. Additionally, the product cost reduction approach adopted in one product line has significant effects on the best product development strategy and sequence.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VF8-5259C3N-1/2/73475785e2fb8a54caa680d657c578eb
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal International Journal of Production Economics.

    Volume (Year): 131 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 2 (June)
    Pages: 505-518

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:proeco:v:131:y:2011:i:2:p:505-518
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpe

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Wu, Chin-Chun & Lin, Pei-Chun & Chou, Chao-Yu, 2006. "Determination of price and warranty length for a normal lifetime distributed product," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 95-107, July.
    2. Chester Chambers & Panos Kouvelis & John Semple, 2006. "Quality-Based Competition, Profitability, and Variable Costs," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(12), pages 1884-1895, December.
    3. Kilsun Kim & Dilip Chhajed, 2002. "Product Design with Multiple Quality-Type Attributes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(11), pages 1502-1511, November.
    4. Matsubayashi, Nobuo, 2007. "Price and quality competition: The effect of differentiation and vertical integration," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 180(2), pages 907-921, July.
    5. V. Krishnan & Saurabh Gupta, 2001. "Appropriateness and Impact of Platform-Based Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 52-68, January.
    6. V. Krishnan & Karl T. Ulrich, 2001. "Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, January.
    7. Liming Liu & Weixin Shang & Shaohua Wu, 2007. "Dynamic Competitive Newsvendors with Service-Sensitive Demands," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 9(1), pages 84-93, June.
    8. Oded Netzer & Olivier Toubia & Eric Bradlow & Ely Dahan & Theodoros Evgeniou & Fred Feinberg & Eleanor Feit & Sam Hui & Joseph Johnson & John Liechty & James Orlin & Vithala Rao, 2008. "Beyond conjoint analysis: Advances in preference measurement," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 337-354, December.
    9. Wallace J. Hopp & Xiaowei Xu, 2005. "Product Line Selection and Pricing with Modularity in Design," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 172-187, August.
    10. V. Krishnan & W. Zhu, 2006. "Designing a Family of Development-Intensive Products," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(6), pages 813-825, June.
    11. Freiesleben, Johannes, 2010. "Proposing a new approach to discussing economic effects of design quality," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 348-359, April.
    12. Tamer Boyaci & Saibal Ray, 2003. "Product Differentiation and Capacity Cost Interaction in Time and Price Sensitive Markets," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 18-36, May.
    13. Paulson Gjerde, Kathy A. & Slotnick, Susan A., 2004. "Quality and reputation: The effects of external and internal factors over time," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 1-20, May.
    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. Karnes, Carol L. & Sridharan, Sri V & Kanet, John J., 1995. "Measuring quality from the consumer's perspective: A methodology and its application," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 215-225, May.
    16. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
    17. Rajiv D. Banker & Inder Khosla & Kingshuk K. Sinha, 1998. "Quality and Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(9), pages 1179-1192, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:proeco:v:131:y:2011:i:2:p:505-518. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.