IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v33y2022i3p784-793.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pay-What-You-Want Pricing in the Digital Product Marketplace: A Feasible Alternative to Piracy Prevention?

Author

Listed:
  • Byung Cho Kim

    (Department of Logistics, Service and Operations Management, Korea University Business School, Korea University, Seoul 02841, Korea)

  • So Eun Park

    (Department of Marketing and Behavioural Science, Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z2, Canada)

  • Detmar W. Straub

    (Institute for Business and Information Technology, Fox School of Business, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122)

Abstract

Pay-what-you-want (PWYW) pricing is a pricing scheme under which buyers pay any amount for a product, often including zero. Digital product firms may particularly benefit from PWYW pricing because it can be utilized as an alternative to their costly piracy prevention efforts. In this paper, we examine PWYW pricing based on the established social preference theory where consumers may be concerned with how fairly they are being treated by firms. Utilizing a two-segment model for consumers (self-interested versus fair minded), we study PWYW pricing against traditional, posted pricing in a monopolistic digital product market. We show that under posted pricing, it is optimal to eliminate piracy when the quality development cost is sufficiently high. Interestingly, high quality of the illegal copy associated with low quality development cost makes PWYW pricing an effective alternative to posted pricing. We also examine the impact of network externalities on PWYW pricing. Counterintuitively, despite the full market penetration, PWYW pricing invariably becomes less profitable than posted pricing as network externalities become sufficiently strong. Our findings explain why PWYW pricing is rare in the established digital product marketplace with strong network externalities despite near-zero marginal costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Byung Cho Kim & So Eun Park & Detmar W. Straub, 2022. "Pay-What-You-Want Pricing in the Digital Product Marketplace: A Feasible Alternative to Piracy Prevention?," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 784-793, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:33:y:2022:i:3:p:784-793
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.2021.1094
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.2021.1094
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.2021.1094?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bae, Sang Hoo & Choi, Jay Pil, 2006. "A model of piracy," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 303-320, September.
    2. Gary Charness & Matthew Rabin, 2002. "Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(3), pages 817-869.
    3. Sanjay Jain, 2008. "Digital Piracy: A Competitive Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 610-626, 07-08.
    4. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    5. Kathleen Reavis Conner & Richard P. Rumelt, 1991. "Software Piracy: An Analysis of Protection Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(2), pages 125-139, February.
    6. Brett Danaher & Samita Dhanasobhon & Michael D. Smith & Rahul Telang, 2010. "Converting Pirates Without Cannibalizing Purchasers: The Impact of Digital Distribution on Physical Sales and Internet Piracy," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1138-1151, 11-12.
    7. Regner, Tobias & Barria, Javier A., 2009. "Do consumers pay voluntarily? The case of online music," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 395-406, August.
    8. Dufwenberg, Martin & Kirchsteiger, Georg, 2004. "A theory of sequential reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 268-298, May.
    9. Sana El Harbi & Gilles Grolleau & Insaf Bekir, 2014. "Substituting piracy with a pay-what-you-want option: does it make sense?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 277-297, April.
    10. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
    11. Terrence August & Tunay I. Tunca, 2008. "Let the Pirates Patch? An Economic Analysis of Software Security Patch Restrictions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 48-70, March.
    12. Klaus M. Schmidt & Martin Spann & Robert Zeithammer, 2015. "Pay What You Want as a Marketing Strategy in Monopolistic and Competitive Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1217-1236, June.
    13. Oz Shy & Jacques‐Françlois Thisse, 1999. "A Strategic Approach to Software Protection," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(2), pages 163-190, June.
    14. Riener, Gerhard & Traxler, Christian, 2012. "Norms, moods, and free lunch: Longitudinal evidence on payments from a Pay-What-You-Want restaurant," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 476-483.
    15. Brett Danaher & Michael D. Smith & Rahul Telang & Siwen Chen, 2014. "The Effect of Graduated Response Anti-Piracy Laws on Music Sales: Evidence from an Event Study in France," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(3), pages 541-553, September.
    16. Atanu Lahiri & Debabrata Dey, 2013. "Effects of Piracy on Quality of Information Goods," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 245-264, June.
    17. Yuxin Chen & Tony Haitao Cui, 2013. "The Benefit of Uniform Price for Branded Variants," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 36-50, March.
    18. Danaher, Brett & Smith, Michael D., 2014. "Gone in 60 Seconds: The Impact of the Megaupload Shutdown on Movie Sales," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 1-8.
    19. Rabin, Matthew, 1993. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1281-1302, December.
    20. Pieter A. Gautier & Bas van der Klaauw, 2012. "Selection in a field experiment with voluntary participation," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 63-84, January.
    21. Tony Haitao Cui & Jagmohan S. Raju & Z. John Zhang, 2007. "Fairness and Channel Coordination," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(8), pages 1303-1314, August.
    22. James Andreoni & John Miller, 2002. "Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Altruism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 737-753, March.
    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. Egbert, Henrik & Greiff, Matthias, 2023. "Pay-What-You-Want für öffentliche Güter: Eine Fallstudie zu vhs.wissen live [Pay-What-You-Want and Public Goods: a case study of vhs.wissen live]," MPRA Paper 118432, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Klaus M. Schmidt & Martin Spann & Robert Zeithammer, 2015. "Pay What You Want as a Marketing Strategy in Monopolistic and Competitive Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1217-1236, June.
    2. Debabrata Dey & Antino Kim & Atanu Lahiri, 2019. "Online Piracy and the “Longer Arm” of Enforcement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 1173-1190, March.
    3. Regner, Tobias, 2015. "Why consumers pay voluntarily: Evidence from online music," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 205-214.
    4. Tarun Jain & Jishnu Hazra & T. C. Edwin Cheng, 2020. "Illegal Content Monitoring on Social Platforms," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(8), pages 1837-1857, August.
    5. Christoph Feldhaus & Tassilo Sobotta & Peter Werner, 2019. "Norm Uncertainty and Voluntary Payments in the Field," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1855-1866, April.
    6. Adrian Bruhin & Ernst Fehr & Daniel Schunk, 2019. "The many Faces of Human Sociality: Uncovering the Distribution and Stability of Social Preferences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(4), pages 1025-1069.
    7. Tetsuo Yamamori & Kazuyuki Iwata, 2023. "Wage claim detracts reciprocity in labor relations: experimental study of gift exchange games," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 18(3), pages 573-597, July.
    8. Daniel Woods & Maroš Servátka, 2019. "Nice to you, nicer to me: Does self-serving generosity diminish the reciprocal response?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 506-529, June.
    9. Christian Korth, 2009. "Reciprocity—An Indirect Evolutionary Analysis," Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, in: Fairness in Bargaining and Markets, chapter 0, pages 35-55, Springer.
    10. Stephen Leider & Markus M. Möbius & Tanya Rosenblat & Quoc-Anh Do, 2009. "Directed Altruism and Enforced Reciprocity in Social Networks," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 124(4), pages 1815-1851.
    11. Samahita Margaret, 2020. "Pay-What-You-Want in Competition," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 20(1), pages 1-16, January.
    12. Andrea Essl & Frauke von Bieberstein & Michael Kosfeld & Markus Kröll, 2018. "Sales Performance and Social Preferences," CESifo Working Paper Series 7030, CESifo.
    13. Leibbrandt, Andreas & López-Pérez, Raúl & Spiegelman, Eli, 2023. "Reciprocal, but inequality averse as well? Mixed motives for punishment and reward," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 91-116.
    14. Cox, James C. & Friedman, Daniel & Gjerstad, Steven, 2007. "A tractable model of reciprocity and fairness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 17-45, April.
    15. Thorsten Chmura & Christoph Engel & Markus Englerth, 2013. "Selfishness As a Potential Cause of Crime. A Prison Experiment," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2013_05, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    16. Diaz, Lina & Houser, Daniel & Ifcher, John & Zarghamee, Homa, 2023. "Estimating social preferences using stated satisfaction: Novel support for inequity aversion," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    17. Quoc-Anh Do & Stephen Leider & Markus M. Mobius & Tanya Rosenblat, 2007. "How much is a friend worth?: directed altruism and enforced reciprocity in social networks," Working Papers 07-11, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
    18. Currie, Janet & Lin, Wanchuan & Meng, Juanjuan, 2013. "Social networks and externalities from gift exchange: Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 19-30.
    19. Polonio, Luca & Coricelli, Giorgio, 2019. "Testing the level of consistency between choices and beliefs in games using eye-tracking," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 566-586.
    20. Bart J. Wilson, 2012. "Contra Private Fairness," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 407-435, April.

    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:inm:orisre:v:33:y:2022:i:3:p:784-793. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.