Optimal Reverse Channel Structure for Consumer Product Returns
Consumers often return a product to a retailer because they learn after purchase that the product does not match as well with preferences as had been expected. This is a costly issue for retailers and manufacturers--in fact, it is estimated that the U.S. electronics industry alone spent $13.8 billion dollars in 2007 to restock returned products [Lawton, C. 2008. The war on returns. Wall Street Journal (May 8) D1]. The bulk of these returns were nondefective items that simply were not what the consumer wanted. To eliminate returns and to recoup the cost of handling returns, many retailers are adopting the practice of charging restocking fees to consumers as a penalty for making returns. This paper employs an analytical model of a bilateral monopoly to examine the impact of reverse channel structure on the equilibrium return policy and profit. More specifically, we examine how the return penalty is affected by whether returns are salvaged by the manufacturer or by the retailer. Interestingly, we find that the return penalty may be more severe when returns are salvaged by a channel member who derives greater value from a returned unit. Also, the manufacturer may earn greater profit by accepting returns even if the retailer has a more efficient outlet for salvaging units.
Volume (Year): 29 (2010)
Issue (Month): 6 (11-12)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA|
Web page: http://www.informs.org/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Kandel, Eugene, 1996. "The Right to Return," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(1), pages 329-356, April.
- Elie Ofek & Zsolt Katona & Miklos Sarvary, 2011. ""Bricks and Clicks": The Impact of Product Returns on the Strategies of Multichannel Retailers," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 42-60, 01-02.
- Gary H. Chao & Seyed M. R. Iravani & R. Canan Savaskan, 2009. "Quality Improvement Incentives and Product Recall Cost Sharing Contracts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(7), pages 1122-1138, July.
- Jeffrey D. Shulman & Anne T. Coughlan & R. Canan Savaskan, 2009. "Optimal Restocking Fees and Information Provision in an Integrated Demand-Supply Model of Product Returns," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 577-594, December.
- Chuan He & Johan Marklund & Thomas Vossen, 2008. "—Vertical Information Sharing in a Volatile Market," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 513-530, 05-06.
- Hamilton Emmons & Stephen M. Gilbert, 1998. "Note. The Role of Returns Policies in Pricing and Inventory Decisions for Catalogue Goods," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(2), pages 276-283, February.
- Nelson, Phillip, 1970. "Information and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(2), pages 311-329, March-Apr.
- V. Padmanabhan & I. P. L. Png, 1997. "Manufacturer's Return Policies and Retail Competition," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 81-94.
- Steven A. Matthews & Nicola Persico, 2005. "Information Acquisition and the Excess Refund Puzzle," PIER Working Paper Archive 05-015, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
- Eric T. Anderson & Karsten Hansen & Duncan Simester, 2009. "The Option Value of Returns: Theory and Empirical Evidence," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 405-423, 05-06.
- Anil Arya & Brian Mittendorf, 2004. "Using Return Polices to Elicit Retailer Information," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(3), pages 617-630, Autumn.
- Davis, Scott & Hagerty, Michael & Gerstner, Eitan, 1998. "Return policies and the optimal level of "hassle"," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(5), pages 445-460, September.
- V. Padmanabhan & I. P. L. Png, 2004. "Reply to “Do Returns Policies Intensify Retail Competition?”," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 614-618, January.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979.
"Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk,"
Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
- Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
- Barry Alan Pasternack, 1985. "Optimal Pricing and Return Policies for Perishable Commodities," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 166-176. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:29:y:2010:i:6:p:1071-1085. 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: (Mirko Janc)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.