IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v56y2010i3p485-494.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Package Size Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Oded Koenigsberg

    (Graduate School of Business, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027)

  • Rajeev Kohli

    (Graduate School of Business, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027)

  • Ricardo Montoya

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Chile, Av. República 701, Santiago, Chile)

Abstract

We describe a model examining how a firm might choose the package size and price for a product that deteriorates over time. Our model considers four factors: (1) the usable life of the product, (2) the rates at which consumers use the product, (3) the relation between package size and the variable cost of the product, and (4) the minimum quantities consumers seek to consume for each dollar they spend (we call these reservation quantities). We allow heterogeneity in the usage rates and reservation quantities for the consumers. We show that when the cost increases as a linear or convex function of the package size, the firm should make packages of the smallest possible size. Smaller packages reduce waste and allow consumers to more closely match their purchases with desired consumption. This in turn allows the firm to charge a higher unit price and also sell more unit volume. The results imply that in a market with multiple package sizes (produced by the same or competing firms), at least one of the packages must have the smallest possible size, provided the fixed cost of making the product is sufficiently low. For concave cost functions, the firm may find it optimal to make larger than smallest-size packages.

Suggested Citation

  • Oded Koenigsberg & Rajeev Kohli & Ricardo Montoya, 2010. "Package Size Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(3), pages 485-494, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:56:y:2010:i:3:p:485-494
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1090.1119
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1119
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1119?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. Cohen, Andrew, 2008. "Package size and price discrimination in the paper towel market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 502-516, March.
    2. Gerstner, Eitan & Hess, James D, 1987. "Why Do Hot Dogs Come in Packs of 10 and Buns in 8s or 12s? A Demand-Side Investigation," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60(4), pages 491-517, October.
    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. Arzi Adbi & Ajay Bhaskarabhatla & Chirantan Chatterjee, 2020. "Stakeholder Orientation and Market Impact: Evidence from India," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 161(2), pages 479-496, January.
    2. Shubhranshu Singh, 2017. "Competition in Corruptible Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 361-381, May.
    3. Ludovic Stourm & Raghuram Iyengar & Eric T. Bradlow, 2020. "A Flexible Demand Model for Complements Using Household Production Theory," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 763-787, July.
    4. Wilfred Amaldoss & Woochoel Shin, 2011. "Competing for Low-End Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 776-788, September.
    5. Gadi Fibich & Roy Klein & Oded Koenigsberg & Eitan Muller, 2017. "Optimal Three-Part Tariff Plans," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(5), pages 1177-1189, October.
    6. Yonezawa, Koichi & Richards, Timothy J., 2016. "Competitive Package Size Decisions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 92(4), pages 445-469.
    7. Anja Lambrecht & Katja Seim & Naufel Vilcassim & Amar Cheema & Yuxin Chen & Gregory Crawford & Kartik Hosanagar & Raghuram Iyengar & Oded Koenigsberg & Robin Lee & Eugenio Miravete & Ozge Sahin, 2012. "Price discrimination in service industries," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 423-438, June.
    8. Peng, Jing & Zhang, Jianghua & Nie, Tengfei & Zhu, Yangguang & Du, Shaofu, 2020. "Pricing and package size decisions in crowdfunding," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    9. Sanjay Jain, 2012. "Marketing of Vice Goods: A Strategic Analysis of the Package Size Decision," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 36-51, January.

    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. Yonezawa, Koichi & Richards, Timothy J., 2016. "Competitive Package Size Decisions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 92(4), pages 445-469.
    2. Awudu Abdulai & Christian Kuhlgatz & Silke Schmitz, 2009. "Empirical investigation of price setting and quantity surcharges in the German food sector," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(3), pages 331-350.
    3. Sanatan Shreay & Hayley H. Chouinard & Jill J. McCluskey, 2016. "Product Differentiation by Package Size," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(1), pages 3-15, January.
    4. Peng, Jing & Zhang, Jianghua & Nie, Tengfei & Zhu, Yangguang & Du, Shaofu, 2020. "Pricing and package size decisions in crowdfunding," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    5. Metin Çakır & Joseph V. Balagtas & Abigail M. Okrent & Mariana Urbina‐Ramirez, 2021. "Effects of Package Size on Household Food Purchases," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(2), pages 781-801, June.
    6. Kokovin, Sergey & Nahata, Babu & Zhelobodko, Evgeny, 2008. "Why quantity premia are rare?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 153-156, July.
    7. Liu, Yizao & Lopez, Rigoberto A. & Zhu, Chen, 2014. "The Impact of Four Alternative Policies to Decrease Soda Consumption," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(1), pages 53-68, April.
    8. Timothy J. Richards & Gordon J. Klein & Celine Bonnet & Zohra Bouamra-Mechemache, 2020. "Strategic Obfuscation and Retail Pricing," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 57(4), pages 859-889, December.
    9. Sofronis Clerides & Pascal Courty, 2017. "Sales, Quantity Surcharge, and Consumer Inattention," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(2), pages 357-370, May.
    10. Marcelo Resende & Eduardo Ferioli, 2018. "Magazine Subscription and Intertemporal Discounting: Some Further Evidence," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 38(4), pages 2079-2093.
    11. Kuhn, Peter J. & Yu, Lizi, 2021. "Kinks as Goals: Accelerating Commissions and the Performance of Sales Teams," IZA Discussion Papers 14115, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Kenneth W. Clements, 2006. "Pricing and Packaging: The Case of Marijuana," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 79(4), pages 2019-2044, July.
    13. Mao, Zhixin & Duan, Yongrui & Liu, Wenxia, 2023. "Consumers’ choice of private label considering reference price and moderating effect," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    14. Raghuram Iyengar & Kamel Jedidi, 2012. "A Conjoint Model of Quantity Discounts," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 334-350, March.
    15. Foubert, Bram & Gijsbrechts, Els, 2010. "Please or Squeeze? Brand performance implications of constrained and unconstrained multi-item promotions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(3), pages 880-892, May.
    16. Çakır, Metin & Balagtas, Joseph V., 2014. "Consumer Response to Package Downsizing: Evidence from the Chicago Ice Cream Market," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 1-12.
    17. Yao Luo, 2011. "Nonlinear Pricing with Product Customization in Mobile Service Industry," Working Papers 11-28, NET Institute.
    18. Kevin J. Fox & Daniel Melser, 2014. "Non-Linear Pricing and Price Indexes: Evidence and Implications from Scanner Data," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 60(2), pages 261-278, June.
    19. Gerstner, Eitan & Klein, Katherine, 1990. "How To Quote A Price -- 0.50 Each Or 2 For 1.00?," Department of Economics and Business - Archive 259456, North Carolina State University, Department of Economics.
    20. Nana Adrian, 2019. "Price Discrimination and Salient Thinking," Diskussionsschriften dp1906, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.

    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:ormnsc:v:56:y:2010:i:3:p:485-494. 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.