Pricing Damaged Goods
Companies with market power occasionally engage in intentional quality reduction of a portion of their output as a means of offering two qualities of goods for the purpose of price discrimination, even absent a cost saving. This paper provides an exact characterization in terms of marginal revenues of when such a strategy is profitable, which, remarkably, does not depend on the distribution of customer valuations, but only on the value of the damaged product relative to the undamaged product. In particular, when the damaged product provides a constant proportion of the value of the full product, selling a damaged good is unprofitable. One quality reduction produces higher profits than another if the former has higher marginal revenue than the latter.
Volume (Year): 1 (2007)
Issue (Month): ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Kiellinie 66, D-24105 Kiel|
Phone: +49 431 8814-1
Fax: +49 431 8814528
Web page: http://www.economics-ejournal.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.:
- Jong-Hee Hahn, 2002.
"Damaged Durable Goods,"
Keele Economics Research Papers
KERP 2002/21, Centre for Economic Research, Keele University.
- Varian, Hal R, 1985. "Price Discrimination and Social Welfare," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(4), pages 870-75, September.
- Srinagesh, Padmanabhan & Bradburd, Ralph M, 1989.
"Quality Distortion by a Discriminating Monopolist,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 79(1), pages 96-105, March.
- Motta, Massimo, 1993. "Endogenous Quality Choice: Price vs. Quantity Competition," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 113-31, June.
- David P. Myatt & Justin P. Johnson, 2002.
"Multiproduct Quality Competition: Fighting Brands and Product Line Pruning,"
Economics Series Working Papers
105, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
- Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2003. "Multiproduct Quality Competition: Fighting Brands and Product Line Pruning," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 748-774, June.
- repec:rje:randje:v:37:y:2006:1:p:121-133 is not listed on IDEAS
- Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
- Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2006.
"Multiproduct Cournot oligopoly,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 583-601, 09.
- Deneckere, R. & McAfee, R.P., 1995.
9508, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- Jing, Bing, 2007. "Network externalities and market segmentation in a monopoly," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 7-13, April.
- Kim, Jong Seok, 1987. "Optimal Price-Quality Schedules and Sustainability," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 231-44, December.
- Armstrong, Mark & Vickers, John, 2001. "Competitive Price Discrimination," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(4), pages 579-605, Winter.
- Besanko, David & Donnenfeld, Shabtai & White, Lawrence J, 1988. "The Multiproduct Firm, Quality Choice, and Regulation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 411-29, June.
- Armstrong, Mark, 1996. "Multiproduct Nonlinear Pricing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(1), pages 51-75, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:ifweej:5580. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.