IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea12/124619.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Price Discrimination with Asymmetric Firms: The Case of the U.S. Carbonated Soft Drinks Market

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Yizao
  • Shen, Shu

Abstract

This paper investigates the relationship between price discrimination and vertical product differentiation, using National Brands and Private Labels in the Carbonated Soft Drink market as a case study. We decompose prices difference into quantity dis- count and cost difference across packagings and recover marginal cost by a structural demand model of consumer preference and firm behavior. Our results suggest that in the carbonated soft drinks market, both national brands and private labels offers quantity discount to consumers: consumers pay lower unit prices when buying larger packed soft drinks. In addition, the price curvature parameter is lower for private la- bels, implying that the price schedule is more curved for private label soft drinks than national brands. This means in the CSD market, private labels have more ability to perform price discrimination, segment consumers, and generate high revenues, com- paring to national brands. This result, to some extent, explains the growing market shares of private label soft drinks and the significant percentage of total sales from private labels goods for retailers, such as Wal-Mart and Target.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Yizao & Shen, Shu, 2012. "Price Discrimination with Asymmetric Firms: The Case of the U.S. Carbonated Soft Drinks Market," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124619, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea12:124619
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/124619
    Download Restriction: no

    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. Shaffer, G. & Zhang, Z.J., 1994. "Competitive Coupon Targeting," Papers 94-02, Michigan - Center for Research on Economic & Social Theory.
    3. repec:adr:anecst:y:1994:i:34:p:03 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Kenneth S. Corts, 1998. "Third-Degree Price Discrimination in Oligopoly: All-Out Competition and Strategic Commitment," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(2), pages 306-323, Summer.
    5. Thisse, Jacques-Francois & Vives, Xavier, 1988. "On the Strategic Choice of Spatial Price Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(1), pages 122-137, March.
    6. Borenstein, Severin & Rose, Nancy L, 1994. "Competition and Price Dispersion in the U.S. Airline Industry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(4), pages 653-683, August.
    7. Liu, Qihong & Serfes, Konstantinos, 2005. "Imperfect price discrimination in a vertical differentiation model," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(5-6), pages 341-354, June.
    8. Greg Shaffer & Z. John Zhang, 1995. "Competitive Coupon Targeting," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 395-416.
    9. Bester, Helmut & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 1996. "Coupons and oligopolistic price discrimination," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 227-242.
    10. Simon P. Anderson & André De Palma, 1988. "Spatial Price Discrimination with Heterogeneous Products," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 55(4), pages 573-592.
    11. Miravete, Eugenio J & Röller, Lars-Hendrik, 2003. "Competitive Non-Linear Pricing in Duopoly Equilibrium: The Early US Cellular Telephone Industry," CEPR Discussion Papers 4069, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Crawford, Gregory S & Shum, Matthew, 2007. "Monopoly Quality Degradation and Regulation in Cable Television," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(1), pages 181-219, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Consumer/Household Economics; Industrial Organization; Marketing;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:aaea12:124619. 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: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.