IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2404.06019.html

Robust Pricing for Quality Disclosure

Author

Listed:
  • Tan Gan
  • Hongcheng Li

Abstract

A platform charges a producer for disclosing quality evidence to consumers before trade. It aims to maximize its revenue guarantee across potentially multiple equilibria which arise from the interdependence of producer purchase decisions and consumer beliefs. The platform's optimal pricing strategy entrenches itself as a market gatekeeper: it induces a unique equilibrium in which non-disclosed products' perceived values are lower than the production cost. To achieve this goal, this pricing strategy iteratively destabilizes under-disclosure equilibria by luring producers to disclose slightly more. Higher-quality producers receive higher rents as their disclosure is prioritized. Despite losing rents, the platform optimally induces socially efficient information transmission for any given evidence structure, and it never benefits from garbling evidence. Compared to the non-robust benchmark, our framework generates more intuitive comparative statics: the platform's ability to extract surplus increases with its value as an information intermediary.

Suggested Citation

  • Tan Gan & Hongcheng Li, 2024. "Robust Pricing for Quality Disclosure," Papers 2404.06019, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2025.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2404.06019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2404.06019
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grossman, Sanford J, 1981. "The Informational Role of Warranties and Private Disclosure about Product Quality," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(3), pages 461-483, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ginger Zhe Jin & Andrew Kato & John A. List, 2010. "That’S News To Me! Information Revelation In Professional Certification Markets," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(1), pages 104-122, January.
    2. Persson, Petra, 2018. "Attention manipulation and information overload," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 78-106, May.
    3. Villas-Boas, Sofia B, 2020. "Reduced Form Evidence on Belief Updating Under Asymmetric Information," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt08c456vk, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    4. Wouter Dessein & Alex Frankel & Navin Kartik, 2025. "Test-Optional Admissions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 115(9), pages 3130-3170, September.
    5. He Huang & Yufeng Yang & Hongyan Xu, 2025. "Larger number of reviews or higher rating? The firm’s pricing and quality disclosure strategies on the online platform," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 39-56, March.
    6. Waters, James, 2015. "Optimal design and consequences of financial disclosure regulation: a real options approach," MPRA Paper 63369, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Simeon Schudy & Verena Utikal, 2015. "Does imperfect data privacy stop people from collecting personal health data?," TWI Research Paper Series 98, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.
    8. Ribstein Larry E., 2005. "Cross-Listing and Regulatory Competition," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 97-148, April.
    9. Roger Bate & Ginger Zhe Jin & Aparna Mathur, 2012. "In Whom We Trust: The Role of Certification Agencies in Online Drug Markets," NBER Working Papers 17955, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Eduardo Perez & Delphine Prady, 2012. "Complicating to Persuade?," Working Papers hal-03583827, HAL.
    11. Shuo Liu & Dimitri Migrow, 2019. "Designing organizations in volatile markets," ECON - Working Papers 319, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    12. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2014-041 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Matthew Plosser & João A. C. Santos, 2014. "Banks' incentives and the quality of internal risk models," Staff Reports 704, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    14. Xiao-Jun Zhang, 2012. "Information relevance, reliability and disclosure," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 189-226, March.
    15. Alexander E. Saak, 2017. "The Value of Delegated Quality Control," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(2), pages 309-335, June.
    16. Xu Jiang & Ying Xue, 2023. "Morale, performance and disclosure," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(1), pages 5-23, February.
    17. Gabriele Gratton & Richard Holden & Anton Kolotilin, 2015. "Timing Information Flows," Discussion Papers 2015-16, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    18. Jeffrey J. Burks & Christine Cuny & Joseph Gerakos & João Granja, 2018. "Competition and voluntary disclosure: evidence from deregulation in the banking industry," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 1471-1511, December.
    19. Ivan Balbuzanov, 2019. "Lies and consequences," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 48(4), pages 1203-1240, December.
    20. Celik, Levent, 2016. "Competitive provision of tune-ins under common private information," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 113-122.
    21. Shmuel Leshem, 2010. "The benefits of a right to silence for the innocent," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(2), pages 398-416, June.

    More about this item

    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:arx:papers:2404.06019. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.