Music for a Song: An Empirical Look at Uniform Song Pricing and its Alternatives
Economists have well-developed theories that challenge the wisdom of the common practice of uniform pricing. With digital music as its context, this paper explores the profit and welfare implications of various alternatives, including song-specific pricing, various forms of bundling, two-part tariffs, nonlinear pricing, and third-degree price discrimination. Using survey-based data on nearly 1000 students' valuations of 100 popular songs in early 2008 and early 2009. We find that various alternatives - including simple schemes such as pure bundling and two-part tariffs - can raise both producer and consumer surplus. Revenue could be raised by between a sixth and a third relative to profit-maximizing uniform pricing. While person-specific uniform pricing can raise revenue by over 50 percent, none of the non-discriminatory schemes raise revenue's share of surplus above 40 percent of total surplus. Even with sophisticated pricing, much of the area under the demand curve for this product cannot be appropriated as revenue.
|Date of creation:||Oct 2009|
|Date of revision:|
|Publication status:||published as “Music for a Song: An Empirical Look at Uniform Song Prices and its Alternatives.” (with Ben Shiller), Journal of Industrial Economics, December 2011 (revised version of NBER Working Paper 15390, October 2009).|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.|
Web page: http://www.nber.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.:
- Kamel Jedidi & Sharan Jagpal & Puneet Manchanda, 2003. "Measuring Heterogeneous Reservation Prices for Product Bundles," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 107-130, July.
- Armstrong, M., 1996.
"Price discrimination by a many-product firm,"
Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics
9628, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
- Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
- Phillip Leslie, 2004. "Price Discrimination in Broadway Theater," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(3), pages 520-541, Autumn.
- William James Adams & Janet L. Yellen, 1976. "Commodity Bundling and the Burden of Monopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 90(3), pages 475-498.
- Fang, Hanming & Norman, Peter, 2005.
"To Bundle or Not to Bundle,"
Microeconomics.ca working papers
norman-05-06-10-08-19-02, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 10 Jun 2005.
- Long, John B, Jr, 1984. "Comments on "Gaussian Demand and Commodity Bundling."," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(1), pages S235-46, January.
- R. Preston McAfee & John McMillan & Michael D. Whinston, 1989. "Multiproduct Monopoly, Commodity Bundling, and Correlation of Values," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 104(2), pages 371-383.
- Yannis Bakos & Erik Brynjolfsson, 1997.
"Bundling Information Goods: Pricing, Profits and Efficiency,"
Working Paper Series
199, MIT Center for Coordination Science.
- Yannis Bakos & Erik Brynjolfsson, 1999. "Bundling Information Goods: Pricing, Profits, and Efficiency," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(12), pages 1613-1630, December.
- Jack L. Knetsch & J. A. Sinden, 1984. "Willingness to Pay and Compensation Demanded: Experimental Evidence of an Unexpected Disparity in Measures of Value," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 99(3), pages 507-521.
- repec:rje:randje:v:37:y:2006:i:4:p:946-963 is not listed on IDEAS
- Geoffrey Heal, 1980. "Spatial Structure in the Retail Trade: A Study in Product Differentiation with Increasing Returns," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(2), pages 565-583, Autumn.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:15390. 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: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.