Search results

Builds on a previous study and examines the influence of asking prices as anchors in the real property negotiating process. Previous studies have shown that the human mind uses short cuts (heuristics) in process information. Describes a study which gives further evidence that negotiators familiar with real property will, in many cases, devalue cognitively difficult pricing information and base their negotiation expectations on the seller’s asking price. Concludes that the seller’s asking price is thus a potential source of bias.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate one of the potential cues that may influence the price consumers are willing to pay for products. This paper seeks to investigate the use of ethically framed marketing efforts in influencing price perceptions among consumers of health and beauty products

The exploratory online experiment was completed in two parts: the first with 84 participants and the second with 61 participants.

Results show that consumers expect prices to be much higher when the product is produced under ethical conditions but they are willing to pay only slightly more for ethically produced products.

The participants were a convenience sample and thus the results are not generalizable. While being socially responsible is an end in itself, consumers may not allow the firms to increase prices to cover the increased costs of production. It is not apparent that consumers fully expect to share in the cost of a social responsible global economy.

The study offers insight into the difficulty firms have in producing products in an ethical manner and passing those costs to their customers. Considering the global financial conditions in 2008/2009, it may be even more difficult for firms to maintain ethical production methods.

There is research evidence that suggests that perceptions of price unfairness give rise to consumer resistance to prices and result in decreased profit to the firm. However, it is as yet unclear what factors influence perceptions of unfairness. Answers the question, “What is fair?” by proposing that consumers sometimes infer a firm’s motive for a price and that the inferred motive influences perceived price fairness. A study provides evidence that consumers use contextual information to infer a firm’s motive. When consumers infer a negative motive, the price is perceived to be unfair and when consumers do not infer a negative motive, the same price is perceived to be fair. Suggests that marketers should: provide reasons for prices; consider consumers’ likely inferences of motive and either avoid taking actions that are likely to give rise to inferences of negative motive or manage the motive inferred; and consider the inferences that consumers may make for other marketing actions in addition to price.

Last year was a busy year for pricers. American Airlines made a much‐publicized bid to simplify the industry's price structure. Procter & Gamble announced that it would drastically simplify its U.S. pricing system and eliminate much of the clutter of coupons, stocking incentives, and discounts. IBM and others announced several new software pricing approaches—such as “modifiedtiered” and “hybrid” pricing—that were intended to deal with the proliferation of channels through which their products are now sold and to better reflect the different levels of use that different customers get from an application. In Brussels, the European Commission (EC) was considering the findings of a report confirming many people's anecdotal impression: Price differentials across Europe are huge—as much as 100% for some electronic capital goods and pharmaceuticals, for example.

Just‐in‐time manufacturing is one of the most important management developments of the last decade and a half. Articles on the subject have virtually flooded the business periodical literature. Yet despite the proliferation of this literature, there are indications that the fundamental implications of this concept as an effective competitive strategy have not been fully grasped by U.S. manufacturers. This article attempts to integrate the manufacturing strategy of just‐in‐time with an important element of the firm's marketing strategy—the price element of the marketing mix. Given the competitive pressures on many U.S. firms, price becomes an increasingly important competitive weapon. Only when the benefits deriving from just‐in‐time show up in a firm's marketing strategy will U.S. firms demonstrate an ability to translate an effective manufacturing strategy into a significant competitive edge.

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of price discounts on products perceived to provide hedonic value vs those perceived to evoke displeasure. Also examined were the effects of various discount levels on consumer intentions to purchase.

The study design was a 2 (emotion-evoked) × 2 (price) × 3 (level of discount) mixed-factorial design. In this study, 182 participants were presented with several products and indicated whether they would shop with a competitor offering various price discounts on pleasure- vs displeasure-evoking products.

ANOVA results indicated a significant main effect of price discounts on intention to purchase and a significant interaction between price discount and type/price of product. Discounts mattered more between certain levels (10 and 50 per cent) than others (50 versus 70 per cent). Discounts mattered more for hedonic products (pleasure-evoking) than those that evoked displeasure; however, price trumped all factors such that discounts mattered most when price of product is high.

Limitations include age range of participants and that intentions to shop were measured. Future research should examine price effects on other socio-demographic groups and actual behavior.

Retailers would benefit from using price discounts as a competitive strategy, with attention given to the “percentage-off” levels that are perceived to be steeper. Discounts are more effective when the product offers hedonic value or when price is high.

To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the relationship between “percentage-off” price discounts on hedonic products. This study contributes to the literature on pricing affect.

This paper aims to describe best practice in pricing strategy for new products and services being introduced to a market.

A review of introductory pricing patterns across a number of industries shows there are some common patterns in customer evaluation of new products and services. Study of customer behavior can be closely tracked where there is an ongoing relationship with the buyer, e.g. online services, software as a service, professional or technical services, consumables, consumer products and sometimes capital items with service suites and warranties (e.g. medical devices). The means for inferring and tracking customer understanding, beliefs and values is to quantify usage patterns, service call‐ins, warranty requirements and trade‐out of the new product/service for newer products and services.

This article examines customer behaviors to suggest that there are three phases to customer product or service adoption: a “learning” phase, where the customer or potential customer (in trial) learns about the products, its attributes, features, utility and value; a “use” phase where the customer has learned how to use the service or product, and is appreciating the value of the product, and using a lot; and a “reassessment” phase. Now the customer is very familiar with the product, the novelty and mystery has worn off, and they wonder if there is an equivalent substitute available for a lower cost.

A bad introductory pricing strategy can destroy price levels and destroy a market, not to mention cost a company a lot of money. For some years many new product/service sponsors believed the best pricing approach for new products and services was to offer it for free. This paper shows that this simple approach is both ineffective and impracticable for most companies. The better approach is to understand customer product adoption cycles, and link the introductory pricing strategy to customer understanding and behavior.

This paper looks at a common type of price adjustment, price indexing, which provides contractors with compensation for increases in price volatile commodities. We address the effect of Firm Fixed Price (FFP) versus indexed price systems for a price volatile commodity. The impact of these two types of bid systems is analyzed through a combined qualitative and quantitative analysis. Results indicate that an indexed price system does not provide a reduction in costs compared to a Firm Fixed Price system. This study is important to state financial managers as they address the efficient use of resources invested in state infrastructure.

Price planning is one of the most overlooked areas in marketing. Traditionally, emphasis is placed on product development, advertising strategy and distribution channel formation before any consideration is given to price. The result is that the pricing decision is made quickly without all of the necessary market and cost factors being included in the final decision. The pricing decision is at the core of every business plan and impacts directly on the critical components of a companys' marketing strategy, including its:

Examines the importance of delivering an all‐inclusive price bundle to consumers. A longitudinal study is conducted to test the role of expectations of both price and other costs (e.g. hassle, time spent) associated with a price bundle on perceptions of value across first‐time and repeat guests at an upscale resort/spa. The findings confirm that consumers consider more than just benefits (quality) and price when assessing value. Specifically, finds that providing an all‐inclusive price package, even if actual monetary outlay is higher, will significantly increase perceptions of value for first‐time consumers.