Search results

The authors consider a variety of cryptocurrency and equity risk factors as potential forces that drive cryptocurrency returns and carry risk premiums. In a cross-section of 2,000 biggest cryptocurrencies during 2014–2020, only downside market risk, cryptocurrency size and cryptocurrency policy uncertainty factors are systematically priced with significant premiums. Cryptocurrencies, which have greater exposures to these factors, yield higher returns subsequently. Equity market risk, particularly equity downside market risk, appears to be more important than cryptocurrency market risk, suggesting greater linkages between cryptocurrency and equity markets than we used to think. Global and the US equity factors are more relevant for the cryptocurrency market than local factors from other markets. However, there is no evidence that exposure to momentum, volatility and Fama–French factors is compensated by higher returns.

After pioneering, but insular, work on the conceptualization and measurement of customer value in business markets undertaken in the 80s and 90s, interest in this topic is substantial since the beginning of this decade. Despite this recent interest, marketing scholars concur that value in business markets is still an under-researched subject. This contribution to the debate is threefold. The paper first proposes an own model of customer value conceptualization in business markets; based on several rounds of testing this theoretically grounded model in managerial practice indications exist to conclude that this model may offer benefits over current models.

Secondly, the paper provides a comprehensive survey of pricing approaches in industrial markets. The paper integrates this literature overview with own empirical findings. Concurrently the paper summarizes extant research on the link between pricing approach and profitability in industrial markets. The paper thirdly proposes a framework for value delivery and value-based pricing strategies in industrial markets. Proposing such a framework is both useful as well as necessary. Useful, since this framework guides new product development and pricing decisions and assists in the implementation of price-repositioning strategies for existing products; necessary, since the theoretical and practical adoption of value-based delivery and pricing strategies may have suffered from the lack of a unifying conceptual framework. Two case studies, one involving the pricing decision for a major product launch at a global chemical company, the other involving value delivery at an industrial equipment manufacturer, illustrate the practical applicability of the proposed framework.

We investigate the innovative supply chain contracts developed and implemented by Barilla, the leading Italian pasta company, in sourcing high-quality durum wheat from farmers in Northern Italy in the Emilia Romagna region.

Using case study techniques to gather information, we captured the evolution of the supply chain contracts adopted by Barilla. We gained information mainly through semi-structured interviews with Barilla’s managers, co-op and consortium managers representing farmers, Barilla’s quantitative data related to contracts’ elements and structure, preliminary experimental results, agri-business magazines, industry reports, and academic literature.

These contracts helped the company improve not only its long-term profits and strategic objectives such as supply security, but also the farmers’ income as well as environmental sustainability, thus providing triple bottom line benefits.

We investigate how Barilla and its suppliers – with the support of additional stakeholders, such as regional institutions – combine in their innovative contracts fixed and market-based prices as well as quality and sustainability-based premiums for desired triple bottom line benefits.

This chapter focuses on the common occurrence of wholesale electricity prices that fall below the cost of production. This “negative pricing” in effect represents payment to high-volume consumers for taking excess power off the grid, thus relieving overload. Occurrences of negative pricing have been observed since the wholesale electricity markets have been operating, and occur during periods of low demand, while generators are being kept in reserve for rapid engagement when demand increases (it is expensive and time-consuming to shut down generators and then restart them, so they are often kept in “spooling mode”). In such situations power production may temporarily exceed demand, potentially overloading the system. When the federal government began subsidizing the construction of wind generation projects, with regulations in place requiring transmission grids to accept all of the electricity produced by the wind generators, negative pricing became more frequent.

The new Basel Accord (known as Basel II) attempts to introduce more risk-sensitive capital requirements. We propose a multiperiod deposit insurance pricing model that incorporates specific regulatory capital requirements and the possibility of capital forbearance and moral hazard. We estimate the cost of deposit insurance under alternative regulation regimes based on the building block approach of the 1988 Basel Accord (known as Basel I) and internal model-based (IMB) capital regulation. In contrast to the building block of Basel I, Basel II's IMB capital regulation links more closely the capital requirement to a bank's actual risk. We develop a multiperiod pricing model while incorporating the effects of capital forbearance and moral hazard. The fairly-priced premium rates are computed by assuming that a bank's asset value follows a GARCH process. In contrast to previous studies based on the building block capital standard, we find that forbearance and the potential moral hazard behavior will not increase the cost of deposit insurance in the scheme of Basel II's IMB capital regulation.

The currency premium is one of the three components of the differential between local and foreign interest rates. Emerging economies such as South Africa typically face positive interest rate differentials, that is, a higher cost of capital than developed economies. In this chapter we aim at identifying the determinants of the South African rand–U.S. dollar currency premium using monthly data over the period 1997–2008. We carry out an empirical analysis using dynamic time series econometric techniques to estimate the determinants of the one-month and one-year currency premia. Our findings show that the currency premia at both horizons are driven by long-run movements in the expected inflation differential between South Africa and the United States, risk aversion as a proxy for the price of rand exchange risk, and the volatility of the rand exchange rate as an indicator of the quantity of that risk. Misalignments in the real effective or rand–U.S. dollar bilateral exchange rates display mixed results in terms of their impact and statistical significance on both currency premium. Our parameter estimators overall are stable and robust to sample variations. Monetary policy is an important determinant of currency premia at both one-month and one-year horizons, but risk aversion is equally important to determine its time fluctuations.

This study examines the empirical relationship between four broad antecedents of brand equity (branding strategy, brand structure, brand positioning and target market) and two separate dimensions of revenue premium: price premium and volume premium. Our modeling framework aims to explain how different antecedents of brand equity influence the realized velocity and margin of branded product sales, key drivers of operating cash flow. Our generalizable empirical analyses are based on a representative dataset of over 6,500 brands, across 200 consumer-packaged goods categories, spanning three years. We find that only 20% of brands command revenue premiums, for which volume premiums are the critical determinant. Branding strategies and brand structure primarily impact volume premium. In contrast, brand positioning has little effect. Target market substantially affects both premiums. Overall, these four elements account for 73% and 69% of the explained variations in price and volume premiums, respectively. This study provides generalizable, important, and novel insights for the theory and practice of brand management regarding price positioning and extending brands into new categories.