The influence of seller strategy on the winning price in online auctions: A moderated mediation model

This paper examines the impact of seller strategy on winning prices in online auctions. In our conceptual model, three strategic choices made by the seller - minimum opening price, auction length, and use of a hidden reserve price - are mediated by the number of bids placed during the auction and moderated by product type. Our tests analyze eBay auction data for four consumer products through two matched studies (two products per study). In particular, we compare products for which value is easily determined with those for which value is less clear. Overall, we find strong evidence of the effects of minimum opening price and hidden reserve prices on final winning prices. The impact of auction length on winning price is less clear. In general, our tests support the idea that potential buyers rely more on signals such as opening price and reserve price for products for which reference prices are less available.     

Reducing information asymmetry in the auctioning of non-perishable experience goods: The case of online wine auctions

We highlight the importance of reducing the perceived risk associated with information asymmetry for experience goods. We analyse a major online non-perishable experience good, wine, from the seller's perspective. The mechanism for lowering information asymmetry is the verification service offered by the auctioneer. By focusing on unsold items/lots, the wine and auction characteristics affecting the probability of a sale are identified. Results show that the verification of the wine's provenance increases the probability of sale by 5.7 percent and leads to an expected increase of 5.1 percent in the auction price. When both effects are combined, the increase in the expected revenue of the seller is 7.3 percent. We test and find no evidence of selection bias. Given the heterogeneity in wine prices, a quantile regression analysis shows how the results differ for high-priced wines compared to lower priced wines. Results highlight how the mechanisms to lower the degree of information asymmetry work both in attracting bidders to online auctions and encouraging bidders to submit higher bids.     

Auction Fever! How Time Pressure and Social Competition Affect Bidders’ Arousal and Bids in Retail Auctions

Auction sites on the Internet frequently put bidders under time pressure or highlight the social competition that is inherent to auctions. Both aspects are believed to elicit an exciting shopping experience, which may culminate in auction fever. In two laboratory experiments, we investigate the process of auction fever in retail auctions and demonstrate when and how auction fever affects bidding behavior. In contrast to previous studies, we employ physiological measurements as an objective and continuous assessment of bidders’ arousal in addition to a subjective assessment of bidders’ emotions through psychometric scales. Moreover, we explicitly study the interaction of time pressure and social competition on arousal and bids. We find that bidders’ arousal is increased in high time pressure auctions and that this leads to higher bids in ascending auctions—but only when bidders compete with human opponents. Thus, social competition is the actual driver underlying the auction fever phenomenon. Furthermore, we show that the “joy of winning” is significantly stronger than the “frustration of losing” in ascending auctions. Finally, we discuss the implications of our findings for the design of retail auctions.     

Partitioned pricing,price fairness perceptions,and the moderating effects of brand relationships in SME business markets

Partitioned pricing effects on price perceptions have been studied in the consumer (B2C) market context, but not in the business (B2B) market, and particularly not in the small- and medium-sized enterprise (SME), context. The current research investigates SME managers' affective and cognitive (e.g., price fairness perceptions) responses to partitioned pricing and extent of relationship with the selling brand. The first of three experimental studies finds that a partitioned price generates greater price fairness perceptions than an all-inclusive price. Study 2 finds that SME buyers elicit the greatest positive affect and the lowest negative affect when the buyer's firm has an established relationship with the brand and the seller partitions the price. The third study further examines the effects of relationship with the brand by separating brand mandate (i.e., when the buying firm requires employees to purchase from a specific brand) and relationship longevity.     

Price fairness perceptions and customer loyalty in a retail context

Loyalty and fairness are major research topics in the marketing literature. However, research examining how customer loyalty and fairness perceptions affect each other is lacking. This study examines these two topics in the context of a retailer increasing its prices, develops hypotheses, and tests these hypotheses using an experimental design approach. Results indicate that loyalty has a positive effect on fairness perceptions when price increases are low, though no such effect is found when price increases are high. Also, justifiable reasons for price increases lead to increased fairness perceptions when price increases are low, but any reason offered when price increases are high increases fairness perceptions. Whether distributive or procedural fairness influences post customer loyalty in the presence of price increases is dependent on both the level of the price increase and the reason offered for the price increase. This research provides implications for retailers and directions for future research.     

Effect of Buyer and Seller Experience on Buy It Now Pricing

ABSTRACT

Although auctions have been around for centuries, online auctions are still a relatively new phenomenon. This paper examines the phenomenon of online auctions, specifically on a pricing option known as “Buy It Now.” With this option, a buyer can purchase merchandise immediately at a stated price and truncate the auction process. Auction items sold with a Buy It Now price tend to be at a higher price than the high bid price for an identical item sold through an ascending-bid auction. In addition, Buy It Now prices tend to attract risk averse bidders while high bidders of ascending-bid auctions tend to be less risk averse or risk neutral bidders. On the other hand, we found more experienced sellers sell their items with a Buy It Now price while less experienced sellers sell their items through an ascending-bid process. Thus, experience and risk are factors in choosing a Buy It Now price for the seller and buyer.     

Procedural and Distributive Fairness: Determinants of Overall Price Fairness

The present research isolates the fairness assessment of the process used by the retailer to set a price, as well as the distributive fairness of the price compared to the price that others are offered, and examines the combined effect of procedural fairness and distributive fairness on overall price fairness. Two experimental studies examine procedural and distributive fairness effects on overall price fairness. In study 1, procedural fairness and distributive fairness are manipulated and found to interact to bring about overall price fairness. In study 2, suspicion toward the seller is found to mediate the relationship between procedural fairness and overall price fairness when the price is disadvantageous.     

An Empirical Analysis of Bidding Fees in Name-your-own-price Auctions

Interactive pricing mechanisms integrate customers into the price-setting process by letting them submit bids. Name-your-own-price auctions are such an interactive pricing mechanism, where buyers' bids denote the final price of a product or service in case they surpass a secret threshold price set by the seller. If buyers are given the flexibility to bid repeatedly, they might try to incrementally bid up to the threshold. In this case, charging fees for the option to place additional bids could generate extra revenue and reduce incremental bidding behavior. Based on an economic model of consumer bidding behavior in name-your-own-price auctions and two empirical studies, we analytically and empirically investigate the effects bidding fees have on buyers' bidding behavior. Moreover, we analyze the impact of bidding fees on seller revenue and profit based on our empirical results.     

Your Call: eBay and Demand for the iPhone 4☆

The iPhone 4 was introduced into the UK market on 24^th June 2010 to significant consumer interest. Demand revealed itself exceeding supply through conventional channels, since there was very extensive activity in terms of bidding on eBay auctions for the product. We monitored all UK eBay transactions on the iPhone 4 for six weeks from introduction, with total transactions amounting to around £1.5m. We analyse determinants of winning bids in terms of characteristics of the phone, the seller, and the buyer. Our most notable and novel finding relative to previous studies is a very significant premium over list price being paid in almost all cases, with positive uplift factors including whether the phone was unlocked and whether it could be sold overseas. Demand fell over time, as evidenced by lower achieved prices, but the fall in price was relatively modest. A significant premium of 32GB over 16GB versions is revealed.     

Examining differences in consumer reactions to partitioned prices with a variable number of price components

Partitioned pricing is a tactic in which a seller presents multiple prices for a single product or service instead of one, all-inclusive price. This research investigates effects of partitioned prices containing a variable number of price components, under varying levels of seller trustworthiness, and with or without the presentation of the total price. The results indicate that partitioning into a large number of price components, relative to a small number of price components, negatively affects perceived fairness and purchase intentions for less trustworthy, but not more trustworthy, sellers when the total price is not presented. However, partitioning into a large number of price components positively affects fairness and purchase intentions, regardless of seller trustworthiness, when the total price is presented. The research also examines effects of partitioning on price estimation and recall.     

Perceptions of price (un)fairness in a channel context

This article extends prior research on perceptions of price (un)fairness by attempting to disentangle where in the marketing channel (un)fairness inferences lie. Extant research in this area overwhelmingly considers (un)fairness perceptions with respect to the pricing action only, ignoring attributions aimed at specific channel actors. This article illustrates differences in (un)fairness inferences with respect to retailers and manufacturers given price increases accompanied by decreased product supply, increased demand, or increased variable costs. We show that a retailer is considered relatively more unfair than a manufacturer given a price increase accompanied by a demand increase, as well as when no explicit reason is given for the price increase. Conversely, a manufacturer is considered relatively more unfair given a price increase accompanied by a supply decrease. Both channel entities are considered equally fair given a price increase accompanied by a channel (both retailer and manufacturer) or manufacturer cost increase, while a retailer is deemed relatively more unfair given a price increase accompanied by a retailer cost increase. This research generally suggests that inferences of causality for specific pricing actions may differentially skew toward upstream or downstream channel entities depending on the particular economic circumstances of the price change.     

Do firms manipulate earnings after winning public-private partnership bids? Evidence from China

We examine whether firms manipulate their reported earnings after winning investment project bids. China's adoption of the public-private partnership (PPP) provides a unique setting for our analysis. Using the PPP announcements to identify the firms participating in PPP projects, we find that firms conduct both accrual-based and real earnings management after PPP participation. Our findings survive difference-in-differences design with different matching methods. We document that PPP-participating firms have strong incentives to manipulate earnings because of abnormal administrative expenditure and greater short-term performance pressure than non-PPP-participating firms. The auditors respond by charging higher audit fees due to the increased risk. Moreover, government subsidies relieve performance pressure and decrease the likelihood of earnings management among PPP-participating firms. Overall, this study documents the unintended consequences of PPP participation.     

All's not fair in pricing: An initial look at the dual entitlement principle

A new theory in economics (Kahneman, Knetsch, and Thaler, 1986a, b) contends that consumer judgments of seller fairness can explain why sellers in many industries do not raise prices to ration off excess demand. In a small study focusing on automated teller machines (ATM) fees, we obtain empirical support for KKT's prediction that unjustified price increases are perceived as unfair, while cost justification legitimates a price increase in consumers' eyes. We also find, however, that fairness perceptions are not significantly related to behavioral intentions (as the theory would suggest). Many respondents felt the fee was unfair but would not switch banks because of switching costs, while others felt the fee was fair but would switch banks because of the cumulative cost. Research directions are discussed.     

Fairness perceptions of retail price increases by foreign and domestic brands: The roles of ethnocentric beliefs,profit stickiness,and contextual information

Although consumers do not usually take kindly to price increases, their perceptions of fairness of price increases are contingent on relevant factors. This study investigates consumers' perceptions of the fairness of retail price increase by a domestic versus a foreign brand, as moderated by consumers' ethnocentricity, bias toward inferring a profit motive from a price increase (i.e., “profit stickiness”), and relevant contextual information. Over the course of two sets of experiments, the authors find that ethnocentricity does not necessarily lead to the intuitively expected favorable (unfavorable) bias toward (against) a domestic (foreign) brand's decision to raise prices, subject to profit stickiness and contextual information. These findings have implications for theory, practice, and further research.     

Effects of Consumers’ Efforts on Price and Promotion Fairness Perceptions

This research examines how consumers’ efforts as a nonmonetary sacrifice influence their price and promotion fairness perceptions in the context of price promotions. Multiple studies using different price promotion tactics demonstrate that consumers’ perceived level of effort to obtain a reduced price negatively influences their fairness perceptions when they deny the promoted price. Exploring the underlying mechanisms of this effect, we show that the amount of effort consumers exert to obtain a promoted price leads to their feeling of deservingness and entitlement. When the promoted price is denied, this feeling of entitlement is violated, causing unfairness perceptions to occur. The research demonstrates that, in addition to retailers’ actions such as price changes, consumers’ actions, in the form of their effort input, are also an important determinant of fairness perceptions.     

On the Demand Elasticity of Initial Public Offerings: An Analysis of Discriminatory Auctions

We analyze 52 Taiwanese IPOs that were introduced through discriminatory auctions (you pay what you bid) between December 1995 and October 1998. The evidence suggests that the elasticity of demand for IPOs in Taiwan through discriminatory auctions is relatively flat. The elasticity is significantly negatively correlated with bidders’heterogeneity, which is consistent with the investor heterogeneity hypothesis. We also find that the average winning bidders earn a significant average abnormal return of 7.83% in the post–IPO market. The post–IPO market abnormal return is positively correlated with the demand elasticity, the idiosyncratic risk of stock returns and the institutional participation rate, and is negatively correlated with the auction clearing price, which is consistent with theory. Finally, there is evidence that informed investors have an incentive to shade their demand for IPOs to avoid the winner’scurse. The most aggressive bidders (the top 5% of the winning bidders) on average incur a small loss of 1.64% (not significant) in the market–adjusted initial returns.     

Consumers’ perceptions of the fairness of price-matching refund policies

This paper examines the antecedents and consequences of perceived price-matching policy fairness. Among the antecedents, we study the effects of the refund depth if a lower competitive price is identified, the degree that the retail product assortment is available at competing retailers, and the consumers’ inference as to the retailer's motive for the price-matching policy. Product assortment uniqueness is identified as a key driver of fairness perceptions, both directly and indirectly through inferred motive. The three experiments show that consumers’ perceptions of the fairness of a store's pricing policy influence their price fairness perceptions, consequently influencing their retail shopping intentions.     

Many a little makes a mickle: Why do consumers negatively react to sequential price disclosure?

Drip pricing (DP) is distinct from partitioned pricing as it sequentially discloses surcharges to consumers. Critics see DP as a deceptive pricing tactic because it obscures the final price of an offer. We examine the effects of the timing of the final price disclosure and the number of sequentially presented surcharges on consumers' attention to the final price and, ultimately, perceived price fairness. In an eye‐tracking study with 225 participants, we find that the sequential (vs. up‐front) disclosure of the final price lowers perceived price fairness by increasing consumers' attention to the final price, in particular, when the number of surcharges is high. In addition, the sequential disclosure of the final price lowers perceived price fairness because of higher perceived price complexity and lower pricing transparency perceptions. The findings suggest that firms need to be aware of both attentional and cognitive effects of the final price disclosure when designing DP.     

The effect of privacy choice in cookie notices on consumers' perceived fairness of frequent price changes

Recent regulatory changes (i.e., General Data Protection Regulation of the European Union) enforce that seller (e.g., retail and service) and all other websites disclose through cookie notices which data they collect and store. At the same time, websites must allow consumers to disagree to the tracking of their browsing behavior. Despite sellers' concern about the loss of consumer insights—as consumers might disagree to the collection of their browsing data—cookie notices might also have a surprising side-effect: Consumers might accept frequent price changes (from personalized or dynamic pricing) more readily, if they agree through a cookie notice that their behavior can be tracked. Specifically, two experimental studies show that consent to the tracking of browsing behavior increases consumers internal attribution of a price change, as consumers attribute the cause of the change (here: giving up data) to themselves. This increases price fairness perceptions and, in turn, purchase intent. As a result, for online sellers of goods or services the implementation of cookie notice should no longer be thought as a matter to be avoided, but rather a trade-off decision: Loss of a part of consumer insights versus higher acceptance of data-driven marketing mix decisions, such as frequent price changes.     

How price complexity takes its toll: The neglected role of a simplicity bias and fairness in price evaluations

Marketing managers commonly employ complex price plans. Surprisingly, limited and conflicting evidence reports how customers perceive and react to complex prices. This study examines perceptions about price complexity and shows that customers tend to prefer simple prices. Two experimental studies show that perceived price complexity negatively affects customer perceptions of price fairness and influences product choice because customers negatively evaluate the transparency of the firm's pricing practices and infer higher total prices. Customers comparing alternate offerings may therefore prefer simple over complex prices, even when the latter are less expensive. Study results suggest limiting price plan variations positively affects customer inferences about transparency and fairness, and thus customer choice.