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.     

The Impact of Store-Price Signals on Consumer Search and Store Evaluation

Always low price (ALP) and low price guarantee (LPG) are store-price signals that retailers frequently use to induce favorable store-price image and discourage consumers from comparing prices across stores. Although both policies signal low prices, only LPG is an obligatory promise to beat rival stores’ prices. Results of two shopping simulations show that when consumer search costs are relatively low, ALP may effectively discourage consumer search whereas LPG may trigger more search. Paradoxically, consumers tend to evaluate ALP stores less favorably (as having lower integrity and higher self-serving intention) than LPG stores even when both signals appear to be credible. These findings suggest that LPG is a superior tactic for creating a favorable store image while ALP is more effective for discouraging consumer search. The results also indicate that consumers visit fewer stores when the LPG is not a credible signal of lowest market price than when it is credible. This is because consumers are inclined to either claim discounts or refunds at the non-credible LPG store or to purchase at the competing store with a lower price rather than continue searching.     

Red price? Red flag! Eye-tracking reveals how one red price can hurt a retailer

Retailers present prices in red color to signal savings. Past research has shown that presenting all prices in red increases perceived savings from the store. However, in practice, retailers often present just one price in red in promotion materials with multiple prices. Will consumers perceive higher savings from the store even if only one price is presented in red? This research examines this prevalent retail practice using a theoretical lens. The theoretical framework predicts that two unique learned associations with red color (red: Savings and red: Stop) play a key role in shaping consumers' perception of savings from stores that highlight only one price in red. This research proposes and empirically demonstrates that consumers perceive lower savings from stores that present only one price in red. The theoretical framework is validated using a multi-method approach that combines the strengths of behavioral and physiological (eye-tracking) methods. Findings from this research suggest that presenting only one price in red lowers perceived savings from the store, which may hurt sales.     

Price recall: Brand and store type differences

Price is among the most important choice criteria for customers, whose price knowledge is often surprisingly inaccurate. This study aims at providing new insights into differences in price recall across brands and store types, and their potential effect on marketing efficiency and customers’ store choice. Towards this aim, we analyze the price recall of consumers for 51 food items by a random-effects panel estimation employing a survey with 715 participants. Our results show that customers recall national brand prices better than private labels, almost irrespectively of the store type; consumers overestimate store brand prices in both store types; the effect, however, is much higher for the convenience store. These outcomes have consequences for the marketing strategy: despite a price-matching guarantee for the store brands in the convenience store, the price image is still in favor of the discounter. This result raises doubts on the effectiveness of the price-matching guarantee, at least in this context. The everyday low price strategy of the discounter seems to pay off in terms of the price image. Though both stores charge the exact same prices for their store brands, prices at the discounter are on average perceived to be significantly lower.     

The impact of external reference price on consumer price expectations

Comparative pricing practices are frequently used where actual product prices are accompanied by higher external reference prices. All types of stores, regular-price department stores as well as discount stores, use comparative price claims to frame price deals as attractive [Marketing Science 4 (1985) 199]. In this paper, a quadratic model is specified for the impact of external reference price (ERP) on consumer price expectations. Based on the research on communication discrepancy and advertising claim discrepancy, which in turn draw on assimilation-contrast, attribution, and prospect theories, we hypothesize a quadratic effect of external reference prices on consumer price expectations. An interactive, computer-controlled experiment using multiple levels of ERP is used to estimate the proposed model. As hypothesized, support for an inverted U-shape relationship is found between consumers’ updated price expectations and the difference between ERP and initial price expectations. That is, as the difference between ERP and subjects’ initial price expectations increases, subjects’ updated price expectations increase to a point and then start to decrease. We find that the fit of the quadratic model specification for the effect of external reference price on price expectations is noticeably superior to that of linear, logarithmic, square root, and S-shaped specifications. Finally, we provide implications of our results for both retail managers and for regulatory authorities alike.     

Temporal Reframing of Prices: When Is It Beneficial?

Prior studies provide mixed results pertaining to the effectiveness of temporal reframing of prices. This study examines the conditions in which such temporal reframing to a shorter period of time is more or less beneficial than aggregate prices. Investigations of the role of four moderating variables—price endings, price level, time periods, and calculation affinity—show that reframed prices are more beneficial than aggregate prices for high-priced products, especially in combination with even price endings, an aggregate price that normally refers to a comparatively short time period, or customers with poor calculation affinity. Aggregate prices offer more benefits than reframed prices for low-priced products, odd price endings, aggregate prices that refer to longer periods, and customers with excellent calculation affinities.     

Consumer Acceptance of Item Price Removal: A Survey Study of Milwaukee Shoppers

A survey was conducted of 193 Milwaukee food shoppers to determine their experiences and opinions relating to item price removal (IPR) in supermarkets. The principal findings were that opinions of IPR were related to experiences with shopping in IPR environments, extent of price comparison behaviors, and certain demographic variables. Most of the respondents thought retailers should supply a price-marking instrument to shoppers. A majority of the respondents who had not shopped in an IPR store said they would switch stores if their current store removed prices. However, only one-quarter of the respondents who had shopped in an IPR store changed stores and price removal was of secondary importance in this decision. Overall, respondents were evenly split on the need for legal controls in IPR, but respondents who had not shopped in an IPR store and who were from disadvantaged households (with regard to age, income and/or education) were more likely to see a need for legal controls. The findings of this study and ones conducted in other cities suggest that the primary public policy issue is not whether or not item prices should be removed. Rather, the issue is what is the best method of providing shoppers with price comparison information.     

Cost Analysis of Calcium in Store Brand versus National Brand Grocery Products

Objective: This study was to determine if calcium fortification yields a higher price per serving in grocery store products. Researchers compared store brand to national brand grocery products in relation to cost in order to examine if calcium values were similar between store brand and national brand products. Methods: A total of 112 store brand and 211 national brand grocery products were collected from three low (national chain store), middle and high priced (Virginia and North Carolina regional store) grocery venues. Products were compared using price and calcium percentage per serving. ANOVA was used to determine between store brand and national brand for price per serving and calcium content, and between grocery venues. Results: National brand fortified products had a significantly lower mean price per serving when compared to national brand non-fortified products (p = 0.0002). There was no statistical difference between store brand fortified and non-fortified products (p = 0.9256). Low priced store brand products had the lowest mean price per serving ($0.34 ±0.24). Conclusions: This study found store brand products have similar calcium content as national brand products. Product cost was lower at low priced store compared to middle and high priced stores.     

中国零售环境下参考价格影响因素的初步研究——以家用电器产品为例

文章以参考价格的研究文献为理论基础,在中国零售环境下针对家电产品研究了影响消费者参考价格形成的一些因素.研究结果显示:在中国零售环境下针对家电产品,消费者的参考价格指数:与产品或品牌的售价正相关;与现场其他产品或品牌的相对价格负相关;在消费者购买高价产品时,与消费者对品牌的喜好正相关;在消费者购买低价产品时,与消费者的价格搜寻活动正相关;与需求紧迫性无显著相关关系.此外,年龄、学历和月收入都对消费者的参考价格指数有影响.最后对研究结果进行了讨论.     

Price Variations for Refrigerators Among Retail Store Types and Cities

This study investigated differences in prices of refrigerators among 5 different types of retailers in 11 different major U.S. cities. Significant differences in price among retailers were found with appliance stores and furniture stores offering the lowest prices. Discount department stores quoted lower prices than did conventional department stores. Some cities had lower average prices than others. There were considerable variations in price among all classes of retailers and among all cities. Dealers that serviced appliances quoted prices similar to those quoted by dealers that did not service appliances. Prices did not vary by the size of the store.     

MEASUREMENT OF GROCERY PRICES: SOME METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND EMPIRICAL RESULTS

This paper examines some methodological issues in the design and execution of food price surveys, and presents findings from a recent survey of fifty-eight grocery stores in the Cardiffarea. The methodology discussed includes the design of samples of goods to be surveyed (the ‘shopping basket’), of shops in which grocery prices are to be measured, and derivation of the shop-price matrices to be used in analyses of grocery pricing strategies. The empirical results show, as expected, significantly cheaper prices in multiple and co-operative stores compared with independent and affiliated. No significant difference is found between the latter categories of store. There is limited support for the hypothesis that the larger the store the lower the prices. Prices measured in the Cardiff area are also compared with average ‘shopping basket’prices derived from a national survey carried out concurrently by the Consumers' Association. Finally, the value to the researcher of ‘one-off’ price surveys is assessed.     

Internal reference price response across store formats

Reference price models have a long tradition in marketing and consumer research. Pricing strategies can utilize consumer response to gains and losses relative to internal reference prices, which are price expectations developed from past-observed prices. Consequently, many previous studies have been devoted to analyzing differences in internal reference price response across product categories and consumer characteristics. However, knowledge about internal reference price response across different store formats is missing. Our study aims to fill this research gap. To do so, we estimate a reference price model for the same set of brands and the same sample of consumers across two store formats (discount chain vs. supermarket chain). The prices for the brands in our model are similar across store formats. Results from our proposed model show that the same consumers are loss-averse at the discount chain while gain-seeking at the supermarket chain. Predicted by previous literature, we attribute the difference in internal reference price response to the different price image of the store formats. Overall, our research contributes to the reference price literature and provides important implications for pricing strategies at stores with different price image.     

The multichannel pricing dilemma: Do consumers accept higher offline than online prices?

Whether to unify or discriminate prices in offline and online channels is a controversial topic that can be central to whether offline retailers survive in the marketplace. Field data evidence from a large multichannel retailer reveals a sobering picture. On average, only offline price premiums of approximately 2% seem feasible, and such premiums vary largely by product categories and price levels. High-priced products, which consumers perceive as risky, tend to allow offline price premiums, as do low-priced, takeaway items. However, in between these two extremes, the results show no potential for offline price premiums. Drawing on price fairness theory, we further explore consumer responses to higher offline prices in three experimental studies. In contrast with the assumptions of price fairness theory, the provision of purchase advisory services and communication of the price motive hardly stimulate consumer acceptance of higher offline prices in our context. However, the findings reveal important heterogeneity in consumer responses depending on their market segment, because some market segments indeed respond less negatively to higher offline prices. In addition, consumers accept offline price premiums for unplanned purchases.     

The influence of multi-channel pricing strategy on price fairness and customer confusion

ABSTRACT

Multi-channel retailers face the challenge of coordinating marketing variables across their channels. In this respect, one of the main issues arising is whether to differentiate or integrate prices. Our study examines the impact of three multi-channel price differentiation instruments on perceived price fairness, customer confusion, and their consequences. In a scenario-based online experiment, we use a 2 x 2 × 2 between-subjects design and manipulate product price differentiation, online promotion and online shipping fees. The results indicate that price differentiation has an impact on fairness evaluations and customer confusion. Product price differentiation and online promotion are perceived as more unfair and lead to more confusion than price parity. Price fairness perceptions of shipping fees depend on product price differentiation. Customers perceive shipping fees as fairer than no shipping fees when prices are cheaper online but perceive shipping fees as less fair when prices are integrated. These results suggest that customers expect a consistent consideration of channel cost advantages and disadvantages and that shipping fees might serve as a cue for customers to consider the retailer’s channel costs. We further show that price fairness and customer confusion mediate effects of pricing instruments (in particular online promotion) on attitudinal and behavioral consequences.     

Buyer Power,Transport Cost and Welfare

Manufacturers produce substitute products and sell to consumers in a linear city through competing retail stores. A low cost store obtains large market share by selling at low prices. Assume that a big retailer may exert buyer power by demanding wholesale discounts from manufacturers. The model identifies exclusionary effects of buyer power against competing retailers. It is also found that certain level of buyer power of a discount retailer may maximize social welfare, while that of a regular price retailer may maximize total consumer surplus. Nevertheless, excessive buyer power hurts both consumers and society.     

Price competition in retailing: The importance of the price density function

Focusing on two determinant aspects of retail competition, prices and catchment area, this paper aims to specifically investigate the importance of the relative price density function. We answer such questions as whether it pays for a store to offer more low-priced items in a given category than its close competitors and whether a retailer should have a consistent assortment in terms of price tier frequency across all categories. To tackle these issues, we use a store-level panel database provided by IRI covering 34 categories and 150 stores in one province.     

Private Label Vendor Selection in a Supply Chain: Quality and Clientele Effects

We model a supply chain consisting of a national brand manufacturer and an independent manufacturer, both of whom are potential suppliers of store brand to a single retailer. The retailer serves two customer segments—a quality sensitive segment (high type) and a price sensitive (low type) segment. The retailer serves these two segments by targeting the national and store brands to the quality and price sensitive segments, respectively. When the national brand manufacturer supplies the store brand he internalizes the effect of store brand quality on the national brand's retail prices. This leads the national brand manufacturer to choose a lower store brand quality than the independent manufacturer. This decrease in store brand quality has the benefit of increased revenues from the high type customers along with an associated cost of decreased revenues from the low type customers. Thus, when the benefit outweighs the cost the retailer chooses the national brand manufacturer to supply the store brand. We show that the retailer will choose the national brand manufacturer to supply the store brand when (a) the size of the high type customer segment is large relative to the low type customer segment, (b) the valuations of the high type customer segment is large relative to the low type customer segment, and (c) the retailer's margin requirement on the store brand is not very high. Overall, these results suggest that retailers who serve a bigger sized quality (price) sensitive clientele would have the national brand (independent) manufacturer supply the store brand.     

Local competition, entry, and agglomeration

This paper analyzes competition between two spatially differentiated multi-product retailers who encounter entry from a low-cost discounter. We assess how entry affects the pricing of the incumbent stores and the role played by the location of the entrant. Our primary objective is to identify how traditional retailers respond to new forms of low-cost retailing. Results show that post entry, the prices for some products are higher than the pre entry. However, which product prices increase depends on the incumbent’s location. Contrary to conventional wisdom, we find that the store closer to the entrant is better off compared to the incumbent located further away. We empirically demonstrate the main workings of our theory using sales data from several grocery stores that saw entry by discount stores in their trading areas.     

Manufacturer-owned retail stores

Increasingly, manufacturers sell their products in their own retail stores, and many of these stores appear to be in direct competition with independent retailers; i.e., both types of retail stores are physically co-located. We analyze one way this practice affects the retail market. We find that, when independent retailers compete against company stores (instead of just against other independent retailers), they (1) charge higher prices and (2) are more willing to engage in marketing efforts on behalf of the manufacturer’s brand. Furthermore, when company stores and independent retailers compete in the same market, the company store charges higher prices and provides more marketing effort. Anecdotal data are consistent with these model predictions.

How Do Price Perceptions of Different Brand Types Affect Shopping Value and Store Loyalty?

This research investigates the relationships among price perceptions for different brand types (national brands, standard store brands, regional store brands, organic store brands), shopping value dimensions (quality, price, social, and emotion value), and store loyalty (retention and word of mouth (WOM)). A comprehensive model depicts determinants of customer store loyalty. Using structural equation modeling, the model test includes 671 consumers intercepted during shopping trips. The data analysis yields several surprising results. In particular, low product price perceptions do not necessarily signal negative store quality evaluations. Shopping value dimensions influence store retention loyalty and WOM behavior differently. Furthermore, different brand types exert distinct effects on the value creation process. Favorable prices for national and standard store brands have comparable positive effects on store price value and emotional value creation; appealing prices of regional store brands instead reduce the emotional value of the store, and low prices for organic store brand products significantly increase social value creation.