Quantitative Marketing and Economics

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 1–34 | Cite as

The role of self selection, usage uncertainty and learning in the demand for local telephone service

  • Sridhar Narayanan
  • Pradeep K. Chintagunta
  • Eugenio J. Miravete
Article

Abstract

Telephone services are often characterized by the presence of ‘fixed’ plans, involving only a fixed monthly fee, as well as ‘measured’ plans, with both fixed fees and per-unit charges for usage. Consumers are faced with the decisions of which plan to choose and how much to use the phone and these decisions are not, in general, independent. Due to the presence of a time lag between plan choice and usage decisions, consumers are uncertain about usage at the plan-choice stage. We develop a structural discrete/continuous model of plan choice and usage decisions of consumers that accounts for such uncertainty. Prior research has also found that consumers switch less often from fixed plans to measured plans to gain from potential savings than vice versa. Consumer uncertainty regarding their mean usage levels and different rates of learning by consumers in the two plans is a potential explanation for this phenomenon. We extend our discrete/continuous model to account for consumer learning about their mean usage and estimate different rates of learning for the two types of plans.

We estimate our model using data from the 1986 Kentucky local telephone tariff experiment. Even in the absence of any price variation over time, we are able to measure the price elasticities both of usage and of choice of plan. Using our parameter estimates, we simulate the effects of the introduction of a metered plan in a market with only a fixed plan and vice versa, on both firm revenues and consumer surplus. We also find that consumers learn very rapidly if they are on the measured plan but learn very slowly when they are on the fixed plan. We investigate an alternative assumption on the nature of the learning process in which only consumers in the measured plan have an opportunity to learn. We find that our empirical results are robust to this change of specification. We conduct counterfactual simulations to simulate enhanced calling plans from the firm and consumer points of view. Additional simulations to measure the value of information in this category are also carried out. We compute the value of both complete information, where the entire uncertainty about future usage is resolved, as well as that of limited information, where the consumer's uncertainty about mean usage is resolved, but the uncertainty about specific month-to-month usage remains. We find that the value of information is modest. We also find that a large proportion of the value of information is that about the mean usage, with the value of the information about a specific month's usage being relatively small.

Keywords

Self-selection Uncertainty Value of information Discrete/continuous models Learning models Telecommunications Optional calling plans 

References

  1. Chernew, M., Gowrisankaran, G., & Scanlon, D. P. (2006). Learning and the value of information: the evidence from health plan report cards. Working Paper, Washington University, St. Louis.Google Scholar
  2. Chiang, J. (1991). A simultaneous approach to whether, what and how much to buy questions. Marketing Science, 10, 297–315.Google Scholar
  3. Chintagunta, P. K. (1993). Investigating purchase incidence, brand choice and purchase quantity decisions of households. Marketing Science, 12, 184–208.Google Scholar
  4. Dubin, J. A., & McFadden, D. M. (1983). An econometric analysis of residential electric appliance holding and consumption. Econometrica, 52, 345–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Economides, N., Seim, K., & Viard, V. B. (2004). Quantifying the benefits of entry into local telephone service. Working Paper, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  6. Erdem, T., & Keane, M. P. (1996). Decision-making under uncertainty: capturing dynamic brand choice processes in turbulent consumer goods markets. Marketing Science, 15, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goettler, R. L., & Clay, K. (2006). Price discrimination with experience goods: sorting-induced biases and illusive surplus. Working Paper, Carnegie Mellon University.Google Scholar
  8. Hanneman, M. (1984). The discrete continuous model of consumer demand. Econometrica, 52, 541–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hobson, M., & Spady, R. H. (1988). The demand for local telephone service under optional local measured service. Bellcore Economics Discussion Paper No. 50.Google Scholar
  10. Huang, C.-I. (2006). Estimating demand for cellular phone service under nonlinear pricing. Working Paper, Northwestern University.Google Scholar
  11. Iyengar, R. (2004). A structural demand analysis for wireless services under nonlinear pricing schemes. Working Paper, Columbia University.Google Scholar
  12. Iyengar, R., Ansari, A., & Gupta, S. (2006). A model of consumer learning for service usage and quality. Working Paper, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  13. Jin, G. Z., & Sorensen, A. T. (2005). Information and consumer choice: the value of publicized health plan ratings. Working Paper, University of Maryland, College Park.Google Scholar
  14. Lambrecht, A., Seim, K., & Skiera, B. (2005). Does uncertainty matter? Consumer behavior under three-part tariffs. Working Paper, University of California at Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  15. MacKie-Mason, J. K., & Lawson, D. (1993). Local telephone calling demand when customers face optimal and nonlinear price schedules. Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  16. Manski, C. F., & Lerman, S. R. (1977). The estimation of choice probabilities from choice based samples. Econometrica, 45, 1977–1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Miravete, E. (2002). Choosing the wrong calling plan? Ignorance and learning. American Economic Review, 93, 297–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Moshkin, N. V., & Shachar, R. (2002). The asymmetric information model of state dependence. Marketing Science, 21, 435–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nair, H. S., Dube, J.-P., & Chintagunta, P. K. (2005). Accounting for primary and secondary demand effects with aggregate data. Marketing Science, 24, 444–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Park, R. E., Wetzel, B. M., & Mitchell, B. M. (1983). Charging for local telephone calls: how household characteristics affect the distribution of calls in the GTE illinois experiment. Journal of Econometrics, 22, 339–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Small, K. A., & Rosen, H. S. (1981). Applied welfare economics with discrete choice models. Econometrica, 49, 105–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Song, I., & Chintagunta, P. K. (2006). A discrete/continuous model for multi-category purchase behavior of households. Journal of Marketing Research, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  23. Train, K. E., McFadden, D. L., & Ben-Akiva, M. (1987). The demand for local telephone service: a fully discrete model of residential calling patterns and service choices. Rand Journal of Economics, 18, 109–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sridhar Narayanan
    • 1
  • Pradeep K. Chintagunta
    • 2
  • Eugenio J. Miravete
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Graduate School of BusinessStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  2. 2.Graduate School of BusinessUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA
  3. 3.Department of EconomicsUniversity of Texas at AustinAustinUSA
  4. 4.CEPRLondonUK

Personalised recommendations