Skip to main content
Log in

Balancing Profitability and Customer Welfare in a Supermarket Chain

  • Published:
Quantitative Marketing and Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We investigate the impact of price discrimination by a large Chicago supermarket chain. First we measure the impact of the chain's current zone-pricing policy on shelf prices, variable profits and consumer welfare across its stores. Using the chain's database to simulate a finer store-specific micro-pricing policy, we study the implications of this policy on profits and welfare. We show how a store-pricing policy that is constrained to offer consumers at least as much surplus as a uniform chain wide pricing policy still enables the retailer to generate substantial incremental profits.

To ensure our pricing problem exhibits a well-defined optimum, we use the parsimonious, mixed-logit demand function that allows for flexible substitution patterns across brands and also retains a link to consumer theory. We discuss the issue of price endogeneity when estimating the demand parameters with weekly store-level data. Standard instrumental variables techniques used to account for such endogeneity also seem to increase the magnitudes of own-price elasticities thereby offsetting the problem encountered by previous researchers of predicted prices from a demand model exceeding those in the actual data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, E. and N. Vilcassim. (2001). Retailer Category Pricing. Working Paper, University of Chicago.

  • Berry, S. (1994). “Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation”, Rand Journal of Economics 25, 242-262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, S., J. Levinsohn, and A. Pakes. (1995). ''Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium'', Econometrica 63, 841-890.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berto Villas-Boas, Sofia. (2001). Vertical Contracts Between Manufacturers and Retailers: An Empirical Analysis. Working paper, University of California, Berkeley.

  • Besanko, D., S. Gupta, and D. Jain. (1998). “Logit Demand Estimation Under Competitive Pricing Behavior: An Equilibrium Framework”, Management Science (November).

  • Besanko, D., J.-P. Dubé, and S. Gupta. (2001a). Heterogeneity and Target Marketing Using Aggregate Retail Data: A Structural Approach. Working paper, Kellogg Graduate School of Management. Forthcoming, Management Science.

  • Besanko, D., J.-P. Dubé, and S. Gupta. (2001b). Identifying Retail Pass-through Rates for Competing Brands. Working paper, Kellogg Graduate School of Management. Forthcoming, Marketing Science.

  • Borenstein, S. (1991). ''Selling Costs and Switching Costs: Explaining Retail Gasoline Margins'', The Rand Journal of Economics 22, 354-369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chevalier, J.A., A.K. Kashyap, and P.E. Rossi. (2000). Why Don't Prices Rise During Peak Periods of Demand? Evidence from Scanner Data. Working paper, University of Chicago.

  • Chiang, J. (1991). “The Simultaneous Approach to the Whether, What, and How much to Buy Questions”, Marketing Science 10, 297-315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiang, R. and C. Spatt. (1982). ''Imperfect Price Discrimination and Welfare'', Review of Economic Studies 49, 153-181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chintagunta, P. (1993). ''Investigating Purchase Incidence, Brand Choice and Purchase Quantity Decisions of Households'', Marketing Science 12, 184-208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chintagunta, P. (1994). ''Heterogeneous Logit Model Implications for Brand Positioning'', Journal of Marketing Research 31, 304-311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chintagunta, P. (2002). “Investigating Category Profit Maximization at a Retail Chain”, Journal of Marketing Research 39(2), 141-154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chintagunta, P., J.P. Dubé, and V. Singh. (2002). ''Market Structure Across Stores: An Application of a Random Coefficients Model with Store Level Data''. In Philip Hans Franses and Alan Montgomery (eds.), Advances in Econometrics: Econometric Models in Marketing. New York: JAI Press, 191-222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A. (2000). Package Size and Discrimination in Paper Towels. Working Paper, University of Virginia.

  • Cohen, A. (2001). Evidence of Price Discrimination Based on Package Size in the Paper Towel Industry. Working Paper, University of Virginia.

  • Dreze, X., S.J. Hoch, and M.E. Purk. (1994a). ''Shelf Management and Space Elasticity'', Journal of Retailing 70, 301-326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreze, X., S.J. Hoch, and M.E. Purk. (1994b). ''EDLP, Hi-Lo, and Margin Arithmetic'', Journal of Marketing 58, 16-29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubé, J.P. (2002). ''Multiple Discreteness and Product Differentiation: Strategy and Demand for Carbonated Soft Drinks''. Forthcoming, Marketing Science.

  • Elrod, T. (1988). ''Choice Map: Inferring a Product Market Map from Panel Data'', Marketing Science 7, 21-40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elrod, T. and M.P. Keane. (1995). ''A Factor-Analytic Probit Model for Representing the Market Structure in Panel Data'', Journal of Marketing Research 32, 1-16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoch, S.J., B.-D. Kim, A.L. Montgomery, and P.E. Rossi. (1995). ''Determinants of Store-Level Price Elasticity'', Journal of Marketing Research 32, 17-30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyer, G. and P.B. Seetheraman. (2003). To Price Discriminate or Not: The Choice of Station Type in Retail Gasoline Markets. Quantitative Marketing & Economics, forthcoming.

  • Kadiyali, V., P.K. Chintagunta, and N.J. Vilcassim. (2000). ''Manufacturer-Retailer Channel Interactions and Implications for Channel Power: An Empirical Investigation of Pricing in a Local Market'', Marketing Science 19, 127-147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J., G.M. Allenby, and P.E. Rossi. (2002). ''Modeling Consumer Demand for Variety'', Marketing Science 21, 229-250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lal, R. and Carmen Matutes. (1994). ''Retail Pricing and Advertising Strategies'', Journal of Business 67, 345-370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leslie, P.J. (2001). Price Discrimination in Broadway Theatre. Working paper, UCLA.

  • McFadden, D. (1989). ''A Method of Simulated Moments for Estimation of Discrete Response Models without Numerical Integration'', Econometrica 57, 995-1026.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFadden, D. and K. Train. (2000). ''Mixed MNL Models for Discrete Response'', Journal of Applied Economerics 15, 447-470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, A.L. (1997). ''Creating Micro-Marketing Pricing Strategies Using Supermarket Scanner Data'', Marketing Science 16, 315-338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, A.L. and E.T. Bradlow. (1999). ''Why Analyst Overconfidence about the Functional Form of Demand Can Lead to Overpricing'', Marketing Science 18, 569-583.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevo, A. (2001). ''Measuring Market Power in the Ready-To-Eat Cereal Industry'', Econometrica 69, 307-340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevo, A. (2000). ''Mergers and Differentiated Products: The Case of the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry'', The Rand Journal of Economics 31, 395-421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pakes, A. and D. Pollard. (1989). ''Simulation and the Asymptotics of Optimization Estimators'', Econometrica 57, 1027-1057.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrin, A. (2001). Quantifying the Benefits of New Products: The Case of the Minivan. Working paper, University of Chicago.

  • Reibstein, D.J. and H. Gatignon. (1984). ''Optimal Product Line Pricing: The Influence of Elasticities and Cross-Elasticities'', Journal of Marketing Research 21, 259-267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmalansee, R. ''Output and Welfare Implications of Monopolistic Third-Degree Price Discrimination'', The American Economic Review 71, 242-247.

  • Shepard, A. (1991). ''Price Discrimination and Retail Configuration'', Journal of Political Economy 99, 30-53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, V. (2002). Competing With Mass Discounters: Implications for Retailer Pricing. Working paper, Kellogg Graduate School of Management.

  • Slade, M.E. (1995). ''Product Market Rivalry with Multiple Strategic Weapons: An Analysis of Price and Advertising Competition'', Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 4, 445-476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Small, K.A. and H.S. Rosen. (1981). ''Applied Welfare Economics with Discrete Choice Models'', Econometrica 49, 105-130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sudhir, K. (2001a). ''Competitive Pricing Behavior in the Auto Market: A Structural Analysis'', Marketing Science 20, 42-60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sudhir, K. (2001b). ''Structural Analysis of Competitive Pricing in the Presence of a Strategic Retailer'', Marketing Science 20, 244-264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trajtenberg, M. (1989). ''The Welfare Analysis of Product Innovations, with an Application to Computed Tomography Scanners'', Journal of Political Economy 97, 444-479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varian, H. (1985). ''Price Discrimination and Social Welfare'', The American Economic Review 75, 870- 875.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villas-Boas, M. and R. Winer. (1999). ''Endogeneity in Brand Choice Models'', Management Science 45(10), 1324-1338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villas-Boas, M. and Y. Zhao. (2001). The Ketchup Marketplace: Retailer, Manufacturers, and Individual Consumers. Working paper, UC Berkeley.

  • Zhao, Y. (2000). Price Dispersion in the Grocery Market. Working paper, University of Hong Kong.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pradeep K. Chintagunta.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chintagunta, P.K., Dubé, JP. & Singh, V. Balancing Profitability and Customer Welfare in a Supermarket Chain. Quantitative Marketing and Economics 1, 111–147 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023534028314

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023534028314

Navigation