Abstract
As the only marketing variable that directly generates revenue for the firm, marketers often “play around” with price in an attempt to maximize the firm’s revenue and/or profit. However, as one of the most regulated marketing variables, unwary use of certain pricing strategies can lead a marketer into legal troubles. This paper conducts a brief overview of legal issues related to pricing and draws the awareness of marketers to common pricing and promotion legal mine fields such as “naked” or tacit agreements to divided the field and ladies’ night price discount promotions. It also outlines other areas of intersection between marketing and law that could benefit from future research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Attorney General. 2006. “Leading Department Store Chain Agrees to Reform Advertising Practices and End Fake Sales,” Press Release, March 14.
Chapman, S. 2004. “Ladies’ Night and the “cancer of Discrimination,” Baltimore Sun, Editorial, June 8.
Elzinga, K. G. 1970. “Predator Pricing: The Case of the Gunpowder Trust,” Journal of Law and Economics, 13, 223-240.
Jones, C. 2004. “Many Scoff at N.J. Ruling Over Ladies’ Night” USA Today, June 4, 3A.
Koller II, R. H. 1971. “The Myth of Predatory Pricing,” Antitrust Law and Economics Review, 105, 105-123.
Koku, P. S. 2007. “Turf Wars or a misunderstanding of roles: an examination of the relationship between marketers and lawyers within the corporation,” Journal of Services Marketing, 21, 15-23.
McCarthy, M. 2005. “’No late fees’ ads cause a stir,” USA Today, p. 1.
McGee, J. S. 1958. “Predatory Price Cutting: The Standard Oil Case,” Journal of Law and Economics, 1, 137-169.
Monroe, K. B. 2003. Pricing: Making Profitable Decisions, McGraw-Hill, New York, New York.
The Consumerist. 2006. “Spitzer Settles False Advertising Suit Against Macy’s, March 15.
Rank, J. E. 2006. “Is Ladies’ Night Really Sex Discrimination?: Public Accommodation Laws, De Minimis Exceptions and Stigmatic Injury,” Seton Hall Law Review, 36
Stigler, G. 1987. The Theory of Price, Macmillan: New York., New York.
United States Congress. 1914. 15 U.S.C. §§ 41-58, The FTC Act
——. 1964. Title II, §202 of the 1964 Civil Rights Acts
——.15 U.S.C §§ 1601 truth in lending,
——.15 U.S.C. § 1637(c)-(g) credit and charge card disclosure
——.15 U.S.C. §§ 1667-1667 (f) consumer leasing and amended the truth in lending act.
Wickman, D. 2004. “Ladies’ Night” Ban in NJ sends the Wrong Message,” USA Today, June 8, 21A.
Williams, W. E. 2004. “Price Discrimination,” Reason, June 16.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Academy of Marketing Science
About this paper
Cite this paper
Koku, P.S. (2015). Which Laws Do Your Marketers Know? Some Legal Issues on Price Discrimination. In: Campbell, C. (eds) Marketing in Transition: Scarcity, Globalism, & Sustainability. Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18687-0_145
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18687-0_145
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-18686-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-18687-0
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)