Multi-channel price differentiation: An empirical investigation of existence and causes

University of Frankfurt, Frankfurt Main, Germany; University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
International Journal of Research in Marketing 01/2010; DOI: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2010.01.004

ABSTRACT Price differentiation has long been recognized as a strategy that companies can use to increase profits when consumers' tastes and valuations of a good differ. Operating multiple distribution channels (e.g., offline and online stores) that have varying degrees of functionality and are differently valued by consumers gives companies an opportunity to apply differential prices in these different contexts. Nevertheless, existing empirical studies suggest that multi-channel retailers charge uniform prices through their different distribution channels to preserve channel consistency and avoid consumer irritation. In this paper, we study channel-based price differentiation and empirically determine the extent of its occurrence among multi-channel retailers. Additionally, we analyze factors that influence a company's decision to engage in channel-based price differentiation. The results show that multi-channel retailers recognize the opportunity to increase their profits and increasingly engage in channel-based price differentiation; this finding contradicts existing empirical studies on price dispersion. Consistent with microeconomic theory, it seems that price differentiation mostly occurs among big companies with market power that can separate markets.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Size and proportions of the postcranial skeleton differ markedly between Australopithecus afarensis and Homo ergaster, and between the latter and modern Homo sapiens. This study uses computer simulations of gait in models derived from the best-known skeletons of these species (AL 288-1, Australopithecus afarensis, 3.18 million year ago) and KNM-WT 15000 (Homo ergaster, 1.5-1.8 million year ago) compared to models of adult human males and females, to estimate the required muscle power during bipedal walking, and to compare this with those in modern humans. Skeletal measurements were carried out on a cast of KNM-WT 15000, but for AL 288-1 were taken from the literature. Muscle attachments were applied to the models based on their position relative to the bone in modern humans. Joint motions and moments from experiments on human walking were input into the models to calculate muscle stress and power. The models were tested in erect walking and 'bent-hip bent-knee' gait. Calculated muscle forces were verified against EMG activity phases from experimental data, with reference to reasonable activation/force delays. Calculated muscle powers are reasonably comparable to experimentally derived metabolic values from the literature, given likely values for muscle efficiency. The results show that: 1) if evaluated by the power expenditure per unit of mass (W/kg) in walking, AL 288-1 and KNM-WT 15000 would need similar power to modern humans; however, 2) with distance-specific parameters as the criteria, AL 288-1 would require to expend relatively more muscle power (W/kg.m(-1)) in comparison to modern humans. The results imply that in the evolution of bipedalism, body proportions, for example those of KNM-WT 15000, may have evolved to obtain an effective application of muscle power to bipedal walking over a long distance, or at high speed.
    Journal of Human Evolution 01/2005; 47(6):453-78. · 4.09 Impact Factor


Available from