WHY DO FIRMS CONTRIVE SHORTAGES? THE ECONOMICS OF INTENTIONAL MISPRICING
- 1 October 1994
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Economic Inquiry
- Vol. 32 (4) , 562-581
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1994.tb01351.x
Abstract
Given buyers' product‐specific information capital, firms may increase long‐run profits by “under‐pricing” (rationing) rather than clearing markets when demands or costs rise transitorily. To minimize resulting shortages' costs, sellers predictably would distinguish among customer groups, managing any queues of disappointed loyal buyers that materialized (but largely ignoring transitory buyer queues), and would discourage resale. Unlike other shortage models, short‐run excess demand necessarily implies neither buyers who prefer consuming in groups, nor waiting costs that are negligible. Any sense of “unfair” price increases would arise endogenously from sellers'failures to value appropriately customers' otherwise prudent informational investments.Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Note on Restaurant Pricing and Other Examples of Social Influences on PriceJournal of Political Economy, 1991
- The Theory of Allocation and Its Implications for Marketing and Industrial Structure: Why Rationing Is EfficientThe Journal of Law and Economics, 1991
- Why are Prices Sticky? Preliminary Results from an Interview StudyPublished by National Bureau of Economic Research ,1991
- Monopoly, quality uncertainty and ‘status’ goodsInternational Journal of Industrial Organization, 1987
- On Monopoly PriceKyklos, 1983
- WHY ARE BETTER SEATS “UNDERPRICED”?Economic Inquiry, 1977
- Advertising and Rate of ReturnThe Journal of Law and Economics, 1975
- The Evolution of Property Rights: A Study of the American WestThe Journal of Law and Economics, 1975
- A Theory of Rationing by WaitingThe Journal of Law and Economics, 1974
- INFORMATION COSTS, PRICING, AND RESOURCE UNEMPLOYMENTEconomic Inquiry, 1969