Comment on "Pharmaceutical Price Discrimination and Social Welfare" (by Frank R. Lichtenberg)

2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard L Schmalensee
2010 ◽  
Vol 100 (4) ◽  
pp. 1601-1615 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iñaki Aguirre ◽  
Simon Cowan ◽  
John Vickers

This paper presents a general analysis of the effects of monopolistic third-degree price discrimination on welfare and output when all markets are served. Sufficient conditions—involving straightforward comparisons of the curvatures of the direct and inverse demand functions in the different markets—are presented for discrimination to have negative or positive effects on social welfare and output. (JEL D42)


2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 1213-1238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iñaki Aguirre

Abstract This paper studies the welfare effects of third-degree price discrimination when competitive pressure varies across markets. In particular, we study the economic aspects of the Robinson–Patman Act associated with the “meeting competition defense.” Using equilibrium models, the main result we find is that this defense might be used successfully in cases of primary line injury precisely when it should not be used, namely when price discrimination reduces social welfare. This result obtains both when discrimination appears in the final good market and when it is used in the intermediate goods market. We also find that these results may maintain under secondary line injury.


2020 ◽  
Vol 66 (9) ◽  
pp. 4003-4023 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhijun Chen ◽  
Chongwoo Choe ◽  
Noriaki Matsushima

We study a model where each competing firm has a target segment where it has full consumer information and can exercise personalized pricing, and consumers may engage in identity management to bypass the firm’s attempt to price discriminate. In the absence of identity management, more consumer information intensifies competition because firms can effectively defend their turf through targeted personalized offers, thereby setting low public prices offered to nontargeted consumers. But the effect is mitigated when consumers are active in identity management because it raises the firm’s cost of serving nontargeted consumers. When firms have sufficiently large and nonoverlapping target segments, identity management can enable firms to extract full surplus from their targeted consumers through perfect price discrimination. Identity management can also induce firms not to serve consumers who are not targeted by either firm when the commonly nontargeted market segment is small. This results in a deadweight loss. Thus, identity management by consumers can benefit firms and lead to lower consumer surplus and lower social welfare. Our main insight continues to be valid when a fraction of consumers are active in identity management or when there is a cost of identity management. We also discuss the regulatory implications for the use of consumer information by firms as well as the implications for management. This paper was accepted by Juanjuan Zhang, marketing.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document