零售商差异条件下的渠道价格决策研究

随着零售商力量的增长,零售商对渠道价格决策的影响力在逐渐增强.本文研究了零售商差异条件下单个制造商和两个零售商构成的渠道的价格决策问题,将零售商的差异提炼为零售商品牌和零售成本差异,并考虑了需求函数和渠道权利结构对渠道价格决策产生的影响.研究表明:无论制造商和零售商哪一方在渠道中处于领导地位,都会导致零售价格水平的提高,在渠道中处于领导地位的一方能从渠道中获得更多的利益;零售商品牌差异程度增大,会导致零售价格的上升和零售商利润上升,而制造商利润会下降;随着零售成本差异的增大,制造商利润上升,成本优势零售商的利润上升,而成本劣势零售商的利润会下降,除了制造商斯塔克尔伯格权利结构下的成本劣势零售商的零售价格会上升之外,其他任何权利结构下的零售价格都会下降.     

零售商信息禀赋优势下制造商电商直销渠道决策

在供应链中由于零售商相比制造商掌握更多消费者信息,能够对市场需求进行预测,因此制造商在建立直销渠道决策时往往面临着市场需求信息的不对称。本文考虑一个由单个制造商和单个零售商组成的供应链,其中零售商向制造商订购产品并销售给终端市场,制造商可能建立直销渠道将产品直接销售给消费者。通过构建制造商无入侵、对称信息下和不对称信息下制造商入侵三种情形下的博弈模型,本文分析了制造商建立直销渠道决策和零售商的订货决策。研究发现,尽管零售商具有信息禀赋优势,制造商建立直销渠道总是能够获得更多的利润,并且在信息不对称情况下制造商建立直销渠道获得的利润大于在信息对称情况下获得的利润。而零售商与之相反,在制造商掌握市场预测信息的情况下零售商的收益更高,供应链总收益在对称信息的情况下最高。进一步考虑制造商按照自身信息禀赋进行备货量决策的情况,可以得到按照自身信息禀赋与零售商同时决策时制造商建立直销渠道的利润大于信息对称和信息不对称两种情况下的利润。     

零售商导入自有品牌对渠道竞争的影响研究

为了增强谈判力量和提升自身的独特竞争优势,零售商开始提供自有品牌,而自有品牌的引入强化渠道成员间的竞争。本文将针对两个对称性制造商和单个零售商的渠道结构,探讨自有品牌导入对渠道竞争决策产生的影响。研究结果表明:在任何渠道权力结构下,自有品牌的导入会降低制造商品牌的利润;在制造商领导权和垂直纳什结构下,被模仿制造商品牌的利润下降更显著;而在零售商领导权结构下,未被模仿制造商品牌的利润下降更显著;在未导入自有品牌情况下,制造商处于领导权地位能提升零售商利润水平;而零售商导入自有品牌时,其结果则相反,制造商处于领导权地位会降低零售商的利润水平;在零售商领导权和垂直纳什结构下,导入自有品牌都能增加零售商利润;而在制造商领导权结构下,仅当制造商之间竞争程度较弱时,导入自有品牌能提高零售商利润。     

考虑消费者退货的制造商入侵策略研究

在考虑消费者退货的情形下，通过构建包括一个制造商、一个零售商和消费者的二级供应链模型，研究了订货量决策以及制造商开通直销渠道的问题。分析提供退款保证和决策顺序对均衡结果以及制造商开通直销渠道的影响。研究发现：在单一渠道供应链中，提供退款保证提高销量，制造商和零售商利润以及消费者剩余；在不提供退款保证情形下，制造商利润和零售商利润都随零售满意度递增；在提供退款保证情形下，制造商利润和零售商利润都随零售满意度先递减后递增；当直销渠道的成本较高时，制造商将不开通直销渠道；提供退款保证有利于制造商开通直销渠道。在双渠道供应链中：在顺序决策情形下，直销量随零售满意度递增，然而在同时决策情形下，直销量却随零售满意度递减；提供退款保证虽然降低零售商利润但能够提高消费者剩余，零售商利润随直销成本递增，在提供退款保证情形下，制造商利润和总利润随直销成本先递减后递增；当零售满意度较高，且直销成本也较高时，提供退款保证使制造商和零售商“双输”，当零售满意度较高，但直销成本较低时，提供退款保证使制造商和零售商达到(win-lose)。     

制造商引入在线渠道的双渠道价格与服务竞争策略

为了削弱传统零售商在渠道博弈中的强势地位,制造商尝试引入直接在线渠道与传统零售商竞争。针对零售商价格领导权的渠道结构,本文在分析双渠道竞争时考虑了服务在战略决策中的价值,并将消费者区分为高服务偏好的消费者和低服务偏好的消费者。研究表明,仅当产品在线适合度足够高时,在零售商占主导权的渠道中,制造商引入在线渠道的战略效果才能实现,能导致制造商利润的增加,产品在线的适合度越高,利润提高越显著。当产品在线适合度足够高时,制造商引入在线渠道能够激励零售商提高服务质量,而且产品在线的适合度越高,服务质量提高越明显;在线渠道的引入能达到制造商和零售商双赢的效果;制造商利润和零售商利润都会随着高服务偏好消费者比例和服务的边际效用的提高而增加。     

基于政府不同补贴形式下的绿色产品制造商渠道选择策略分析

为促进可持续供应链的发展,政府通常会根据企业的绿色研发成本尝试采用不同的补贴形式,制造商也会根据政府的补贴形式设计不同的渠道结构来销售产品。本文构建了一个由政府为领导者,制造商和零售商为跟随者组成的供应链博弈模型。根据制造商绿色生产技术,政府提供其研发成本补贴或单位生产补贴,研究了制造商采取不同销售渠道结构下的政府补贴、制造商产品绿色度水平和直销渠道价格,及各个成员的利润或绩效。研究结果表明：政府补贴形式与制造商的绿色技术投入及渠道结构选择之间存在密切关联性。从制造商角度看,当政府向制造商提供研发成本补贴时,若制造商降低其绿色研发成本,则制造商采用双渠道结构模式能减少政府支出,并且是对制造商、零售商和政府都更优的策略。而当政府向制造商提供单位生产补贴时,制造商则需综合考虑消费者环保意识、价格弹性和绿色技术开发成本率等因素选择不同的渠道结构。此外,从政府绩效角度看,当绿色技术开发成本或环境改善的边际收益较低时,采用单位生产补贴将更利于政府和环保产品生产的政策,同时更有利于制造商和零售商的利益;否则,政府应采用研发成本补贴策略。     

考虑商誉的双渠道供应链动态定价与联合减排策略

考虑由一个制造商和一个零售商组成的双渠道供应链，将产品商誉和减排量作为状态变量构建微分博弈模型。文章首先讨论了不同渠道结构下供应链成员的最优均衡策略，随后探讨了广告合作-减排成本分担契约对供应链协调性的影响，最后通过算例对模型进行了分析。研究发现，产品商誉轨迹随时间变化呈现多变性，而减排量轨迹则具有单调性。与单渠道相比，双渠道下零售商的广告努力和利润下降，而制造商的减排努力和利润增大，只有当传统渠道市场占有率较高且制造商竞争较小时，制造商单渠道的利润才高于双渠道，此时制造商将不会开设网络渠道。广告合作-减排成本分担契约可以实现制造商、零售商和整个供应链系统利润的帕累托改善，且消费者低碳偏好和品牌偏好越高，制造商和零售商越有动力达成合作。     

强势零售商的灰色市场渠道结构选择策略

基于零售商灰色市场投机的背景，构建了由一个强势零售商和制造商组成的供应链系统，研究了零售商的渠道选择问题。根据零售商在不同市场进行灰色市场投机，考虑了三种渠道结构：首先，求解得出三种渠道结构下参与者的均衡策略，总结了灰色市场贸易的行业特征，并给出灰色市场存在的条件；其次，比较各渠道结构下零售商的利润，得出零售商的最优渠道结构选择策略。研究结果表明：服务成本较大、客户忠诚度越高和消费者对服务不太关注的领域，越容易发展灰色市场。当服务成本很大时，跨国灰色市场渠道结构为最优；当服务成本适中时，零售商应选择本地灰色市场渠道结构；当服务成本较小时，双渠道灰色市场结构为最佳选择。     

基于微分对策的再制造闭环供应链回收渠道选择策略

动态环境下,研究了再制造闭环供应链的两种回收渠道。通过将产品回收率建立为回收努力投入的微分方程,分别建立了制造商负责回收和零售商负责回收的动态闭环供应链模型,利用微分对策理论求解得到不同回收渠道下的最优控制策略。对两种回收渠道比较分析发现:(1)制造商负责回收下,制造商对产品回收的投入更多,产品回收率高于零售商负责回收下的产品回收率;(2)制造商负责回收下产品的市场价格更低,市场需求更高;(3)零售商在制造商负责回收下的利润更高,制造商回收是零售商的最优渠道;(4)综合考虑经济因素和非经济因素时,制造商回收同样是制造商的最优渠道。     

异质品双渠道供应链下制造商的渠道决策研究

研究由两个制造商、两个零售商以及消费者组成的双渠道供应链,制造商的最优产品分销渠道策略问题,通过构建Stackelberg主从动态博弈模型,分析制造商在不同渠道选择下的产品质量水平及定价决策,消费者三种不同渠道偏好下渠道竞争和品牌竞争激烈程度对制造商渠道选择均衡结果及帕累托最优选择的影响,以及对产品质量水平、产品价格、制造商及零售商利润的影响.研究表明：品牌和渠道双重竞争下,两种竞争之间存在相互作用的关系,并共同影响制造商最终渠道选择,制造商通过权衡价格决策的后动优势与消费者渠道偏好对其利润的贡献选择是否开辟双渠道,产品价格与产品质量水平正相关,与产品的替代率负相关,产品质量水平对渠道价格的影响程度等于消费者对该渠道的偏好程度.当消费者偏好某一渠道时,制造商可在该渠道上的产品采取优质高价策略,但渠道上产品性价比降低,当品牌竞争越激烈,产品价格越低,对制造商和零售商的利润挤压越严重.     

Why Competition from a Multi‐Channel E‐Tailer Does Not Always Benefit Consumers*

Empirical studies have delivered mixed conclusions on whether the widely acclaimed assertions of lower electronic retail (e‐tail) prices are true and to what extent these prices impact conventional retail prices, profits, and consumer welfare. For goods that require little in‐person pre‐ or postsales support such as CDs, DVDs, and books, we extend Balasubramanian's e‐tailer‐in‐the‐center, spatial, circular market model to examine the impact of a multichannel e‐tailer's presence on retailers' decisions to relocate, on retail prices and profits, and consumer welfare. We demonstrate several counter‐intuitive results. For example, when the disutility of buying online and shipping costs are relatively low, retailers are better off by not relocating in response to an e‐tailer's entry into the retail channel. In addition, such an entry—a multichannel strategy—may lead to increased retail prices and increased profits across the industry. Finally, consumers can be better off with less channel competition. The underlying message is that inferences regarding prices, profits, and consumer welfare critically depend on specifications of the good, disutility and shipping costs versus transportation costs (or more generally, positioning), and competition.     

渠道结构对第三方负责回收闭环供应链的影响

研究了四种渠道结构对第三方负责回收闭环供应链的影响。分别建立了四种再制造闭环供应链模型,给出了这些模型的最优零售价格、批发价格、回收比例以及各方的最优利润,并对这四种模型进行了比较分析。研究发现回收方制定回收策略时需考虑回收品价格和回收努力成本的大小,闭环供应链中任意两方的战略联盟有利于另外一方利润的增加,而且,闭环供应链中的任意两方都有战略联盟的动机。     

关税与成本变动下零售商主导的跨境双渠道供应链定价决策

构建了零售商为Stackelberg领导者的跨境供应链博弈模型,通过引入关税、国际运输成本等因素并分析关税变动对跨国供应链产品定价和各成员利润的影响。结果表明：随着产品关税的增加,国内制造商产品A批发价格会增加、产品A直销价格和境外制造商产品B批发价格会减少,而关税变动对零售商定价决策的影响与消费者价格敏感系数有关;本国加征关税会使得国内制造商利润增加、境外制造商利润减少,而关税增加对零售商利润影响与消费者价格敏感系数有关：只有当消费者价格敏感系数较大时,本国关税上调才会使得国内零售商利润增加;随着境外产品B国际运输成本的增加,产品A、B批发价格会减少,而产品A、B零售价格都会增加,供应链中各成员利润都会减少。     

回收模式相异的零售商主导型闭环供应链竞争模型研究

随着经济全球化的推进，同行业竞争已逐渐由企业间的竞争转化为供应链间的竞争。在此背景下，本文围绕MR、MT和RT三种相异的回收模式组合，构建了两条零售商主导型闭环供应链的竞争博弈模型，运用逆向归纳法得到三种回收模式组合下各条链的均衡价格、回收率、渠道成员利润、单条链利润与双链总利润，然后结合链间竞争强度将不同回收模式组合的结果进行比较，研究表明：（1）在三种回收模式组合下，链间竞争强度的增加将使批发价、零售价与回收率均提高，市场需求量增大，各渠道成员的收益均得到改善，但却损害了消费者利益；（2）MR与MT组合下四条链的产品售价、单链回收率、制造商利润、零售商利润与单链总利润排序均与链间竞争强度无关，而RT组合两条链的变量均衡解、利润与MR、MT组合的数量关系与链间竞争强度密切相关；（3）对于两条竞争性闭环供应链的任一条链，若其竞争链是制造商回收链（零售商回收链），则在选择相异回收模式时，从整条链利润视角其应形成零售商回收链（制造商回收链）；若其竞争链是第三方回收链，当双链竞争不是极为剧烈时，其应形成制造商回收链，否则应形成零售商回收链；（4）当链间竞争较平稳时，MR组合的双链总利润优于MT组合和RT组合；随着双链竞争强度的增加，RT组合的双链总利润将依次超过MT组合与MR组合；当链间竞争特别激烈时，MR组合甚至低于MT组合。故链间竞争强度的增加对RT组合两条链具有最显著的积极影响，而对MR组合的影响则较为有限。本文研究不仅拓展了闭环供应链竞争理论，而且能够为现实中处于链与链竞争环境下的企业选择合理的回收模式提供理论支持。     

SALES AND COLLUSION IN A MARKET WITH STORAGE

Sales are a widespread and well‐known phenomenon documented in several product markets. This paper presents a novel rationale for sales that does not rely on consumer heterogeneity, or on any form of randomness to explain such periodic price fluctuations. The analysis is carried out in the context of a simple repeated price competition model, and establishes that firms must periodically reduce prices in order to sustain collusion when goods are storable and the market is large. The largest equilibrium profits are characterized at any market size. A trade‐off between the size of the industry and its profits arises. Sales foster collusion, by magnifying the inter‐temporal links in consumers' decisions.     

A Brief Review and Assessment of the Leegin Decision: Who Wins and Who Loses When Manufacturers Are Free to Set Retail Prices?

For decades, it has been a per se violation of U.S. antitrust law for manufacturers or distributors to specify retail selling prices. In the spirit of atomistic, unrestrained competition, retailers were free to set prices without undue interference from upstream channel participants. Attempts by manufacturers or other channel participants to restrict retail price setting initiatives were viewed by regulators as an unwarranted and illegal interference with the market mechanism. Restrictions on price setting initiatives would, it was argued, lessen competition and ultimately raise prices above competitive levels to the detriment of consumers. Recently, under the leadership of newly appointed Chief Justice Roberts, a more “business friendly” Supreme Court has reversed this policy; vertical price fixing is no longer a per se violation of U.S. antitrust law. By a five‐to‐four margin, the Court held in Leegin Creative Leather Products that manufacturers could, under certain circumstances, establish binding retail selling prices. Henceforth, retail price setting restrictions will be subject to a rule of reason evaluation whereby price restrictions will be assessed on a case‐by‐case basis. Proponents of the now‐legal restrictions argue that this will ensure that merchandise sold through retail outlets will receive needed support, free riding will be reduced or eliminated, and new brand introduction will be facilitated. Critics argue that the Court's decision marks a return to the days of fair trading; marginal firms will be protected, so‐called “inframarginal consumers” will be forced to pay for services they do not want or need, and prices for many branded products will rise, all to the detriment of consumer welfare.     

政府补贴下制造/再制造竞争机理研究

以政府“以旧换再”补贴政策为背景,建立了原始制造商、再制造商与零售商两阶段博弈模型.基于此博弈模型,考虑政府不采取补贴政策、政府补贴给再制造商及政府通过零售商补贴购买再制造产品消费者3种情况,对比分析了政府不同补贴策略对两种产品单位批发价格、零售价格、销售量、利润、消费者剩余及环境的影响.结果表明:当再制造产品的需求不受废旧产品回收量限制,政府补贴可以降低两种产品单位零售价格,增加再制造商和零售商的利润,提高消费者的剩余;当再制造产品的需求受到废旧产品回收量限制时,政府补贴可以增加两种产品的单位批发价格和两种产品制造商的利润,但是会降低零售商的销售利润.     

顾客忠诚对差异化竞争制造商市场入侵的影响研究

本文针对一个在位制造商和一个入侵制造商组成的供应链,结合两个竞争性制造商各自生产和销售一种存在差异化的替代产品,以及存在的顾客忠诚行为,建立了不存在差异化竞争制造商和竞争环境下的博弈模型,并得到唯一均衡解。研究结果表明,两个竞争性制造商均存在四种不同的定价策略;在满足一定条件下,在位制造商通过策略性定价有可能阻止差异化竞争制造商入侵市场;市场入侵并不一定会影响在位制造商的最优定价策略,但当差异化竞争制造商成功进入市场时,市场竞争会促使在位制造商实施低价策略,并导致位在制造商利润损失。     

Optimal Retail Return Policies with Wardrobing

Many retailers offer refunds to consumers who, after a trial period, return a product that they find does not fit their needs. Some consumers are willing to use this return option opportunistically for short‐term consumption rather than its intended purpose of resolving fit uncertainty. Such behavior has been termed “wardrobing.” Restocking fees (partial refunds) can be used to combat wardrobing. However, there is a trade‐off involved, since partial refunds will be viewed negatively by consumers who return an item due to a true lack of fit. In this study, we consider how the extent of wardrobing (how many consumers consider such behavior) and the benefit of wardrobing (how much value can be extracted during the trial) impact firm pricing decisions and profits in this retail context. Our results imply that an increase in the extent of wardrobing is most detrimental to profits when the current extent of wardrobing is low. On the contrary, if the extent of wardrobing is already very high, and the benefit of wardrobing to consumers is also high, the retailer can set prices and refunds such that additional wardrobing actually increases firm profits. In a model extension, we show how a retailer can effectively screen wardrobers from ordinary consumers by offering a menu of price/refund pairs, and that such an approach can lead to increased profits if the extent of wardrobing is sufficiently high. Overall, our findings provide new insights into how retailers can set prices and refund policies to effectively manage opportunistic behavior by consumers.     

Product Positioning and Pricing Under Production Cost Considerations*

A framework in a competitive environment is proposed that incorporates production cost and economies of scale in the problem of positioning a product for a market segment. The model facilitates the existence of a Nash equilibrium in prices and product positions. As such, firms can simultaneously choose prices and product positions for the segment. This result improves the traditional theory on equilibria points in prices and product positions where firms choose their product positions first and then set their prices. A sensitivity analysis demonstrates the effects of changes in the unit savings derived from economies of scale or the cost of furnishing a product with its attributes by one firm on the product positions, prices, and profits of all competing firms. More important, the paper examines the effect on prices and profits of competing firms when one of the firms repositions its product closer to the segment's ideal point. It is shown that under certain conditions, the profit of a firm may actually decrease as it redesigns its product closer to the segment's ideal point. These conditions assist management to identify the product design beyond which enhancements of the product would lead to lower profits because of increasing production costs. It is also shown that the price of this firm increases. Past research supports the idea that positioning a brand closer to the ideal point, given fixed product positions of competing firms, would lead to greater buyer preferences and eventually higher profits. The price and profits of the competing firm may increase or decrease. Conditions are derived under which a movement towards the segment's ideal point by one firm would lead to higher profits by the competing firm.