奢侈品的折衷定价

IF 5.2 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Product and Brand Management Pub Date : 2021-10-13 DOI:10.1108/jpbm-10-2020-3157
B. Parguel, Annalisa Fraccaro, S. Macé
{"title":"奢侈品的折衷定价","authors":"B. Parguel, Annalisa Fraccaro, S. Macé","doi":"10.1108/jpbm-10-2020-3157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nGoing beyond odd and even prices, this paper aims to explore the rationale behind the widespread practice of setting prices ending in “50” or “80” in the luxury industry. The authors argue that when they set such prices, managers agree to reduce their profit margin to limit the anticipated guilt luxury consumers associate with luxury shopping while also protecting their brand luxury. The authors label these prices compromise prices and formally define compromise pricing as the practice of choosing a price’s ending so that the price falls below (but not just below) a round number to boost sales without damaging brand luxury.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nFollowing the observation of the overrepresentation of prices ending in “50” and “80” in the luxury clothing category, an experiment explores the impact of compromise prices on anticipated guilt and brand luxury in the luxury watch category. Then, to identify when luxury pricing managers typically favor compromise prices, multinomial regressions investigate prices collected on two online luxury fashion retailers for the luxury clothing and handbag categories.\n\n\nFindings\nCompromise prices reduce the anticipated guilt luxury consumers associate with luxury shopping compared with even prices while enhancing brand luxury compared with odd prices and interestingly, with even prices also. This finding gives rationale to luxury managers’ preference for compromise prices in the ninth hundred (i.e. €X950, €X980), especially for higher-priced products, i.e. when the potential for price underestimation and/or the risk of damaging brand luxury are more important.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis research contributes to the field of luxury pricing by providing evidence to an original price-ending practice, coined compromise pricing, which consists in agreeing to a slight reduction in prices and unit margin to protect brand luxury.\n","PeriodicalId":48172,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Product and Brand Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Compromise pricing in luxury\",\"authors\":\"B. Parguel, Annalisa Fraccaro, S. Macé\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jpbm-10-2020-3157\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nGoing beyond odd and even prices, this paper aims to explore the rationale behind the widespread practice of setting prices ending in “50” or “80” in the luxury industry. The authors argue that when they set such prices, managers agree to reduce their profit margin to limit the anticipated guilt luxury consumers associate with luxury shopping while also protecting their brand luxury. The authors label these prices compromise prices and formally define compromise pricing as the practice of choosing a price’s ending so that the price falls below (but not just below) a round number to boost sales without damaging brand luxury.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nFollowing the observation of the overrepresentation of prices ending in “50” and “80” in the luxury clothing category, an experiment explores the impact of compromise prices on anticipated guilt and brand luxury in the luxury watch category. Then, to identify when luxury pricing managers typically favor compromise prices, multinomial regressions investigate prices collected on two online luxury fashion retailers for the luxury clothing and handbag categories.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nCompromise prices reduce the anticipated guilt luxury consumers associate with luxury shopping compared with even prices while enhancing brand luxury compared with odd prices and interestingly, with even prices also. This finding gives rationale to luxury managers’ preference for compromise prices in the ninth hundred (i.e. €X950, €X980), especially for higher-priced products, i.e. when the potential for price underestimation and/or the risk of damaging brand luxury are more important.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThis research contributes to the field of luxury pricing by providing evidence to an original price-ending practice, coined compromise pricing, which consists in agreeing to a slight reduction in prices and unit margin to protect brand luxury.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":48172,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Product and Brand Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Product and Brand Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpbm-10-2020-3157\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Product and Brand Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpbm-10-2020-3157","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的超越单双价,本文旨在探讨奢侈品行业普遍设置以“50”或“80”结尾的价格背后的基本原理。作者认为,当他们设定这样的价格时,管理者同意降低他们的利润率,以限制奢侈品消费者对奢侈品购物的预期内疚,同时也保护他们的品牌奢侈品。作者将这些价格标记为妥协价格,并将妥协定价正式定义为选择价格的结尾,使价格低于(但不仅仅低于)整数,以在不损害品牌奢侈品的情况下促进销售。设计/方法/方法在观察到奢侈品服装类别中以“50”和“80”结尾的价格的过度代表之后,一项实验探讨了奢侈品手表类别中妥协价格对预期内疚和品牌奢侈的影响。然后,为了确定奢侈品定价经理通常倾向于折中价格,我们对两家在线奢侈品时尚零售商收集的奢侈品服装和手袋类别的价格进行了多项回归调查。研究结果:与偶数价格相比,折中价格降低了奢侈品消费者对奢侈品购物的预期内疚感,而与奇数价格相比,折中价格增强了品牌的奢侈感,有趣的是,偶数价格也增强了品牌的奢侈感。这一发现为奢侈品经理倾向于在900欧元(即X950欧元,X980欧元)的价格妥协提供了理由,特别是对于价格较高的产品,即价格低估的可能性和/或损害品牌奢侈品的风险更为重要。原创性/价值本研究为奢侈品定价领域提供了证据,证明了一种原始的价格终止做法,即妥协定价,即同意小幅降低价格和单位利润,以保护品牌奢侈品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Compromise pricing in luxury
Purpose Going beyond odd and even prices, this paper aims to explore the rationale behind the widespread practice of setting prices ending in “50” or “80” in the luxury industry. The authors argue that when they set such prices, managers agree to reduce their profit margin to limit the anticipated guilt luxury consumers associate with luxury shopping while also protecting their brand luxury. The authors label these prices compromise prices and formally define compromise pricing as the practice of choosing a price’s ending so that the price falls below (but not just below) a round number to boost sales without damaging brand luxury. Design/methodology/approach Following the observation of the overrepresentation of prices ending in “50” and “80” in the luxury clothing category, an experiment explores the impact of compromise prices on anticipated guilt and brand luxury in the luxury watch category. Then, to identify when luxury pricing managers typically favor compromise prices, multinomial regressions investigate prices collected on two online luxury fashion retailers for the luxury clothing and handbag categories. Findings Compromise prices reduce the anticipated guilt luxury consumers associate with luxury shopping compared with even prices while enhancing brand luxury compared with odd prices and interestingly, with even prices also. This finding gives rationale to luxury managers’ preference for compromise prices in the ninth hundred (i.e. €X950, €X980), especially for higher-priced products, i.e. when the potential for price underestimation and/or the risk of damaging brand luxury are more important. Originality/value This research contributes to the field of luxury pricing by providing evidence to an original price-ending practice, coined compromise pricing, which consists in agreeing to a slight reduction in prices and unit margin to protect brand luxury.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
19.60%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: Branding has evolved and organizations are facing a lot of new challenges when managing their brand reputations, an activity that has become strategic and interdisciplinary. The Journal of Product and Brand Management (JPBM) advances the theoretical and managerial knowledge of products and brands. Manuscripts may either report results based on rigorously analysed qualitative/quantitative data or be purely conceptual. All manuscripts must offer significant research findings and insights and offer meaningful implications for the real world. This journal is proudly international and inter-disciplinary. We publish manuscripts which compare international markets and encourage submissions approaching branding and product management from any discipline. We focus on all aspects of branding and product management from development to dilution. This includes areas as broad as person, place or political brands.
期刊最新文献
Understanding copycat packaging: a systematic review and research directions Brand purpose: a literature review and BEING implementation framework Make it unique! Why embossed product labels increase purchase intentions and willingness to pay The effect of virtual anchor appearance on purchase intention: a perceived warmth and competence perspective Sustainable food packaging: engagement through the public discourse on social networks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1