IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/mgtdec/v27y2006i8p631-641.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Increasing sales by introducing non-salable items

Author

Listed:
  • Kobi Kriesler

    (Department of Economics, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 52900, Israel)

  • Shmuel Nitzan

    (Department of Economics, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 52900, Israel)

Abstract

Rationality implies that adding 'irrelevant' and, in particular, inferior alternatives to the opportunity set cannot increase the choice probability of some other alternative. In this study, we propose a novel approach that can rationalize an intended addition of such alternatives because it strictly increases the choice probability of some existing alternative. The driving force behind the existence and extent of such an increase is the random nature of individual preferences, that implies intransitivity, and the random nature of the applied choice procedures. We study the case of a firm interested in increasing the sales of some of its existing products by introducing a new and inferior (non-salable) product. Our main results focus on the feasibility and potential advantage of a successful such strategy. We first establish necessary and sufficient conditions for an increase in the sale probability and then derive the maximal possible absolute and relative increase in this probability, when the firm has extremely limited information on the characteristics of the consumers. We then derive analogous results, assuming that the existing line of products consists of just two items and that the firm has accurate information on the consumers' stochastic preferences over the existing products. These later results are illustrated using some experimental evidence. The applicability of the approach is finally briefly discussed in the context of branding policy. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Kobi Kriesler & Shmuel Nitzan, 2006. "Increasing sales by introducing non-salable items," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(8), pages 631-641.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:27:y:2006:i:8:p:631-641
    DOI: 10.1002/mde.1295
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/mde.1295
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/mde.1295?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Osborne, Martin J & Rubinstein, Ariel, 1998. "Games with Procedurally Rational Players," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(4), pages 834-847, September.
    2. Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2003. "Multiproduct Quality Competition: Fighting Brands and Product Line Pruning," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 748-774, June.
    3. repec:bla:jindec:v:45:y:1997:i:3:p:305-28 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Amartya Sen, 1997. "Maximization and the Act of Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(4), pages 745-780, July.
    5. Shmuel Nitzan & Eyal Baharad, 2000. "Extended preferences and freedom of choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 17(4), pages 629-637.
    6. Marcel Canoy & Martin Peitz, 1997. "The Differentiation Triangle," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 305-328, September.
    7. Klemperer, Paul, 1992. "Equilibrium Product Lines: Competing Head-to-Head May Be Less Competitive," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(4), pages 740-755, September.
    8. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    9. Bandyopadhyay, Taradas & Dasgupta, Indraneel & Pattanaik, Prasanta K., 1999. "Stochastic Revealed Preference and the Theory of Demand," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 95-110, January.
    10. Raymond J. Deneckere & R. Preston McAfee, 1996. "Damaged Goods," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 149-174, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Diego Lanzi, 2010. "Embedded choices," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 263-280, March.
    2. Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2006. "Multiproduct Cournot oligopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 583-601, September.
    3. Kobi Kriesler & Shmuel Nitzan, 2008. "Is Context-Based Choice due to Context-Dependent Preferences?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 64(1), pages 65-80, February.
    4. Jehiel, Philippe, 2005. "Analogy-based expectation equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 81-104, August.
    5. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    6. Tyson, Christopher J., 2008. "Cognitive constraints, contraction consistency, and the satisficing criterion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 138(1), pages 51-70, January.
    7. Manez, J.A. & Waterson, M., 2001. "Multiproduct Firms and Product Differentiation: a Survey," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 594, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    8. Natalia Fabra & Juan-Pablo Montero, 2022. "Product Lines and Price Discrimination in Markets with Information Frictions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 981-1001, February.
    9. Eckel, Carsten & Iacovone, Leonardo & Javorcik, Beata & Neary, J. Peter, 2015. "Multi-product firms at home and away: Cost- versus quality-based competence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 216-232.
    10. Eric T. Anderson & James D. Dana, Jr., 2009. "When Is Price Discrimination Profitable?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(6), pages 980-989, June.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:4:p:517-533 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. J. C. R. Alcantud & Carlos Alós-Ferrer, 2002. "Choice-Nash Equilibria," Vienna Economics Papers vie0209, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    13. Ortoleva, Pietro, 2013. "The price of flexibility: Towards a theory of Thinking Aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 903-934.
    14. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    15. Coibion, Olivier & Einav, Liran & Hallak, Juan Carlos, 2007. "Equilibrium demand elasticities across quality segments," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 13-30, February.
    16. Mark Armstrong, 2016. "Nonlinear Pricing," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 583-614, October.
    17. Homsombat, Winai & Lei, Zheng & Fu, Xiaowen, 2014. "Competitive effects of the airlines-within-airlines strategy – Pricing and route entry patterns," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-16.
    18. Suzumura, Kotaro & Xu, Yongsheng, 2003. "Consequences, opportunities, and generalized consequentialism and non-consequentialism," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 293-304, August.
    19. Wisnicki, Bartlomiej, 2022. "Consumer inertia fosters product quality," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    20. Daniel A. DeCaro & Marci S. DeCaro & Jared M. Hotaling & Joseph G. Johnson, 2020. "Procedural and economic utilities in consequentialist choice: Trading freedom of choice to minimize financial losses," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(4), pages 517-533, July.
    21. Jordan Tong & Daniel Feiler, 2017. "A Behavioral Model of Forecasting: Naive Statistics on Mental Samples," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(11), pages 3609-3627, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:27:y:2006:i:8:p:631-641. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/7976 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.