IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/isochp/978-1-4899-7562-1_13.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Manufacturer-to-Retailer Versus Manufacturer-to-Consumer Rebates in a Supply Chain

In: Retail Supply Chain Management

Author

Listed:
  • Goker Aydin

    (Indiana University)

  • Evan L. Porteus

    (Stanford University)

Abstract

Starting with a newsvendor model (single-product, single-period, stochastic demand), we build a single-retailer, single-manufacturer supply chain with endogenous manufacturer rebates and retail pricing. The demand uncertainty is multiplicative, and the expected demand depends on the effective (retail) price of the product. A retailer rebate goes from the manufacturer to the retailer for each unit it sells. A consumer rebate goes from the manufacturer to the consumers for each unit they buy. Each consumer’s response to consumer rebates is characterized by two exogenous parameters: α, the effective fraction of the consumer rebate that the consumer values, leading to the lower effective retail price perceived by the consumer, and β, the probability that a consumer rebate will be redeemed. The type(s) of rebate(s) allowed and the unit wholesale price are given exogenously. Simultaneously, the manufacturer sets the size of the rebate(s) and the retailer sets the retail price. The retailer then decides how many units of the product to stock and the manufacturer delivers that amount by the beginning of the selling season. Compared to no rebates, an equilibrium retailer rebate leads to a lower effective price (hence, higher sales volume) and higher profits for both the supply chain and the retailer. An equilibrium consumer rebate also leads to a lower effective price and higher profits for the retailer, but not necessarily for the chain. Under our assumptions, such a consumer rebate (with or without a retailer rebate) allocates a fixed fraction of the (expected) supply chain profits to each player: The retailer gets α ∕ ( α + β ) $$ \alpha / \left(\alpha +\beta \right) $$ and the manufacturer gets the rest, leading to interesting consequences. However, both firms prefer that α be higher and β lower: Even though the manufacturer gets a smaller share of the chain profits, the total amount received is higher. Neither the retailer nor the manufacturer always prefers one particular kind of rebate to the other. In addition, contrary to popular belief, it is possible for both firms to prefer consumer rebates even when all such rebates are redeemed.

Suggested Citation

  • Goker Aydin & Evan L. Porteus, 2015. "Manufacturer-to-Retailer Versus Manufacturer-to-Consumer Rebates in a Supply Chain," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Narendra Agrawal & Stephen A. Smith (ed.), Retail Supply Chain Management, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 349-386, Springer.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:isochp:978-1-4899-7562-1_13
    DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4899-7562-1_13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ata Allah Taleizadeh & Alireza Mahmoudzade Varzi & Alireza Amjadian & Mahsa Noori-daryan & Ioannis Konstantaras, 2023. "How cash-back strategy affect sale rate under refund and customers’ credit," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 1-69, March.
    2. Cheng, Xianghui & Deng, Shiming & Jiang, Xuan & Li, Yanhai, 2023. "Optimal promotion strategies of online marketplaces," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(3), pages 1264-1278.

    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:spr:isochp:978-1-4899-7562-1_13. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.