IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tuf/tuftec/0419.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Price Discrimination and the Long Boom

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Richards

Abstract

This paper considers the possibility that an important role of computerization and information technology in strengthening the long boom of the 1990’s may have been to lower price-cost margins principally by facilitating price discrimination and “versioning, or that this may be a convenient way to model this contribution. Such practices intensify pric e competition and force firms to exploit scale economies more fully. Simulations of a simple model suggest that these effects account for two percentage points of extra gdp or between one third and nearly all of conventional estimates of the extra production by the end of the 1990’s.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Richards, 2004. "Price Discrimination and the Long Boom," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0419, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    • Handle: RePEc:tuf:tuftec:0419
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ase.tufts.edu/econ/papers/200419.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ioannides, Yannis M. & Seslen, Tracey N., 2002. "Neighborhood wealth distributions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 357-367, August.
    2. Anna Hardman & Yannis Ioannides, 2004. "Income Mixing and Housing in U.S. Cities: Evidence from Neighborhood Clusters of the American Housing Survey," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0420, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    3. Ellickson, Bryan, 1971. "Jurisdictional Fragmentation and Residential Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(2), pages 334-339, May.
    4. Quah, Danny T, 1996. "Twin Peaks: Growth and Convergence in Models of Distribution Dynamics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 1045-1055, July.
    5. Pancs, Romans & Vriend, Nicolaas J., 2007. "Schelling's spatial proximity model of segregation revisited," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(1-2), pages 1-24, February.
    6. Michael Kremer, 1997. "How Much does Sorting Increase Inequality?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(1), pages 115-139.
    7. Dennis Epple & Holger Sieg, 1999. "Estimating Equilibrium Models of Local Jurisdictions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(4), pages 645-681, August.
    8. Epple, Dennis & Platt, Glenn J., 1998. "Equilibrium and Local Redistribution in an Urban Economy when Households Differ in both Preferences and Incomes," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 23-51, January.
    9. Quah, Danny, 1996. "Twin peaks : growth and convergence in models of distribution dynamics," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 2278, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Yannis M. Ioannides & Jeffrey E. Zabel, 2003. "Neighbourhood effects and housing demand," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(5), pages 563-584.
    11. Schelling, Thomas C, 1969. "Models of Segregation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(2), pages 488-493, May.
    12. Christopher J. Mayer, 1996. "Does location matter?," New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, issue May, pages 26-40.
    13. Pancs, Romans & Vriend, Nicolaas J., 2007. "Schelling's spatial proximity model of segregation revisited," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(1-2), pages 1-24, February.
    14. Danny Quah, 1996. "Twin Peaks: Growth and Convergence in Models of Distribution Dynamics," CEP Discussion Papers dp0280, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    15. Rady, Sven & Ortalo-Magné, François, 2002. "Homeownership," Discussion Papers in Economics 28, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    16. Hoyt, William H. & Rosenthal, Stuart S., 1997. "Household Location and Tiebout: Do Families Sort According to Preferences for Locational Amenities?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 159-178, September.
    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. Ioannides, Yannis M., 2004. "Neighborhood income distributions," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 435-457, November.
    2. Ioannides, Yannis M., 2003. "Interactive property valuations," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 145-170, January.
    3. Ioannides, Yannis M., 2002. "Residential neighborhood effects," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 145-165, March.
    4. Schmidheiny, Kurt, 2006. "Income segregation and local progressive taxation: Empirical evidence from Switzerland," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 429-458, February.
    5. Patrick Bayer & Stephen L. Ross, 2006. "Identifying Individual and Group Effects in the Presence of Sorting: A Neighborhood Effects Application," Working papers 2006-13, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Jan 2009.
    6. John Lynham & Philip R. Neary, 2024. "Tiebout sorting in online communities," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 73(3), pages 1149-1174, October.
    7. Yannis M. Ioannides, 2010. "Neighborhood Effects and Housing," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0747, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    8. Boustan, Leah Platt, 2013. "Local public goods and the demand for high-income municipalities," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 71-82.
    9. Kiel, Katherine A. & Zabel, Jeffrey E., 2008. "Location, location, location: The 3L Approach to house price determination," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 175-190, June.
    10. Nicolai V. Kuminoff & V. Kerry Smith & Christopher Timmins, 2010. "The New Economics of Equilibrium Sorting and its Transformational Role for Policy Evaluation," NBER Working Papers 16349, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Pancs, Romans & Vriend, Nicolaas J., 2007. "Schelling's spatial proximity model of segregation revisited," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(1-2), pages 1-24, February.
    12. Ioannides, Yannis M. & Seslen, Tracey N., 2002. "Neighborhood wealth distributions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 357-367, August.
    13. John Lynham & Philip R. Neary, 2021. "Tiebout sorting in online communities," Papers 2110.05608, arXiv.org, revised May 2024.
    14. Binner, Amy & Day, Brett, 2015. "Exploring mortgage interest deduction reforms: An equilibrium sorting model with endogenous tenure choice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 40-54.
    15. Itzhak Benenson & Erez Hatna & Ehud Or, 2009. "From Schelling to Spatially Explicit Modeling of Urban Ethnic and Economic Residential Dynamics," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 37(4), pages 463-497, May.
    16. Ioannides, Yannis M., 2015. "Neighborhoods to nations via social interactions," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 5-15.
    17. Sergio J. Rey & Mark V. Janikas, 2003. "Convergence and space," Urban/Regional 0311002, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 16 Nov 2003.
    18. Sergio J. Rey & Mark V. Janikas, 2005. "Regional convergence, inequality, and space," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 155-176, April.
    19. Henryk Gurgul & Łukasz Lach, 2011. "The impact of regional disparities on economic growth," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 21(2), pages 17-43.
    20. Paulo B. Brito, 2022. "The dynamics of growth and distribution in a spatially heterogeneous world," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 21(3), pages 311-350, September.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:tuf:tuftec:0419. 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: Marcus Weir (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://ase.tufts.edu/economics .

    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.