Would the Social Planner Let Bags Fly Free?

Gad Allon, Achal Bassamboo, M. Lariviere
{"title":"Would the Social Planner Let Bags Fly Free?","authors":"Gad Allon, Achal Bassamboo, M. Lariviere","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1919807","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Motivated by airline baggage fees, we consider a service provider offering a main service (e.g., transporting a person) and an ancillary service (e.g., transporting a checked bag) that an individual customer may or may not need. We ask whether the firm should bundle the two services and post a single price or unbundle them and price the ancillary service separately. We consider two motivations for unbundling the services. The first focuses on altering consumer behavior to lower the firm’s costs. We assume that providing the ancillary service is costly but consumers can exert effort in order to reduce the rate at which the ancillary service is needed. We show that the firm unbundles and sets the fee for the ancillary service at the same level the social planner would. Profit maximization thus results in social efficiency. The second rationale for unbundling is segmentation. We assume that there are two segments that differ in the rate at which they use the ancillary service. The optimal contracts impose higher ancillary service fees on those less likely to use the service. In the airline setting, this would imply that business travelers would face higher baggage fees than leisure travelers. We conclude that the way in which airlines have implemented baggage fees is more consistent with attempts to control consumer behavior than segment customers.","PeriodicalId":346985,"journal":{"name":"PROD: Analytical (Service) (Topic)","volume":"45 22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"28","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PROD: Analytical (Service) (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1919807","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

Abstract

Motivated by airline baggage fees, we consider a service provider offering a main service (e.g., transporting a person) and an ancillary service (e.g., transporting a checked bag) that an individual customer may or may not need. We ask whether the firm should bundle the two services and post a single price or unbundle them and price the ancillary service separately. We consider two motivations for unbundling the services. The first focuses on altering consumer behavior to lower the firm’s costs. We assume that providing the ancillary service is costly but consumers can exert effort in order to reduce the rate at which the ancillary service is needed. We show that the firm unbundles and sets the fee for the ancillary service at the same level the social planner would. Profit maximization thus results in social efficiency. The second rationale for unbundling is segmentation. We assume that there are two segments that differ in the rate at which they use the ancillary service. The optimal contracts impose higher ancillary service fees on those less likely to use the service. In the airline setting, this would imply that business travelers would face higher baggage fees than leisure travelers. We conclude that the way in which airlines have implemented baggage fees is more consistent with attempts to control consumer behavior than segment customers.
社会规划师会让行李自由飞行吗?
在航空公司行李费的激励下,我们考虑服务提供商提供个人客户可能需要或不需要的主要服务(例如运送人员)和辅助服务(例如运送托运行李)。我们要问的是,公司是应该把这两项服务捆绑在一起,并公布一个单一的价格,还是应该把它们分开,分别为辅助服务定价。我们考虑了拆分服务的两个动机。第一种侧重于改变消费者行为以降低公司成本。我们假设提供辅助服务是昂贵的,但消费者可以努力降低辅助服务的需要率。我们证明,该公司将辅助服务的费用与社会规划师的水平相同。利润最大化的结果就是社会效率。拆解的第二个基本原理是细分。我们假设有两个部分在使用辅助服务的比率上是不同的。最优契约对那些不太可能使用服务的人征收更高的辅助服务费用。在航空公司的环境中,这意味着商务旅客将比休闲旅客面临更高的行李费。我们得出的结论是,航空公司实施行李费的方式更符合控制消费者行为的企图,而不是航段客户。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信