{"title":"揭示众筹的新功能:生产风险转移机制","authors":"Yang Xu , Yu Zhang , Jiancheng Lyu","doi":"10.1016/j.omega.2025.103408","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Existing literature has underscored the financing advantages intrinsic to crowdfunding, often overlooking its pivotal risk transfer function. By factoring in elements of loss aversion, our study formulates a comprehensive crowdfunding model to discern disparities between the crowdfunding and traditional financing model in mitigating the production risk. In the traditional financing model, the entrepreneur navigates a strategic trade-off between the financing cost and production risk by judiciously allocating the asset–liability portfolio between personal funds and loan capital. Conversely, the crowdfunding model entails the entrepreneur pre-selling the products, thereby positioning buyers as the bearer of risk. Our results indicate that crowdfunding does not universally emerge as the dominant strategy. When the production cost is high and product value is low, the entrepreneur is advised to leverage crowdfunding to curtail financing expenses and mitigate demand uncertainty. This, however, entails transferring the production risk to buyers, necessitating the entrepreneur to set a more modest product price. When the production cost is low or the product value is high, the traditional financing model outshines crowdfunding. Introducing crowdfunding will trigger a precipitous decline in buyers’ willingness to pay and an unwarranted erosion of marginal returns. This elucidates why products unveiled on crowdfunding platforms frequently exhibit a lack of substantial value. Additionally, we introduce the deferred payment mechanism to augment crowdfunding efficacy and unveil its role in risk sharing. We also analyze in detail how the optimal prepayment ratio is affected by capital constraints, product attributes, risks, and market size. Finally, we explore five intriguing extensions: heterogeneous buyer valuations, the market size follows uniform distribution, hybrid financing, quality endogeneity, and partial consumers in crowdfunding market, yielding valuable insights.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19529,"journal":{"name":"Omega-international Journal of Management Science","volume":"138 ","pages":"Article 103408"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reveal the new function of crowdfunding: Production risk transfer mechanism\",\"authors\":\"Yang Xu , Yu Zhang , Jiancheng Lyu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.omega.2025.103408\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Existing literature has underscored the financing advantages intrinsic to crowdfunding, often overlooking its pivotal risk transfer function. By factoring in elements of loss aversion, our study formulates a comprehensive crowdfunding model to discern disparities between the crowdfunding and traditional financing model in mitigating the production risk. In the traditional financing model, the entrepreneur navigates a strategic trade-off between the financing cost and production risk by judiciously allocating the asset–liability portfolio between personal funds and loan capital. Conversely, the crowdfunding model entails the entrepreneur pre-selling the products, thereby positioning buyers as the bearer of risk. Our results indicate that crowdfunding does not universally emerge as the dominant strategy. When the production cost is high and product value is low, the entrepreneur is advised to leverage crowdfunding to curtail financing expenses and mitigate demand uncertainty. This, however, entails transferring the production risk to buyers, necessitating the entrepreneur to set a more modest product price. When the production cost is low or the product value is high, the traditional financing model outshines crowdfunding. Introducing crowdfunding will trigger a precipitous decline in buyers’ willingness to pay and an unwarranted erosion of marginal returns. This elucidates why products unveiled on crowdfunding platforms frequently exhibit a lack of substantial value. Additionally, we introduce the deferred payment mechanism to augment crowdfunding efficacy and unveil its role in risk sharing. We also analyze in detail how the optimal prepayment ratio is affected by capital constraints, product attributes, risks, and market size. Finally, we explore five intriguing extensions: heterogeneous buyer valuations, the market size follows uniform distribution, hybrid financing, quality endogeneity, and partial consumers in crowdfunding market, yielding valuable insights.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19529,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Omega-international Journal of Management Science\",\"volume\":\"138 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103408\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Omega-international Journal of Management Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048325001343\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Omega-international Journal of Management Science","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048325001343","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reveal the new function of crowdfunding: Production risk transfer mechanism
Existing literature has underscored the financing advantages intrinsic to crowdfunding, often overlooking its pivotal risk transfer function. By factoring in elements of loss aversion, our study formulates a comprehensive crowdfunding model to discern disparities between the crowdfunding and traditional financing model in mitigating the production risk. In the traditional financing model, the entrepreneur navigates a strategic trade-off between the financing cost and production risk by judiciously allocating the asset–liability portfolio between personal funds and loan capital. Conversely, the crowdfunding model entails the entrepreneur pre-selling the products, thereby positioning buyers as the bearer of risk. Our results indicate that crowdfunding does not universally emerge as the dominant strategy. When the production cost is high and product value is low, the entrepreneur is advised to leverage crowdfunding to curtail financing expenses and mitigate demand uncertainty. This, however, entails transferring the production risk to buyers, necessitating the entrepreneur to set a more modest product price. When the production cost is low or the product value is high, the traditional financing model outshines crowdfunding. Introducing crowdfunding will trigger a precipitous decline in buyers’ willingness to pay and an unwarranted erosion of marginal returns. This elucidates why products unveiled on crowdfunding platforms frequently exhibit a lack of substantial value. Additionally, we introduce the deferred payment mechanism to augment crowdfunding efficacy and unveil its role in risk sharing. We also analyze in detail how the optimal prepayment ratio is affected by capital constraints, product attributes, risks, and market size. Finally, we explore five intriguing extensions: heterogeneous buyer valuations, the market size follows uniform distribution, hybrid financing, quality endogeneity, and partial consumers in crowdfunding market, yielding valuable insights.
期刊介绍:
Omega reports on developments in management, including the latest research results and applications. Original contributions and review articles describe the state of the art in specific fields or functions of management, while there are shorter critical assessments of particular management techniques. Other features of the journal are the "Memoranda" section for short communications and "Feedback", a correspondence column. Omega is both stimulating reading and an important source for practising managers, specialists in management services, operational research workers and management scientists, management consultants, academics, students and research personnel throughout the world. The material published is of high quality and relevance, written in a manner which makes it accessible to all of this wide-ranging readership. Preference will be given to papers with implications to the practice of management. Submissions of purely theoretical papers are discouraged. The review of material for publication in the journal reflects this aim.