{"id":522,"date":"2013-03-25T19:19:27","date_gmt":"2013-03-26T02:19:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/?p=522"},"modified":"2013-03-25T19:19:27","modified_gmt":"2013-03-26T02:19:27","slug":"on-google-and-why-price-discrimination-is-good-for-consumers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2013\/03\/on-google-and-why-price-discrimination-is-good-for-consumers\/","title":{"rendered":"On Google, and why price discrimination is good for consumers"},"content":{"rendered":"

Paul Krugman<\/a> writes about the decision by Google to shut down Google Reader. Whatever your thoughts on the good or evil nature of Google, he raises an important issue for thinking about price discrimination: there are cases where, if no price discrimination is possible, such that the seller can only charge one price to all, there does not exist a price that can possibly allow the firm to cover its costs. And this is true even if the total value consumers place on the good (as measured by their reservation prices – their willingness to pay for it) is greater than the total cost of provision.<\/p>\n

\"need<\/a>

from Paul Krugman, “The Economics of Evil Google”, New York Times, March 23, 2013<\/p><\/div>\n

He illustrates with the diagram to the left. Average cost – the cost per subscriber – falls with the number of users, as there are high fixed costs to provide the service but low marginal costs per additional user. If a high price is charged to reflect the reservation prices of the high demand customers, the total revenue is the red rectangle, but that doesn’t cover costs (where average cost is given by the curve, and lies above the rectangle). If a low price is charged to reflect the reservation prices of low intensity users, total revenue is the blue rectangle, but that doesn’t cover costs either. And yet, if it were possible to charge customers according to their individual reservation prices, costs could be covered – revenues would be the sum<\/em> of the two rectangles – and we would have the service.<\/p>\n

Nonprofits in the arts are often in this situation. They too have declining average costs, and they need to price discriminate, or indeed get donors to voluntarily price discriminate, in order to cover costs. No single price will work. And here Krugman is suggesting it is true for certain for-profit goods as well. As he notes, in some cases we leave it to the public sector to provide the valued service when the for-profit sector cannot, but that is not very applicable to IT services since the state will lack the ability to innovate in the way for-profit firms can.<\/p>\n

In class when I begin to discuss price discrimination, students can initially react as if there is something rather unsavory about the practice, that it is underhanded, a “trick” played on customers. But it isn’t – it is often the only<\/em> way a good can be provided. The ability to offer both hardcover and paperback books is necessary to keep publishers afloat (something that is not always easy) – they could not make the same revenue if they could only offer one version of each book. As a reader I am glad<\/em> they do this. Sometimes I’ll buy hardcover, sometimes I’ll buy paperback. I understand the reason why the price differential exceeds the difference in cost of production and shipping, and I understand why they delay the release of the paperback. I might wish for it to come out sooner, but I don’t wish for a world where publishers go bankrupt for inability to cover costs. Price discrimination is good for me as a consumer – it brings goods to market that otherwise would not be available at all.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Paul Krugman writes about the decision by Google to shut down Google Reader. Whatever your thoughts on the good or evil nature of Google, he raises an important issue for thinking about price discrimination: there are cases where, if no price discrimination is possible, such that the seller can only charge one price to all, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[26],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-522","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-issues","7":"entry","8":"has-post-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p3dIW5-8q","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":1617,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2014\/10\/amazon-and-monopoly-encore\/","url_meta":{"origin":522,"position":0},"title":"Amazon and monopoly: encore (updated)","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"October 14, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"The debate that won't die. I've posted on whether Amazon is a monopoly (it isn't) here and here. Today Joe Nocera joins Matt Yglesias and Annie Lowrey in his critique of Franklin Foer's New Republic article that tries to claim dangerous monopoly powers at Amazon. Artsjournal.com blog neighbor Scott Timberg\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"still don't need it","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/jail-card-monopoly.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/jail-card-monopoly.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/jail-card-monopoly.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/jail-card-monopoly.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":1660,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2014\/10\/what-is-dynamic-pricing-a-clarification\/","url_meta":{"origin":522,"position":1},"title":"What is dynamic pricing? A clarification (updated)","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"October 27, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"'Dynamic pricing on websites: illegal or unfair?', asks\u00a0\u00c9lo\u00efse Gratton on her blog. But the post confuses various pricing strategies, not all of which are 'dynamic pricing'. Dynamic pricing, also known as \u201cadaptive pricing\u201d, \u201cdynamic pricing\u201d or \u201cdiscriminatory pricing\u201d \u00a0or\u00a0first-degree price discrimination, is defined as a practice where organizations attempt to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"first-degree","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/flea-market.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/flea-market.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/flea-market.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/flea-market.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/flea-market.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/flea-market.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":504,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2013\/03\/a-primer-on-price-discrimination\/","url_meta":{"origin":522,"position":2},"title":"A primer on price discrimination","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"March 20, 2013","format":false,"excerpt":"My previous two posts dealt with different aspects of price discrimination, and since many future posts will cover the topic from various angles, I think it worthwhile to go over a few basic ideas and definitions. Marginal cost will be defined here as the cost to your arts organization of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"direct price discrimination\"","block_context":{"text":"direct price discrimination","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/tag\/direct-price-discrimination\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"who knows their reservation prices?","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/03\/audience-300x300.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":1704,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2014\/11\/gender-and-price-discrimination\/","url_meta":{"origin":522,"position":3},"title":"Gender and price discrimination","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"November 16, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Women pay more than men for some products. Why is this, and is this a situation where there oughtta be a law? Last week, Time reported that women consumers' advocates in France were pressing for a law that would prohibit price discrimination where men and women use virtually the same\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"it's going to cost you big time","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/11\/venus.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":1892,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2015\/04\/big-data-and-price-discrimination-chill\/","url_meta":{"origin":522,"position":4},"title":"Big data and price discrimination: chill","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"April 23, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"A search on our blog host artsjournal.com re 'big data' yields a lot of hits, suggesting it is obviously something about which arts managers need to be aware of, and which citizens might have cause to fear as corporations and governments use data in hidden but nefarious ways. But is\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Shh, Linus, they'll hear you","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/04\/Charlie_Brown_Xmas_tree.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/04\/Charlie_Brown_Xmas_tree.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/04\/Charlie_Brown_Xmas_tree.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/04\/Charlie_Brown_Xmas_tree.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/04\/Charlie_Brown_Xmas_tree.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":495,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/2013\/03\/voluntary-price-discrimination-is-not-a-new-idea\/","url_meta":{"origin":522,"position":5},"title":"Voluntary price discrimination is not a new idea","author":"Michael Rushton","date":"March 18, 2013","format":false,"excerpt":"Alyssa Rosenberg on crowdsourcing new movies: One thing that\u2019s striking about the Veronica Mars Kickstarter is that you have to give at least $35, more than four times the cost of the average American movie ticket in 2012, to get a digital download of the movie. You have to give\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "issues"","block_context":{"text":"issues","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/category\/issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"looking for funding","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/03\/vm.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/522","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=522"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/522\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=522"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=522"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/worth\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=522"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}