經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)Essay作業(yè)：How Price Discrimination Affects Consumers and Producers
本文是工商管理專業(yè)的留學(xué)生Essay范例，題目是“How Price Discrimination Affects Consumers and Producers（價(jià)格歧視如何影響消費(fèi)者和生產(chǎn)者）”，價(jià)格歧視是指企業(yè)為了獲得更高的利潤(rùn)，對(duì)同樣的商品向消費(fèi)者收取不同的價(jià)格。價(jià)格歧視之所以可能，是因?yàn)橥环N商品的消費(fèi)產(chǎn)生的效用不同，需求的價(jià)格彈性也不同。價(jià)格歧視有三種類型，即一級(jí)價(jià)格歧視(完全價(jià)格歧視)、二級(jí)價(jià)格歧視和三級(jí)價(jià)格歧視。在這篇文章中，我們將看看不同類型的價(jià)格歧視如何影響消費(fèi)者和生產(chǎn)者，以及公司是否有理由采用這種類型的價(jià)格歧視。
Price discrimination is a practice firms employ when they charge consumers different prices for the same good in order to earn higher profits. Price discrimination is made possible because of varying utility derived from the consumption of the same good and varying price elasticity of demand1. There are 3 types of price discrimination, namely: first-degree price discrimination (perfect price discrimination), second-degree price discrimination and third-degree price discrimination. In this essay, we will look at how the different types of price discrimination affect both consumers and producers, and whether or not firms are justified to employ that type of price discrimination.
A firm is said to have practised first-degree price discrimination when it charges each consumer a different price. Each different price corresponds to the value each individual consumer places on the good.
As seen in Figure 1 above, the firm charges different prices to different consumers according to how much consumers value the good, thus the marginal revenue curve is equal to the demand curve. So, all consumer surplus is captured by the firm. Output of the firm is at Q2, where marginal cost (MC) incurred by the firm is equal to marginal revenue (MR) of the firm. Profit earned by the firm is given by the green shaded area (A).
如圖1所示，公司根據(jù)消費(fèi)者對(duì)商品的價(jià)值向不同的消費(fèi)者收取不同的價(jià)格，因此邊際收入曲線等于需求曲線。所有的消費(fèi)者剩余都被公司占有。企業(yè)的產(chǎn)出在Q2，此時(shí)企業(yè)產(chǎn)生的邊際成本(MC)等于企業(yè)的邊際收入(MR)。企業(yè)的利潤(rùn)由綠色陰影區(qū)域(A)給出。
In reality however, it is difficult to ascertain the value consumers place on the good offered by firms. The closest example is the case of Amazon2 charging different consumer different prices by tracking their online shopping behaviour. From there, Amazon can gauge the price sensitivity of a consumer. For consumers that are assessed to have relatively high price sensitivity, Amazon will charge them lower prices for the same good compared to other consumers with relatively lower price sensitivity.
Firms should practise perfect price discrimination because they produce at a socially optimum level. This also allows more customers (who previously could not afford the good) to consume the good. More consumers who previously were priced out of the market are able to afford the good3 now.
企業(yè)應(yīng)該實(shí)行完全價(jià)格歧視，因?yàn)樗鼈兊纳a(chǎn)處于社會(huì)最優(yōu)水平。這也允許更多的顧客(以前買不起商品的人)消費(fèi)商品。以前因價(jià)格過(guò)高而被市場(chǎng)排擠的消費(fèi)者現(xiàn)在有能力買得起這種商品了。
When a firm does not practise perfect price discrimination, it fixes price at P1 and produces at an output of Q1. Profits earned by these firms will be given by the green shaded rectangle (B). Comparing Figure 1 and 2, it can be seen that firms earn more profits when it practises perfect price discrimination. Furthermore, firms that practise perfect price discrimination produces more of the good for consumers (Q2 > Q1). Lastly, there is a deadweight loss, given by the shaded brown triangle (D), when a firm does not practise perfect price discrimination.
However, when firms do not practise price discrimination, consumer surplus increases from 0 in Figure 1 to the black shaded area (C) in Figure 2. Furthermore, the issue of fairness crops up2: some consumers pay more for the same good because of their assessed consumption pattern. There is also a moral issue involved when firms go past the line by infringing on consumers “privacy” while ascertaining their price sensitivity, as illustrated by Amazon.
然而，當(dāng)企業(yè)不實(shí)行價(jià)格歧視時(shí)，消費(fèi)者剩余從圖1中的0增加到圖2中的黑色陰影區(qū)域(C)。此外，公平問(wèn)題出現(xiàn)了2:一些消費(fèi)者為同樣的商品支付更多的錢，因?yàn)樗麄冊(cè)u(píng)估的消費(fèi)模式。當(dāng)公司在確定消費(fèi)者對(duì)價(jià)格的敏感性的同時(shí)侵犯消費(fèi)者的“隱私”時(shí)，也會(huì)涉及到道德問(wèn)題，如亞馬遜所示。
While there are good reasons on both sides as to whether firms should practise price discrimination, one must pause to ponder about the social and moral issues that crop up. How far can a firm go in assessing their consumers’ online behaviour? Is it fair that while firms charge more to other groups of consumers, they are at the same time allowing lower income groups of customers to consume the good? The fact that the practise of perfect price discrimination (or attempted replications of it) is ubiquitous and has long been used, suggest that such pricing strategy is ultimately beneficial to society3.
Second-degree price discrimination occurs when firms charge lower per unit prices as quantity purchase by consumers increases. For example, in Manchester, the Sugden Sports Centre charges students ￡165 for 9 months gym membership, ￡195 for 12 months gym membership and ￡5 per entry to the gym for students without the membership. Say a student would like to frequent the gym (workout twice a week) and continues going for the rest of the year. He is better off buying the 12 months membership because ￡195 < ￡5 x 2 x 4 x 12 = ￡480. Say another student (overseas student) would like to frequent the gym (workout twice a week) and continues going for 9 months (Length of academic year). He is better off buying the 9 months membership because ￡165 < ￡195 < ￡5 x 2 x 4 x 9 = ￡360. Lastly, say another student(Infrequent) who is not committed to working out in the gym but goes to the gym twice a month is better off not buying any gym membership.
當(dāng)消費(fèi)者購(gòu)買量增加時(shí)，企業(yè)每單位價(jià)格收取更低的價(jià)格，就會(huì)發(fā)生二級(jí)價(jià)格歧視。例如，在曼徹斯特，薩格登體育中心(Sugden Sports Centre)對(duì)9個(gè)月健身房會(huì)員收取165英鎊，對(duì)12個(gè)月健身房會(huì)員收取195英鎊，對(duì)沒有會(huì)員資格的學(xué)生每次進(jìn)入健身房收取5英鎊。比如，一個(gè)學(xué)生想經(jīng)常去健身房(每周鍛煉兩次)，并且一直堅(jiān)持到今年年底。他最好買12個(gè)月的會(huì)員資格，因?yàn)?/span>195英鎊< 5 × 2 × 4 × 12 = 480英鎊。假設(shè)另一名學(xué)生(留學(xué)生)想經(jīng)常去健身房(每周鍛煉兩次)，并持續(xù)鍛煉9個(gè)月(學(xué)年長(zhǎng)度)。他最好買9個(gè)月的會(huì)員資格，因?yàn)?/span>165英鎊< 195英鎊< 5 × 2 × 4 × 9 = 360英鎊。最后，另一個(gè)學(xué)生(不常去)說(shuō)，他不承諾在健身房鍛煉，但一個(gè)月去兩次健身房，最好不買任何健身會(huì)員卡。
The above examples have shown that if Sugden Sports Centre sets a single price, say ￡195 for 12 months gym membership and no per entry fee, overseas students and infrequent students will not sign up for the gym and Sugden Sports Centre loses potential revenue. However, if Sugden Sports Centre were to charge a ￡5 per entry fee regardless of frequency of usage of the gym, frequent users will not go to the gym at Sugden Sports Centre. Thus, by practising second degree price discrimination through offering different prices to consumers who purchase different quantities of good, Sugden Sports Centre allows different groups of students(consumers) to use the gym(consume the good). So instead of just obtaining revenue from one group of consumers, a firm can now obtain revenue from the few groups, thereby maximising profits.
Figure 3 above shows the graphical representation of Sugden Sports Centre’s practice of second degree price discrimination. We assume that students who buy the 12 months and 9 months membership go to the gym twice a week every month. Therefore, at the end of their membership, students who subscribed to the 12 month membership would have gone to the gym 96 times and students who subscribed to the 9 month membership, 64 times. ￡2.57 is the calculated per visit entry fee for students who subscribed to the 12 month membership and ￡2.03 is the calculated per visit entry fee for the 9 month membership subscribers. Figure 3 clearly shows the falling per unit price as quantity of good or service consumed increases.
上面的圖3顯示了Sugden體育中心二級(jí)價(jià)格歧視的做法的圖形表示。我們假設(shè)購(gòu)買12個(gè)月和9個(gè)月會(huì)員卡的學(xué)生每個(gè)月每周去兩次健身房。因此，在會(huì)員制結(jié)束時(shí)，12個(gè)月會(huì)員制的學(xué)生去健身房的次數(shù)為96次，9個(gè)月會(huì)員制的學(xué)生去健身房的次數(shù)為64次。對(duì)于12個(gè)月會(huì)員的學(xué)生，2.57英鎊是每次訪問(wèn)的計(jì)算報(bào)名費(fèi);對(duì)于9個(gè)月會(huì)員的學(xué)生，2.03英鎊是每次訪問(wèn)報(bào)名費(fèi)。圖3清楚地顯示了每單位價(jià)格隨著商品或服務(wù)消費(fèi)數(shù)量的增加而下降。
Firms should practise second degree price discrimination because the good or service offered will be made more available to different groups of consumers. The above example shows that if the firm were to set a single price, some groups of consumers will be priced out. Hence, practising second degree price discrimination will result in a win-win situation for producers and consumers as producers earn higher profits while more consumers can enjoy the good3. However, in some cases where a monopoly operates in the market, the firm may charge a very high price for the first few quantities of good and seemingly relatively low price for larger quantities of the good. It is still unfair and being dishonest to consumers because the monopoly intends to mislead consumers into buying larger quantities of good and hence earn more profits.
Third-degree price discrimination is practised when a firm charges different prices to different identifiable groups for the same good or service. These groups are identifiable based on, for example, age or sex4.Three requirements must be met before a firm can practise third-degree price discrimination: there must be varying sensitivity to price among the different groups, firms must identify the different groups explicitly and no resale of goods can be made among the groups themselves.
第三級(jí)價(jià)格歧視是指公司對(duì)同一商品或服務(wù)向不同的可識(shí)別群體收取不同的價(jià)格。這些群體可以根據(jù)年齡或性別等來(lái)識(shí)別。在企業(yè)實(shí)施三級(jí)價(jià)格歧視之前，必須滿足三個(gè)條件:不同群體之間對(duì)價(jià)格的敏感性必須不同，企業(yè)必須明確地識(shí)別不同群體，并且不能在這些群體之間進(jìn)行商品轉(zhuǎn)售。
For example in Singapore, a typical bus ride will cost students a fix fare of S$0.55 but it will cost an adult S$1.00. The bus company is able to charge different prices because the above three conditions are met. A student is more price sensitive to adults because adults are drawing income and thus have higher purchasing power. A student and an adult are easily identifiable through identification cards and for obvious reasons. And a student bus ticket cannot be used by an adult.
As seen in both figures, demand for bus rides by students is more price elastic than demand for bus rides by adults, hence the demand curve for students is less steep. At profit maximising output, students are charged S$0.55 per bus ride and adults are charged S$1.00 per bus ride. Thus, we can see that the firm charges different prices for different groups of consumers.
從兩幅圖中可以看出，學(xué)生乘坐公交車的需求比成年人乘坐公交車的需求更具價(jià)格彈性，因此學(xué)生的需求曲線不那么陡峭。為了實(shí)現(xiàn)利潤(rùn)最大化的產(chǎn)出，學(xué)生每乘一次巴士收費(fèi)0.55新元，成人每乘一次巴士收費(fèi)1.00新元。由此可見，企業(yè)對(duì)不同的消費(fèi)者群體收取不同的價(jià)格。
In this case, it is justifiable for the bus company to practise third-degree price discrimination as the profits earned from adults taking the bus might be used to cover the costs incurred from charging a lower price for students. However, in some cases like events held in nightclubs- charging men a fee of say ￡20 while women can enter for free. The answer to whether a firm should practise third-degree price discrimination is now highly subjective.
The practice of price discrimination remains a double edged sword. On one hand, it may seem beneficial because more consumers who otherwise might be priced out from previous higher price can now consumer the good3.But on the other hand, social and moral issues like unfairness and privacy may entail2. There are also many other sound justifications as to why firms should or should not price discriminate: able to identify consumers who are willing to pay more3 and the issue of the loss of consumer surplus. Whether or not firms should price discriminate is highly subjective and varies from case to case because of varying benefits and costs to society.
價(jià)格歧視的做法仍然是一把雙刃劍。一方面，這似乎是有益的，因?yàn)楦嗟南M(fèi)者本來(lái)可能因先前較高的價(jià)格而被定價(jià)排擠，現(xiàn)在他們可以消費(fèi)這種商品了。但另一方面，可能會(huì)涉及不公平和隱私等社會(huì)和道德問(wèn)題。還有許多其他合理的理由來(lái)說(shuō)明為什么公司應(yīng)該或不應(yīng)該進(jìn)行價(jià)格歧視:能夠辨別出哪些消費(fèi)者愿意支付更多的錢，以及消費(fèi)者剩余損失的問(wèn)題。企業(yè)是否應(yīng)該進(jìn)行價(jià)格歧視是非常主觀的，而且由于對(duì)社會(huì)的利益和成本不同而因人而異。
留學(xué)生dissertation相關(guān)專業(yè)范文素材資料，盡在本網(wǎng)，可以隨時(shí)查閱參考。本站也提供多國(guó)留學(xué)生課程essay寫作指導(dǎo)服務(wù)，如有需要可咨詢本平臺(tái)。
