MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Shipping Fees or Shipping Free? A Tale of Two Price Partitioning Strategies in Online Retailing

2013· article· en· W1984866637 on OpenAlexaff
Mehmet Gümüş, Shanling Li, Wonseok Oh, Saibal Ray

Bibliographic record

VenueProduction and Operations Management · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Market Behavior and Pricing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStylized factProduct (mathematics)BusinessPortfolioEmpirical researchMarketingIndustrial organizationMicroeconomicsEconomicsFinanceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we study the price partitioning decisions of online retailers regarding shipping and handling (S&H) fees. Specifically, we analyze two partitioning formats used by retailers in this context. In the first scenario, retailers present customers with a price that is partitioned into a product price and a separate S&H surcharge (the PS strategy ); in the second, customers are offered free shipping through a non‐partitioned format where the product price already includes the shipping cost (the ZS strategy ). We first develop a stylized game‐theoretic model that captures the competitive dynamics between (and within) these two formats. Analysis of the model provides insights into how both firm and product level characteristics drive a retailer's strategic choice regarding which partitioning format to adopt and, hence, determines the equilibrium market structure in terms of proportion of ZS and PS retailers. Subsequently, we conduct empirical analyses , based on product and S&H prices data for two different product categories (digital cameras and printers) collected from online retailers, to validate all the results of our theoretical model. We establish that PS retailers charge lower product prices than ZS ones, but the total price (product + S&H) charged is higher for the first group. The S&H charge for PS retailers can be significant—it is, on average, 5.4% (printers) and 3.0% (digital cameras) for our two product categories. Furthermore, retailers which are popular and/or face risky cost environment are more likely to opt for the ZS strategy, while retailers whose portfolio mostly includes large or heavy products with high cost (S&H)‐to‐price ratios usually choose the PS strategy. Lastly, our empirical study also illustrates that the price adjustment behavior of retailers is affected by their shipping‐fee policies—for example, ZS retailers change their product prices almost 1.5 times more frequently than PS ones.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProduction and Operations ManagementSame topicConsumer Market Behavior and PricingFrench-language works237,207