MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121496510

Profit-Increasing Consumer Exit

2013· article· en· W3121496510 on OpenAlexaff
Amit Pazgal, David Soberman, Raphael Thomadsen

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfitability indexProfit (economics)PhenomenonBusinessMarket shareProduct marketEconomicsMarket economyIndustrial organizationCommerceMarketingMicroeconomicsIncentive
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the phenomenon of profit-increasing consumer exit and the related phenomenon of profit-decreasing consumer entry. We demonstrate that firms can be better off in shrinking markets and worse off in growing markets, even in the absence of competitive entry or exit. Specifically, firms may benefit if a segment of consumers who are relatively indifferent about consuming any product in the category leave the market. Profits can increase for all firms even if the exiting consumers have strong preferences for only one of the products in the market. In shrinking markets, it is reasonable to assume that the people who are likely to exit the market first are people who are “least committed” to the category. In particular, people who are the least satisfied with the existing offers are the most likely to change their behavior by finding an alternative or adopting a new technology. Similarly, in growing markets, consumers who enter the market late are generally the least committed to the category. Such exiting can relax the competitive pressure between firms and lead to increased profitability. Our findings provide an explanation for profit growth that has been observed in product industries exhibiting slow and predictable declines over time, including vacuum tubes, cigarettes, and soft drinks.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.190 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicFirm Innovation and GrowthFrench-language works237,207