Pricing Ancillary Service Subscriptions

References

• Aksoy-Pierson M, Allon G, Federgruen A (2013) Price competition under mixed multinomial logit demand functions. Management Sci. 59(8):1817–1835.Link, Google Scholar
• Allon G, Bassamboo A, Lariviere M (2011) Would the social planner let bags fly free? Working paper, Northwestern University, Chicago.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson SP, de Palma A, Thisse J (1992) Discrete Choice Theory of Product Differentiation (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ascarza E, Lambrecht A, Vilcassim N (1998) When talk is “free”: The effect of tariff structure on usage under two- and three-part tariffs. J. Marketing Res. 17(4):406–423.Google Scholar
• Balasubramanian S, Bhattacharya S, Krishnan V (2015) Pricing information goods: A strategic analysis of the selling and pay-per-use mechanisms. Marketing Sci. 34(2):218–234.Link, Google Scholar
• Belavina E, Girotra K, Kabra A (2017) Online grocery retail: Revenue models and environmental impact. Management Sci. 63(6):1781–1799.Link, Google Scholar
• Ben-Akiva M, Lerman SR (1985) Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Berglas E (1976) On the theory of clubs. Amer. Econom. Rev. 66(2):116–121.Google Scholar
• Besbes O, Saure D (2016) Product assortment and price competition with informed consumers. Production Oper. Management 25(1):114–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bhargava HK, Gangwar M (2016) “Pay as you go” or “all you can eat”? Pricing methods for computing and information services. Proc. 49th Hawaii Internat. Conf. System Sci. (IEEE, Washington, DC), 5239–5248.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Buchanan JM (1965) An economic theory of clubs. Econometrica 32(125):1–14.Google Scholar
• Cachon GP, Feldman P (2011) Pricing services subject to congestion: Charge per-use fees or sell subscriptions? Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 13(2):244–260.Link, Google Scholar
• CarTrawler (2016) Top ancillary revenue rates reach $52 per passenger and $6 billion per airline. Accessed July 20, 2016, http://www.ideaworkscompany.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Press-Release-110-Ancillary-Revenue-Top-10-FINAL.pdf.Google Scholar
• Cui Y, Duenyas I, Sahin O (2018) Unbundling of ancillary service: How does price discrimination of main service matter? Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 20(3):389–600.Google Scholar
• Dong L, Kouvelis P, Tian Z (2009) Dynamic pricing and inventory control of substitute products. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 11(2):317–339.Link, Google Scholar
• Farias VF, Jagabathula S, Shah D (2013) A non-parametric approach to modeling choice with limited data. Management Sci. 59(2):305–322.Link, Google Scholar
• Gallego G, Sahin O (2010) Revenue management with partially refundable fares. Oper. Res. 58(4):817–833.Link, Google Scholar
• Gallego G, Wang R (2014) Price optimization and competition for multi-products under the nested logit model with product-differentiated price coefficients. Oper. Res. 62(2):450–461.Link, Google Scholar
• Hanson W, Martin K (1990) Optimal bundle pricing. Management Sci. 36(2):155–174.Link, Google Scholar
• Hayes B (1987) Competition and two-part tariffs. J. Bus. 60(1):41–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leider S, Sahin O (2014) Contracts, biases, and consumption of access services. Management Sci. 60(9):2198–2222.Link, Google Scholar
• Li H, Huh WT (2011) Pricing multiple products with the multinomial logit and nested logit models: Concavity and implications. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 13(4):549–564.Link, Google Scholar
• Li H, Webster S, Mason N, Kempf K (2019) Product-line pricing under discrete mixed multinomial logit demand. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 21(1):14–28.Link, Google Scholar
• Maynard M (2013) The latest thing in airline fees: United’s annual baggage subscription. Forbes (June 3), http://www.forbes.com/sites/michelinemaynard/2013/06/03/the-latest-thing-in-airline-fees-uniteds-annual-baggage-subscription.Google Scholar
• McFadden D (1974) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Zarembka P, ed. Frontiers in Econometrics (Academic Press, New York), 105–142.Google Scholar
• Niculescu M, Shin H, Whang S (2012) Underlying consumer heterogeneity in markets for subscription-based IT services with network effects. Inform. Syst. Res. 23(4):1322–1341.Link, Google Scholar
• Oi WY (1971) A Disneyland dilemma: Two-part tariffs for a mickey mouse monopoly. Quart. J. Econom. 85(1):77–96.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Png IPL, Wang H (2010) Buyer uncertainty and two-part pricing: Theory and applications. Management Sci. 56(2):334–342.Link, Google Scholar
• Randhawa RS, Kumar S (2008) Usage restriction and subscription services: Operational benefits with rational users. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 10(3):429–447.Link, Google Scholar
• Schmalensee R (1981) Monopolistic two-part pricing arrangements. Bell J. Econom. 12(2):445–466.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shulman JD, Geng X (2013) Add-on pricing by asymmetric firms. Management Sci. 59(4):899–917.Link, Google Scholar
• Sundararajan A (2004) Nolinear pricing of information goods. Management Sci. 50(12):1660–1673.Link, Google Scholar
• van Ryzin G, Mahajan S (1999) On the relationship between inventory costs and variety benefits in retail assortments. Management Sci. 45(11):1496–1509.Link, Google Scholar
• Wang R (2018a) Consumer choice and market expansion: Modeling, optimization and estimation. Working paper, Johns Hopkins Carey Business School, Baltimore.Google Scholar
• Wang R (2018b) When prospect theory meets consumer choice models: Assortment and pricing management with reference prices. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 20(3):389–600.Link, Google Scholar
• Wang R, Sahin O (2018) The impact of consumer search cost on assortment planning and pricing. Management Sci. 64(8):3649–3666Google Scholar
• Wang R, Wang Z (2017) Consumer choice models with endogenous network effects. Management Sci. 63(11):3944–3960.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhang D, Adelman D (2009) An approximate dynamic programming approach to network revenue management with customer choice. Transportation Sci. 43(3):381–394.Link, Google Scholar