The comparison between trade-in and leasing of a product with technology innovations

被引:51
|
作者
Li, Kate J. [1 ]
Xu, Susan H. [2 ]
机构
[1] Suffolk Univ, Sawyer Business Sch, Dept Informat Syst & Operat Management, Boston, MA 02108 USA
[2] Penn State Univ, Smeal Coll Business, Dept Supply Chain & Informat Syst, University Pk, PA 16802 USA
关键词
Trade-in; Leasing; Durable goods; Product reuse; Stationary equilibrium; DURABLE-GOODS; MARKET-SEGMENTATION; RETURN POLICIES; CONSUMER; DESIGN; COMPETITION; PRICE;
D O I
10.1016/j.omega.2015.01.018
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
Companies can adopt trade-in and/or leasing to shorten consumers' upgrade cycle and gain control over secondary markets. In this paper, we consider a monopolistic manufacturer who offers a technology product to a market consisting of heterogeneous consumers. We focus on an exogenous, stochastic innovation process that determines the availability of new technology and consequently, residual value of the current product We derive the optimal pricing strategy of trade-in and leasing, respectively, examine its impact on the manufacturer's expected profit, and compare the performance of the two strategies. Trade-in protects the manufacturer against residual value risk and allows the flexibility of offering the option at different innovation states separately. Leasing, on the other hand, provides the manufacturer an opportunity to circumvent low new product prices and thus increases expected profit when product reuse profitability is high. The interplay between the two forces, product reuse profitability and new product price, determines the preference between trade-in and leasing. Our findings provide monopolistic manufacturers guidance on how to optimally employ the trade-in and leasing strategies. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:134 / 146
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Trade-In Rebates for Price Discrimination and Product Recovery
    Agrawal, Vishal V.
    Ferguson, Mark
    Souza, Gilvan C.
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, 2016, 63 (03) : 326 - 339
  • [2] Product Architecture and Trade-in for Managing Sequential Innovation
    Luo, Zican
    Shen, Houcai
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2017 7TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL NETWORK, COMMUNICATION AND EDUCATION (SNCE 2017), 2017, 82 : 618 - 626
  • [3] Product green degree and pricing with different trade-in strategies
    Hu Q.
    Cao J.
    Zhou G.
    Jiang X.
    Li J.
    Jisuanji Jicheng Zhizao Xitong/Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems, CIMS, 2019, 25 (08): : 2045 - 2058
  • [4] Exploring the Effect of a Trade-In on Consumers' Willingness to Pay for a New Product
    Zhu, Rui
    Chen, Xinlei
    Dasgupta, Srabana
    ADVANCES IN CONSUMER RESEARCH, VOL 35, 2008, 35 : 157 - 158
  • [5] Impact of product sharing and heterogeneous consumers on manufacturers offering trade-in programs*
    Hu, Shu
    Tang, Yanli
    OMEGA-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2024, 122
  • [6] Does implementing trade-in and green technology together benefit the environment?
    Dou, Guowei
    Choi, Tsan-Ming
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2021, 295 (02) : 517 - 533
  • [7] Leasing, trade-in for new, or the mixed of both: an analysis of new recycling modes driven by industry 4.0 technologies
    Wang, Kun
    Li, Yongjian
    Yue, Xiaohang
    Fan, Chunxing
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION RESEARCH, 2024, 62 (07) : 2350 - 2369
  • [8] A Study on Recycle Schedules for Trade-In Rebates With Consideration of Product Life Cycle
    Huang, Yeu-Shiang
    Lin, Chia-Jen
    Fang, Chih-Chiang
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, 2019, 66 (03) : 475 - 490
  • [9] Trade-in Strategy and Competition between Two Independent Remanufacturers
    Feng, Zhangwei
    Luo, Na
    Liu, Yanping
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2021, 18 (13)
  • [10] A Comparison of Buyback and Trade-In Policies to Acquire Used Products for Remanufacturing
    Cole, Dwayne
    Mahapatra, Santosh
    Webster, Scott
    JOURNAL OF BUSINESS LOGISTICS, 2017, 38 (03) : 217 - 232