The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Strategic Capacity Rationing to Induce Early Purchases
Abstract
Dynamic pricing offers the potential to increase revenues. At the same time, it creates an incentive for customers to strategize over the timing of their purchases. A firm should ideally account for this behavior when making its pricing and stocking decisions. In particular, we investigate whether it is optimal for a firm to create rationing risk by deliberately understocking products. Then, the resulting threat of shortages creates an incentive for customers to purchase early at higher prices. But when does such a strategy make sense? If it is profitable to create shortages, what is the optimal amount of rationing risk to create? We develop a stylized model to study this problem. In our model, customers have heterogeneous valuations for the firm's product and face declining prices over two periods. Customers are assumed to have identical risk preferences and know the price path and fill rate in each period. Via its capacity choice, the firm is able to control the fill rate and, hence, the rationing risk faced by customers. Customers behave strategically and weigh the payoff of immediate purchases against the expected payoff of delaying their purchases. We analyze the capacity choice that maximizes the firm's profits. First, we consider a monopoly market and characterize conditions under which rationing is optimal. We examine how the optimal amount of rationing is affected by the magnitude of price changes over time and the degree of risk aversion among customers. We then analyze an oligopoly version of the model and show that competition reduces the firms' ability to profit from rationing. Indeed, there exists a critical number of firms beyond which a rationing equilibrium cannot be supported.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Theory and Practice of Revenue Management
Talluri, K. T., & Van Ryzin, G. J. (2004) · International Series in Operations Research & Management Science · doi:10.1007/b139000 · Cited by 2,243
Note: The Newsvendor Model with Endogenous Demand
Dana, J. D., & Petruzzi, N. C. (2001) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.47.11.1488.10252 · Cited by 239
Cited by
The Value of Fast Fashion: Quick Response, Enhanced Design, and Strategic Consumer Behavior
Cachon, G. P., & Swinney, R. (2011) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1100.1303 · Cited by 687
Strategic Customer Behavior, Commitment, and Supply Chain Performance
Su, X., & Zhang, F. (2008) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1080.0886 · Cited by 522
Dynamic Pricing Strategies with Reference Effects
Popescu, I., & Wu, Y. (2007) · Operations Research · doi:10.1287/opre.1070.0393 · Cited by 447
Are Consumers Strategic? Structural Estimation from the Air-Travel Industry
Li, J., Granados, N., & Netessine, S. (2014) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2013.1860 · Cited by 281
Mapping the Ethicality of Algorithmic Pricing: A Review of Dynamic and Personalized Pricing
Seele, P., Dierksmeier, C., Hofstetter, R., & Schultz, M. D. (2021) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-019-04371-w · Cited by 196
Metadata
- Authors
- Liu, Q., & van Ryzin, G. J.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2008-06
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1115-1131
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2086891434
- Cited by
- 463
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 53.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Strategic Capacity Rationing to Induce Early Purchases. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.1070.0832
- The paper
- Liu, Q., & van Ryzin, G. J. (2008). Strategic Capacity Rationing to Induce Early Purchases. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1070.0832
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.