市场营销学生第八章.pptVIP

* * * * 对竞争者降价的估计与对策 能够/应该采取有效的行动吗？ 竞争者降价了吗？ 建立低价 “战斗品牌” 提高顾客的 感知质量 改善质量并 提高价格 维持原价：继续监控竞争者的价格 降价 是 是 不 不 是 不 降价不利于我们的市场份额和利润吗 二、定价中的公共政策问题 制造商A 串通定价 掠夺性定价 制造商 B 零售价维持 价格歧视 零售商1 串通定价 掠夺性定价 零售商 2 欺诈性定价 消费者 欺诈性定价 串通定价 不同渠道层次的价格 掠夺性定价 定价中的公共政策问题 三、 跨渠道定价 价格歧视 确保在同一 贸易层次上 提供同样的价格 零售价格维持 生产者不能 要求经销商为 其产品制定 某一个价格 欺诈性定价 避免销售商制定 误导消费者的 价格或价格折扣 * * * * * * * Note to Instructor It is best to use an example like the Texas Instruments (TI) example given in the book: TI has built a plant to produce 1,000 calculators per day. Figure 10.3A shows the typical short?run average cost curve (SRAC). It shows that the cost per calculator is high if TI’s factory produces only a few per day. But as production moves up to 1,000 calculators per day, average cost falls. This is because fixed costs are spread over more units, with each one bearing a smaller share of the fixed cost. TI can try to produce more than 1,000 calculators per day, but average costs will increase because the plant becomes inefficient. Workers have to wait for machines, the machines break down more often, and workers get in each other’s way. If TI believed it could sell 2,000 calculators a day, it should consider building a larger plant. The plant would use more efficient machinery and work arrangements. Also, the unit cost of producing 2,000 calculators per day would be lower than the unit cost of producing 1,000 units per day, as shown in the long?run average cost (LRAC) curve (Figure 10.3B). In fact, a 3,000?capacity plant would even be more efficient, according to Figure 10.3B. But a 4,000-daily production plant would be less efficient because of increasing diseconomies of scale—too many workers to manage, paperwork slowing things down, and so on. Figure 10.3B shows that a 3,000-daily production plant is the best size to build if demand is strong enough to support this level of production. * * Note to Instructor The TI example continues as follows: Suppose TI runs a plant that produces 3,00