Pricing Strategy
Price discrimination exists whenever consumers in different countries are charged
different prices for the same product or slightly different variations of the product. Price
discrimination involves charging whatever the market will bear; in a competitive market,
prices may have to be lower than in a market where the firm has a monopoly. Price
discrimination can help a company maximize its profits. It makes economic sense to
charge different prices in different countries. Two (2) conditions are necessary for
profitable price discrimination. First, the firm must be able to keep its national markets
separate. If it cannot do this, individuals or businesses may undercut their attempts at
price discrimination by engaging in arbitrage. Arbitrage occurs when an individual or
business capitalizes on a price differential for a firm’s product between two countries by
purchasing the product in the country where prices are lower and reselling it in the
country where prices are higher
Strategic pricing
The concept of strategic pricing has three (3) aspects, which refer to predatory pricing,
multipoint pricing, and experience curve pricing.
a. Predatory pricing
Predatory pricing is the use of price as a competitive weapon to drive weaker competitors
out of a national market. Once the competitors have left the market, the firm can raise
prices and enjoy high profits. For such a pricing strategy to work, the firm must generally
have a profitable position in another national market, which it can use to subsidize
aggressive pricing in the market it is trying to monopolize. Historically, many Japanese
firms were accused of pursuing such a policy. The argument ran like this: Because the
Japanese market was protected from foreign competition by high informal trade barriers,
Japanese firms could charge high prices and earn high profits at home. They then used
these profits to subsidize aggressive pricing overseas, to drive competitors out of those
markets. Once this had occurred, so it is claimed, the Japanese firms then raised prices.
Matsushita was accused of using this strategy to enter the U.S. TV market. As one of the
major TV producers in Japan, Matsushita earned high profits at home. It then used these