How to Price Your Products in Different Markets
This letter constitutes a permission to reprint or mirror any and
all of the materials mentioned or linked to herein subject
to appropriate credit and linkback. Every article published MUST
include the author bio, including the link to the author's Web site
(at the bottom of this message).
===============================================================
How to Price Your Products in Different Markets
By Sam Vaknin
Author of "Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited"
In April 2002, the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Trade
Organization (WTO), the Norwegian Foreign Ministry, and the US-based
Global Health Council held a 3-days workshop about "Pricing and
Financing of Essential Drugs" in poor countries. Not surprisingly,
the conclusion was:
"... There was broad recognition that differential pricing could
play an important role in ensuring access to existing drugs at
affordable prices, particularly in the poorest countries, while the
patent system would be allowed to continue to play its role in
providing incentives for research and development into new drugs."
The 80 experts, who attended the workshop, proposed to reconcile
these two, apparently contradictory, aspirations by introducing
different prices for drugs in low-income and rich countries. This
could be achieved bilaterally, between companies and purchasers,
patent holders and manufacturers, global suppliers and countries -
or through a market mechanism.
According to IMS Health, poor countries are projected to account for
less than one quarter of pharmaceutical sales in 2002. Of every $100
spent on medicines worldwide - 42 are in the USA, 25 in Europe, 11
in Japan, 7.5 in Latin America and the Caribbean, 5 in China and
South East Asia, less than 2 in East Europe and India each, about 1
in Africa and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) each.
Vaccines, contraceptives, and condoms are already subject to cross-
border differential pricing. Lately, drug companies, were forced to
introduce multi-tiered pricing following court decisions, or
agreements with the authorities. Brazilians and South Africans, for
instance, pay a fraction of the price paid in the West for their
anti-retroviral AIDS medication.
Even so, the price of a typical treatment is not affordable. Foreign
donors, private foundations - such as the Bill and Melissa Gates
Foundation - and international organizations had to step in to cover
the shortfall.
The experts acknowledged the risk that branded drugs sold cheaply in
a poor country might end up being smuggled into and consumed in a
much richer ones. Less likely, industrialized countries may also
impose price controls, using poor country prices as benchmarks.
Other participants, including dominant NGO's, such as Oxfam and
Medecins Sans Frontieres, rooted for a reform of the TRIPS
agreement - or the manufacturing of generic alternatives to branded
drugs.
The "health safeguards" built into the Trade-related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) convention allow for compulsory
licensing - manufacturing a drug without the patent holder's
permission - and for parallel imports - importing a drug from
another country where it is sold at a lower price - in case of an
health emergency.
Aware of the existence of this Damocles sword, the European Union
and the trans-national pharmaceutical lobby have come out last May
in favor of "global tiered pricing".
In its 2001 Human Development Report (HDR), the United Nations
Development Program (UNDP) called to introduce differential rich
versus poor country pricing for "essential high-tech products" as
well. The Health GAP Coalition commented on the report:
"On the issue of differential pricing, the Report notes that, while
an effective global market would encourage different prices in
different countries for products such as pharmaceuticals, the
current system does not. With high-tech products, where the main
cost to the seller is usually research rather than production, such
tiered pricing could lead to an identical product being sold in poor
countries for just one-tenth-or one-hundredth- the price in Europe
or the United States.
But drug companies and other technology producers fear that
knowledge about such discounting could lead to a demand for lower
prices in rich countries as well. They have tended to set global
prices that are unaffordable for the citizens of poor countries (as
with many AIDS drugs).
'Part of the battle to establish differential pricing must be won
through consumer education. The citizens of rich countries must
understand that it is only fair for people in developing countries
to pay less for medicines and other critical technology products.' -
stated Ms. Sukaki Fukuda-Parr" the lead author of the Report.
Public declarations issued in Havana, Cuba, in San Jose, Costa Rica
in the late 1990's touted the benefits of free online scholarship
for developing countries. The WHO and the Open Society Institute
initiated HINARI - Health InterNetwork Access to Research
Initiative. Peter Suber, the publisher of the "Free Online
Scholarship" newsletter, summarizes the initiative thus:
"Under the program, the world's six largest publishers of biomedical
journals have agreed to three-tiered pricing. For countries in the
lowest tier (GNP per capita below $1k), online subscriptions are
free of charge. For countries in the middle tier (GNP per capita
between $1k and $3k), online subscriptions will be discounted by an
amount to be decided this June. Countries in the top tier pay full
price.
The six participating publishers are Blackwell Synergy, Elsevier
Science Direct, Harcourt IDEAL, Springer Link, Wiley Interscience,
and Wolters Kluwer. The subscriptions are given to universities and
research institutions, not to individuals. But they are identical in
scope to the subscriptions received by institutions paying the full
price."
Of 500 bottom-tier eligible institutions, more than 200 have already
signed up. Additional publishers have joined this 3-5 years program
and most biomedical journals are already on offer. Mid-tier pricing
will be declared by January next year. HINARI will probably be
expanded to cover other scientific disciplines.
Authors from developing countries also benefit from the spread of
free online scholarship coupled with differential pricing. "Best of
Science", for example, a free, peer-reviewed, online science journal
subsists on fees paid by the authors. It charges authors from
developing countries less.
But differential pricing is unlikely to be confined to scholarly
journals. Already, voices in developing countries demand tiered
pricing for Western textbooks sold in emerging economies. Quoted in
the Free Online Scholarship newsletter, Lai Ting-ming of the Taipei
Times criticized, on March 26, 2002 "western publishers for selling
textbooks to third world students at first world prices. There is
a 'textbook pricing crisis' in developing countries, which is most
commonly solved by illicit photocopying."
Touchingly, the issue of the dispossessed within rich country
societies was raised by two African Special Rapporteurs in a report
submitted last year to the UN sub-Commission on Human Rights and
titled "Globalization and its Impact on the Full Enjoyment of Human
Rights". It said:
" ... The emphasis on R & D investment conveniently omits mention of
the fact that some of the financing for this research comes from
public sources; how then can it be justifiably argued that the
benefits that derive from such investment should accrue primarily to
private interests? Lastly, the focus on differential pricing between
(rich and poor) countries omits consideration of the fact that there
are many people within developed countries who are also unable to
afford the same drugs. This may be on account of an inaccessible or
inhospitable health care system (in terms of cost or an absence of
adequate social welfare mechanisms), or because of racial, gender,
sexual orientation or other forms of discrimination."
Differential pricing is often confused with dynamic pricing.
Bob Gressens of Moai Technologies and Christopher Brousseau of
Accenture define dynamic pricing, in their paper "The Value
Propositions of Dynamic Pricing in Business-to-Business E-Commerce"
as: "... The buying and selling of goods and services in markets
where prices are free to move in response to supply and demand
conditions."
This is usually done through auctions or requests for quotes or
tenders. Dynamic pricing is most often used in the liquidation of
surplus inventories and for e-sourcing.
Nor is differential pricing entirely identical with non-linear
pricing. In the real world, prices are rarely fixed. Some prices
vary with usage - "pay per view" in the cable TV industry, or "pay
per print" in scholarly online reference. Other prices combine a
fixed element (e.g., a subscription fee) with a variable element
(e.g., payment per broadband usage). Volume discounts, sales, cross-
selling, three for the price of two - are all examples of non-linear
pricing. Non-linear pricing is about charging different prices to
different consumers - but within the same market.
Hal Varian of the School of Information Management and Systems at
the University of California in Berkeley summarizes the treatment
of "Price Discrimination" in A. C. Pigou's seminal 1920 tome, "The
Economics of Welfare":
"First-degree price discrimination means that the producer sells
different units of output for different prices and these prices may
differ from person to person. This is sometimes known as the case of
perfect price discrimination.
Second-degree price discrimination means that the producer sells
different units of output for different prices, but every individual
who buys the same amount of the good pays the same price. Thus
prices depend on the amount of the good purchased, but not on who
does the purchasing. A common example of this sort of pricing is
volume discounts.
Third-degree price discrimination occurs when the producer sells
output to different people for different prices, but every unit of
output sold to a given person sells for the same price. This is the
most common form of price discrimination, and examples include
senior citizens' discounts, student discounts, and so on."
Varian evaluates the contribution of each of these practices to
economic efficiency in a 1996 article published in "First Monday":
"First-degree price discrimination yields a fully efficient outcome,
in the sense of maximizing consumer plus producer surplus.
Second-degree price discrimination generally provides an efficient
amount of the good to the largest consumers, but smaller consumers
may receive inefficiently low amounts. Nevertheless, they will be
better off than if they did not participate in the market. If
differential pricing is not allowed, groups with small willingness
to pay may not be served at all.
Third-degree price discrimination increases welfare when it
encourages a sufficiently large increase in output. If output
doesn't increase, total welfare will fall. As in the case of second-
degree price discrimination, third-degree price discrimination is a
good thing for niche markets that would not otherwise be served
under a uniform pricing policy.
The key issue is whether the output of goods and services is
increased or decreased by differential pricing."
Strictly speaking, global differential pricing is none of the above.
It involves charging different prices in different markets, in
accordance with the purchasing power of the local clientele (i.e.,
their willingness and ability to pay) - or in deference to their
political and legal clout.
Differential prices are not set by supply and demand and, therefore,
do not fluctuate. All the consumers within each market are charged
the same - prices vary only across markets. They are determined by
the manufacturer in each and every market separately in accordance
with local conditions.
A March 2001 WHO/WTO background paper titled "More Equitable Pricing
for Essential Drugs" discovered immense variations in the prices of
medicines among different national markets. But, surprisingly, these
price differences were unrelated to national income.
Even allowing for price differentials, the one-month cost of
treatment of Tuberculosis in Tanzania was the equivalent of 500
working hours - compared to 1.4 working hours in Switzerland. The
price of medicines in poor countries - from Zimbabwe to India - was
clearly higher than one would have expected from income measures
such as GDP per capita or average wages. Why didn't drug prices
adjust to reflect indigenous purchasing power?
According to the Paris-based International Chamber of Commerce
(ICC), differential pricing is also - perhaps mostly - influenced by
other considerations such as: transportation costs, disparate tax
and customs regimes, cost of employment, differences in property
rights and royalties, local safety and health standards, price
controls, quality of internal distribution systems, the size of the
order, the size of the market, and so on.
Differential pricing was made possible by the application of mass
manufacturing to the knowledge society. Many industries, both
emerging ones, like telecommunications, or information technology -
and mature ones, like airlines, or pharmaceuticals - defy
conventional pricing theory. They involve huge sunk and fixed costs -
mainly in research and development and plant.
But the marginal cost of each and every manufactured unit is
identical - and vanishingly low. Beyond a certain quantitative
threshold returns skyrocket and revenues contribute directly to the
bottom line.
Consider software applications. The first units sold cover the
enormous fixed and sunk costs of authoring the software and the
machine tools used in the manufacturing process. The actual
production ("variable" or "marginal") cost of each unit is a mere
few cents - the wholesale price of the diskettes or CD-ROM's
consumed. Thus, after having achieved breakeven, sales revenues
translate immediately to gross profits.
This bifurcation - the huge fixed costs versus the negligible
marginal costs - vitiates the rule: "set price at marginal cost". At
which marginal cost? To compensate for the sunk and fixed costs, the
first "marginal units" must carry a much higher price tag than the
last ones.
Hal Varian studied this problem. His conclusions:
"(i) Efficient pricing in such environments will typically involve
prices that differ across consumers and type of service; (ii)
producers will want to engage in product and service differentiation
in order for this differential pricing to be feasible; and, (iii)
differential pricing will arise naturally as a result of profit
seeking by firms. It follows that differential pricing can generally
be expected to contribute to economic efficiency."
Differential pricing is also the outcome of globalization. As brands
become ubiquitous and as the information superhighway renders prices
comparable and transparent - different markets react differently to
price signals. In impoverished countries, differential pricing was
introduced illegally where manufacturers insisted on rigid, rich-
world, price lists.
Piracy of intellectual property, for instance, is a form of coercive
(and illegal) differential pricing. The existence of thriving rip-
off markets proves that, at the right prices, demand is rife (demand
elasticity). Both piracy and differential pricing may be spreading
to scholarly publishing and other form of intellectual property such
as software, films, music, and e-books.
Consumers are divided on the issue of multi-tiered pricing tailored
to fit the customer's purchasing power. Not surprisingly, rich world
buyers are apprehensive. They feel that differential pricing is a
form of hidden subsidy, or a kind of "third world tax".
On September 2000, Amazon.com conducted a unique poll - this time
among customers - regarding differential pricing (actually, non-
linear pricing) - showing different prices to different users on the
same book.
Forty two percent of all respondents though it was "discrimination"
and "should stop" - but a surprising 31 percent regarded it as "a
valid use of data mining". A quarter said it is "OK, if explained to
users". The comments were telling:
"I work over 80 hours a week. As a small business owner, I may make
good money, but does that mean I should be charged more than
unmotivated individuals who are broke because they don't want to
work more than 30 hours a week. I don't think so ... Should
(preferred) customers disappear in (the) off-line world? Should Gold
Cards or Platinum Cards disappear? ...
The interesting thing is that discrimination of pricing is very
common in the insurance industry - the basis for actuarial work and
in airlines - based on load factors. The key is the pricing
available to groups of customers with similar profiles ... Simple
supply and demand, competition from other suppliers should
offset ... A dangerous policy to implement ... As a consumer I don't
necessarily like it, (unless I get a lower price!). However,
economically speaking, (think of a monopolist's MR curve) the ideal
is to have each person pay the maximum amount that they are willing
to pay."
==============================================================
AUTHOR BIO (must be included with the article)
Sam Vaknin ( samvak.tripod.com ) is the author of Malignant
Self Love - Narcissism Revisited and After the Rain - How the West
Lost the East. He served as a columnist for Global Politician,
Central Europe Review, PopMatters, Bellaonline, and eBookWeb, a
United Press International (UPI) Senior Business Correspondent, and
the editor of mental health and Central East Europe categories in
The Open Directory and Suite101.
Until recently, he served as the Economic Advisor to the Government
of Macedonia.
Visit Sam's Web site at samvak.tripod.com
|