...
【24h】

Intermediated surge pricing

机译:中介价格飙升

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Although Uber and Lyft are known for their flexible "surge pricing," they are surprisingly rigid in another way: each firm takes a constant percentage of passenger fare whether or not there is a surge. In this paper, I investigate the possible reasons for, and the impact of, this rigidity. I study a market in which a profit-maximizing intermediary facilitates trade between buyers and sellers. The intermediary sets prices for buyers and sellers, and keeps the difference as her fee. Optimal prices increase when demand increases, that is, shifts right. If a demand increase is due to an increase in the number of ex ante symmetric buyers, then the intermediary's optimal percent fee decreases. If, instead, a demand increase is due to a reduction in the elasticity of demand, then the intermediary's optimal percent fee increases. In either case, if the intermediary keeps a constant percent fee regardless of shifts in demand, as is the case with Uber and Lyft, then surge pricing (i.e., the ratio of price during high demand to price during low demand) is amplified on one side of the market and diminished on the other side.
机译:尽管Uber和Lyft因其灵活的“加价定价”而闻名,但它们却以另一种方式出人意料地僵化:无论是否出现加价,每家公司都会收取一定百分比的乘客票价。在本文中,我研究了这种僵化的可能原因及其影响。我研究的市场中,利润最大化的中介机构促进了买卖双方之间的贸易。中介机构为买方和卖方设定价格,并保留差额作为她的费用。当需求增加(即右移)时,最优价格会增加。如果需求增加是由于事前对称购买者数量的增加,则中介机构的最佳百分比费用会降低。相反,如果需求增加是由于需求弹性的降低而引起的,那么中介人的最佳百分比费用也会增加。在这两种情况下,如果中介机构不考虑需求的变化而保持恒定的费用百分比(如Uber和Lyft的情况),那么激增定价(即,高需求期间的价格与低需求期间的价格之比)就会放大市场的另一端减少。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号