Non-price competition

Last updated
A model of imperfect competition in the short-run Imperfect competition in the short run.svg
A model of imperfect competition in the short-run

Non-price competition is a marketing strategy "in which one firm tries to distinguish its product or service from competing products on the basis of attributes like design and workmanship". [1] It often occurs in imperfectly competitive markets because it exists between two or more producers that sell goods and services at the same prices but compete to increase their respective market shares through non-price measures such as marketing schemes and greater quality. [2] It is a form of competition that requires firms to focus on product differentiation instead of pricing strategies among competitors. Such differentiation measures allowing for firms to distinguish themselves, and their products from competitors, may include, offering superb quality of service, extensive distribution, customer focus, or any sustainable competitive advantage other than price. When price controls are not present, the set of competitive equilibria naturally correspond to the state of natural outcomes in Hatfield and Milgrom's two-sided matching with contracts model. [3] [4]

Contents

It can be contrasted with price competition , which is where a company tries to distinguish its product or service from competing products on the basis of low price. Non-price competition typically involves promotional expenditures (such as advertising, selling staff, the locations convenience, sales promotions, coupons, special orders, or free gifts), marketing research, new product development, and brand management costs.

Businesses can also decide to compete against each other in the form of non-price competition such as advertising and product development. Oligopolistic businesses normally do not engage in price competition as this usually leads to a decrease in the profit businesses can make in that specific market.

Non-price competition is a key strategy in a growing number of marketplaces (oDesk, TaskRabbit, Fiverr, AirBnB, mechanical turk, etc) whose sellers offer their Service as a product, and where the price differences are virtually negligible when compared to other sellers of similar productized services on the same marketplaces. They tend to distinguish themselves in terms of quality, delivery time (speed), and customer satisfaction, among other things.

Market structure

Although any company can use a non-price competition strategy, it is most common among oligopolies and monopolistic competition, because firms can be extremely competitive. Firms will engage in non-price competition, in spite of the additional costs involved, because it is usually more profitable than selling for a lower price, and avoids the risk of a price war.

Kinked demand curve model Kinked demand.svg
Kinked demand curve model

Oligopolistic competition

Non-price competition often occurs in oligopoly, where few firms dominate the market. Due to the little or few firms in the market, these firms tend to compete in non-price measures to distinguish themselves. Such competition would be otherwise known as quality competition where oligopolistic firms depend on their quality improvement intensities to survive. [5] In order to distinguish themselves well, these firms can compete in price, but more often, oligopolistic firms engage in non-price competition because of their kinked demand curve. In the kinked demand curve model, the firm will maximize its profits at Q,P where the marginal revenue (MR) is equal to the marginal cost (MC) of the firm. Hence, a change in MC would not necessarily change the market price, implying rather stable and sticky market prices.

Long-run equilibrium of the firm under monopolistic competition Long-run equilibrium of the firm under monopolistic competition.JPG
Long-run equilibrium of the firm under monopolistic competition

Monopolistic competition

Monopolistic market structures also engage in non-price competition because they are not price takers. Due to having rather fixed market prices, leading to inelastic demand, they engage in product differentiation. Monopolistic markets engage in non-price competition because of how the market is designed where the firm dominates the market. In order to sustain in the market, they have to innovate and improve on their product development to appeal to consumers. The new trade theory suggests that the model of monopolistic competition plays a big role in explaining trade trends in trade patterns where product development drives product differentiation. Under monopolistic competition, firms engage in non-price competition to innovate and further boost their brand image.

Main types

There are two main branches of non-price competition. This is where firms branch out to create new avenues for themselves to remain competitive in a market where prices are rather sticky. Such streams of non-price competition include product differentiation and/or development and advertising and/or promotion.

Product differentiation

Product differentiation allows for a firm to establish its products from its competitors to win over a greater market share. The more different the products of rival firms are, the lower the cross effects between their markets with regards to both non-price and price variables. [6] By offering a wide range of products, firms can not only achieve economies of scope, but also be able to expand their market base. However, such product differentiation measures may result in significantly higher overhead costs.

Advertising and promotion

Example of a promotional material to capture customer attention: Marilyn Monroe and Tom Ewell in a promotional photo for the movie The Seven Year Itch, 1955. Marilyn Monroe and Tom Ewell in a promotional photo for the movie The Seven Year Itch, 1955.png
Example of a promotional material to capture customer attention: Marilyn Monroe and Tom Ewell in a promotional photo for the movie The Seven Year Itch, 1955.

Promotion can be considered an umbrella term to include all advertising, branding, public relations and packaging. This strategy includes all aspects of non-price strategies to continuously capture market attention. Advertising is divided into two categories:

  1. Informative: This form of advertising includes informing consumers about product features, details descriptions.
  2. Persuasive: This form of advertising engages with the consumers on an emotional level. Such advertising methods are highly linked to behavioural economics which takes advantage of the heuristics and bounded rationality of consumers when making decisions.

Advertising mediums can be designed specifically to meet with the expectations of consumers as well as the size of the market. Firms aim on reaching as high targets as possible by making use of the network effects of advertising. [6]

Promotional means depend on a number of factors such as the nicheness of the market, and allocated promotional budgets.

Examples

There are many ways of how firms can engage in non-price competition to increase their market share and retain their customer base. Examples are such like loyalty programs, subsidized delivery, unique selling points, brand recognition, ethical and/or charitable concerns, after-sales service, positive feedback reviews, marketing campaigns and many more. The few of the more important and common examples of non-price competition are as follows.

Loyalty programs

Most firms offer out loyalty cards in order to capture market attention and retain customers. Loyalty cards are a form of differentiation where customers are given incentives to purchase from that specific firm.

Subsidized delivery

Big firms such as Amazon has been successful in offering AmazonPrime delivery in order to provide free delivery for their customers, with a paid subscription. This would give customers an incentive to purchase more because of the waived delivery fee. This works especially well for customers who are regular online shoppers. Supermarkets such as Tesco and Costco are offering delivery services worldwide as well, to cater for their international customer bases.

Unique selling points

Firms with unique selling points are a result of focused differentiation because products are customized to consumer preferences. For instance, food companies now engage in promoting health foods which cater to healthy-living which has become a norm nowadays. Such products can have gluten-free options, sugar-free options and even low-carb alternatives. Some unique selling points might also be a result of good packaging that aim to capture consumer attention.

Accumulation of positive reviews

Many large companies rely on positive reviews from previous customers in order to gain positive feedback from others. [7] Such methods are important because it gives other new consumers an anchor to base the quality of their products on, and creates a certain level of trust from the amount of positive feedback received.

Offering good after-sales service

After-sales service is crucial for the reputation and brand loyalty of the firm. In order to retain customers, they would have to provide great after-sales service so customers would be able to return and obtain the services they demand. Examples are such like Apple Care offering warranty and also proper services to repair the purchased devices.

Relationship with excess profits

Many economists wonder about the literature on non-price competition whether positive profits accruing to the members of an oligopolistic group of firms, which may be pushed to zero by competitive price undercutting, can also be competed away by advertising or other non-price activities. [6] This question is specifically relevant to regulated industries without free entry, or a cartel arrangement, where the objective of the price regulation is to preserve profit levels. This also comes to the question regarding successful or unsuccessful product differentiation among competitors. If advertising costs are higher than the revenues of the firms, then it would lead to a waste of resources, resulting in negative profits. [8]

The history of price competition has led to many believing that non-price competition is less intense as compared to price competition. Formal models like those of Stigler(1968) show that the outcome depends on how the system parameters is valued. [6]

Differences with price competition

The main difference between price competition and non-price competition would be the traditional case of which price competition exists in homogenous products where products are very difficult to be differentiated and can only be produced in minimal forms. Such circumstances would result in firms competing with prices, leading to price wars. Price competition exists as a result of balancing between supply and demand for specified goods. [9]

Non-price competition engages in any other forms of non-price attributes of products or services tailored to capture as much market share as possible. Non-price competition revolve around competing qualitatively among products and services.

With relations to the demand curve, price competition implies that the firm accepts its demand curve and manipulates its price to reach its goals. Non-price competition however, seeks to change its demographics and shape of the demand curve by adapting and innovating.

Incentives

Price regulation

Price competition can be completely absent in markets where the government fully sets the rates. [10] When there is no room for price competition because of fixed market prices, firms resort to other non-price alternatives to compete. Before deregulation in the late 1970s and early 1980s, there were many industries in the United States where price regulation was done in conjunction with non-price competition but disguised as price competition. [11] The fixing of commission rates by the New York Exchange still allows brokerage houses to compete through non-price measures through offering advisory services regarding investments. [11] However, elimination of price competition through regulation does not necessarily result in non-price competition. In an initially unregulated industry, firms would be able to choose optimal values for both price and non-price values. [11] Such an incentive would only happen when prices are regulated at a different equilibrium level.

Acts of collusion/cartel agreements

When firms within an industry engage in collusions or cartels to fix the market prices of their products, this rules out price competition among them. This would give each firm a fixed share of total output at the common price, therefore, showing a negatively-sloping demand curve. Under a collusion, firms conspire against the consumer, but still compete among each other in terms of quality or by advertising. [12] This is also to maintain their own branding by colluding on a set price so their brands can be the distinguishing factor within a branding competition. [13]

Consider a situation where the cartel fixes a price and allows for competition in advertising. There would be two marginal costs: (i) Marginal cost of production alone (MCp) and (ii) Marginal cost of production + advertising (MCp+a). This leads to two possibilities: (1) Marginal cost (MCp+a) stays constant, (2) Marginal cost (MCp+a) falls. If marginal production cost (MCp) is constant, the marginal production cost+cost of advertisement (MCp+a) will remain constant as well, under the conditions of increasing returns to advertising. On the other hand, if marginal production cost is rising, then the rise must be equally offset by increasing returns to advertising. In case (1), each firm will seek to expand output by increasing advertising efforts. In case (2), firms will expand until where (MCp+a) equals to the price.

Price competition is believed by most economists to be more effective in increasing output and reducing profits as compared to non-price competition. However, marginal costs of production do not rise as rapidly as marginal costs of advertising, quality and other non-price variables. Therefore, the more common and plausible view would be that the marginal non-price variable cost is larger than the marginal price-reduction cost, if the firm was an initial monopolist. [11]

Cases involving joint ventures

When an industry is dominated by joint ventures, this makes joint venture partners obtain majority of the market power. This results in an irrelevant price competition because it would not be of use. An example would be the Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp., 472 U.S. 585 (1985) where these two firms owning these mountains formed a joint venture to offer consumers a lift ticket good at all four areas. Although they were not engaging in price competition, this joint venture was structured in a way where non-price competition was fostered because the firms shared the revenue, and which allowed consumers to still be able to make their own choices in terms of the quality of the facilities offered by both partners.

Involvement of third-party payors

When consumers' bills are paid by third party entities, the consumer will decide on their consumption based on non-price measures, such as quality, service or location. For instance, insurance coverage allow for buyers to engage in non-price decision making because they know that the insurance company will pay for them based on the insurance package they signed up for.

Antitrust Law and non-price competition

With relations to the above section regarding incentives to engage in non-price competition, these incentives lead to an unfair market structure that require the attention of competition regulators, specifically under Antitrust Laws. [10] For cases with price regulation, antitrust policies have managed to prevent various firms within the airline industry from merging so they would still engage in non-price competition.

For cases involving industry-wide joint ventures, courts have paid a close attention to only permit firms to engage in joint ventures if they are still engaging in non-price competition that protects the choices of consumers.

For cases involving third-party payors, partial solutions where consumers are forced to engage in some price comparisons where a threat of rate increases if too many claims are made.

Advantages and significance

Non-price competition is significant in the wide areas of economics, business and legal.

Economics

As non-price competition consistently brings about product differentiation especially among monopolistic firms, it brings about a greater diversity in product offerings, and can benefit and increase consumer utility through various ways. Non-price effects increasingly capture attention in the economics domain of on the different dimensions and effects of non-price competition in the form of variety, quality and service. [14]

Business

Business research confirms that firms rely highly on non-price strategies in competition. For example, in strategic management, areas of focus revolve around continuous innovation, synergism and long-term relationships that build sustainable businesses. [14] Similarly, in marketing, price is not only the only factor that affects the firm. Other areas need to complement the prices set by firms in order to maintain market presence. These areas may include the 4 P's: Product, Promotion, Place and Price.

Law/legal

The existence of non-price competition call upon the attention of antitrust law regulators in order to maintain fair competition among firms. A significant issue in the Continental Can litigation was how a relevant product market should be known for reviewing company mergers. [14]

Other advantages

Disadvantages

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Microeconomics</span> Behavior of individuals and firms

Microeconomics is a branch of economics that studies the behavior of individuals and firms in making decisions regarding the allocation of scarce resources and the interactions among these individuals and firms. Microeconomics focuses on the study of individual markets, sectors, or industries as opposed to the economy as a whole, which is studied in macroeconomics.

A monopoly, as described by Irving Fisher, is a market with the "absence of competition", creating a situation where a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular thing. This contrasts with a monopsony which relates to a single entity's control of a market to purchase a good or service, and with oligopoly and duopoly which consists of a few sellers dominating a market. Monopolies are thus characterised by a lack of economic competition to produce the good or service, a lack of viable substitute goods, and the possibility of a high monopoly price well above the seller's marginal cost that leads to a high monopoly profit. The verb monopolise or monopolize refers to the process by which a company gains the ability to raise prices or exclude competitors. In economics, a monopoly is a single seller. In law, a monopoly is a business entity that has significant market power, that is, the power to charge overly high prices, which is associated with unfair price raises. Although monopolies may be big businesses, size is not a characteristic of a monopoly. A small business may still have the power to raise prices in a small industry.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Monopolistic competition</span> Imperfect competition of differentiated products that are not perfect substitutes

Monopolistic competition is a type of imperfect competition such that there are many producers competing against each other but selling products that are differentiated from one another and hence not perfect substitutes. In monopolistic competition, a company takes the prices charged by its rivals as given and ignores the impact of its own prices on the prices of other companies. If this happens in the presence of a coercive government, monopolistic competition will fall into government-granted monopoly. Unlike perfect competition, the company maintains spare capacity. Models of monopolistic competition are often used to model industries. Textbook examples of industries with market structures similar to monopolistic competition include restaurants, cereals, clothing, shoes, and service industries in large cities. The "founding father" of the theory of monopolistic competition is Edward Hastings Chamberlin, who wrote a pioneering book on the subject, Theory of Monopolistic Competition (1933). Joan Robinson's book The Economics of Imperfect Competition presents a comparable theme of distinguishing perfect from imperfect competition. Further work on monopolistic competition was undertaken by Dixit and Stiglitz who created the Dixit-Stiglitz model which has proved applicable used in the sub fields of international trade theory, macroeconomics and economic geography.

An oligopoly is a market in which control over an industry lies in the hands of a few large sellers who own a dominant share of the market. Oligopolistic markets have homogenous products, few market participants, and inelastic demand for the products in those industries. As a result of their significant market power, firms in oligopolistic markets can influence prices through manipulating the supply function. Firms in an oligopoly are also mutually interdependent, as any action by one firm is expected to affect other firms in the market and evoke a reaction or consequential action. As a result, firms in oligopolistic markets often resort to collusion as means of maximising profits.

In economics, specifically general equilibrium theory, a perfect market, also known as an atomistic market, is defined by several idealizing conditions, collectively called perfect competition, or atomistic competition. In theoretical models where conditions of perfect competition hold, it has been demonstrated that a market will reach an equilibrium in which the quantity supplied for every product or service, including labor, equals the quantity demanded at the current price. This equilibrium would be a Pareto optimum.

In economics, imperfect competition refers to a situation where the characteristics of an economic market do not fulfil all the necessary conditions of a perfectly competitive market. Imperfect competition causes market inefficiencies, resulting in market failure. Imperfect competition usually describes behaviour of suppliers in a market, such that the level of competition between sellers is below the level of competition in perfectly competitive market conditions.

Price discrimination is a microeconomic pricing strategy where identical or largely similar goods or services are sold at different prices by the same provider in different market segments. Price discrimination is distinguished from product differentiation by the more substantial difference in production cost for the differently priced products involved in the latter strategy. Price discrimination essentially relies on the variation in the customers' willingness to pay and in the elasticity of their demand. For price discrimination to succeed, a firm must have market power, such as a dominant market share, product uniqueness, sole pricing power, etc.

In economics and marketing, product differentiation is the process of distinguishing a product or service from others to make it more attractive to a particular target market. This involves differentiating it from competitors' products as well as from a firm's other products. The concept was proposed by Edward Chamberlin in his 1933 book, The Theory of Monopolistic Competition.

Anti-competitive practices are business or government practices that prevent or reduce competition in a market. Antitrust laws ensure businesses do not engage in competitive practices that harm other, usually smaller, businesses or consumers. These laws are formed to promote healthy competition within a free market by limiting the abuse of monopoly power. Competition allows companies to compete in order for products and services to improve; promote innovation; and provide more choices for consumers. In order to obtain greater profits, some large enterprises take advantage of market power to hinder survival of new entrants. Anti-competitive behavior can undermine the efficiency and fairness of the market, leaving consumers with little choice to obtain a reasonable quality of service.

In theories of competition in economics, a barrier to entry, or an economic barrier to entry, is a fixed cost that must be incurred by a new entrant, regardless of production or sales activities, into a market that incumbents do not have or have not had to incur. Because barriers to entry protect incumbent firms and restrict competition in a market, they can contribute to distortionary prices and are therefore most important when discussing antitrust policy. Barriers to entry often cause or aid the existence of monopolies and oligopolies, or give companies market power. Barriers of entry also have an importance in industries. First of all it is important to identify that some exist naturally, such as brand loyalty. Governments can also create barriers to entry to meet consumer protection laws, protecting the public. In other cases it can also be due to inherent scarcity of public resources needed to enter a market.

Monopoly profit is an inflated level of profit due to the monopolistic practices of an enterprise.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Substitute good</span> Economics concept of goods considered interchangeable

In microeconomics, substitute goods are two goods that can be used for the same purpose by consumers. That is, a consumer perceives both goods as similar or comparable, so that having more of one good causes the consumer to desire less of the other good. Contrary to complementary goods and independent goods, substitute goods may replace each other in use due to changing economic conditions. An example of substitute goods is Coca-Cola and Pepsi; the interchangeable aspect of these goods is due to the similarity of the purpose they serve, i.e. fulfilling customers' desire for a soft drink. These types of substitutes can be referred to as close substitutes.

In economics, market power refers to the ability of a firm to influence the price at which it sells a product or service by manipulating either the supply or demand of the product or service to increase economic profit. In other words, market power occurs if a firm does not face a perfectly elastic demand curve and can set its price (P) above marginal cost (MC) without losing revenue. This indicates that the magnitude of market power is associated with the gap between P and MC at a firm's profit maximising level of output. The size of the gap, which encapsulates the firm's level of market dominance, is determined by the residual demand curve's form. A steeper reverse demand indicates higher earnings and more dominance in the market. Such propensities contradict perfectly competitive markets, where market participants have no market power, P = MC and firms earn zero economic profit. Market participants in perfectly competitive markets are consequently referred to as 'price takers', whereas market participants that exhibit market power are referred to as 'price makers' or 'price setters'.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Marginal revenue</span> Additional total revenue generated by increasing product sales by 1 unit

Marginal revenue is a central concept in microeconomics that describes the additional total revenue generated by increasing product sales by 1 unit. Marginal revenue is the increase in revenue from the sale of one additional unit of product, i.e., the revenue from the sale of the last unit of product. It can be positive or negative. Marginal revenue is an important concept in vendor analysis. To derive the value of marginal revenue, it is required to examine the difference between the aggregate benefits a firm received from the quantity of a good and service produced last period and the current period with one extra unit increase in the rate of production. Marginal revenue is a fundamental tool for economic decision making within a firm's setting, together with marginal cost to be considered.

Bertrand competition is a model of competition used in economics, named after Joseph Louis François Bertrand (1822–1900). It describes interactions among firms (sellers) that set prices and their customers (buyers) that choose quantities at the prices set. The model was formulated in 1883 by Bertrand in a review of Antoine Augustin Cournot's book Recherches sur les Principes Mathématiques de la Théorie des Richesses (1838) in which Cournot had put forward the Cournot model. Cournot's model argued that each firm should maximise its profit by selecting a quantity level and then adjusting price level to sell that quantity. The outcome of the model equilibrium involved firms pricing above marginal cost; hence, the competitive price. In his review, Bertrand argued that each firm should instead maximise its profits by selecting a price level that undercuts its competitors' prices, when their prices exceed marginal cost. The model was not formalized by Bertrand; however, the idea was developed into a mathematical model by Francis Ysidro Edgeworth in 1889.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Market structure</span> Differentiation of firms by goods and operations

Market structure, in economics, depicts how firms are differentiated and categorised based on the types of goods they sell (homogeneous/heterogeneous) and how their operations are affected by external factors and elements. Market structure makes it easier to understand the characteristics of diverse markets.

Merger simulation is a commonly used technique when analyzing potential welfare costs and benefits of mergers between firms. Merger simulation models differ with respect to assumed form of competition that best describes the market as well as the structure of the chosen demand system

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Competition (economics)</span> Economic scenario

In economics, competition is a scenario where different economic firms are in contention to obtain goods that are limited by varying the elements of the marketing mix: price, product, promotion and place. In classical economic thought, competition causes commercial firms to develop new products, services and technologies, which would give consumers greater selection and better products. The greater the selection of a good is in the market, the lower prices for the products typically are, compared to what the price would be if there was no competition (monopoly) or little competition (oligopoly).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Profit (economics)</span> Concept in economics

In economics, profit is the difference between revenue that an economic entity has received from its outputs and total costs of its inputs, also known as surplus value. It is equal to total revenue minus total cost, including both explicit and implicit costs.

In microeconomics, the Bertrand–Edgeworth model of price-setting oligopoly looks at what happens when there is a homogeneous product where there is a limit to the output of firms which are willing and able to sell at a particular price. This differs from the Bertrand competition model where it is assumed that firms are willing and able to meet all demand. The limit to output can be considered as a physical capacity constraint which is the same at all prices, or to vary with price under other assumptions.

References

  1. McConnell, Campbell R. (2002). Economics : principles, problems, and policies. Brue, Stanley L., 1945- (15th ed.). Boston, Mass.: McGraw-Hill. ISBN   0-07-234036-3. OCLC   47074801.
  2. A dictionary of business and management. Law, Jonathan (Sixth ed.). Oxford. 2016. ISBN   978-0-19-176527-8. OCLC   944122322.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) CS1 maint: others (link)
  3. Hatfield, John William; Kojima, Fuhito (2008). "Matching with Contracts: Comment". The American Economic Review. 98 (3): 1189–1194. doi:10.1257/aer.98.3.1189. ISSN   0002-8282. JSTOR   29730113.
  4. Hatfield, John William; Milgrom, Paul R (2005-08-01). "Matching with Contracts" (PDF). American Economic Review. 95 (4): 913–935. doi:10.1257/0002828054825466. ISSN   0002-8282.
  5. Moghadam, Hamed Markazi (2020-04-01). "Price and non-price competition in an oligopoly: an analysis of relative payoff maximizers". Journal of Evolutionary Economics. 30 (2): 507–521. doi:10.1007/s00191-019-00653-8. hdl: 10419/119460 . ISSN   1432-1386. S2CID   214032844.
  6. 1 2 3 4 Lancaster, K. J. (2016), "Non-price Competition", The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 1–4, doi:10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5_1739-1, ISBN   978-1-349-95121-5 , retrieved 2020-11-01
  7. Pettinger, Tejvan (9 December 2019). "Non-Price Competition". Economics Help. Retrieved 2020-11-01.
  8. 1 2 Boudreaux, Donald J. (1989). "Imperfectly Competitive Firms, Non-Price Competition, and Rent Seeking". Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE) / Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft. 145 (4): 597–612. ISSN   0932-4569. JSTOR   40751243.
  9. "Price and non-price competition". CEOpedia | Management online. Retrieved 2020-11-01.
  10. 1 2 "Using the "Consumer Choice" Approach to Antitrust Law". Antitrust Law Journal. 74: 175–264 via JSTOR.
  11. 1 2 3 4 Stigler, George J. (1968). "Price and Non-Price Competition". Journal of Political Economy. 76 (1): 149–154. doi:10.1086/259391. ISSN   0022-3808. JSTOR   1830736. S2CID   154265215.
  12. "Price Fixing and Non-Price Competition". ResearchGate. Retrieved 2020-11-01.
  13. Wang, Huaqing; Gurnani, Haresh; Erkoc, Murat (2016). "Entry Deterrence of Capacitated Competition Using Price and Non-Price Strategies". Production and Operations Management. 25 (4): 719–735. doi:10.1111/poms.12500. ISSN   1937-5956.
  14. 1 2 3 "Non-Price Effects of Mergers: Introduction and Overview | Request PDF". ResearchGate. Retrieved 2020-11-01.
  15. "What is Non-Price Competition? Definition and meaning". Market Business News. Retrieved 2020-11-01.

Further reading