Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
“We'll buy your old suit back for $100 when you order a new suit.” “We'll trade you $15 for your old sneakers when you buy a new pair.” These offers may seem unusual, but these trade-ins can be an effective pricing tool. When a firm introduces a new and unproved product to the market, consumers who already own a product of lower quality in the same category may not be so willing to upgrade. There may be a mental cost to making a new purchase when they feel that they have not yet gotten their money's worth out of their previous purchase. Pricing tools such as trade-ins can help mitigate this mental cost. Based on the principles of mental accounting (Thaler 1985) and mental depreciation (Heath and Fennema 1996), I provide a theoretical explanation for the mental cost of a replacement purchase, and why a trade-in can be a more effective pricing tool than a straight sale of equivalent cash value. The product replacement model that I present has two unique aspects. First, it describes a replacement product purchase as a decision that involves two criteria: one based on marginal cost benefit analysis, and another based on mental accounting. Each criterion is coded as a gain or loss according to a simplified value function (Kahneman and Tversky 1979), and the net gain associated with a replacement product purchase is the sum of the gain/loss of these two accounts. The second unique aspect is the concept of a product's “mental book value”. During ownership of a product, a consumer mentally depreciates the initial purchase price, thus creating a mental book value for the product. This mental book value is written off when a replacement purchase is made, and this write-off is essentially the mental cost associated with the replacement purchase. Through three experiments, I explore trade-ins, gift opportunities, and external reference prices as three different ways to promote the purchase of a new replacement product by mitigating the write-off of the mental book value.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Erica Mina Okada (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: