Download Price busters - London Business School

2
2
2
0.180.
0
8
.
1
0
1
.
.822
0
Issue 9 October 2008
Marketing
Price
busters
Strategies to fight
low cost rivals
Price check
Using price to awaken
consumer thinking
Place your bets
The success of Betfair
PLUS:
Value Merchants
– how to create
superior value in
business markets
Marketing Insight
Issue 9
In this issue
Economic downturn?
Time to address the
marketing challenges
facing your organisation
London Business School’s marketing
programmes will provide you with the
knowledge and tools needed to market
successfully during uncertain times.
Customer Focused Marketing: The Key to Unlocking Profits
Aligning customers and market strategy
Dates: 2-7 November 2008, 31 May – 5 June 2009, 8-13 November 2009
Market Driving Strategies
Create new markets through innovation
Dates: 9–14 November 2008, 14-19 June 2009, 15-20 November 2009
For more information contact our Client Services Team on
+44 (0)20 7000 7391 or email [email protected]
London Business School
Tel +44 (0)20 7000 7390
Email [email protected]
www.london.edu/
Marketing Fundamentals
Examine and critique core marketing principles
Dates: This is an evening programme
(once a week from 12th January 2009 until 16th March 2009)
For more information, contact the London Business School Centre
for Marketing via email: [email protected]
News and forthcoming events
04
Strategies to fight low cost rivals
Companies have only three options: attack, coexist
uneasily, or become low-cost players themselves.
None of them is easy, but the right framework can
help you learn which strategy is most likely to work,
says Nirmalya Kumar.
06
Value Merchants: Demonstrating and
Documenting Superior Value in Business Markets
An excerpt from a new book by James Anderson,
Nirmalya Kumar and James Narus.
09
About Betfair
A look at this company launched in 2000 and now
the world’s number one online betting exchange.
10
Marketing Insight interview: Anton Bell
Paddy Barwise talks to Director of Central Marketing
Anton Bell about the role of marketing and branding
at Betfair.
12
Introducing Marco Bertini
London Business School Assistant Professor
Marco Bertini discusses the effect that price can
have on consumers’ judgments and preferences
and suggests how pricing can be used to solve
some of the issues facing marketers today.
Using price to awaken consumer thinking...
...and impact buying behaviour. Marco Bertini
develops the findings of recent research on the
psychological aspects of pricing.
Centre for Marketing contact information
“By far the single
most important
thing marketers
can do to boost
the bottom line
is improve the
way they price.
Interestingly,
while firms
continue to spend
a lot of money
trying to reduce
costs or bolster
revenue, very little
attention is paid to
optimising price.”
page 14 Marco Bertini
14
Contact
16
19
>>
All enquiries to:
Centre for Marketing
London Business School
Regent’s Park
London
NW1 4SA
United Kingdom
Tel +44 (0)20 7000 8627
Email [email protected]
Issue 9 October 2008
3
News
The latest updates from Marketing ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New faculty appointments
>>
Forthcoming Events
Executive Education
Rajesh K. Chandy
BA (Madurai Kamaraj) MBA (Oklahoma) PhD (Southern California)
October 2008
Professor of Marketing
Rajesh K. Chandy
Rajesh K. Chandy joins London Business
School on sabbatical leave from the University
of Minnesota, where he holds the James D.
Watkins Chair in Marketing, and served until
August 2008 as Co-Director of the Institute for
Research in Marketing. Chandy served (with
the CEOs of 3M, IBM, Microsoft, Medtronic,
and UPS) as a member of the US Secretary of
Commerce Advisory Committee on Measuring
Innovation in the 21st Century Economy.
His areas of expertise include innovation,
technology management, and marketing
strategy. His research and publications on
innovation have received several awards,
including the Journal of Marketing Harold
Maynard Award for contributions to
marketing theory and thought, the American
Marketing Association Early Career Award
for Contributions to Marketing Strategy, the
AMA TechSIG Award for the best article on
Technology and Innovation, the Marketing
Science Institute Alden Clayton Award for the
best marketing dissertation proposal, and
the Mary Kay Award for the best marketing
dissertation. Fortune magazine described
his findings on innovation as “an unorthodox
and bracing set of management principles.” He serves on the editorial boards of Journal
of Marketing Research, IEEE Transactions
on Engineering Management, Journal of
Marketing, International Journal of Research
in Marketing, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, and Marketing Letters.
Chandy has received a number of teaching
awards, including the Outstanding Professor
of the Year Award, the Award for Excellence
in Teaching, and the Outstanding Faculty
Dedication Award at the Carlson School of
Management, University of Minnesota.
John Mullins
BA (Lehigh) MBA (Stanford)
PhD (Minnesota)
Associate Professor of Management Practice in Marketing and Entrepreneurship
John Mullins
4
Issue 9 October 2008
John Mullins is an Associate Professor of
Management Practice in the Entrepreneurship
and Marketing groups at London Business
School. He earned his MBA at the Stanford
Graduate School of Business and his PhD.
from the University of Minnesota. An awardwinning teacher, John brings to his teaching
and research 20 years of executive experience
in high-growth retailing firms including two
ventures he founded and one he took public.
Since becoming a business school
professor in 1992, John has published three
books, numerous cases and more than
40 articles in a variety of outlets, including
Harvard Business Review, the MIT Sloan
Management Review, and the Journal
of Product Innovation Management. His
research has won national and international
awards from the Marketing Science Institute,
the American Marketing Association,
and the Richard D. Irwin Foundation.
He is a frequent speaker to audiences in
entrepreneurship and venture capital.
John’s best-selling trade book, The New
Business Road Test: What Entrepreneurs
and Executives Should Do Before
Writing a Business Plan (2e, London:
Prentice-Hall/FT 2006), is the definitive
work on the assessment and shaping of
entrepreneurial opportunities. John is
also co-author of Marketing Management:
A Strategic Decision Making Approach,
7th edition and Marketing Strategy: A
Decision Focused Approach, 5th edition.
John has consulted and taught executive
education on four continents for a variety of
organisations both large and small, including
the African and European Venture Capital
Associations, Eastman Kodak Company,
the International Finance Corporation
of The World Bank, the International
Planned Parenthood Federation, Kenya
Airways, Phoenix Equity Partners, Pumpkin
Ltd., Roche Diagnostics, Time Warner
Communications, the Young Presidents’
Organization, and numerous others.
Executive Workout
Launch Event, London
Wednesday 1 October
08.00 – 9.30am
With Steve Currall, Visiting Professor of
Organisational Behaviour and Entrepreneurship
Executive Workout Launch Events
Be the first to experience first-hand a taster of
our new 2-day programmes, network with other
senior executives, meet and learn from worldclass faculty.
After Hours
A series of informal evenings when senior
business executives can meet with the
London Business School
Executive Education senior
management team.
Each evening includes
a keynote seminar followed
by a networking drinks
reception.
After Hours with London
Business School, hosted by
Allen & Overy, Frankfurt
After Hours with London
Business School, Zurich
Monday 17 October
18.30pm onwards
With Zeger Degraeve,
Professor of Decision Sciences
Other cities we will be visiting in
2009 include: Paris, Amsterdam,
Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Copenhagen,
Milan and London
Tuesday 14 October
18.30pm onwards
With Steve Currall, Visiting Professor of
Organisational Behaviour and Entrepreneurship
November 2008
Executive Workout
Launch Event, London
Monday 17 October
18.30pm onwards
With Dominic Houlder, Adjunct Professor
of Strategic and International Management
For more information and to register for
any of the events listed, please contact
either Rebecca or Kate in our events team:
[email protected]
or visit www.london.edu/execed/events/
Forthcoming Event
Centre for Marketing
12 November 2008
Price Discrimination
Strategies
Anja Lambrecht
London Business School
A company can price discriminate between
customers with a high and a low willingness
to pay by offering multiple pricing plans. Such
plans differ in their monthly fee, their usage
price and possibly the number of free units. For
example, mobile phone companies offer many
different cell phone plans ranging from none to
unlimited free minutes. Web hosting companies
charge different monthly fees depending on the
amount of web space and bandwidth. Insurance
companies typically charge a flat fee per month
but experiment with pay-as-you-drive insurance.
This seminar highlights several strategies
that companies can use to price discriminate
with optional pricing plans and evaluates the
profitability of such pricing strategies based
on results of multiple research projects. We
discuss questions such as why customers and
companies benefit from a “flat-rate bias”, how
customers’ uncertainty about usage contributes
to profits, when it may be profitable to switch
customers to new tariffs and whether companies
should offer so-called rollover minutes.
For full details and to register,
please visit www.london.edu/marketing/
Issue 9 October 2008
5
0
Feature
0.26
Strategies
to fight low
cost rivals
Nirmalya Kumar
Over the past five years, I’ve studied around 50 incumbents and
25 low-cost businesses. My research shows that ignoring cut-price
rivals is a mistake because it eventually forces companies to vacate
entire market segments.
When market leaders do respond, they often
set off price wars, hurting themselves more
than the challengers. Companies that wake
up to that fact usually change course in one
of two ways. Some become more defensive
and try to differentiate their products—a
strategy that works only if they can meet a
stringent set of conditions. Others take the
offensive by launching low-cost businesses
of their own. This so-called dual strategy
succeeds only if companies can generate
synergies between the existing businesses and
the new ventures. If they cannot, companies
are better off trying to transform themselves
into solution providers or, difficult though it
is, into low-cost players. Before I analyse the
various strategy options, however, I must dispel
some myths about low-cost businesses.
6
Issue 9 October 2008
The sustainability of
low-cost businesses
Be it in the classroom or the boardroom,
executives invariably ask me the same
question: Are low-cost businesses a permanent,
enduring threat? Most managers believe they
aren’t; they’re convinced that a business that
sells at prices dramatically lower than those
incumbents charge must go bankrupt.
Successful price warriors stay ahead of
bigger rivals by using several tactics: they
focus on just one or a few consumer segments;
they deliver the basic product or provide
one benefit better than rivals do; and they
back everyday low prices with superefficient
operations to keep costs down. That’s how
Aldi, the Essen-headquartered retailer that
owns Trader Joe’s in the U.S., has thrived in
the brutally competitive German market.
Aldi doesn’t pamper customers. Its stores
display products on pallets rather than shelves
in order to cut restocking time and save money.
Customers bring their own shopping bags or
buy them in the store. Aldi was one of the first
retailers to require customers to pay refundable
deposits for grocery carts. Shoppers return the
carts to designated areas, sparing employees
the time and energy needed to round them
up. At the same time, Aldi gets the basics
right. There are several checkout lines, so wait
times are short even during peak shopping
hours. Its scanning machines are lightning fast,
which allows clerks to deal quickly with each
shopper. Most retailers follow local pricing, but
every Aldi store in a country charges the same
price, which reinforces the chain’s image as
0.25
a consumer champion. Aldi sells products far
cheaper than rivals do (their average markup
is 13% while that of most European retailers
is 28% to 30%) and according to European
market research firms, the chain had a 20%
share of Germany’s supermarket business.
As Aldi’s story suggests, the financial
calculations of low-cost players are different
from those of established companies. They earn
smaller gross margins than traditional players
do, but their business models turn those into
higher operating margins. Those operating
margins are magnified by the businesses’
higher-than-average asset turnover ratios,
which result in impressive returns on assets.
Because of those returns and high growth rates,
the market capitalisations of many upstarts
are higher than those of industry leaders,
despite the larger equity bases of the latter.
Interestingly, low-cost companies stay ahead
of market leaders because consumer behaviour
works in their favour. If a business gets a
customer to buy its products or services on the
basis of price, it will lose the customer only if a
rival offers a lower price. Since the discounters
win all their customers because of the prices
they offer, they don’t have to worry about
traditional rivals that always charge premiums.
Only new entrants with even lower cost
structures can compete with the price warriors.
0.24
0.23
0.22
The futility of price wars
The moment a company spots a low-cost
competitor, it would do well to ask itself this
question: Is our new rival targeting a segment
we don’t want to serve or will it eat into our
sales? If the new entrant has set its sights
on customers no other business serves,
incumbents needn’t worry—for the moment.
They can observe without engaging the
competitor. That wait-and-watch strategy often
works for companies that market products
for people at the very top of the pyramid,
such as wines, perfumes, and cosmetics.
Even when market leaders copy the
critical elements of low-cost players’
business models, they are unable to match
their prices. That’s because the individual
elements of the model don’t matter as
much as the interactions among them.
Slashing prices usually lowers profits for all
incumbents without driving the low-cost entrant
out of business. I learned that firsthand while
serving as a consultant to a European telecomequipment provider that was competing against
traditional rivals as well as a low-cost Asian
competitor for a multimillion-dollar contract in
Africa. All the bidders kept cutting prices in
0.21
0.20
0.19
0.18
7
Feature
?
order to best the Asian rival’s offer, which proved
to be the lowest after every round of bidding.
Eventually, the telecom giants discovered
that the Asian company had offered a 40%
discount on the lowest price the customer
could negotiate with its rivals! Not surprisingly,
the low-cost company won the contract. In
addition, although the telecom giants would
not have made profits on their lowest bids,
the Asian contender seemed likely to do so.
the business models of such rivals appear to
be simpler than their own. In the 1990s, for
instance, all the major airlines launched no-frills
second carriers—Continental Lite, Delta Express,
KLM’s Buzz, SAS’s Snowflake, US Airways’
MetroJet, United’s Shuttle—to take on low-cost
competition. All these second carriers have since
been shut down or sold off, showing how tough
it is for companies to use the dual strategy.
Although most executives don’t realise it,
“Successful price warriors stay ahead
of bigger rivals by using several tactics:
they focus on just one or a few consumer
segments; they deliver the basic product
or provide one benefit better than rivals
do; and they back everyday low prices
with superefficient operations to keep
costs down.”
When differentiation works
When businesses finally realise they can’t
win a price war with low-cost players, they try
to differentiate their products in a last-ditch
attempt at coexistence. Companies, we’re
told, should adopt the following approaches:
Design cool products, as, say,
Apple and Bang & Olufsen do.
Continually innovate in the
tradition of Gillette and 3M.
Offer a unique product mix, like that of
Sharper Image and Whole Foods.
Brand a community à la HarleyDavidson and Red Bull.
Sell experiences, as Four Seasons,
Nordstrom, and Starbucks do.
Three conditions will determine their efficacy.
First, smart businesses don’t use these tactics
in isolation. Second, companies must be able
to persuade consumers to pay for benefits
and the ability to do so usually depends on
the products they sell. And third, companies
must bring costs and benefits in line before
implementing the differentiation strategy.
Dealing with dual strategies
When companies discover that the low-price
customer segment is large, they often set up
low-cost ventures themselves. Because of
their years of industry experience as well as
their abundant resources, incumbents are
often seduced into believing that they can
easily replicate cut-price operations. Moreover,
8
Issue 9 October 2008
companies should set up low-cost operations
only if the traditional operation will become more
competitive as a result and the new business
will derive some advantages that it would
not have gained as an independent entity.
Another factor that affects incumbents’
low-cost businesses is the allocation of
resources. When disruptors are new ventures,
they face market tests of their capital needs.
Subsidiaries face internal resource-allocation
processes that optimise different criteria—both
for legitimate reasons, such as higher margins
and lower risk, as well as illegitimate ones,
such as power and politics. Consequently, the
parent may end up starving the new unit.
Switching to conquer
If there are no synergies between traditional
and low-cost businesses, companies
should consider two other options: they
can switch from selling products to selling
solutions or, radical though it may sound,
convert themselves into low-cost players.
Switch to solutions. Since low-cost players
turn incumbents’ basic products or services
into commodities, existing companies may be
able to succeed by selling solutions. By offering
products and services as an integrated package,
companies can expand the segment of the
market that is willing to pay more for additional
benefits. Solutions offer several advantages:
They include a large service component, so
it’s hard to evaluate the quality of the solutions
various companies provide. Over time, the
seller develops a deep understanding of
the customer’s business processes, so the
customer finds it difficult and costly to change
suppliers. Furthermore, since low-cost players
have limited product ranges and service
capabilities, they cannot offer solutions.
Despite the popularity of this strategy, making
the changeover is difficult. Many companies,
such as Boots, Compaq, Xerox, and Uniys,
didn’t succeed because they assumed that
selling solutions required modifying their existing
business models rather than transforming them.
Switch to low-cost models
In theory, a company can consider switching
from a high-cost to a low-cost business
model. In practice, such a transformation
is unlikely because the incumbent will have
a profitable albeit shrinking business to
maintain. Moreover, switching to a low-cost
business model means acquiring capabilities
that are different from the company’s existing
competencies. It’s hard to imagine many
market leaders having the stomach for that.
Low-cost players will continue to mushroom,
and some will succeed. However, there will
always be two kinds of consumers: those who
buy on the basis of price and those who are
partial to value. Therefore, there will always be
room for both low-cost players and value-added
businesses. How much room each will have
depends not only on the industry and customers’
preferences, but also on the strategies traditional
businesses deploy. If incumbents don’t take on
low-cost rivals quickly and effectively, they can
blame no one for their failure but themselves.
This article is an abstract from the author’s research,
which can be read in its entirety in Strategies to
Fight Low-Cost Rivals, Harvard Business Review, 84
(December 2006), 104-12.
Value
Merchants:
Demonstrating and Documenting
Superior Value in Business Markets
By James C. Anderson, Nirmalya Kumar and James A. Narus
Purchasing managers in business markets
are becoming increasingly sophisticated in
their strategies and tactics. Increasingly held
accountable for reducing costs, purchasing
and other customer, managers don’t have the
luxury of simply believing suppliers’ claims of
cost savings. A relatively easy and quick way
to obtain savings is for purchasing managers
to focus on price and obtain price concessions
from suppliers. To enhance their negotiating
power, purchasing managers attempt to
convince suppliers that their offerings are the
same as their competitors, so that they could
be easily replaced.
In the face of such pressure, suppliers
cave in and match competitor prices. It is a
rare commodity in business markets to find
firms that do business based on demonstrably
superior value.
Big idea: Prices are transparent, value is
opaque. The book presents a methodology for
how to demonstrate the value of your firm’s
offering versus the next best alternative in
monetary terms.
squanders the superior value of the supplier’s
market offerings while getting little in return.
Doing business based on demonstrating
and documenting superior value is, indeed,
a rare commodity. Yet it doesn’t have to be so.
By adopting the customer value management
approach presented below, value merchants
can prevail when they encounter challenges.
allows more refined targeting through various
levels of service and enables suppliers to
capitalise on differences between customers.
Conceptualise value focuses on the
fundamental building block of the customer
value management and addresses questions
like: What do we mean specifically by “value”
in business markets? How does one define
points of difference, points of parity and points
of contention vis-à-vis the next-best alternative?
Profit from value provided is all about how
companies can profit from the superior value
they provide customers. Although it is natural
to think first of price premiums, there are also
three other means of obtaining a fair return
from customers for value provided in business
markets: a more profitable mix of business, a
greater share of the customer’s business, and
the elimination of value drains and value leaks.
Value merchants versus
value spendthrifts
Substantiate value propositions provides a
methodology for persuasively substantiating
value propositions to customers.
A value merchant recognises the supplier’s
own costs and the market offering’s value to
the customer and works to obtain a fair return
for both the supplier firm and customer firm.
The value merchant stands in stark contrast
to the all-too-common value spendthrift, who
Formulate value propositions begins with
analysing what potential changes in the market
offering customers would value most vis-à-vis
the next-best alternative. This is used to develop
a value proposition to aspire to, and qualitative
research is conducted to refine the value
proposition.
Tailor market offerings demonstrates how
a deep understanding of customer value can
be used to construct segment-specific market
offerings as naked solutions with options. This
Transform sales force to value merchants
challenges suppliers to transform their sales
forces from selling on price to becoming value
merchants.
This content is taken from the new book, Value
Merchants: Demonstrating and Documenting Superior
Value in Business Markets by James C. Anderson,
Nirmalya Kumar and James A. Narus
It brings together years of consulting experience
and research to provide the reader with a detailed
explanation of customer value management and how
to implement it. Discover the required tools to develop
new strategies that shift the focus from pleasing
customers by reducing prices to retaining customers
by demonstrating superior value.
Available to purchase through Harvard Business
School Press and Amazon
Issue 9 October 2008
9
Feature
“Betfair completes
5 million transactions
per day – more
than all of Europe’s
stock exchanges
combined.”
About
Betfair
Betfair is the UK’s biggest online betting company
with over 1,800,000 registered customers and over
500,000 active users.
It launched the betting exchange concept
with cutting-edge technology in June 2000.
Co-founders Andrew Black and Edward Wray
were named Ernst and Young Emerging
Entrepreneurs of the Year in 2002. The
company has since become global and runs
from bases in London, Malta, and Tasmania.
Central to Betfair’s success is its technology
which allows it to manage risk perfectly.
The result is that punters can choose their
own odds and effectively bet against each
other. Betfair’s bookmaking model results in
odds which, according to one study, are on
average more than 20 percent better than the
prices offered by conventional bookmakers
and offers genuine ‘in-running’ betting this means customers can bet on an event
after it has started. Betfair charges a small
commission between 2-5% on net winnings.
Losing customers pay no commission. Betfair
launched its own Starting Price (SP) in
December 2007 allowing customers to take SP
odds set by customer demand instead of being
dictated by the bookmaker.
10
Issue 9 October 2008
Betfair offers betting on over 50 different
sports and events from 122 different countries.
Horse racing is the dominant sport, then soccer
and tennis. Cricket and golf are growth areas.
Others include reality TV and financial markets.
The Betfair Games portfolio has expanded to
diversify its revenue streams in what is a highly
competitive market. Multiples and Accumulator
Betting was launched in 2007 for customers to
have the chance to win across selections with
a range of accumulator betting options. This
runs from Malta and has been a significant area
of growth and investment. In addition, Betfair
Poker was launched in 2004 and is now the
exclusive sponsor of the World Series of Poker
Europe in London. It’s the result of a three
year partnership with Harrah’s Entertainment
to stage the first World Series of Poker event
outside of Las Vegas. Betfair Casino was
launched in October 2006 with an innovative
‘zero lounge’ which means the games have no
house edge.
The Betfair mobile product was launched
in 2006 allowing in-play betting on the betting
exchange. The company bought and rebranded
‘Mobet software’ from the Scottish IT company
Rapid Mobile to enable secure transactions
to be carried out on a mobile network. Betfair
Australia was awarded a betting exchange
licence by the Tasmanian Gaming Commission
and began operating in 2006. In 2007, the
£10m launch of ‘Tradefair’ enabled betting on
financial markets with a white label agreement
signed with London Capital Holdings to
produce a spread betting product. It means
the company now employs over 1,200 people
across its bases in Hammersmith, Stevenage,
Hobart and Malta.
With over 350 engineers, Betfair has one of
the fastest and most resilient betting platforms,
completing 5 million transactions per day –
more than all of Europe’s stock exchanges
combined - and 99.9% of the bets are handled
in less than a second. Oracle views Betfair
as one of its top five customers in the world
today, alongside eBay and Google. There are
automated price feeds to third parties for
mobile, automated trading or historical data.
The API (Application Programming Interface)
to third parties integrates the exchange with
participants in the Developers Program to build
customised tools and interfaces for Betfair
sports exchange.
Betfair’s aim is to be the unassailable choice
of the punter by providing the best value,
service and protection. Betfair has a longstanding policy of not accepting US customers,
funds or bets and was not affected by UIGEA
(Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act)
passed in 2006, restricting internet gambling
financial processing.
In the UK, Betfair pays tax in exactly the
same way as every other bookmaker: a gross
profits tax at 15%. This allows all bookmakers to
compete on an even footing and ensures a well
regulated and safe environment for all punters.
In the 2007 budget, Gordon Brown set the
Remote gaming duty’ at 15% in line with the
rate of general betting duty.
Betfair works closely with governments and
regulators to provide transparency. It has a 40
strong Integrity Team which monitors betting
patterns and records details of every bet and
currently has 32 Memoranda of Understanding
(MoU) with sports governing bodies to share
information about betting patterns and
customer behaviour.
At the 2007 tennis tournament in Sopot,
Poland, Betfair voided £3.4m bets between
Martin Vassallo Arguello and Nikolay Davydenko
following suspicious betting patterns during
the match. The information provided by the
Integrity Team to the Association of Tennis
Professionals was key to the Gunn and Rees
report ‘Environmental Review of Integrity in
Professional Tennis’ in May 2008.
Betfair has received two Queen’s Awards for
Enterprise: 2003 for Innovation and 2008 for
International Trade. In 2004, it won Company of
the Year at the Confederation of British Industry
Growing Business Awards and in November
2005, it retained its title as Company of the Year
at the CBI Growing Business Awards.
Issue 9 October 2008
11
Interview
Marketing Insight interview:
Anton Bell
Director of Central Marketing, Betfair
Professor Patrick Barwise talked to Anton Bell about the role
of marketing and branding at Betfair.
How has the brand developed
over time?
We have always been keen to differentiate
ourselves from the traditional bookmakers
and our early strap line, ‘Sharp minds Betfair’
was intended to be aspirational and inclusive.
We found this approach excluded the more
recreational segments of the marketplace and
some bettors believed that we weren’t relevant
to them. Currently, our aim is to promote both
the relevance of our gambling proposition
- through scale, value and choice - whilst
reinforcing the key P2P differentiator of our
sportsbook offering, which is betting against
other people. In summary it’s a superior offering
and hence, ‘Betting as it should be’.
So does the brand now have to stretch
across different categories?
Curriculum Vitae
>>
Betfair 2004-present
Director Central Marketing
Customer Acquisition, CRM, Insight,
Planning and Delivery – across sports,
casino, poker
Director/Head of Insight
Customer, consumer, competitor and
market analytics and research
Centrica 2000-2004
Group Insight Manager – Group CRM
Marketing, customer relationship
management and insight role for
Centrica Group – Goldfish, OneTel,
The AA, British Gas
Capital One 1999-2000
Senior Analyst/Project Manager
Marketing sub-prime financial credit
products and new partnership development
London School of Economics
and Political Science
BSc (Econ) Econometrics and Mathematical
Economics
12
Issue 9 October 2008
What brought you to Betfair?
After Centrica sold Goldfish.com to LloydsTSB,
I began looking for a new and fresh online
environment that would continue my move
away from financial services. When the Betfair
opportunity came along, the company was a
relatively new and successful enterprise with
huge scope for global growth. I’d grown up
around betting and gambling - my mum’s
partner worked as an on-course bookmaker
and I’d done a stint with William Hill when I was
at university - so I was excited by the chance
to be part of something that was revolutionising
the gambling industry.
Tell me about the Insight function
at Betfair
Building the Insight capability at Betfair was my
first challenge. I started with a couple of data
analysts querying the new data warehouse and
then grew to a strong team of Insight specialists
responsible for customer understanding,
behavioural analysis and modelling, consumer
and market research, competitor and market
intelligence. The aim was to bring these areas
together to inform and drive business decisions.
What would be a typical
Insight project?
One of the first research projects we undertook
was simply to understand what our customers
thought about us. Our customer base consisted
mostly of sophisticated early adopters who were
very passionate about their betting and with it,
the opportunity that we provided them versus
the traditional bookmaker. We were looking
to grow our product portfolio and needed to
prioritise this against customers’ perceptions
of the values we stood for – being innovative,
offering value, being fair and on the side of
the punter and obviously, person to person
(P2P). Talking to our customers provided
some fascinating insights into their motivations
and we were able to model their responses to
the range of new product concepts. Further
quantitative understanding revealed that
our savvy sports betting customers were still
playing more recreational products with our
competitors, whilst exhibiting sophisticated
behaviour on the Exchange, so it gave us
confidence in our plans for future growth.
How has marketing evolved at Betfair?
In the early days of the Exchange, customer
acquisition was heavily driven by word of
mouth but as our product portfolio has grown
over the last four years, so has our marketing
investment. Understanding the effectiveness of
our marketing spend is critical as the product
and channel mix evolves and we look to
prioritise new opportunities. Our Finance and
Insight teams work very closely with Marketing
to stay on top of this.
As we grow, there is an increasing challenge
to communicate effectively with our customer
base. Targeting relevant and valuable
communications to our customers, into an
increasingly crowded email inbox, is something
that we strive to improve. A solid understanding
of customer life stage, value and risk is central
to this activity.
Betfair historically was purely a sports betting
exchange, but we also have Poker and Casino
as part of our portfolio. Tradefair was launched
in 2007 for those segments attracted to
financial and spreads products and, more
recently, Tai Kai, where you can set up your own
tournaments and play against your friends for
money or just for fun. Growing our brand from
our primary Exchange heritage and moving
from niche to mainstream has been our biggest
challenge.
What’s the most exciting marketing
innovation that you’ve undertaken
while you’ve been there?
Betfair continues to innovate, developing new
products and businesses and expanding into
new markets, so the Central Marketing Team
are constantly faced with new challenges. In
the past 12 months we embarked on two new
partnerships, the main one being with Harrah’s
Entertainment sponsoring the World Series
of Poker Europe. In October we went to air
with our first TV campaign and launched the
Betfair Starting Price (SP) in November, which
kicked off a 5 month multi-channel campaign
delivering a series of new innovations from ‘the
Betfair Stable’. This culminated in the Grand
National activity which delivered a record
number of new customers.
And this really helped building
awareness of the Betfair brand?
Brand investment has been central to the past
12 month’s marketing success with increased
exposure on television extending our reach and
driving growth in the UK and Europe. We have
a very strong value proposition but the benefits
of the P2P concept can be a difficult message
to get across in a press ad, a poster or even
online. TV has provided a richer medium to
“The online betting
exchange enables punters
to choose their own odds
and bet against each other”
communicate with different segments of the
gambling population and show that we are
relevant to everyone who wants to place a bet
or gamble online. This is important when some
of our competitors have decades of high street
presence benefiting their online proposition.
What was the message from the TV?
The TV campaign ran from October and used
animation to represent the Betfair world the scale of our community, betting against
others online, providing value to the customer.
Over three waves we have seen significant
growth in spontaneous awareness, improved
understanding of our portfolio and, importantly,
a 70% increase in consideration.
What do you think are the mistakes
people are making in marketing?
Aligning creativity with empiricism, and
achieving clear measurable objectives, is
fundamental to marketing effectiveness.
Marketers are often focused on developing the
big idea or getting the campaign out of the door
and lose sight of the original objectives and
the target audience. Constantly evolving and
learning from successes and mistakes is critical
to improving effectiveness and in a fast moving
environment it can be difficult to stop and take
stock of where these improvements can be
realised.
Why are you supporting the Centre for
Marketing at London Business School?
London Business School is a great place
for staying in touch with new thinking about
business and marketing. Operating in new
territory, it is vital to look at exemplars in
other categories and apply learnings and best
practice to our relatively unique model.
Issue 9 October 2008
13
Faculty Profile
Introducing Marco Bertini
Assistant Professor of Marketing, Marco Bertini discusses the effect that
price can have on people’s judgments and preferences and suggests how
it can be used to solve some of the issues facing marketers today.
What do you see as the main challenge
for the marketing function today?
One of the main challenges still faced by the
marketing function today is accountability.
For a number of years now there has been
pressure on marketers to demonstrate the
return generated by their investments. A lot
of work has been done in that area. I can
think of a number of important research
papers and books that have provided useful
insights. At the same time, I think there is still
a considerable amount of work to do. More
important, I am concerned about some of the
reactive measures that marketers seem to be
taking. Pressured to quantify their decisions,
some marketers are reverting to actions that
have little to do with customers. One example
is segmentation. Segmentation is getting a lot
more attention nowadays; however, marketers
seem to favour more and more schemes
that rely on easy-to-justify variables such as
demographics and geography in consumer
markets and account size or industry type
in business markets – none of which really
identify what customer needs exist in the
marketplace. A second example is in pricing,
the area I conduct most of my research
and teaching in. Harsher economic times
are putting pricing under the microscope.
Unfortunately, marketers continue to base their
pricing decisions on the costs of the products
they sell. Again, this move is easy to quantify
and justify, but neglects the key criterion:
what is the customer actually willing to pay?
What is the single most important
thing that marketing can do
to boost the bottom line?
By far the single most important thing
marketers can do to boost the bottom line
is improve the way they price. Interestingly,
while firms continue to spend a lot of money
trying to reduce costs or bolster revenue,
very little attention is paid to optimising
price. This is amazing to me because price
is by far the most significant profit lever. A
number of studies have shown that a simple
1% increase in price can increase profit by
10-12% on average. This kind of return is
almost impossible with process re-engineering,
advertising, product development, and
other measures targeted at cutting costs or
increasing revenue. A little sophistication in
pricing can go a long way. To me this is the
first thing marketers should look to improve.
14
Issue 9 October 2008
How can companies improve the
quality of their pricing decision?
There are a number of steps firms can take to
improve the quality of their pricing decisions.
First of all, prices should not be set based
on costs. This does not mean costs are
irrelevant – far from it. Costs are important
to understand the implications of pricing
decisions. Beyond that, pricing policy needs
to start from two key pieces of information:
(1) the objective worth of the product we
are selling, and (2) the perceived value of
that same product to our customers. It is the
job of marketing to quantify the benefits in
a firm’s offering, measure the gap between
objective and perceived value, and work
hard to bridge that gap by communicating
value in a way that customers understand.
An additional way to improve the quality
of pricing is to make sure price policy is well
integrated with the other marketing decisions.
For instance, a deep understanding of
customer needs through segmentation gives
marketers the basic information for price
discrimination – charging different prices to
different segments. Unless firms understand
where value is created, and how that value
differs across groups of people, the prices
that are subsequently set are never going to
be optimal. Also, price needs to be calculated
in conjunction with the other three “Ps” of
the marketing mix. The marketing mix is just
that: a mix. Better pricing decisions keep
these other factors in mind: How should we
structure our product line such that we can
charge different prices for different models?
What channels of distribution should be used
to reach different customer segments with
different prices? What promotional material
do we need to develop to communicate
the value we are selling and therefore
justify the price we charge? And so on.
What is unique about the
contribution of London Business
School’s Centre for Marketing to
the discipline of marketing?
The way in which it integrates rigorous
academic research with practical relevance.
All of the marketing faculty at the school
have a strong interest in addressing problems
that are important to practice. We definitely
pride ourselves in doing things that we think
managers find both interesting and useful. This
is evident in the research questions we tackle
and in the way we teach our programmes
and courses. As much as possible, we bring
the insight generated by our research to the
classroom. The feedback we then receive
from the students is crucial to ensure we
continue to study relevant phenomena.
What are some of the more interesting
findings with practical implications
of your research over the years?
As I mentioned earlier, my main area of
research is pricing. My work to date has looked
at instances where price changes people’s
perceptions of the products and services they
buy. I find this topic very interesting because
such an effect is not really supposed to exist.
Price has nothing to do with the quality of
a good. All it is supposed to do is index the
terms of trade; that is, price “tells” consumers
how much money they need to give up in
order to make a purchase. My own research
and that of other academics in marketing,
psychology, and economics show that price
can actually have a very strong effect on
people’s judgments and preferences.
My article on page 16 demonstrates
that price (the amount firms charge, the
way firms present price, etc.) can influence
how we perceive everyday goods. I have
documented cases when the effect is
driven by the amount of thinking we do or
the attention we pay. The research of other
academics has identified other explanations.
What are the main research areas
you currently working on?
I am currently working on a number of
interesting projects in the area of pricing and
promotions. One project I am particularly
keen on studies the relationship between
assortment size and consumers’ willingness to
pay. My co-authors and I have conducted four
different experiments to date. The data tells
us that consumers are willing to pay less for
low quality products and more for high quality
products when assortments are large. This
polarisation of willingness to pay is puzzling
because the evaluation of any product is
supposed to be based solely on the merits of
that good, not on the number of alternatives
available. My co-authors and I believe this
effect exists when consumers are uncertain
about the value of an offering – a fairly common
situation. When this is the case, we believe
that consumers infer how important quality
“By far the single most important thing
marketers can do to boost the bottom line
is improve the way they price. Interestingly,
while firms continue to spend a lot of
money trying to reduce costs or bolster
revenue, very little attention is paid to
optimising price.” ”
Issue 9 October 2008
15
Faculty Profile
differences are by observing the number of
alternatives firms are willing to market: the more
populated an assortment is, the more important
quality differences are expected to be, which
in turn increases the willingness to pay.
A second project I am involved with is
studying the effects of monetary incentives on
the type of products people buy. We argue that
incentives such as quantity discounts, bundling,
referral bonuses, coupons, etc. change people’s
frame of mind, making them much more price
sensitive at the time of selecting a product.
Finally, I am working on a project with
colleagues from Columbia and Duke that
examines the quality of people’s choices when
price is a factor in the decision. Marketers have
known for quite a while that pricing can have
significant psychological implications. Some of
my past and current research has demonstrated
that point exactly. In this research we study
a more fundamental question: how good are
people at making decisions when they have to
process price? Common intuition would suggest
that price is the easiest attribute to consider
when making a purchase. After all, price is an
ubiquitous, objective quantity. However, we
repeatedly found that people make many more
errors in judgment when price is presented.
We attribute this counterintuitive result to two
observations: (1) money is much more than a
medium of exchange – we feel pleasure or pain
just by receiving or spending money, and (2)
unfortunately we don’t really have a good sense
of how much pleasure or pain money brings
us – this is because money has no specific
inherent value beyond what we can buy with it.
Marco Bertini is Assistant Professor of
Marketing at London Business School. His
research focuses on the strategic implications of
consumer behaviour, with particular emphasis
on pricing policy and product differentiation
decisions. Marco has also consulted to
companies such as AstraZeneca, BT, De Beers,
and Procter & Gamble. He teaches on the 5-day
Executive Education programme Customer
Focused Marketing: The Key to Unlocking Profits
and on the 2-day Executive Workout: Pricing for
Profit. For more information please contact the
Client Services team on +44 (0)20 7000 7378
16
Issue 9 October 2008
Using price to
awaken consumer
thinking and impact
buying behaviour
Are you aware just how much the price of a product or
even the way that the price is presented to the consumer
can affect buying behaviour?
Recent research on the psychological aspects
of pricing suggests that the relationship
between price and choice might be more
complex than originally thought. Marco Bertini
and Luc Wathieu explore this further. Firstly
they look at the way that price information
is presented and how this can influence
perceptions of value. Secondly they consider
how overpricing can motivate consumers
to think about the personal value of a new
benefit, in turn affecting their likelihood to buy.
The practice of price partitioning has
become increasingly common. Instead of
charging a simple, all-inclusive price, firms
regularly post sets of mandatory charges
attached to various attributes of an offer. This
phenomenon is not limited to predictable
settings such as Internet sites and catalogues.
Today, one can also find furniture stores
breaking out the cost of sofa pillows and
hotels charging a separate fee for room keys.
There are differing views on the effects
of price partitioning on consumer behaviour.
Some believe that price partitioning could
increase demand because buyers tend to
underestimate the total cost associated with
multiple charges. Others, however, argue
that price partitioning will decrease demand
because multiple losses are generally more
painful than a single loss of equal monetary
value and that advertising a partitioned
price often triggers negative effect, which
could consequent into boycotting of the
brand and damaging word-of-mouth.
Price partitioning will not only impact on
the perception of expenses, but also the
perception of nonprice attributes; i.e. the
benefits of the purchase. Consumers that
are presented with an all-inclusive price
are likely to concentrate their evaluation
on the focal attribute of the transaction
(DVDs, groceries, etc.). A partitioned price,
on the other hand, increases the amount
of attention paid to secondary attributes
(shipping and handling, advance booking,
etc.), which in turn affects preference
and choice. It can sensitise consumers to
features they might otherwise overlook.
An emphasis on perceived benefits (rather
than expenses) suits situations in which
price partitioning increases demand as well
as situations in which price partitioning
harms demand. For instance, shipping
and handling is a requisite in most online
transactions, and the cost associated with
this service typically varies little across
vendors. A secondary attribute is neglected
if price is all-inclusive but overemphasised
“Consumers’ motivation to think
is determined by market prices in
combination with other factors such as
magnitude of the potential benefit, initial
degree of uncertainty, and cost of thinking.”
if price is partitioned. This could be an
explanation for the “abandoned basket effect”
that causes many online transactions to fall
through once shipping charges are levied.
Secondary features that are relatively easy
(difficult) to evaluate receive exaggerated
(minimal) consideration under price
partitioning. Spelling out what consumers “get”
for their money through price partitioning might
or might not be good business. If a product
offering is mediocre in terms of secondary
attributes, for example, firms might benefit by
using all-inclusive prices to focus attention to
the focal attribute. On the other hand, firms that
offer commoditised products might use price
partitioning to capitalise on the attractiveness of
secondary features and distract attention from
any weakness in the main value proposition.
It is not only the way in which a price is
broken down that will awaken consumer
thinking. Pricing a product at a level higher
than may be initially expected can also
motivate consumers to think for longer about a
purchase and the personal value of its benefit.
When a firm introduces a new benefit of
any kind, consumers are often unsure whether
or not they need it or what the benefit is worth
to them. Accounting for this uncertainty, firms
normally offer an introductory discount or
target a small group of more affluent
or enthusiastic consumers.
Alternatively companies can
induce people to think by
overpricing—pricing above
what they initially want
to pay, but not too high.
Encouraging the consumer
to make a more definite
judgment about the
personal benefit
of a purchase will
intensify desire and willingness to pay,
justifying the posted price premium.
Consumers’ motivation to think is
determined by market prices in combination
with other factors such as magnitude
of the potential benefit, initial degree of
uncertainty, and cost of thinking.
If the price associated with a unique
additional benefit is low enough, consumers
will buy without further questioning their
prior impressions. An excessively high price,
on the other hand, will discourage a quick
purchase because the additional deliberation
could reveal nothing to compensate for
the extra cost. However, there does exist
between these two extremes, a range of
prices that should encourage consumers
to think and gain clarity regarding the
personal relevance of the offered benefit.
A sophisticated firm will acknowledge
this phenomenon by adjusting its marketing
strategy to better manage consumer
deliberation. The firm should first consider
pricing away from consumers’ initial willingness
to pay and evaluate whether regressive
pricing (closer to the market’s mean price) or
transgressive pricing (farther from the market’s
mean price) is optimal. Moderate overpricing
is more likely to be optimal when production
cost is higher and consumers’ cost of
thinking lower. The firm should then,
under certain conditions, empower
consumers by reducing the cost
of thinking through various forms
of subsidy (e.g. product trial
opportunities and projective
advertising). Consumer
empowerment enables the
firm to price its product
near potential value without
letting incentives to think
interfere with the process of value extraction.
Differentiated firms can use these tactics
to take fuller advantage of the uniqueness
of their offerings, earn greater profits, and
enter markets despite cost disadvantages
and consumers’ initial reluctance to take
into account new dimensions of value.
It is apparent that the ways in which
a price is displayed and the price point
chosen will impact buyer behaviour. How it
is done depends on the product being sold
and the desired outcome of the transaction.
Breaking down an expense can potentially
stimulate demand by highlighting dimensions
of differentiation that might otherwise go
unnoticed. If, on the other hand, a supplier’s
strength lies with a focal attribute or the product
offering is mediocre in terms of secondary
attributes, then an all-inclusive price might be
well advised. Similarly, a firm’s ability to charge
a price premium depends on the consumer’s
cost of thinking and initial lack of prejudice.
The effect of a higher price is not to select lessprice-sensitive or higher income consumers but
to trigger a polarisation of demand that induces
a split between enthusiasts and the indifferent.
Potentially useful concepts arising from
this work by Bertini and Wathieu include
transgressive pricing, regressive pricing,
and projective advertising or retailing, all of
which derive from the view that one function
of price and marketing communication is to
stimulate thinking and deliberation. Information
processing theories and behavioural
decision research can be brought together
to study marketing problems providing
an interesting avenue for developing our
understanding of consumer decision making.
This article is taken from the following two papers:
• Attention arousal through price partitioning
• Price as a stimulus to think: the case for wilful
overpricing
Both written by Marco Bertini, London Business
School, and Luc Wathieu, ESMT European School of
Management and Technology
Issue 9 October 2008
17
Centre for Marketing
At last, world-class
executive development
designed to suit
your agenda.
Membership
The Mission of the Centre for Marketing is to help
improve the practice of marketing through rigorous
and relevant research.
London Business School’s Centre for Marketing
provides opportunities for executives to widen
their perspective on marketing practice through
a range of activities organised throughout the
year. These include a seminar series, a tenweek evening programme, regular publications
and access to cutting-edge research.
Centre for Marketing membership for one year per
company is £16,500.
As a member, your company can nominate delegates to
attend the Centre for Marketing’s events, which include
its seminar series and evening programme.
In addition members receive Marketing Insight, as
well as research updates from the Centre’s faculty and
London Business School’s quarterly journal: Business
Strategy Review.
For further information, please contact Fran Husson on
+44 (0)20 7000 8627 or email [email protected]
Media Watch: Publications for Marketing Faculty and Associates
London Business School’s faculty is world-renowned. With over 100 academics, drawn from
over 20 countries, our faculty fosters global issues, develops innovative research and helps
to shape contemporary business practice.
Social Context and Advertising Memory
Puntoni S; Tavassoli N T,
Journal of Marketing Research 2007
Vol 44:2 p 284-296.
Competitive Response to Radical Product Innovations
Aboulnasr K; Narasimhan O; Blair E; Chandy R,
Journal of Marketing 2008
Vol 72:3 p 94-110.
Fast and frugal heuristics are plausible
models of cognition: Reply to Dougherty,
Franco-Watkins, and Thomas
Gigerenzer G; Hoffrage U; Goldstein D G.,
Psychological Review 2008
Vol 115:1 p: 230-237.
Why Some Acquisitions Do Better Than
Others: Product Capital as a Driver of Long-Term
Stock Returns
Sorescu A B; Chandy R K et al.,
Journal of Marketing Research 2007
Vol 44:1 p 57-72.
Getting Attention for Unrecognised Brands
Goldstein D G,
Harvard Business Review 2007
Vol 85:3 p 24-28.
Branding from the inside out
Tavassoli N T,
Brand Strategy 2007
Vol 214: p 40-41.
We don’t quite know what we are talking
about when we talk about volatility
Goldstein, D G; Taleb N N,
Journal of Portfolio Management 2007
Vol 33:4 p 84-86.
Would a Rose in Chinese smell as sweet?
Tavassoli N T,
Business Strategy Review 2007
Vol 18:2 p 35-39.
What will neuroscience do for advertisers?
Ambler T,
Admap 2008
Vol 490:43 p 24-26.
Response to “International food advertising,
pester power and its effects”
Ambler T,
International Journal of Advertising 2007
Vol 26:2 p 283-286.
What can advertisers learn from neuroscience?
Ambler T,
International Journal of Advertising 2007
Vol 26:2 p 151–175.
Value Merchants: Demonstrating and Documenting
Superior Value in Business Markets
Anderson J C; Kumar N; Narus J A,
Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press 2007.
NEW Executive Workouts
Executive Short Programmes
General Management Programmes
3-5 days
3-4 weeks
2 days
In today’s competitive market it’s more
important than ever for your organisation
to develop and retain the best talent.
Yet time and budget constraints have
never been tighter.
Powering Business
Performance
18
L710102_SP_Ad_190x250_0408.indd 1
Issue 9 October 2008
Attention Arousal Through Price Partitioning
Bertini M; Wathieu L,
Marketing Science 2008
Vol 27:2 p. 236-246.
That’s why we at London Business School have extended our portfolio
by creating Executive Workouts, a series of new 2-day programmes
that cover specific business issues concisely yet intensively.
Generating inspiration and ideas, these programmes are designed to equip
your people with solutions they can instantly apply in the workplace.
So whether you are looking to create an executive development plan for
an individual, a group or an entire tier of your management team, you can
now piece together your own selection from our portfolio in a way which
offers immediate positive results that meet your organisation’s needs.
The Dark Side of Choice:
When Choice Impairs Social Welfare
Botti S; Iyengar S S,
Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 2006
Vol 25:1 p 24-38.
When Choosing Is Not Deciding: The Effect
of Perceived Responsibility on Satisfaction
Botti S; McGill A L,
Journal of Consumer Research 2006
Vol 33:2 p 211-219.
Assessing the Economic Value of Distribution
Channels: An Application to the Personal
Computer Industry
Chu J; Chintagunta P K; Vilcassim N J,
Journal of Marketing Research 2007
Vol 44:1 p 29-41.
To find out more about Executive Workouts,
log on to www.londonworkouts.com/mi/
Alternatively call +44 (0)20 7000 7377
or email [email protected]
for more information.
5/8/08 09:35:38
Mapping the Bounds of Incoherence: How Far
Can You Go and How Does It Affect Your Brand?
Kayande U; Roberts J H; Lilien G L; Fong D K H,
Marketing Science 2007
Vol 26:4 p 504-513.
From the 4P’s to the 3V’s
Kumar N,
The Marketer 2007
Vol 33: p 6-9.
Are Brands Dead?
Kumar N; Steenkamp J.-B E M,
Chief Executive 2007
p 40-43.
Private Label Strategy: How to Meet the
Store Brand Challenge
Kumar N; Steenkamp J.-B E M,
Harvard Business School Press 2007.
Does Uncertainty Matter? Consumer
Behavior Under Three-Part Tariffs
Lambrecht A; Seim K et al.,
Marketing Science 2007
Vol 26:5 p 698-710.
Discovering “Unk-Unks”
Mullins J W,
MIT Sloan Management Review 2007
Vol 48:4 p 17-21.
How to project customer retention
Fader P S; Hardie B G S,
Journal of Interactive Marketing 2007
Vol 21:1 p 76-90.
Good Money After Bad?
Mullins J W; Farneti I et al,
Harvard Business Review 2007
Vol 85:3 p 37-48.
Estimating CLV using aggregated data:
The Tuscan Lifestyles case revisited
Fader P S; Hardie B G S et al.,
Journal of Interactive Marketing 2007
Vol 21:3 p 55-71.
Marketing management: a strategic
decision-making approach
Mullins J. W; Walker O C,
Boston, [Mass]: McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2008.
SAGE handbook of advertising
Tellis G J; Ambler T,
London: SAGE 2007.
Price as a Stimulus to Think: The Case
for Willful Overpricing
Wathieu L; Bertini M,
Marketing Science 2007
Vol 26:1 p 118-129.
Asymmetric Discounting in Intertemporal
Choice: A Query-Theory Account
Weber E U; Johnson E J; Milch K F; Chang H;
Brodscholl J C; Goldstein D G,
Psychological Science 2007
Vol 18:6 p 516-523.
Managing the Future: CEO Attention
and Innovation Outcomes
Yadav M S; Prabhu J C; Chandy R K,
Journal of Marketing 2007
Vol 71:4 p 84-101.
Marketing programmes at
London Business School
Customer Focused Marketing: The Key to
Unlocking Profits
2 -7 November 2008
Market Driving Strategies
9 - 14 November 2008
Centre for Marketing Evening Programme 2009
12 January – 16 March 2009
(10 consecutive Mondays)
For more information please contact:
Tel: 44 (0)20 7000 8627
Email: [email protected]
www.london.edu/execed/marketing/
www.london.edu/marketing/
Issue 9 October 2008
19
“Pricing is the unsung hero
in an organisation. Ensure
that you realise and unlock
it’s true potential.”
Marco Bertini, Assistant Professor of Marketing,
London Business School
Marketing Programmes at London Business School
Contact Greg Kirwan:
Tel: +44 (0)20 7000 7381
Fax: +44 (0)20 7000 7371
Email: [email protected]
www.london.edu/execed/marketing/