This document relates generally to computer-implemented systems and methods for price analysis and more particularly to computer-implemented systems and methods for cross-price analysis.
Retailers face a difficult task when attempting to establish prices for the products that they offer. The task involves balancing the price of the products with consumer demand of the products. The task is made even more difficult if the retailers are confronted with many products that have to be priced.
Pricing of a specific product is rarely done in isolation. Instead, the process of establishing a price of a product involves consideration of the prices of related products (cross-prices). However, including the cross-prices of related products can quickly lead to a demand model with too many parameters to estimate—particularly with a demand model that attempts to price at a low level, such as at the Stock Keeping Unit (SKU) level. (The SKU is a unique number assigned to each style/size combination of a product.)
A current approach to limit the number of estimated cross-price parameters is described in the following publication: Bruce G. S. Hardie et al., “Attribute-based Market Share Models: Methodological Development and Managerial Applications,” University of Pennsylvania, Working Paper 98-009, pp. 1-48, 1998. The approach suggests developing measures of cross-price effects at the attribute level for each SKU. However, the cross-price variable approach disclosed therein exhibits significant disadvantages, such as not explaining demand well which adversely affects the performance of regression models that are attempting to predict demand.
In accordance with the teachings provided herein, systems and methods for operation upon data processing devices are provided to determine demand of products, wherein each of the products share a common set of attributes and include a first product as well as products that compete with the first product. As an example, a system and method can be configured wherein price data is received about the products. With respect to a first attribute of the first product, a single price is determined based upon the price data of the products which compete with the first product and whose attributes are alike with respect to the first product's attributes except for the first attribute. The determined single price is used in a mathematical model for determining demand for the first product. The determined single price being based upon the price data of the products which compete with the first product allows the competing product prices to affect the determined price for the first product.
With respect to the cross-pricing model construction system 34, the users 32 can interact with such a system 34 through a number of ways, such as over one or more networks 36. Server(s) 38 accessible through the network(s) 36 can host the system 34. One or more data stores 40 can store the data to be analyzed by the system 34 as well as any intermediate or final data generated by the system 34, such as input information that is received about competing products as well as the pricing values that are generated by system 34 for use by a consumer demand model.
The system 34 can be an integrated web-based reporting and analysis tool that provides users flexibility and functionality for performing product cross-price analysis. It should be understood that the system 34 could also be provided on a stand-alone computer for access by a user.
With reference to
Process 130 uses the estimated price 120 to generate a demand model 140. For example, the demand model 140 can be a regression model whose parameters are based upon the estimated price data generated by process 110. Because of the manner in which the estimated price is generated via this approach, the demand model 140 will exhibit better predictive performance when determining what level of demand there will be for a product by consumers.
The products can have many different attributes. As an illustration, a product can have such attributes such as packaging size, type, brand, color, etc. After selecting one of the attributes as a cross-price variable, process 110 provides an estimated product price 120 by examining the prices of products that are the same as the product in question by all but that one selected attribute. In one situation, the selected attribute could be the packaging size attribute, while in another situation it could be a different attribute such as product type.
As another illustration, consider trying to estimate the demand for a 6-pack of Bud Light beer (e.g., 6-12 oz. bottles). This example assesses how we capture the effect of the prices of competing products. Too many products compete to add the price of each one in a demand model. However a system can be configured as shown in
With reference to
Cells 430 and 432 fit this cross-pricing inclusion criteria. Cell 430 is a product that differs with respect to the selected cross-price variable value (i.e., brand=“Bud”) because the brand associated with cell 430 is Coors which is different than Bud. Cell 430 also is a product whose other attributes are the same as the product in question:
Similarly, cell 432 fits the cross-pricing inclusion criteria. Cell 432 is a product that differs with respect to the selected cross-price variable value (i.e., brand=“Bud”) because the brand associated with cell 432 is Miller which is different than Bud. Cell 432 also is a product whose other attributes are the same as the product in question:
In contrast, the product associated with cell 440 does not meet the cross-pricing inclusion criteria. While cell 440 may be a product that differs with respect to the selected cross-price variable value (i.e., brand=“Bud”) because the brand associated with cell 440 is Coors, cell 440 does contain another attribute whose value differs from the value of the product in question—that is, the type attribute of cell 440 is “Regular” (which is different than the type attribute for the product in question; i.e., “Light”). Accordingly, the price data associated with the product in cell 440 (i.e., Coors regular in a 6-pack) is not used in determining the brand weighted average price.
It should be understood that similar to the other processing flows described herein, the steps and the order of the processing described in
Processes 610, 620, and 630 select different attributes to determine which competing product prices should be included in estimating prices for the product in question. Process 610 examines brand competition by finding a single price based on competitive products that are alike in all attributes excluding the brand attribute. Similarly for “type” competition, process 620 finds all the products that are the same in all other attributes except type and uses the price of these products to determine a weighted average price to measure competition from other “types” of beers. For pack size competition analysis, process 630 finds all the products that are the same in all other attributes except pack size and uses the price of these products to determine a weighted average price to measure competition from other “sizes” of beers. It is noted that an analyst may decide that when people buy beer, cases are not a direct substitute for 6-packs, and in this case the system may be configured to not consider the price of such products.
As a result of processes 610, 620, and 630, multiple cross-price variables are generated: a cross-price brand variable (Bud, Coors, Miller); a cross-price type variable (light, regular); and a cross-price packaging size variable (6-pack, 12-pack, case, etc). These variables and their determined pricing information are used as inputs to marketing models for determining product demand.
Process 620 which performed type competition analysis would use the product information associated with cell 720 because this cell contains a product whose attributes are the same in all other attributes except type. Accordingly, process 620 would use the product information associated with cell 720 to find a single price based on competitive products that are alike in all attributes excluding the type attribute.
Process 630 which performed size competition analysis would use the product information associated with cells 710 and 712 because these cells contain products whose attributes are the same in all other attributes except size. Accordingly, process 630 would use the product information associated with cells 710 and 712 to find a single price based on competitive products that are alike in all attributes excluding the size attribute.
While examples have been used to disclose the invention, including the best mode, and also to enable any person skilled in the art to make and use the invention, the patentable scope of the invention is defined by claims, and may include other examples that occur to those skilled in the art. Accordingly the examples disclosed herein are to be considered non-limiting. As an illustration,
To illustrate the approach of assessing product similarity/differences and establishing thresholds or criteria for the removal from consideration products that are not suitable replacements,
Note that (the absolute value of) the matrix entries equal to 1, 10, or 100 indicate that the two products in question differ by one attribute and that they are only one level away from the product in question in that particular attribute. Entries whose absolute value equals 2, 20, or 200 indicate that the products differ by one attribute only—but in this case, the level of the attribute is 2 apart. Whether the fact that an attribute is 1 or 2 apart can make a difference and depends if the attribute in question is ordinal or not. For example, if a 1 indicates Coors versus Budweiser and a 2 indicates Coors versus Miller the magnitude of the number has no meaning—that is, both products differ from the Coors product only by brand and they would both be used in the calculation of cross-price brand variable. On the other hand, the difference between product combinations yielding 100 and 200 may be deemed significant. A 200 in the example illustrated above indicates a comparison of products which are identical except for the packaging size and the comparison is between a 6-pack and a case. A value of 100, on the other hand indicates a comparison between either a 6-pack and a 12-pack, or a 12-pack and a case. For this data, an analyst can decide that a value of 200 indicates the two products in question are not direct substitutes and thus, may not include these product combinations in the calculation of cross-price pack size (CPS). CPS only includes those products with a value of 100 (in absolute value).
As another illustration of the wide scope of the systems and methods disclosed herein,
It is further noted that the systems and methods may be implemented on various types of computer architectures, such as for example on a single general purpose computer (as shown at 1000 on
It is further noted that the systems and methods may include data signals conveyed via networks (e.g., local area network, wide area network, internet, combinations thereof, etc.), fiber optic medium, carrier waves, wireless networks, etc. for communication with one or more data processing devices. The data signals can carry any or all of the data disclosed herein that is provided to or from a device.
Additionally, the methods and systems described herein may be implemented on many different types of processing devices by program code comprising program instructions that are executable by the device processing subsystem. The software program instructions may include source code, object code, machine code, or any other stored data that is operable to cause a processing system to perform the methods and operations described herein. Other implementations may also be used, however, such as firmware or even appropriately designed hardware configured to carry out the methods and systems described herein.
The systems' and methods' data (e.g., associations, mappings, data input, data output, intermediate data results, final data results, etc.) may be stored and implemented in one or more different types of computer-implemented ways, such as different types of storage devices and programming constructs (e.g., data stores, RAM, ROM, Flash memory, flat files, databases, programming data structures, programming variables, IF-THEN (or similar type) statement constructs, etc.). It is noted that data structures describe formats for use in organizing and storing data in databases, programs, memory, or other computer-readable media for use by a computer program.
The systems and methods may be provided on many different types of computer-readable media including computer storage mechanisms (e.g., CD-ROM, diskette, RAM, flash memory, computer's hard drive, etc.) that contain instructions (e.g., software) for use in execution by a processor to perform the methods' operations and implement the systems described herein.
The computer components, software modules, functions, data stores and data structures described herein may be connected directly or indirectly to each other in order to allow the flow of data needed for their operations. It is also noted that a module or processor includes but is not limited to a unit of code that performs a software operation, and can be implemented for example as a subroutine unit of code, or as a software function unit of code, or as an object (as in an object-oriented paradigm), or as an applet, or in a computer script language, or as another type of computer code. The software components and/or functionality may be located on a single computer or distributed across multiple computers depending upon the situation at hand.
It should be understood that as used in the description herein and throughout the claims that follow, the meaning of “a,” “an,” and “the” includes plural reference unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. Also, as used in the description herein and throughout the claims that follow, the meaning of “in” includes “in” and “on” unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. Finally, as used in the description herein and throughout the claims that follow, the meanings of “and” and “or” include both the conjunctive and disjunctive and may be used interchangeably unless the context expressly dictates otherwise; the phrase “exclusive or” may be used to indicate situation where only the disjunctive meaning may apply.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5627973 | Armstrong et al. | May 1997 | A |
5652842 | Siegrist, Jr. et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5767854 | Anwar | Jun 1998 | A |
5799286 | Morgan et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5873069 | Reuhl et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5926820 | Agrawal et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5953707 | Huang et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5960407 | Vivona | Sep 1999 | A |
5963910 | Ulwick | Oct 1999 | A |
5999908 | Abelow | Dec 1999 | A |
6009407 | Garg | Dec 1999 | A |
6014640 | Bent | Jan 2000 | A |
6029139 | Cunningham et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6078892 | Anderson et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6115691 | Ulwick | Sep 2000 | A |
6115694 | Cheetham et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6151582 | Huang et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6182060 | Hedgcock et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6236977 | Verba et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6237138 | Hameluck et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6249768 | Tulskie et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6275812 | Haq et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6286005 | Cannon | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6321206 | Honarvar | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6397224 | Zubeldia et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6456999 | Netz | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6470344 | Kothuri et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6484179 | Roccaforte | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6502077 | Speicher | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6526526 | Dong et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6546135 | Lin et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6581068 | Bensoussan et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6584447 | Fox et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6611829 | Tate et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6640215 | Galperin et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6728724 | Megiddo et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6735570 | Lacy et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6750864 | Anwar | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6898603 | Petculescu et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6901406 | Nabe et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6907382 | Urokohara | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6970830 | Samra et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
7039594 | Gersting | May 2006 | B1 |
7089266 | Stolte et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7092929 | Dvorak et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7133876 | Roussopoulos et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7346538 | Reardon | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7370366 | Lacan et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
7523047 | Neal et al. | Apr 2009 | B1 |
20010049642 | Harris | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020013757 | Bykowsky et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020046096 | Srinivasan et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020072953 | Michlowitz et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020073009 | Hogg et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020107723 | Benjamin et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020116237 | Cohen et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020123930 | Boyd et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020169654 | Santos et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020169655 | Beyer et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020178049 | Bye | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030023598 | Janakiraman et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030078830 | Wagner et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030083924 | Lee et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030083925 | Weaver et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030088458 | Afeyan et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030097292 | Chen et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030110072 | Delurgio et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030110080 | Tsutani et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030120584 | Zarefoss et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030126010 | Barns-Slavin | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030204408 | Guler et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030208402 | Bibelnieks et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030208420 | Kansal | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030236721 | Plumer et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040068413 | Musgrove et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040093296 | Phelan et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040111388 | Boiscuvier et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040199781 | Erickson et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050033761 | Guttman et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050055275 | Newman et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050066277 | Leah et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050262108 | Gupta | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060218162 | Keil et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070050235 | Ouimet | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070055482 | Goodermote et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070073758 | Perry et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070174119 | Ramsey et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20080033787 | Keil et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080270326 | Musgrove et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20090210355 | Dagum et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090327167 | Ginzel et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
WO 0111522 | Feb 2001 | WO |