谢谢分享！
请问lz第三篇是这篇文章吗？
If a product has a finite 【有限的】 selling season and uncertain demand, retail overstock is a possibility. Anticipating how such surplus will devalue, the retailer may stock less of the item than the manufacturer would like, if any at all. As illustrated by P&G, manufacturer return policies and markdown money are two common strategies used by manufacturers to combat this tendency. Both work by decreasing the retailer's net cost of overstock.
Return policies are often observed when demand is unpredictable and/or the risk of obsolescence（过时） is high, as extensively documented by Padmanabhan and Png (1995) and Kandel (1996). Markdown money also has a rich tradition among products facing such environments, including fashion apparel（时装） (Ryan 1998; Monget 1998), cosmetics and fragrances (Parks 1996), toys (Leccese 1993), specialty products (Gallagher 1999), certain food categories and over-the-counter medications (Tenser 1997). However, nothing in our discussion thus far suggests if, when, or why either method might be preferable to the other.
The academic literature is silent on these questions. Return policies are certainly relatively well-studied (Pasternack 1985; Kandel 1996; Padmanabhan and Png 1997; Emmons and Gilbert 1998; Donohue 2000; Webster and Weng 2000), as will be discussed in greater detail in the next section. These works advocate return policies as a way to improve the efficiency of the channel to the participants' mutual benefit（共同利益）. However, this conclusion relies on two assumptions that mask the differences between the practices in question:
(1) the physical return of product does not incur additional cost, and
(2) the channel members are equally effective at liquidating（清偿） overstock (2).
The first assumption is problematic in that the handling, logistics, and administrative overhead（费用） associated with moving product back up the channel may be substantial（实际存在的）. For instance, P&G Cosmetics has calculated that each handling of an item (because of damage, discontinuation, or simple return) costs 34 cents, a nontrivial（重大的） fraction of typical profit margins for such products (Born 1997). And Hal Upbin, CEO of Kellwood Co. (a manufacturer of ready-to-wear apparel(非定制成衣)) notes, "We don't take anything back; the cost of handling would be absurd (Infotracs 1997)."
With respect to the second assumption, the reality is that recovering value from surplus product is a substantive professional competency（能力）, and different parties likely have different aptitude and tolerance for this (Hungerford 1999). The retailer obviously has the most immediate option, i.e., to sell to the same customer base at a discount. Indeed, access to markets and comparative advantage in merchandising（广告推销） are among the underlying reasons a retail channel would be used in the first place, and these factors should persist at the clearance phase（清仓甩卖阶段）. However, if the residual（剩余的） value comes from recovering and reusing the raw materials, the manufacturer could have an advantage. Also, by consolidating（合并） the returns from multiple retailers a manufacturer might be able to assemble an assortment that becomes economically viable for resale to a discount specialist (e.g., T. J. Maxx in the apparel industry). Additional aging of the product and potential damage during the processing of returns should be considered, of course. Similar points are raised, but not formally pursued, by Kandel (1996) and Padmanabhan and Png (1997).
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2019-1-24 15:58:05
收藏
收藏
