This dissertation consists of three essays on the implications of consumer heterogeneity and uncertainty for firms' strategies. The first essay analyzes how firms should develop add-on policies when consumers have heterogeneous tastes and firms are vertically differentiated. The theory provides an explanation for the seemingly counter-intuitive phenomenon that higher-end hotels are more likely than lower-end hotels to charge for Internet service, and predicts that selling an add-on as optional intensifies competition, in sharp contrast to standard conclusions found in the literature. The second essay examines how firms should develop product and pricing policies when customer reviews provide informative feedback about improving product or service quality. The analysis provides an alternative view of customer reviews such that they not only can help consumers learn about product quality, but also can help firms learn about problems with their products or services. The third essay studies the implications of cognitive simplicity for consumer learning problems. We explore one viable decision heuristic - index strategies, and demonstrate that they are intuitive, tractable, and plausible. Index strategies are much simpler for consumers to use but provide close-to-optimal utility. They also avoid exponential growth in computational complexity, enabling researchers to study learning models in more-complex situations.

This dissertation consists of three independent but related papers. All of them are devoted to estimate demand functions in presence of unobservable product attributes, such as quality, using different identification strategies. The first two exercises are based on a discrete choice model using the product-market approach developed by Berry (1994) with aggregate data information for gum and beer consumption. The third paper uses a control function approach as an identification strategy in order to estimate the choice model using disaggregated (micro level) data on household choices. These exercises reveal the importance of controlling for price endogeneity due to the existence of unobservable product attributes incorporating substantial bias in the coefficients when ignored.

Over the last decade, the market for organic food products in Germany has grown steadily, as consumers become increasingly aware of credence characteristics of food products. The primary goal of this study is to integrate psychometric data into a choice experiment to examine preference heterogeneity among consumers and their willingness-to-pay for organic products. In particular, the role of trust and gender are considered in analysing both preferences and willingness-to-pay for organic products. The results of the mixed logit models reveal significant heterogeneity in preferences among consumers for the products examined. The second focus of this study is the effect of starting point bias on the willingness-to-pay estimates obtained. The use of different prices in the first choice set results in different distributions of choices and significantly different preferences and willingness-to-pay estimates in two otherwise identical choice set designs. The results of the latent class models indicate that consumers’ trust perceptions tend to significantly influence their preferences for organic food products. The findings of this study indicate that some consumer groups are willing to pay high price premiums for specific organic food products and, to some extent, for locally produced food. As there is consumer segmentation based on varying levels of trust and due to the heterogeneous preferences of the consumers, organic food marketing should increase its use of suitable communication strategies concerning quality attributes.

We examine the strategic implications of rating schemes in online marketplaces and peerto-peer platforms. In traditional online marketplaces, multi-dimensional rating scheme is superior to the single-dimensional rating scheme in reducing consumers’ uncertainty about the value of a product when consumers have heterogeneous preferences regarding the product quality attributes. However, we show that, when sellers respond to product ratings by adjusting their prices, the multi-dimensional rating scheme does not always benefit consumers. The main driver of the results is that the multi-dimensional ratings amplify the consumers’ perceptions of any underlying differentiation in the attributes of competing products, while simultaneously exposing the similarity between the products if they are homogeneous. Therefore, the rating scheme alters the heterogeneity in consumer perceptions and utility, which, in turn, affects the upstream price competition. In peerto-peer markets, many platforms use a bilateral review scheme in which both consumers and providers rate each other, unlike the more prevalent unilateral review scheme in which only consumers rate providers. We show that if the proportion of the low-cost consumers is less than a threshold, consumers are better off, the platform is worse off, and the providers are worse off under the bilateral review scheme than the unilateral review scheme. The key driver for these results is that the price competition between providers for the low-cost consumers can be fundamentally different under the different review schemes; the price competition affects the consumer preference for a provider and hence the match between consumers and providers, which ultimately determines the payoffs to participants and the social welfare. Our findings also contribute to the adverse selection literature by identifying the critical role played by demand and supply conditions on the impact of adverse selection

It is well understood that decisions made under uncertainty differ from those made without risk in important and significant ways. Yet, there is very little research into how uncertainty manifests itself in the most ubiquitous of decision-making environments: Consumers' day-to-day decisions over where to shop, and what to buy for their daily grocery needs. Facing a choice between stores that either offer relatively stable "everyday low prices" (EDLP) or variable prices that reflect aggressive promotion strategies (HILO), consumers have to choose stores under price-uncertainty. I find that consumers' attitudes toward risk are critically important in determining store-choice, and that heterogeneity in risk attitudes explains the co-existence of EDLP and HILO stores - an equilibrium that was previously explained in somewhat unsatisfying ways. After choosing a store, consumers face another source of risk. While knowing the quality or taste of established brands, consumers have very little information about new products. Consequently, consumers tend to choose smaller package sizes for new products, which limits their exposure to the risk that the product does not meet their prior expectations. While the observation that consumers purchase small amounts of new products is not new, I show how this practice is fully consistent with optimal purchase decision-making by utility-maximizing consumers. I then use this insight to explain how manufacturers of consumer packaged goods (CPGs) respond to higher production costs. Because consumers base their purchase decisions in part on package size, manufacturers can use package size as a competitive tool in order to raise margins in the face of higher production costs. While others have argued that manufacturers reduce package sizes as a means of raising unit-prices (prices per unit of volume) in a hidden way, I show that the more important effect is a competitive one: Changes in package size can soften price competition, so manufacturers need not rely on fooling consumers in order to pass-through cost increases through changes in package size. The broader implications of consumer behavior under risk are dramatic. First, risk perceptions affect consumers' store choice and product choice patterns in ways that can be exploited by both retailers and manufacturers. Second, strategic considerations prevent manufacturers from manipulating package size in ways that seem designed to trick consumers. Third, many services are also offered as packages, and also involve uncertainty, so the effects identified here are likely to be pervasive throughout the consumer economy.

When purchase and consumption decisions are separated in time and when future utility is state dependent, consumers may desire to pursue consumption flexibility by purchasing different products together (multiple buying). This paper analyzes the effects of consumption flexibility on competing firms' marketing mix decisions, in a model in which future preference uncertainty exists and consumers differ in their preferred product location on a horizontal attribute. The analysis shows that the nature of price competition in such markets is dependent upon whether consumer multiple buying (and thus primary demand) is endogenously induced. When preference uncertainty is important, the firms are involved in a flexibility trap in which primary demand is expanded but profits decrease with the spread of consumer heterogeneity. This counter-intuitive result is caused by the firms being induced to over-cut prices to increase primary demand when consumption flexibility is important. In response to this, the firms may configure their products to alleviate the adverse effect of consumer heterogeneity. For example, if preference uncertainty is important, the firms may choose to minimize differentiation on the horizontal attribute, or extend the current product line, to deal with the flexibility trap. The implications of allowing for positive salvage value, uncertainty heterogeneity, preference correlation, and state-dependent preference configuration are also investigated.