Electronic Commerce Research

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 187–200 | Cite as

I can’t get no satisfaction: How bundling and multi-part pricing can satisfy consumers and suppliers

  • Samuel E. Bodily
  • Rafi A. Mohammed


Bundling and multi-part pricing may save etailers from mortal challenges attacking the music industry. These strategies are attractive to customers, perhaps spelling the difference between pirating and legally purchasing music; they allow “custom pricing” to capture more of the consumer surplus, and just as importantly, they contribute to developing new artists for long-term viability of the music industry. The many ways to bundle include exact firm-selected bundles, category bundling, customer-selected bundles, and mixing these with individual products. Each of these approaches has specific advantages for different market segments, making up for generally lower prices in the competitive online world. Multi-part pricing affords additional opportunities to capture more of the consumer surplus. These ideas are especially relevant to online music because of the ease of packaging products, the low cost of reproducing music on demand, the reduced friction of consumer/firm interaction, the low cost of monitoring complex behavior, and the enhanced measurement of performance. In the online world, content offerings are revitalized when offered as bundles or service packages.


Data Structure Communication Network Information Theory Lower Price Complex Behavior 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Adams, W., & Yellen, J. (1976). “Commodity Bundling and the Burden of Monopoly,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90, 475–498.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Bakos, Y., & Brynjolfsson, E. (1999). “Bundling Information Goods: Pricing, Profits, and Efficiency, Management Science, 45, 1613–1630.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Bakos, Y., & Brynjolfsson, E. (2000). “Bundling and Competition on the Internet: Aggregation Strategies for Information Goods, Marketing Science, 19, 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Chuang, J. C.-I., & Sirbu, M. S. (1999). “Optimal Bundling Strategy for Digital Information Goods: Network Delivery of Articles and Subscriptions, Information Economics and Policy, 11, 147–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Eppen, G. D., Hanson, W. A., & Martin, R. K. (1991). “Bundling New Products, New Markets, Low Risk,” Sloan Management Review 7–14.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Flynn, L. (2003). “Technology; Apple Offers Music Downloads with Unique Pricing,” New York Times.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Holson, L., & Fabrikant, G. (2003) “Music Industry Braces for a Shift,” New York Times, Section C (Business section), p. 1.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    “iTunes Music Store Sells Over One Million Songs in First Week,” Press release dated May 5, 2003 from
  9. [9]
    Grover, R. (2000). “Doing What He Does Best: Mike Ovitz is Packaging His Clients All Over Tinseltown,” Business Week, p. 42.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Grover, R., Landler M., & Oneal, M. (1993). “Ovitz—How Many Fields Can the King of Hollywood Conquer,” Business Week, 50, 50–55.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Kearney, R. W., & Klein, B. (1983). “The Economics of Block Booking,” Journal of Law and Economics 26, 497–540.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Oi, W. (1971). “A Disneyland Dilemma: Two-part Tariffs for a Mickey Mouse Monopoly,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 85, 77–96.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Salinger, M. A. (1995). “A Graphical Analysis of Bundling,” Journal of Business, 68(1), 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Schmalensee, R., (1982). “Commodity Bundling by Single Product Monopolies,” Journal of Law and Economics 25, 67–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Zhu, K., & MacQuarrie, B. (2003). “The Economics of Digital Bundling: The Impact of Digitization and Bundling on the Music Industry,” Communications of the ACM, 46, 264–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Darden Graduate Business SchoolUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesville
  2. 2.Simon-Kucher Partners, Strategy & Marketing ConsultantsCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations