Search

Purpose This study aims to examine the critical role of types of coopetition (upstream/downstream), market structure (concentrated/competitive) and innovation (low vs high degree of innovation) that can affect the way consumers perceive the resulting price (un)fairness of new offerings. Design/methodology/approach Three between-subjects experiments involving different participant populations and product categories were conducted to test the research hypotheses. Findings The valence of the effect of types of coopetition (upstream/downstream) on price fairness is conditional on the market structure and the degree of innovation associated with the new product offering. Downstream (as opposed to upstream) coopetition is much more detrimental to perceptions of price fairness in a concentrated market than in a competitive and fragmented market. However, within a competitive market, downstream coopetition may lead to greater price fairness perception than upstream coopetition when the new product offering is highly innovative. Research limitations/implications The current study uses lab experiments with fictitious scenarios and focuses on two moderating variables: market structure and innovation perceptions. Future research may use field experiments and explore additional moderating variables that may annihilate the negative effect of downstream coopetition on price fairness perception, especially in a concentrated market. Practical implications In concentrated markets, firms should opt for upstream rather than downstream coopetition to limit the negative effect the announcement of coopetition has on price fairness evaluation. However, within a competitive market, when the new product offering resulting from coopetition is associated with a high perceived degree of innovation, firms should opt for downstream rather than upstream coopetition because of its positive impact on price fairness evaluation. Originality/value To the best of authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to demonstrate that new product development from coopetition has important implications for the perception of price fairness, leading to positive or negative effects depending on market structure and the degree of innovation of the new product offering. It then explores the conditions under which types of coopetition (upstream/downstream) might backfire.

The aim of our paper is to clear up the draw backs of the firms’ strategic behavior on consumer behavior. It attempts to spot light on a possible interaction between strategic firms behavior and consumer behavior by using Inoculation Theory. Indeed, it suggests that interaction between firms on the public scene can be a possible source of inspiration for the consumers who react vertically to the firm and horizontally to its consumers by replicating the same firms’ interactional scheme with other consumers. A netnographic study of Smartphone consumers’ behavior reveals interesting results on possible inoculating effect of the firms’ strategic behavior and interaction on consumers that is noticeable through oppositional loyalty and resistance phenomena. We chose to call this replication of behavior from the corporate level to the consumer level ‘The Mirror Effect’. Despites the exploratory nature of our study, it draws attention towards a reconsideration of the use of inoculation theory and permits building a bridge between two analysis levels: the corporate and the consumer one.