Blackstone Executive Vice Chairman Tony James says he's less optimistic now than before that the U.S.-China trade war could be resolved, but even a smaller deal could help...World Economyread more
The massive market transformation this month that some on Wall Street called a "once in a decade opportunity" might have just been a one-off technical move because of taxes.Marketsread more
The Pentagon will deploy U.S. forces to the Middle East on the heels of the attack on Saudi Arabian oil facilities, United States Secretary of Defense Mark Esper announced...Defenseread more
CNBC did a deep dive through the most recent Wall Street research to find stocks that analysts say are underappreciated.Marketsread more
Shares of MasterCard are up 46% this year, and 1120% since 2011, getting a boost from the strong U.S. consumer.Investingread more
CNBC sat in on an "empathy training" at Amazon PillPack's Somerville offices, which is part of new hire orientation.Technologyread more
Trade with China is the 'big unknown' for the Federal Reserve as it decides how best to support the U.S. economy, says Council on Foreign Relations Director of International...Futures Nowread more
Lobbying experts said the visit is likely an attempt to be in lawmakers' ears as they consider legislation that would impact Facebook.Technologyread more
Yardeni Research's Edward Yardeni believes the U.S. economy is picking up steam.Trading Nationread more
Iran's audacious drone and cruise missile attack on Saudi Arabia's oil producing facilities has provided a critical test yet for the Trump administration's foreign policy. A...Politicsread more
New research has found that U.S. retailers charge nearly identical prices across stores, despite wide variation in customer income and local demographics.
And by holding prices steady across locations, retailers significantly increase the prices paid by poorer households relative to the rich as a percentage of total income.
The uniform pricing also ends up costing firms nearly 7 percent of profits on average because they lose out on higher prices they could charge the wealthy and lower volume for lower-income consumers.
In a working paper filed with the National Bureau of Economic Research, economists Stefano DellaVigna of UC Berkeley and Matthew Gentzkow of Stanford University reported their findings.
For the food stores studied, customers of stores in the lowest income decile pay about 0.7 percent higher prices than they would under flexible prices, while customers of stores in the top income decile pay roughly 9 percent lower prices, according to the research.
Gentzkow, who's been a professor at Stanford for two years, underscored that classical economics predicts that companies adjust prices in response to surges or contractions in demand or income. That is, firms take advantage of people who want a particular good more than others and exploit populations with higher income levels.
The researchers studied data from tens of thousands of stores in the Nielsen Retailer Scanner to extract information on weekly prices from firms while using Consumer Panel data from the University of Chicago to study customer income trends. The team focused on three store types: 9,415 food stores, 9,977 drugstores and 3,288 mass merchandise stores.
"We view this sharp contrast between within- and between-chain results as one of our key findings. It suggests that chains are either varying their prices for too little across stores in response to income, or varying their prices far too much at the overall chain level," wrote the economists in their paper.
Their research found an increase in per capita income of $10,000 for localities — equivalent to a move from the 30th to the 75th percentile — is associated with an increase in price of just 0.72 percent.
"The thing that makes it surprising to us is that those stores typically have very different consumers," Gentzkow told CNBC in an interview. "Econ 101 would tell you that inequality in incomes is going to be offset because poor people are going to end up paying lower prices."
The paper doesn't go into much on the reasons why retailers are charging the same everywhere, but it's likely that access to Amazon and Google pricing comparison tools on a consumer's smartphone is playing a role.
DellaVigna and Gentzkow suggest it may have more to do with managers at chain stores being reluctant to adjust prices for their location. "Change may impose additional costs, as managers may not be well incentivized to make the change, while fearing the cost if a change backfires," wrote the team.
But stores may be reluctant to give that power to individual locations with Amazon available to ship anywhere easily at a lower price.
"I think it's plausible that if one of these stores said now were going to start varying the prices in their stores it would come at managerial costs," Gentzkow told CNBC. Plus "people might be upset if they realize you were change the price in one store in not another."
Another important effect is that floating prices help mitigate the negative impact of local economic shocks; even when the population experiences a hit to income, reductions in local retail prices would naturally offset the damage. However, fixed prices as observed by the researchers diminish this helpful response.