Skip to main content
Log in

R&D and product obsolescence

  • Published:
Review of Industrial Organization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Claims of “planned obsolescence” have often been made by various consumer groups. Bulow (1986) examined a monopolist's choice of product durability and found that firms who sell their products tend to choose lower durability levels than firms that rent. We argue that the speed of new product development may be a more appropriate proxy for obsolescence than is durability. Reformulating Bulow's model in terms of R&D choice rather than durability choice, we find that sales firms engage in higher levels of R&D than do rental firms. Additionally, we provide an empirical example using data from the copier and computer industries which also suggests a strong positive relationship between the R&D intensity of a firm and the proportion of output sold versus rented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bhatt, S. (1989) ‘Demand Uncertainty in a Durable Goods Monopoly’,International Journal of Industrial Organization,7, 341–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond, E. and Samuelson, L. (1987) ‘Durable Goods, Market Structure and the Incentives to Innovate’,Economica,54, 1987, 57–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bucovetsky, S. and Chilton, J. (1986) ‘Concurrent Renting and Selling in a Durable-Goods Monopoly Under the Threat of Entry’,Rand Journal of Economics,17, 261–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulow, J. (1986) ‘An Economic Theory of Planned Obsolescence’,Quarterly Journal of Economics,101, 729–749.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butz, D. (1990) ‘Durable Good Monopoly and Best-Price Provisions’,American Economic Review,80, 1062–1076.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. (1972) ‘Durability and Monopoly’,Journal of Law And Economics,15, 143–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goering, G. (1992) ‘Oligopolies and Product Durability’,International Journal of Industrial Organization,10, 55–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hay, D. and Morris, D. (1991)Industrial Economics and Organization, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Judge, G., Hill, R., Griffiths, W., Lutkepohl, H. and Lee, T. (1988)Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Econometrics, New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamien, M. and Shwartz, N. (1982)Market Structure and Innovation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinthal, D. and Purohit, D. (1989) ‘Durable Goods and Product Obsolescence’,Marketing Science,8, 35–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmalensee, R. (1979) ‘Market Structure, Durability, and Quality: A Selective Survey’,Economic Inquiry,17, 177–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, J. (1991) ‘Intel: Is It Still Inside “The Computer Inside”’,PC Week,8, 73.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Goering, G.E., Boyce, J.R. & Collins, J.M. R&D and product obsolescence. Rev Ind Organ 8, 609–621 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01024249

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01024249

Keywords

Navigation