Skip to main content
Log in

Disposing the leftovers under the consignment contract with revenue sharing: Retailer vs supplier

  • Published:
Journal of Systems Science and Complexity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper studies the consignment contract with revenue sharing where the retailer offers two revenue share schemes between himself and his supplier from the viewpoint of inventory ownership: One is that the retailer takes charge of the unsold items, the other one is that the retailer returns the unsold items to the supplier at the end of the selling period, and the supplier disposes those overstockings. In each contract, the retailer deducts a percentage from the selling price for each sold item and transfers the balance to the supplier. The supplier solves a two-stage problem: She first chooses contract, then decides retail price and delivery quantity according to the terms of the contract chosen. With an iso-price-elastic demand model, the authors derive the retailer and suppliers’ optimal decisions for both schemes. In addition, the authors characterize how they are affected by disposing cost. The authors compare the decisions between the two schemes for disposing cost turn out to be holding cost or salvage value, respectively. The authors use numerical examples to show the supplier’s first-stage optimal decision depends critically on demand price elasticity, the disposing cost and the retailer’s share for channel cost.

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

  1. W. H. Bolen, Contemporary Retailing, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Y. Wang, L. Jiang, and Z. Shen, Channel performance under consignment contract with revenue sharing, Management Science, 2004, 50(1): 34–47.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. S. Karlin and C. R. Carr, Prices and optimal inventory policy, K. J. Arrow, S. Karlin, H. Scarf, eds., Studies in Applied Probability and Management Science, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, 1962.

    Google Scholar 

  4. N. Petruzzi and M. Dada, Pricing and the newsvendor problem: A review with extensions, Operation Research, 1999, 47: 184–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. G. P. Cachon and M. A. Lariviere, Supply chain coordination with revenue-sharing contracts: Strengths and limitations, Management Science, 2005, 51(1): 30–44.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. S. C. Choi, Price competition in a channel structure with a common retailer, Marketing Science, 1991, 10(4): 271–296.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. H. Emmons and S. Gilbert, The role of returns policies in pricing and inventory decisions for catalogue goods, Management Science, 1998, 44(6): 276–283.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. A. Ha, supplier-buyer contracting: Asymmetric cost information and the cut-off level policy for buyer participation, Naval Research Logistics, 2001, 48: 41–46.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. S. C. Hackett, Consignment contracting, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1993, 20(2): 247–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Y. Wang, Joint pricing-production decisions in supply chains of complementary products with uncertain demand, Operation Research, 2006, 54: 1110–1127.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wei Hu.

Additional information

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos. 70901029, 71171088, 71131004, and 71002077, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Universities under Grant No. 65010771.

This paper was recommended for publication by Editor Shouyang WANG.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hu, W., Li, J. Disposing the leftovers under the consignment contract with revenue sharing: Retailer vs supplier. J Syst Sci Complex 25, 262–274 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11424-011-9063-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11424-011-9063-7

Key words

Navigation