Abstract
This paper investigates consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for click-and-collect grocery services. In particular, we analyze whether the time-pressed are willing to pay higher fees. We exploit a survey among 572 customers of two Belgian supermarket chains—both users and non-users. We test our model for three (increasingly narrow) samples: all respondents, respondents with a non-zero WTP, and current users. Our key finding relates to the latter sample. Surprisingly, if we use the WTP measure put forward in the literature, the answer to our research question is ‘no’: we find no significant relationship between users’ perceived time pressure and the maximum service cost per order they are willing to pay. However, on closer scrutiny this ‘no’ in fact means ‘yes’: our finding implies that in the face of increasing fees the time-pressed are willing to maintain their current, higher order frequency for as long as the other users. The maximum total cost they are willing to incur over a given period is thus higher. This said, the absence of a relationship between time pressure and the WTP per order does limit the opportunities for e-grocers to price discriminate, as is suggested in the literature. A further complication is that we find no clear pattern between perceived time pressure and the use of specific time slots.
Highlights
Online grocery shopping has instigated the return of traditional, pre-supermarket delivery concepts [1,2]
A further complication is that we find no clear pattern between perceived time pressure and the use of specific time slots
Retailers might benefit from mentioning this cost in their advertising campaigns, all the while emphasizing the advantages of online grocery shopping and the existence of service cost waivers
Summary
Online grocery shopping has instigated the return of traditional, pre-supermarket delivery concepts [1,2]. Retailers face additional logistics costs [3]. To cover these extra costs, e-grocers typically charge a service fee. The literature argues that users willingly pay these fees because they think of grocery shopping as a chore and appreciate the convenience of the online service. According to this ‘convenience hypothesis’ [4], cost recovery should not be a problem. (Kotzab and Teller [4] formulate the ‘convenience hypothesis’ for the home delivery model; supermarkets with a click-and-collect service incur additional costs.) According to this ‘convenience hypothesis’ [4], cost recovery should not be a problem. (Kotzab and Teller [4] formulate the ‘convenience hypothesis’ for the home delivery model; supermarkets with a click-and-collect service incur additional costs.)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.