Dynamic pricing with finite price sets: a non-parametric approach (Q2238754): Difference between revisions

The paper's setting is wrong from the aspect of economic science. We do provide the main points of this assertion: \begin{itemize} \item[1.] Authors do develop their results under the assumption that prices are exogenous, which is not compatible to the monopolistic behaviour. This contradiction appears in comparing pages 3 and page 6. \item[2.] Monopolists maximize their revenue, hence the notion of ``demand'' function is not understood. \item[3.] Sellers' behaviour relies on a numerable set of prices. This assumption is not explained. Why prices are numerable and why do they formulate an increasing sequence? Which are the properties of this sequence of ``prices''? The prices of the goods under production may be unbounded? Why prices pose on the goods under production have to be bounded? \item[4.] Authors do mention the term ``suboptimal'' in page 6, which is not further explained. \item[5.] Authors refer to the term ``full information'' in page 7, which is probably used in order to explain of the monopolists (?) Why monopolists may have not full information? This approach implies that monopolists ``observe'' demand before production at any time-period, in order to extract the production plans' prices. \item[6.] Authors do mention the terms ``seasons'' and ``periods'' in page 8, without further explanation. \item[7.] Authors refer to the distinction between the ``phase'' of observation and the ``phase'' of prices' posing in page 9, about the time -horizon as a whole, but not for any sole time-period. \end{itemize} Authors do propose an interesting statistical framework, which may be useful for other purposes.