Indirect Cost Factors In Menu Pricing

In the discussion - Indirect Cost Factors in Menu Pricing – by David V. Pavesic, Associate Professor, Hotel, Restaurant and Travel Administration at Georgia State University, Associate Professor Pavesic initially states: “Rational pricing methodologies have traditionally employed quantitative factors to mark up food and beverage or food and labor because these costs can be isolated and allocated to specific menu items. There are, however, a number of indirect costs that can influence the price charged because they provide added value to the customer or are affected by supply/demand factors. The author discusses these costs and factors that must be taken into account in pricing decisions. Professor Pavesic offers as a given that menu pricing should cover costs, return a profit, reflect a value for the customer, and in the long run, attract customers and market the establishment. “Prices that are too high will drive customers away, and prices that are too low will sacrifice profit,” Professor Pavesic puts it succinctly. To dovetail with this premise the author provides that although food costs measure markedly into menu pricing, other factors such as equipment utilization, popularity/demand, and marketing are but a few of the parenthetic factors also to be considered. “… there is no single method that can be used to mark up every item on any given restaurant menu. One must employ a combination of methodologies and theories,” says Professor Pavesic. “Therefore, when properly carried out, prices will reflect food cost percentages, individual and/or weighted contribution margins, price points, and desired check averages, as well as factors driven by intuition, competition, and demand.” Additionally, Professor Pavesic wants you to know that value, as opposed to maximizing revenue, should be a primary motivating factor when designing menu pricing. This philosophy does come with certain caveats, and he explains them to you. Generically speaking, Professor Pavesic says, “The market ultimately determines the price one can charge.” But, in fine-tuning that decree he further offers, “Lower prices do not automatically translate into value and bargain in the minds of the customers. Having the lowest prices in your market may not bring customers or profit. “Too often operators engage in price wars through discount promotions and find that profits fall and their image in the marketplace is lowered,” Professor Pavesic warns. In reference to intangibles that influence menu pricing, service is at the top of the list. Ambience, location, amenities, product [i.e. food] presentation, and price elasticity are discussed as well. Be aware of price-value perception; Professor Pavesic explains this concept to you. Professor Pavesic closes with a brief overview of a la carte pricing; its pros and cons.

A Multi-Criteria GIS-Based Route Selection Tool for Hazardous Material Transport: Consideration of Environmental Consequence, Traffic Congestions and Costs

Hazardous materials are substances that, if not regulated, can pose a threat to human populations and their environmental health, safety or property when transported in commerce. About 1.5 million tons of hazardous material shipments are transported by truck in the US annually, with a steady increase of approximately 5% per year. The objective of this study was to develop a routing tool for hazardous material transport in order to facilitate reduced environmental impacts and less transportation difficulties, yet would also find paths that were still compelling for the shipping carriers as a matter of trucking cost. The study started with identification of inhalation hazard impact zones and explosion protective areas around the location of hypothetical hazardous material releases, considering different parameters (i.e., chemicals characteristics, release quantities, atmospheric condition, etc.). Results showed that depending on the quantity of release, chemical, and atmospheric stability (a function of wind speed, meteorology, sky cover, time and location of accidents, etc.) the consequence of these incidents can differ. The study was extended by selection of other evaluation criteria for further investigation because health risk as an evaluation criterion would not be the only concern in selection of routes. Transportation difficulties (i.e., road blockage and congestion) were incorporated as important factor due to their indirect impact/cost on the users of transportation networks. Trucking costs were also considered as one of the primary criteria in selection of hazardous material paths; otherwise the suggested routes would have not been convincing for the shipping companies. The last but not least criterion was proximity of public places to the routes. The approach evolved from a simple framework to a complicated and efficient GIS-based tool able to investigate transportation networks of any given study area, and capable of generating best routing options for cargos. The suggested tool uses a multi-criteria-decision-making method, which considers the priorities of the decision makers in choosing the cargo routes. Comparison of the routing options based on each criterion and also the overall suitableness of the path in regards to all the criteria (using a multi-criteria-decision-making method) showed that using similar tools as the one proposed by this study can provide decision makers insights in the area of hazardous material transport. This tool shows the probable consequences of considering each path in a very easily understandable way; in the formats of maps and tables, which makes the tradeoffs of costs and risks considerably simpler, as in some cases slightly compromising on trucking cost may drastically decrease the probable health risk and/or traffic difficulties. This will not only be rewarding to the community by making cities safer places to live, but also can be beneficial to shipping companies by allowing them to advertise as environmental friendly conveyors.