Gabor-Granger Pricing

Both are direct, survey-based pricing methods, but they ask different questions. Gabor-Granger asks a yes/no purchase-intent question at each of several specific prices, producing a demand curve, revenue-maximizing price, and elasticity. Van Westendorp asks four open-ended questions about prices that seem too cheap, cheap, expensive, and too expensive, and from the cumulative distributions infers an optimal price point and a range of acceptable prices rather than a demand curve. Gabor-Granger is better for finding a revenue or profit optimum at concrete price points, while Van Westendorp maps perceived price boundaries; the two are often used together for a fuller picture.

Gabor-Granger draws respondents' attention to price repeatedly and in isolation from the competitive and contextual cues that accompany real purchases. This priming makes people behave as more deliberate, price-focused shoppers than they typically are, so stated demand falls off more steeply with price than real demand would, inflating the estimated elasticity. As pricing-research guides note, the absolute acceptance figures and elasticities should therefore be read as directional and relative rather than literal, and conclusions are stronger when cross-checked against choice-based conjoint or actual sales data, where price competes with other attributes.

Yes. The core output is a stated demand curve, acceptance share at each price, from which revenue at each price is price times share. If unit cost information is available, expected profit at each price is the demand share times the margin (price minus cost), and the price maximizing that product is the profit-maximizing price. Because profit usually peaks at a higher price than revenue, this distinction matters managerially. The same caveats apply, intention-inflated demand and isolated price framing, so the profit optimum is best treated as guidance and validated against richer methods or market evidence.