Rice Business Professor Amit Pazgal found that in certain situations, gray markets can actually help manufacturers and retailers. Photo by Science in HD on Unsplash

A camera store in Taiwan buys Nikon cameras from an electronics shop in the Philippines, where photo equipment is cheaper. Then the store sells them to consumers in Taiwan at a lower price. The camera comes without a warranty and instructions are in Filipino – the buyers in Taiwan are happy to have a real Nikon for a lower cost.

The sellers and customers are operating in the so-called gray market – where genuine products are sold through unauthorized channels. Gray marketers buy goods in markets with lower prices, then ship them to a market with higher prices, where they will likely sell for a profit. Though the products are identical, consumers typically see gray market goods as inferior since they often lack benefits like after-sale services or warranty coverage.

For years, gray markets have posed a significant threat to both manufacturers and retailers, depriving both of customers and profits. It's estimated that around $7 billion to $10 billion in goods enter the U.S. market through gray market channels every year. The IT industry, for one, loses approximately $5 billion a year due to gray market activities.

No specific laws in the U.S. ban this practice outright, however. As a result, in recent years, retailers are increasingly taking advantage of potentially cheaper prices abroad, personally importing or using third parties to buy original goods not meant for direct sale in the United States – and then selling them here for less. Alibaba, China's most extensive online shopping site, offers its hundreds of millions of shoppers a large array of gray market goods to peruse.

Manufacturers usually respond to gray markets with knee-jerk hostility, urging customers to avoid gray market goods and even filing lawsuits against gray market peddlers. Nikon, for example, includes a website section to educate consumers on how to identify gray market products, to shun the gray market.

But is gray market commerce always destructive? Rice Business Professor Amit Pazgal joined then-Rice Business Ph.D. student Xueying Liu (now an assistant professor at Nankai University) to explore scenarios in which gray markets could be good for both manufacturers and retailers. Testing the theory in recent research, Pazgal and Liu found that there are indeed situations in which both manufacturers and retailers can profit thanks to gray markets, while the associated product also improves in quality.

To reach these conclusions, the researchers started by recruiting 118 participants between the ages of 25 and 45 to complete a gray market product survey. They found the majority had no problem buying gray market goods. Only 3 percent of consumers wouldn't consider buying cosmetics from a gray marketer, while 6 to 7 percent wouldn't buy electronics. Despite this, more than 90 percent of participants who were willing to buy required a price discount of 20 to 30 percent, showing the goods were seen as slightly inferior.

The researchers then tested responses to a model of a manufacturer selling a single product to two markets – or countries – that differed in size and in customer willingness to pay for the product. Consumers in one market would pay more, on average, for quality. For example, the Nikon D500 camera is sold for a 7.5 percent premium in Taiwan versus Thailand and a 10 percent price premium in Taiwan versus the Philippines.

Pazgal and Liu found that when the manufacturer sells their product directly to consumers in both markets when there is also a gray market, both the manufacturer's profit and product quality decrease. But when the same manufacturer sells their product indirectly to a retailer in at least one of these markets, both the manufacturer's and the retailer's profits can increase. So can the product's quality.

This occurs for several reasons. First, gray marketers increase total demand and profit for the retailer in the lower-priced market, or in the market where the gray marketer buys their goods. The manufacturer can set a higher wholesale price for the better quality product in a market where consumers pay more, and increase sales in both markets as consumers compare the regular, high-quality product to the gray market one. In fact, by offering a lower-priced, lower quality (that is, gray market) alternative to its own high-quality product, the manufacturer can better segment consumers in the higher-priced market.

Finally, the retailer in the higher-priced market becomes more profitable even though they lose some customers to the gray market. This is because increased product quality and price more than make up for lost sales. Researchers found that the results hold regardless of whether the gray marketer buys from the manufacturer or a retailer.

The bottom line: in certain situations, gray markets can improve profitability for both manufacturers and retailers (and, of course, the gray marketers). Counterintuitive though it is, manufacturers that sell through retailers shouldn't automatically see gray markets as an obstacle to their profits, rushing to demand that governments and courts shut them down. Instead, in some cases, companies could do well to embrace these gray markets, because they lead to overall improved profits.

Manufacturers can use this information to their advantage, Pazgal noted. Nikon, for example, could introduce a higher quality camera to the market, allowing it to set even higher wholesale prices and increase sales in both markets, far exceeding the cost of the higher quality product.

For consumers, meanwhile, gray markets are always beneficial because of lower prices. If companies heed Pazgal's findings, however, customers could also benefit from more innovative and higher quality cameras and other merchandise, as manufacturers hurry to create better products to bump up their profits.

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and is based on research from Amit Pazgal, the Friedkin Professor of Management – Marketing at the Jones Graduate School of Business.

Turns out, timing is everything when launching a new tech product, this reacher found for Rice Business Wisdom. rawpixel.com /Pexels

Rice University researcher discovers what makes a tech product stand out in a crowd

Houston Voices

From smart phones to video games to virtual reality toys, new products roll forward as relentlessly as the tides. So what, and how, should you tell consumers about your product to avoid being swept away in a sea of similar wares?

To answer this question, Rice Business professor Amit Pazgal and colleague Yuanfang Lin of Conestoga College dove into the particulars of how companies differentiate their products by informing consumers about a new product's quality.

The rush of new products, they note, is particularly intense in technology, where innovations are constant — which means consumers constantly need information about them. Traditionally, tech companies make the case for their products using advertising, free sample, product trials and splashy product demonstrations. (See your local Apple Store).

But how does a consumer's wish for information interact with their ultimate buying decision?

Timing, Pazgal and Lin found, plays a powerful role in the type of information that best influences consumers. Suppose, for example, Firm 1 offers a new product, say a smartphone with innovative features. This makes Firm 1 a pioneer. For a certain golden period, Firm 1 might hold a monopoly in the market, since there's simply no other smartphone like theirs. This is the moment, the researchers say, to offer consumers information that reveals the product's true quality and uniqueness. Because no similar product is out there, Firm 1 has the power to establish the parameters for judging its invention.

Inevitably, of course, another company (call it Firm 2) will come up with something comparable. Thanks to the heavy lifting in innovation by Firm 1, Firm 2 has the luxury to create a phone of equal or greater quality. And this is when the tide starts to turn. One might assume Firm 2 would just inform consumers of the superior quality of its product. But, surprisingly, Pazgal and Lin found that in most cases Firm 2 will instead focus on educating consumers about their preference for quality — in effect, leaving it up to the buyer to decide which of the two phones they really wants.

However, if another firm emerges with a similar product of lesser quality, its marketing will likely take yet another turn. Instead of trying to claim better quality, late entry companies offering an inferior product typically admit outright that their product isn't as well made as other versions.

That's because such firms calculate that if customers discover this themselves, they'll react badly. By telling the truth and pricing appropriately, a firm can find a calm stretch of water elsewhere in the market, someplace where it's not clashing directly with the earlier, higher quality products.

Whether it's Alexa, a smart TV or a virtual reality game, Pazgal and Lin explain, when a product enters the market for the first time, consumers need to be shown how it works. When a second product in the same line is introduced by a different company, the marketing task changes: it's now more important to show consumers how to identify a quality product, and then let them choose for themselves.

Any time a company launches a device or service into the world, in other words, it needs to trust consumers' ability to learn — and not drown them with too much information. Informed what good quality looks like, Pazgal and Lin conclude, consumers will swim on their own to the item they truly want.

------

This article originally appeared on Rice Business Wisdom.

Amit Pazgal is Friedkin Chair in Management and Professor of Marketing and Operations Management at Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Astrodome group seeks new ideas for future of historic Houston landmark

8th Wonder News

The Astrodome may have once been touted as the Eighth Wonder of the World, but its current condition remains one of Houston's most famous follies. In an effort to find a better use for the iconic building, The Astrodome Conservancy has released a Request for Information (RFI), inviting proposals from interested parties on how the historic landmark might be used in the future. Respondents have until September 8 to submit their responses at the official conservancy site.

“This RFI is an opportunity for the market to help shape a shared vision for the Astrodome,” said Beth Wiedower Jackson, executive director of the Astrodome Conservancy, in a release. “We are looking to gather creative, feasible, and financially viable ideas that reflect both the significance of the Astrodome and its potential as a catalyst for future development.”

When the Astrodome opened in 1965, it was a marvel of engineering and the world's first air-conditioned, multi-purpose domed sports stadium. It remained an iconic part of Houston until changing trends in sports sent the Astros and the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo to newer stadiums with modern amenities. After the 2003 rodeo, the dome was closed, except for a brief use as an evacuation shelter for Hurricane Katrina.

A decades-long fight over what to do with the Astrodome followed that closure. The City of Houston condemned the building for various code violations in 2009. Fully renovating it would cost over $700 million — a tall order for taxpayers. Demolishing it would be far cheaper (around $55 million), but its status on the National Register of Historic Places makes that virtually impossible. Meanwhile, Harris County pays hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to maintain the building.

Proposals for the space have run the gamut. In 2024, the Astrodome Conservancy proposed Vision: Astrodome, which would transform the building into an indoor mall and event space. That still appears to be the foundation of the plan according to the RFI.

The RFI is seeking private investment to partner with the Harris County property. Proposals are merely for planning purposes and will not automatically lead to contracts for development. Section 2.3 states that participants in the new mixed-use space will "require back-of-house infrastructure improvements to support reliable operations at scale," likely meaning that the plan is to fund some of the much-needed renovations via tenants. However, the RFI points out that participants in the revitalized Astrodome will also be eligible for historic space preservation tax credits.

While Vision: Astrodome seems committed to using the stadium as a public space for the entertainment of Houstonians, the RFI is clear other options are on the table.

The Astrodome possibly being used to house a data center is specifically mentioned, though the RFI mandates such a proposal would need to be very upfront about the infrastructure demands and continuing operating costs of such a project. Public backlash against data centers led to Governor Greg Abbott ordering a pause on grid connections to them pending further review.

"The Astrodome presents a unique opportunity for adaptive reuse and redevelopment that honors its legacy while positioning it for long-term community and economic impact," said the conservancy in the release announcing the RFI.

Houston lands $14M in latest CPRIT grants to advance cancer, lab-on-chip research

cancer funding

Thanks to a $4 million grant from the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, the University of Houston has recruited a top-tier researcher developing AI-powered lab-on-a-chip technology for early cancer detection.

Tianhong Cui, a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities and an adjunct professor of physiology and biomedical engineering at the Mayo Clinic, specializes in microelectromechanical systems and advanced manufacturing at microscale and nanoscale levels. In addition to lab-on-a-chip systems, Cui focuses on biosensors and water sensors.

Lab-on-a-chip devices deliver big results in a tiny package

The CPRIT grant supports Cui’s development of a microscale lab-on-a-chip system for early cancer detection and post-therapy monitoring.

“Lab-on-a-chip technology crams an entire lab’s worth of functions into a tiny device roughly the size of a USB stick,” according to Built In.

Common uses for the technology include medical diagnostics, point-of-care testing, and environmental monitoring.

Lab-on-a-chip work being carried out at UH and elsewhere in Houston promises to revolutionize cancer detection and treatment. For instance, Houston biotech company iBiochips, a spinout from the Houston Methodist Research Institute, makes lab-on-a-chip devices that bolster cancer detection and therapy.

Four local organizations gain $10 million in CPRIT grants

Four other Houston-area organizations received an additional $10 million in grants in CPRIT’s latest round of funding:

  • University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center received two $2 million grants to recruit researchers Zheqi Li of Harvard University’s Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Nikolaos Koundouros of Weill Cornell Medicine.
  • Rice University received one $2 million grant to recruit researcher Maria Akoppyan, formerly of the University of Southern California.
  • UT Medical Branch at Galveston received one $2 million grant to recruit researcher Cristina Santarossa of Johns Hopkins University.
  • Houston-based biopharma company Pulmotect received one $2 million grant to support better outcomes for cancer patients by activating immunity in the lungs as a first line of defense against germs.

The funding was part of $35 million in new CPRIT grants for institutions and companies across Texas approved at the organization's most recent meeting. To date, CPRIT has awarded more than $4.2 billion in grants.

“These awards support research across the cancer continuum from prevention to new classes of therapeutics,” said Dr. Scott Hiebert, chief scientific officer of CPRIT, said in a news release. “The work of these investigators will impact the lives of Texans across the state.”

2 Houston high schools soar as America's best for 2026, says U.S. News

Honor Roll

Houston ISD's Carnegie Vanguard High School is standing tall as one of the 25 best high schools in America, according to U.S. News and World Report's 2026-2027 Best High Schools rankings.

DeBakey High School for Health Professions also ranks among the top 100 nationally, and 23 more Houston-area schools join them at the top of the class in Texas.

Each year, U.S. News evaluates approximately 27,000 public high schools on six factors: college readiness, college curriculum breadth, state assessment proficiency, state assessment performance, underserved student performance, and graduation rates.

The highest ranking public schools provide the best educational environments where "students demonstrated outstanding outcomes above expectations in math, reading and science state assessments, earned qualifying scores on an array of college-level exams, and graduated in high proportions."

"Every student deserves a pathway to success, and that journey often begins with selecting the right school," said LaMont Jones, Ed.D., managing editor for education at U.S. News. "The 2026-2027 Best High Schools rankings empower families with the valuable data and transparency they need to help make the best educational choices for them. We are proud to offer this essential resource to help shape the next generation of college-ready students."

Top ranking Houston schools
Carnegie Vanguard High School once again leads in Texas as the No. 2 best high school, and soared as No. 25 in U.S. News' national list of the best high schools, up from No. 42 last year.

DeBakey High School for Health Professions is the 9th best high school in Texas and ranks No. 91 nationally (down from No. 75 last year).

Three more local schools ranked among the best STEM schools in the country: Memorial High School in Spring Branch ISD (No. 86), Seven Lakes High School in Katy ISD (No. 96), and Dulles High School in Fort Bend ISD (No. 99).

In U.S. News' ranking of the best charter schools, four Houston-area schools made the top 100: Spring Branch ISD's Westchester Academy for International Studies (No. 62), Harmony School of Innovation - Katy (No. 72), Harmony School of Discovery - Houston (No. 78), and YES Prep - North Central (No. 100).

Other Houston-area schools that rank among the 100 best in Texas are:

  • No. 17 – Kerr High School, Alief ISD, Houston
  • No. 24 – Young Women's College Prep Academy, Houston ISD
  • No. 25 – Kinder High School for Performing and Visual Arts, Houston ISD
  • No. 31 – Challenge Early College High School, Houston ISD
  • No. 39 – Westchester Academy for International Studies, Spring Branch ISD, Houston
  • No. 44 – Tomball Star Academy, Tomball ISD
  • No. 45 – Harmony School of Innovation - Katy
  • No. 46 – North Houston Early College High School, Houston ISD
  • No. 51 – Eastwood Academy, Houston ISD
  • No. 52 – Seven Lakes High School, Katy ISD
  • No. 54 – Harmony School of Discovery - Houston
  • No. 55 – Energy Institute High School, Houston ISD
  • No. 56 – Spring Early College Academy, Spring ISD
  • No. 63 – Sharpstown International School, Houston ISD
  • No. 66 – YES Prep - North Central, Houston
  • No. 73 – Tompkins High School, Katy ISD
  • No. 76 – YES Prep - Southeast, Houston
  • No. 80 – Harmony School of Innovation - Sugar Land
  • No. 81 – Clements High School, Fort Bend ISD, Sugar Land
  • No. 82 – Houston Academy for International Studies, Houston ISD
  • No. 86 – Jordan High School, Katy ISD
  • No. 88 – Victory Early College High School, Aldine ISD, Houston
  • No. 96 – Clear Horizons Early College High School, Clear Creek ISD, Houston

---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.