Even when raw material costs, labor costs, and logistics expenses rise together, not every company suffers the same impact. Some brands raise prices while retaining both customers and profits, while others fail to remain competitive even when they keep prices unchanged. In an era of rising costs, what determines a company?  fate is not the cost itself but the ?œlegitimacy of the price??recognized by customers.

***

Even when statistics indicate that inflation has slowed, the cost pressure experienced by businesses does not easily disappear. A lower inflation rate does not mean that prices have returned to their previous levels. It merely means that the pace of price increases has slowed. Raw material costs, wages, rents, logistics expenses, and energy costs that have already risen remain embedded in corporate income statements. Tariffs, supply chain restructuring, exchange-rate fluctuations, and geopolitical uncertainty are adding further pressure, forcing companies to decide whether to absorb the costs internally or pass them on through consumer prices.

On the surface, every company appears to be facing a similar problem. However, the actual impact of rising costs on profitability varies significantly from one brand to another. Companies capable of convincing customers of the reasons for a price increase can pass part of the burden on to the market. By contrast, companies with numerous substitutes and weak differentiation risk losing customers as soon as they raise prices. If they freeze prices, they may preserve sales volume but suffer shrinking margins. If they raise prices, both revenue and market share may decline. They become trapped in a dilemma.

Pricing power is not simply the authority to change the number on a price tag. It is the ability to raise prices while preventing customer defection and maintaining sales volume and brand trust above a certain level. Even within the same product category, some companies can raise prices by more than the increase in costs and protect their profits, while others cannot prevent declining sales volumes even after expanding discounts and promotions. Rising costs are a common shock imposed on all companies, but the ability to withstand that shock is not distributed equally.

In the past, companies with large-scale production facilities and distribution networks held an advantage in price competition. Economies of scale lowered their costs. Today, scale alone is no longer sufficient. The expansion of online retail has made price comparisons easier, while retailers??private-label brands have rapidly improved their quality and design. Consumers no longer pay higher prices unconditionally for familiar names. At the same time, they are willing to accept higher prices than before when a brand delivers clear benefits and distinctive experiences.

The gap in pricing power becomes even more pronounced during an economic downturn. As consumption weakens, customers do not reduce every category of spending equally. They eliminate expenditures they consider unimportant while spending more on products they consider essential or meaningful. Competition among brands is no longer merely a contest over who can sell at the lowest price. It has become a competition over which brand can remain within the customer?™s limited budget until the very end.

Strong pricing power is not created by fame alone. Even brands with long histories and high recognition can be rejected if customers cannot find a valid reason for the price. Conversely, even a small or newly established brand can command a higher price if it offers distinctive features, a clear philosophy, and an outstanding customer experience. The key is to encourage customers to interpret price not merely as a number but as something connected to value.

The first foundation is a product advantage that is difficult to replace. At least one element?performance, quality, design, or ease of use?must be difficult for competitors to replicate. The moment customers conclude that ?œswitching to a cheaper product would make little difference,??the brand?™s pricing power weakens. If technological differentiation is difficult, the company must create distinctions outside the product itself through service, the purchasing process, after-sales support, community, or content.

The second foundation is trust. The more expensive a product is, the more consumers want to reduce the possibility of making a failed purchase. Trust in a brand functions as a form of insurance that lowers the perceived risk of a decision. Brands that maintain consistent quality, respond responsibly when problems arise, and avoid exaggerated promises can partially escape direct price comparisons. Customers are not purchasing only the product. They are also purchasing peace of mind after the transaction.

The third foundation is identity. Today, brands do more than provide functions. They help customers express who they are. The clothes people wear, the cars they drive, and the food they choose have become a language through which they reveal their tastes and values. A brand connected to the person a customer wishes to become gains stronger loyalty than an ordinary product. The price of such a brand is not determined simply by adding a fixed profit margin to manufacturing costs. The symbolic value and emotional satisfaction perceived by the customer raise the upper limit of what the brand can charge.

The fourth foundation is habit and ecosystem. When one product is connected to other services, or when the user experience accumulates over time, switching costs increase. If data, membership, content, accessories, and community form a single ecosystem, customers do not move simply because a cheaper product appears. However, repeatedly raising prices by relying only on switching costs can generate resentment. An ecosystem should not be a fence that traps customers but an environment in which they want to remain.

Even strong brands cannot raise prices without limit. Pricing power is not a license to test the limits of customer tolerance. If products and services do not improve despite repeated price increases, customers will eventually feel that the brand is exploiting their loyalty. Even when a price increase produces higher revenue, pricing power may already be weakening if sales volume, repurchase rates, and willingness to recommend are falling at the same time.

One of the most prominent recent developments in the consumer market is the simultaneous growth of premium and ultra-low-cost offerings. On one side, demand remains strong for high-priced experiences and superior quality. On the other, products emphasizing the lowest possible price and practical utility are spreading rapidly. Although these two movements may appear contradictory, they often occur simultaneously within the choices of the same consumer.

Consumers no longer purchase only high-priced or low-priced products consistently according to their income level. They may ordinarily buy private-label foods and discounted products while choosing premium offerings in areas they consider important, such as health, hobbies, travel, and pets. They scrutinize unit prices when purchasing daily necessities but spend generously on special experiences. A value-conscious consumer and a premium consumer coexist within the same individual.

The competitiveness of ultra-low-cost brands does not come simply from offering lower prices. What matters is that customers can clearly understand what they are giving up and what they are receiving. These brands reduce elaborate packaging, unnecessary functions, and excessive services while consistently providing acceptable basic quality. When consumers are convinced that the low price results from an efficient structure rather than inferior quality, affordability itself becomes a brand philosophy.

Retailers??private labels also demonstrate this transformation. Private labels were once regarded as inexpensive imitations of well-known products, but they have evolved into independent brands that emphasize quality, design, health, sustainability, and distinctive flavors. In a 2025 NIQ survey, 53 percent of consumers worldwide said they were increasing their purchases of private-label products. At the same time, sales momentum among the world?™s leading brands also recovered. The result was a polarization in which low-cost offerings and powerful brands grew together. [NIQ](https://nielseniq.com/global/en/news-center/2025/niqs-global-report-reveals-challenges-and-opportunities-for-private-label-and-branded-product-growth/)

Premium brands do not succeed merely by attaching high prices to their products. The greater the economic uncertainty, the stricter the standards consumers apply to expensive purchases. They examine what justifies the price difference?materials, craftsmanship, technology, scarcity, service, or brand narrative. A famous logo alone can no longer justify a premium. The higher the price, the greater the value the brand must explain.

For this reason, consumer polarization does not refer only to the separation of income groups. It is closer to a phenomenon in which consumers rearrange their spending priorities across product categories. More money flows into categories selected as important, while competition for the lowest price intensifies in less important categories. The business model of assuming an average consumer and offering moderate quality at a moderate price is steadily losing its strength.

The most dangerous position amid the polarization of price and value is the middle. This does not mean that mid-priced products will disappear. It means that brands without a clear reason for customers either to pay more or to spend less will face increasing difficulty. When consumers cannot perceive a difference, a middle price is no longer a reasonable choice. It becomes an ambiguous one.

In the past, mid-market brands grew on the strength of widespread recognition and stable distribution networks. Their quality was above average, and their prices were not excessively high. At a time when consumers could not easily compare detailed product information, familiarity itself was a competitive advantage. However, the spread of search engines, customer reviews, price-comparison services, and social media has reduced information asymmetry. Customers can easily discover cheaper alternatives of similar quality and identify small specialist brands that offer higher satisfaction.

When a mid-market brand raises its prices in response to rising costs, the problem can become even more serious. The price gap with premium brands narrows, while the difference from private labels and low-cost products widens. Customers begin to ask whether they should pay a little more for a better product or pay considerably less for similar utility. If the brand cannot provide a convincing reason to be chosen in either direction, sales volume declines. It then increases discounts to compensate, further weakening its brand value.

Not every mid-market brand must move toward either the premium or the ultra-low-cost end of the market. Strong competitiveness can still be built at a middle price point. Instead of offering a generally acceptable product to everyone, however, the brand must solve a specific problem for a particular customer more effectively. It can establish value by reducing the time required for use, lowering maintenance costs, decreasing the risk of a failed purchase, or improving accessibility.

?œAffordable premium??can also be a viable position. Such a product may not be as elaborate as the most expensive alternative, but it does not compromise on core performance and offers greater reliability and service than low-cost products. For this strategy to work, customers must be able to recognize what has been removed and what has been preserved. Resources should be concentrated on the functions customers consider important rather than spread thinly across a broad collection of features.

The collapse of the middle ground signifies the exit of brands without identity rather than the disappearance of a price range. A brand with a clear value proposition can survive at a middle price point. By contrast, even a famous and large-scale brand will be among the first to face pressure in a polarized market if its reason for being chosen becomes unclear.

When cost pressure and declining sales occur at the same time, the easiest option for a company is to offer discounts. Discounts can generate an immediate customer response, reduce inventory, and increase revenue. Repeated discounting, however, teaches customers that the list price is not the real price. Customers postpone purchases and wait for the next promotion, while consumers who paid the regular price feel that they have suffered a loss.

When discounts become routine, profitability deteriorates even if sales volume is maintained. If the company cuts costs to compensate for lower profits, quality and service may weaken, making the brand less attractive. As customers leave, the company must offer even larger discounts, and the wider the discounts become, the less convincing the regular price appears. A brand that has lost pricing power becomes dependent on discounts, while its dependence on discounts further damages its pricing power. This creates a vicious cycle.

Not every price promotion is harmful. Discounts can be useful for encouraging customers to try a new product, concentrating demand during a specific period, or managing inventory efficiently. The problem arises when discounts have neither a clear purpose nor a defined end point. If a company repeats the same promotion whenever sales decline, customers begin responding to the discount rate rather than the product?™s value. The purchasing rule taught by the brand changes from ?œbuy it when you need it??to ?œwait until it becomes cheaper.??/div>