I wrote about this topic:

When a firm's objective is to gain as much market share as possible, a likelypricingstrategy is penetration pricing, sometimes also referred to aspricingfor maximum marketing share (Marshall, 2020). Companies will also set a low price to have a better competitive advantage, but over time the price tends to increase. The problem with with this is that the company istargeting new customers, but they will be pone to issues with branding seeing as that the customers may correlate the low price with with the brand being cheap or of poor quality. If this trend continues, then long-term, customers will be inclined to find other resources and business. Thus, loss in product and subsequently profitability. Marketing managers can consider penetration pricing when it comes to acquiring customers from competitors and product usage with mass-produced products. This is a good way to potentially boost business sales and profitability short-term. Long-term though, unless the product is a game-changer for consumers, brand loyalty tends to fade. An example is smart-phone users. In this penetration marketing scheme, providers sell cheap or free smart phones in return for long-term contract with customers. Consumers get excited about the cheap phone, and fail to notice that the contract costs much more in the long-term than the phone would (Pricing, 2019). It makes you wonder the powerful hold that certain brands have over consumers.

My questions is simply:

Is there a way for a marketer to use penetration pricing for a premium offering and avoid the negative risks I outlined?