Random discount is an uncertain mode of cash discount provided by companies to consumers, which refers that consumers receive different amounts of discounts based on pre-set probability factors. As a special form of uncertain discount, random discount is quite different from the traditional price promotion and seldom discussed by researchers. According to the different discount ranges presented, there are different tactics of random discount. Providing a lower bound of discount amount (e.g., “5 yuan can be saved at least”), providing an upper bound of discount amount (e.g., “50 yuan can be saved at most”), and providing both an upper bound and a lower bound (e.g., “5 yuan to 50 yuan can be saved at random”) are three common tactics of random discount. Different random discount tactics mean that consumers may take the lower bound, the upper bound, or the discount amount received by other consumers as a reference and compare the discount amount they receive with the reference. Will such a comparison affect consumers’ price fairness perception? Marketers urgently need to know whether these different random discount tactics will lead to different marketing effects.

Therefore, based on the anchoring effect and the price fairness perception theory, this paper constructs a relationship model between random discount tactics and the intention to buy. The results of the three experiments show that different random discount tactics have a different impact on the intention to buy. Firstly, consumers take the upper bound of discount range in priority when choosing reference, and the tactic of showing upper bound leads to a lower intention to buy compared to the tactic of showing lower bound. Specifically, consumers take the upper bound of discount range as a reference and compare the discount amount they receive with the reference, which reduces the price unfairness perception and leads to a lower intention to buy. Secondly, even when the actual discount amount received by consumers in the upper bound condition is higher than in the lower bound condition, consumers still feel a stronger price unfairness perception and a lower intention to buy. Lastly, there is a boundary condition in the effect of random discount tactics on the intention to buy. When there is no additional reference, consumers give priority to the upper bound of discount range and take it as a reference to form their price fairness perception. The stronger the price unfairness perception, the lower their intention to buy. After introducing an additional reference, however, consumers will take the discount amount that other consumers receive as a reference. When they know that they will not pay a higher price than other consumers, their intention to buy will increase again.

These findings have important theoretical contributions. Firstly, this paper is a great supplement to the research in the field of price promotion, which is helpful for further exploration of the designs of random discount tactics. Secondly, this paper finds that consumers will take the upper bound of discount as an anchor benchmark, but will give a higher priority to evaluate the price fairness between the price paid by themselves and other consumers. This makes an important supplement to the research on the anchoring effect and psychological reference systems, and also helps to guide companies to design more effective random discount strategies.