Who benefits from store brand entry?

被引:242
作者
Pauwels, K [1 ]
Srinivasan, S
机构
[1] Tuck Sch Business, Hanover, NH 03755 USA
[2] Univ Calif Riverside, A Gary Anderson Sch Management, Riverside, CA 92521 USA
关键词
structural change; manufacturers versus retailers; store brand entry; unit root tests; vector-autoregressive models; long-term price elasticity;
D O I
10.1287/mksc.1030.0036
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Store brand entry has become a key issue in marketing as it may structurally change the performance of and the interactions among all market players. Based on their multivariate time-series analysis, the authors demonstrate permanent performance effects of store brand entry, typically benefiting the retailer, the consumers, and premium-brand manufacturers, while harming second-tier brand manufacturers. For the retailer, they consistently find two beneficial effects of store brand entry: high unit margins on the store brand itself and higher unit margins on the national brands. This increase in unit margins implies that the retailer strengthens its bargaining position vis-a-vis national brand manufacturers. However, store brand entry only rarely yields category expansion and does not create store traffic or revenue benefits. Second, consumers do not obtain lower prices on all national brands, only on some second-tier brands. However, they benefit from enlarged product assortment and intensified promotional activity that lowers average price paid for two out of four categories. For the manufacturers, store brand entry is typically beneficial for premium-price national brands, but not for second-tier national brands. Often, premium brands experience lower long-term price sensitivity and higher revenues, whereas second-tier brands experience higher long-term price sensitivity and lower revenues.
引用
收藏
页码:364 / 390
页数:27
相关论文
共 76 条
[1]   PROMOTER - AN AUTOMATED PROMOTION EVALUATION SYSTEM [J].
ABRAHAM, MM ;
LODISH, LM .
MARKETING SCIENCE, 1987, 6 (02) :101-123
[2]   Pursuing the value-conscious consumer: Store brands versus national brand promotions [J].
Ailawadi, KL ;
Neslin, SA ;
Gedenk, K .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING, 2001, 65 (01) :71-89
[3]   The retail power-performance conundrum: What have we learned? [J].
Ailawadi, KL .
JOURNAL OF RETAILING, 2001, 77 (03) :299-318
[4]   The effect of promotion on consumption: Buying more and consuming it faster [J].
Ailawadi, KL ;
Neslin, SA .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, 1998, 35 (03) :390-398
[5]  
AILAWADI KL, 2002, IN PRESS J MARKETING
[6]   THERE IS NO AGGREGATION BIAS - WHY MACRO LOGIT-MODELS WORK [J].
ALLENBY, GM ;
ROSSI, PE .
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & ECONOMIC STATISTICS, 1991, 9 (01) :1-15
[7]   TESTS FOR PARAMETER INSTABILITY AND STRUCTURAL-CHANGE WITH UNKNOWN CHANGE-POINT [J].
ANDREWS, DWK .
ECONOMETRICA, 1993, 61 (04) :821-856
[8]   The decomposition of promotional response: An empirical generalization [J].
Bell, DR ;
Chiang, JW ;
Padmanabhan, V .
MARKETING SCIENCE, 1999, 18 (04) :504-526
[9]   PRICE-INDUCED PATTERNS OF COMPETITION [J].
BLATTBERG, RC ;
WISNIEWSKI, KJ .
MARKETING SCIENCE, 1989, 8 (04) :291-309
[10]   The emergence of market structure in new repeat-purchase categories: The interplay of market share and retailer distribution [J].
Bronnenberg, BJ ;
Mahajan, V ;
Wilfried, R ;
Vanhonacker, WR .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, 2000, 37 (01) :16-31