Supplier inferences to enhance private label perceptions

In large part due to the expertise of many manufacturer brands that are private label suppliers, the objective quality gap between private labels and leading manufacturer brands is small-to-none in many cases. The current research examines how consumer beliefs about the manufacturer brand origins of private labels may enhance their subjective appeal, by testing the effectiveness of two retailer-controlled tactics that create specification similarity and sourcing inferences regarding private labels, and the degree to which these inferences close perceptual gaps between private labels and targeted manufacture brands. Both the private label copycat packaging and invitation to compare to the manufacturer brand tactics are found to create such inferences and significantly narrow perceptual gaps, while enhancing retailer attitude.     

Analyzing the effects of private-label supplier disclosure on retailer image

Private-label retailers' disclosures of dual manufacturing agreements—that is, agreements with manufacturers that produce both their own national brands and private labels—can affect the images associated with the retailers. In this study, an experiment reveals moderating effects on retailer images, according to the images of both the national brand manufacturers and the retailers; and also depending on the brand equity of the private label. A low-image retailer's disclosure that a national brand manufacturer supplies its private label causes consumers to perceive that the retailer has a higher image. However, the positive effects of private label supplier disclosure on the retailer's image are weaker when the private label enjoys high equity.     

Consumer attitudes and loyalty towards private brands

Private or store brands improve the efficiency of consumer decision making by offering equivalent quality products at lower prices. The present study evaluated consumer attitudes towards private brands with the goal of understanding their appeal in order to enhance efforts to convince more consumers to buy them. We used three samples (ns = 279, 245 and 305) of US consumers to compare attitudes of buyers of private and national brands in three product categories: orange juice, cereal and bottled water. The results show that private label buyers (23% of orange juice, 6.5% of cereal and 14% of bottled water buyers) consider brands themselves to be less important and private brands to offer better performance than do national brand buyers. When asked about specific brands, national brand buyers tended to be price insensitive towards national brands, and private label buyers price insensitive towards store brands. In addition, the national brand buyers saw some of the national brands to be more relevant to their lifestyles and needs, but the private label buyers saw the private labels the same way. Being relevant to consumers' lives appears to influence brand selection. Besides touting lower prices, private brand promotions might stress the equivalent performance of private labels and create promotions showing how these brands can be relevant to consumers' lifestyles and needs.     

A Positive Theory of Private Label: A Strategic Role of Private Label in a Duopoly National-Brand Market

This article offers an economic rationale for national brands to provide private labels to their retailers. We build a game-theoretic model that analyzes the interactions among two national brand manufacturers and one common retailer. In an interesting strategic role, the private label mitigates the promotion competition between the two national brands and provides benefits for all three members in the channel. Our analysis shows that offering a private label can be a credible commitment from a national brand manufacturer that it will not engage in promotions and decrease the incentive of the national brand rival to engage in promotions. In this way, we attempt to provide a reason for why national brand manufacturers provide retailers with private labels in practice. In addition, we discuss the optimal quality level of private labels.     

Will they return? Getting private label consumers to come back: Price,promotion, and new product effects

Using a hazard model specification with two years of consumer panel data, this study simultaneously quantifies the effects of price gaps, non-monetary promotions, and new products on consumer switching from private labels back to manufacturer brands. The research focuses on the switching phenomena, rather than choice, such that time is a relevant variable. According to the results, non-monetary promotions and new products are more effective for recovering consumers than price gap reductions. These findings underscore the importance of understanding how consumers perceive the value of manufacturer brands.     

Are they always promising? An empirical analysis of moderators influencing consumer preferences for economy and premium private labels

The identification of conditions under which premium or economy private labels are more promising from a consumer perspective is of high managerial relevance. This paper is first to analyze the moderating impact of store-, category-, and private label-characteristics on consumer preferences for premium vs. economy private labels. The results reveal that premium (economy) private labels are more preferred at high-priced (low-priced) retailers and in categories of high (low) brand relevance. However, consumers' believes whether the private label is produced by a well-known manufacturer or the retailer itself do not moderate consumer preferences for premium vs. economy private labels.     

The moderating effect of average wage and number of stores on private label market share: A hierarchical linear model analysis

Existing research on private label market share is primarily in the context of the Western market. The Chinese market context research is scarce, although private labels are developing rapidly in the past several years. This study investigates how the average wage and number of stores affect the Chinese market's private label market share. More importantly, this paper examines the moderating effect of the average wage and the number of stores on the relationship between the private label market share and product assortment as well as the relationship between the private label market share and pricing. Data collected from a Chinese supply chain dyad is analyzed to study category management using hierarchical linear models. The results reveal that the average wage and the number of stores positively affect the private label market share. Furthermore, the average wage enhances the negative effect of the number of brands, weakens the negative effect of the private label price, weakens the positive effect of national brand price. Meanwhile, the number of stores enhances the positive effect of the SKU proliferation of private label, enhances the negative effects of the number of brands, and enhances the negative effect of the private label price. This study contributes to category management. Furthermore, the findings will be valuable to domestic and international grocery marketers and retailers operating private labels in China.     

Consumers’ choice of private label considering reference price and moderating effect

Retailers frequently place private labels (PLs) next to the top-moving sales national brands (NBs) and utilize comparative pricing that is related to the national brands. There is thus always an external reference price between the private labels and the national brands. In this study, two categories of products were selected, and a hierarchical non-linear model used to study the impact of external reference prices on consumers’ choice of private labels. In addition, the effects of package size and average disposable income (ADI) were introduced into the analysis for the relationship between external reference price and consumers’ choice of private label. The findings show an inverted U-shaped curve between consumers’ choice of private labels and the external reference price discrepancy. Consumers in areas with high ADI are more likely to buy private labels. Package size and ADI have different direct and moderating effects on two categories of products. This study contributes to reference dependence theory and category management.     

Understanding premium private labels: A consumer categorisation approach

Worldwide premium private labels (PPLs) are a new and rapidly growing phenomenon. However to date, little is known about consumers' perceptions of these newer entrants relative to other brand types. Therefore it is difficult for marketers to understand the opportunities and threats created by this new generation of brands. This study examines the ways in which consumers categorise PPLs compared to more traditional value private labels (VPLs) and national brands (NBs) on the three dimensions of quality, value for money and trust. The data includes seven packaged goods categories in three countries, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia. The findings show that PPLs sit on a separate island, in between VPLs and NBs in consumer memory. While consumers generally view PPLs as a separate subgroup of brands, PPL are connected to other subgroups in that they are perceived to have the value characteristics of VPLs but quality characteristics of NBs. Finally, consumers with past experience with VPLs have a stronger ability to categorise PLs into distinct brand tiers.     

Do private labels increase retailer bargaining power?

Like any new product, private label entry increases competition within a category leading to downward pressure on both wholesale and retail prices. But, given the higher margins for private labels and potential bargaining benefits for retailers, they have incentives to help private labels gain market share. The paper addresses two questions: First, do private labels enhance a retailer’s bargaining power with respect to manufacturers? Second, given the higher profitability and potential increase in bargaining power, does the retailer strategically set retail prices to favor and strengthen the private label? We find support for the “bargaining power” hypothesis, but qualified support for the “strategic retailer pricing” hypothesis. Retailers gain bargaining power through lower wholesale prices on imitated national brands. But the gain is greater in niche categories than in mass categories, suggesting that niche national brands with limited “pull” power lose greater bargaining power. In terms of strategic pricing, the retailer, on initially introducing the private label, strategically sets prices to help private labels gain market share in high volume mass market categories. But retail prices revert to the category profit maximizing price after a year when the private label gains a stable market share.     

The impact of national brand introductions on hard-discounter image and share-of-wallet

Hard-discounters (HDs) such as Aldi and Lidl are increasingly introducing national brands (NBs) into their private label (PL) dominated assortments. While there is evidence that this enhances sales in the categories where such NBs are added, little is known about how it affects consumers' overall perceptions of the HD and consequently its share of the customers' wallet. Using a unique data set that combines longitudinal information on a HD's perceptions, with that chain's assortment composition, we investigate the impact of NB introductions on the chain's overall value and assortment image, and spending share.We show that introductions of NBs, in particular category leaders, may significantly contribute to a more favorable perception of the HD store. For positive value-image effects to materialize, HDs must offer these NBs at low-enough prices to maintain a reasonable price gap with the current private label offer. For the NB entry to enhance the HD's assortment perception, it must come with a sufficiently deep product line.However, there are limits to this approach. Introductions gradually lose effect as the share of NBs at the HD goes up. More importantly, ill-selected NB additions may backfire on the HD. Listing NBs that are not category-leaders, at prices too far above its private labels, deteriorates the HD's favorable value positioning — cutting into its core competitive advantage, and leading to notable reductions in share-of-wallet. We discuss the academic and managerial implications of these findings.     

The Effect of Product Innovation,Promotion, and Price on Consumer Switching to Private Labels

The channel conflict that exists between retailers and manufacturers of branded products has dynamically shifted as large retailers have expanded their offerings of private label products. This study investigates the ability of consumer packaged goods companies to exert influence in the channel by testing which marketing initiatives implemented by manufacturer brands are more efficient in preventing consumer switching to private labels. We use a hazard model to simultaneously measure the effects due to product innovation, promotion, and price on consumer switching and how strong those effects are. We find that as expected product innovation, promotion, and price exert a negative effect on the consumer likelihood of switching to private labels. However, we find the strongest effect on promotion suggesting the importance of understanding how consumers perceive value in the national brands offer.     

Manufacturer brands versus private brands: Hoch's strategic framework and the Swedish food retail sector

The purpose of this study was to contribute to the knowledge of how manufacturer brands choose and can choose to defend themselves vis-à-vis introduction of private brands by retailers. The study adopts the same research approach as a Dutch empirical study (Verhoef, P. C., E. J. Nijssen, and L. M. Sloot. 2002. “Strategic Reactions of National Brand Manufacturers Towards Private Labels – An Empirical Study in the Netherlands.” European Journal of Marketing 36 (11/12): 1309–1326) that tested and rejected large parts of the original and well-known conceptual framework by Hoch (Hoch, S. J. 1996. “How Should National Brands Think About Private Labels?” Sloan Management Review 37 (2): 89–102) consisting of six manufacturer strategies to defend against private brands. This study is based on the Swedish market, a more typical market compared with the Dutch market characterized by high innovation level and high penetration of private brands. The study builds on a combination of qualitative and quantitative interviews with brand managers at 100 manufacturers in the Swedish Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) market. The results support Hoch's original conceptual framework concerning appropriate defence strategies for manufacturer brands. However, the two differentiation strategies – value for money and new and improved – are seen as one category of the strategies, which creates a simpler and more distinct structure to the framework. The results show that it is the largest and the leading manufacturers that choose this strategy. The lower the penetration of private brands, the larger the share of manufacturers that choose this strategy. The study gives a more nuanced picture concerning the motives behind the strategies and also concerning the differences between how manufacturers act depending on size and market share.     

Determinants of Store Brand Share

Private labels or store brands have witnessed considerable growth in the last few decades, especially in grocery products. However, market shares of store brand vary considerably across categories, markets, and countries. A natural question of interest to academics and practitioners is what factors influence store brand market shares. Drawing on a utility framework, we develop 21 consumer, manufacturer, retailer, and product-market characteristics that can influence store brand share. We test the empirical generalizability of the effect of these determinants through a meta-analysis of data from 54 individual and aggregate market studies. Twenty of the 21 determinants show significant, empirically generalizable effects. We discuss the key findings, their implications, and directions for future empirical research.     

The influence of price and brand loyalty on store brands versus national brands

Abstract

This article investigates how price and brand loyalty of three frequently purchased product categories can influence the purchase decision process of store brands versus national brands. A multinomial logit model was constructed to analyse the data obtained from a consumer panel. The results confirmed that brand loyalty is the main variable which influences the purchase decision process of both national and store brands. The influence of price on the purchase decision process is product specific. There is a clear distinction between the buyer's profile of store brands and national brands. But there is no evidence of any correlation between demographic variables and national brands or store brands.     

Taking private labels upmarket: Empirical generalizations on category drivers of premium private label introductions

Premium private labels (PLs) are considered one of the hottest trends in grocery retailing. Still, retailers do not feel the need to introduce premium PLs in every category. Generalizing across approximately 150 categories for six retailers from two countries that already carry premium PLs for several years, the authors find that retailers are more likely to introduce premium PLs in categories with a higher industry PL share, and with a more proliferated assortment in terms of standard PLs. However, retailers are also aware of the risk of creating PL fatigue at high levels of standard PL proliferation. Further, premium PLs are more likely to be introduced in categories with more frequent price promotions, a longer interpurchase time, a higher need for variety, and higher functional, but lower social, risk. In addition, retailers consider category growth and the prevailing practice of their country's premium-PL pioneer when deciding in which categories to also introduce a premium PL. Finally, when NBs spend a smaller amount on advertising and NB proliferation is moderate, premium PL introductions are more likely. Importantly, while some of the earlier empirical generalizations on factors conducive to a standard PL entry still hold for a premium PL entry, new variables need to be considered as well, while other insights need to be updated to better reflect the new reality of higher-quality/higher-price premium PL introductions.     

The Future of Private Labels: Towards a Smart Private Label Strategy

Modern day store brands (SB) or private labels (PL), now also popularly called private brands, are brands generally owned and marketed by retailers. They have been active on the market for about 70 years. Over this time span, these brands have evolved from generic, cheap, low-quality economy or budget private labels to lower-priced-than-national brand but acceptable-quality value or standard private labels. Over time, retailers extended the value proposition to the consumer segment seeking higher quality by offering premium private labels. This strategy, called the tiered-private label, comprises offering economy PL to the price-sensitive but not quality sensitive consumers, standard PL to mainstream consumers seeking acceptable quality at lower prices, and premium PL to the quality-sensitive segment seeking value. Over the last 40 years (1980–2020), these versions of private labels have witnessed substantial growth around the world, though the growth is said to be tapering in recent times.As retailers chart the future strategy for their private labels in 2020 and beyond, a pertinent question they face is: Should they continue to offer value or even tiered PL with the same formula that brought them success in the past, or should they morph and adopt new strategies in keeping with current market trends? We support adopting a new strategy that we call the smart PL strategy. The value PL strategy and its manifestation as the tiered PL strategy cater to different consumer segments but focus primarily on price and quality as attributes of choice. In the current marketplace, consumers care not only about price and quality, but also about sustainability, ethics, social responsibility, image, so forth, perhaps more so than earlier generations. They are also more tech-savvy in using digital tools for search and purchase. Retailers, on their part, are now endowed with rich, extensive data that they can tap into to understand customers’ diverse needs, and they are able to harness technology for developing the right product and communication. Thus, the smart PL strategy is a strategy by which retailers can leverage data and technology to market private labels that meet diverse customer needs and achieve greater retail differentiation, store loyalty, margins, and profits. This thought piece provides a road map for developing such a smart PL strategy and directions for future research.     

Customer choices of manufacturer versus retailer brands in alternative price and usage contexts

This article offers a context-dependent theory of how price changes influence consumer purchase choice for fast moving consumer goods (FMCGs) for manufacturer (large household share) and retailer (small household share) brands. The theory proposes that the influence of price on demand is systematically very sensitive to context effects; more specifically, the theory includes the hypothesis that elasticity is much greater when the price change results in the manufacturer and retailer brands having the same price compared to when the price change keeps the manufacturer brand price above the retailer brand price. The implicit and/or explicit association with higher quality with the manufacturer versus retailer brand may be the main reason for buying the higher priced manufacturer brand. Decreasing the price of the manufacturer brand to equal the retailer brand's price takes away the primary reason for buying the retailer brand (i.e., saving money); increasing the price of the retailer brand to equal the manufacturer brand's price has the same effect. The empirical findings in the studies that this article reports support the hypothesis and confirm Scriven and Ehrenberg's [2004. Consistent consumer responses to price changes. Australas. Mark. J. 12(3), 21–39] major conclusion that relative order of price is more important than relative distance.     

Does private-label production by national-brand manufacturers create discounter goodwill?

Discount stores have a private-label dominated assortment where national brands have only limited shelf access. These limited spots are in high demand by national-brand manufacturers. We examine whether private-label production by leading national-brand manufacturers for two important discounters (one hard and one soft) creates discounter goodwill. We estimate a selection model that is based on a sample of 450 manufacturer-category combinations from two leading discounters (Aldi in Germany and Mercadona in Spain), and we show that private-label production is indeed rewarded: national-brand manufacturers that are involved in such practices have a higher likelihood of procuring shelf presence for their brands. Moreover, while powerful manufacturers are intrinsically more likely to obtain shelf presence with soft discounters, manufacturers with less power can compensate for this by producing private labels. No such dependence on power exists for hard discounters.However, not all national-brand manufacturers are equally likely to produce private labels for discounters. We find that national-brand manufacturers are less likely to do so when: (a) they experience more sales growth, (b) it is more difficult to produce high-quality products in a specific category, (c) they invest more advertising support into their brands, and (d) they introduce more innovations. Moreover, a higher price differential relative to the discounter's private labels makes national-brand manufacturers less likely to engage in private-label production for hard discounters.     

Factors that influence manufacturer and store brand behavioral loyalty

This study examines the factors that are linked to consumer goods brands having unusually high or low behavioral loyalty, after controlling for the association between brand size and loyalty that occurs due to the ‘double jeopardy’ effect. Behavioral, or repeat-purchase loyalty is measured as the brand's average share of category requirements (in volume) among its buyers over a 12-month period. We examine a range of factors that theory or past evidence suggests are associated with higher or lower behavioral loyalty, including brand type (store brand/manufacturer brand), price level, promotion intensity, as well as average brand volume per occasion and pack size. Using extensive US panel purchasing data, we find that store brands exhibit relatively higher behavioral loyalty than manufacturer brands. We explain the theory behind this result. We also find that the brand's average pack size and volume bought per occasion has a markedly positive association with behavioral loyalty. Finally, we find that the effect of low price on excess loyalty is moderated via a positive association with average volume purchase per occasion. These findings add to the body of knowledge relating to patterns in behavioral brand loyalty for both manufacturer and store brands, as well as the marketing-mix factors that influence it.