Retailer and manufacturer advertising scheduling in a marketing channel

This paper investigates, in a bilateral monopoly, the optimal scheduling of retailer and manufacturer advertising in a three-period planning horizon. Consistent with previous literature, the integrated channel adopts continuous advertising schedules when advertising effects are not very large and decay exponentially over time. Conversely, when pricing and advertising decisions are uncoordinated, vertical externalities also influence advertising scheduling. Consequently, channel members can optimally implement each of the following three advertising schedules depending on the effects of retailer and manufacturer advertising: The full continuous schedule, in which channel members advertise in the three periods; the full pulsing schedule, in which the two channel members advertise only in the first and third periods, and the mixed schedule where the retailer continuously advertises and the manufacturer advertises exclusively in the first and third periods. Surprisingly, the uncoordinated channel adopts lower retail prices than the integrated channel when the mixed schedule is adopted.     

An integrative framework of cooperative advertising: Should manufacturers continuously support retailer advertising?

A two-period game is developed in a bilateral monopoly where, besides pricing decisions, the retailer and manufacturer can set their advertising and cooperative advertising support rates for each period. It is demonstrated that, in addition to the established continuous cooperative advertising programs, in which the retailer advertises and the manufacturer supports retailer advertising in each period, two other advertising schedules are possible. First, the retailer advertises in each period, while the manufacturer only supports the second-period advertising. Second, whether or not the manufacturer provides a cooperative advertising program in the first period, the retailer only advertises in the second period and receives advertising support. The conditions under which each of these advertising arrangements is implemented are identified. In a continuous cooperative advertising schedule, the manufacturer may change his advertising support over time depending on the nature of the long-term effects of retailer advertising. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

How does the added new online channel impact the supporting advertising expenditure?

This research addresses the strategic effect of a newly added online channel on a manufacturer’s supportive advertising expenditure once a manufacturer opts to open an online channel to compete with its retailer. We first study the manufacturer–traditional retailer supply chain and consider three different scenarios: (1) product is less compatible with the online channel than with the traditional channel; (2) product is more compatible with the online channel than with the traditional channel; (3) product has the same compatibility with the online channel as with the traditional channel. Our results show that the added online channel significantly impacts the manufacturer’s investment in supportive advertising. Depending on the different product categories, the impact of the newly added online channel on the supportive advertising expenditure also will be different. Furthermore, we extend our model to study the manufacturer–online retailer supply chain and investigate the effect of that added online channel on the manufacturer’s supportive advertising to the online retailer. Based on our results, the manufacturer can utilize our findings to improve its decision-making when it plans to open an online channel to improve its product distribution.     

Decomposing the effect of advertising: What happens in the retail channel?

The diverging interests of manufacturers and retailers famously give rise to the double marginalization problem but have consequences far beyond pricing. Advertising is another marketing instrument that is under the control of the manufacturer but its ultimate effect on consumer demand also depends on retailers’ pricing decisions. We decompose the effect of advertising in the channel and highlight an additional route through which advertising affects sales, namely via the changes in the retail price that a strategic retailer makes in response to changes in demand following manufacturer advertising. The total demand effect of advertising thus comprises the direct effects of advertising on market shares, and the indirect effects coming through adjustments that the retailer makes to the in-store prices of all the brands in a given product category in response to the shifted demand due to advertising. We match advertising data for four different categories (both food and non-food) to store-level scanner panel data, which also include information on wholesale prices. Controlling for wholesale prices, we establish in a reduced-form model that the retailer reacts to manufacturer advertising by changing retail prices instead of simply imposing a constant markup on the wholesale price. To further explore the role of the strategic response of the retailer in a systematic fashion and quantify the effects derived in the decomposition, we estimate a discrete-choice model of demand and determine the magnitude of the direct and indirect effects. We find that the indirect effect of advertising through retailer prices is about half the size of the direct effect, and thus substantively affects advertising effectiveness.     

Optimal generic and brand advertising efforts in a decentralized supply chain considering customer surplus

While the previous researches of advertising efforts decisions focus on only the firms' profit target, no literature introduces corporation social responsibility target into advertising efforts decisions of a supply chain (SC). To fill this gap, we consider a two-stage SC with a manufacturer and a retailer where the SC members consider the customer surplus. Both the retailer and the manufacturer can invest in generic advertising efforts to influence and increase the products' sales volumes. This paper investigates the following four scenarios: (1) The retailer cares the customer surplus (Model I); (2) The manufacturer cares the customer surplus (Model II); (3) Both the retailer and the manufacturer care the customer surplus (Model III); (4) We then extend the model III to the case that the manufacturer invests in both the generic and brand advertising efforts (Model IV). The objective of this paper is to determine the optimal retail price, the optimal advertising efforts, and the optimal profits of SC members, and find the influence of customer concern level on the SC performance. Finally, numerical examples are conducted to investigate the influence of the customer concern levels of the retailer or the manufacturer on the profits of the SC members and the entire SC. We also study the joint impacts of the customer concern levels of the retailer and the manufacturer on the SC performance. We find that the SC obtains the highest profits when the retailer's customer concern level and the manufacturer's customer concern level are relatively high, and the best cooperative strategy for the retailer and the manufacturer is that they improve customer concern level simultaneously.     

Efficient replenishment in the distribution channel

Efficient replenishment (ER), a business process that involves the reduction of order cost to facilitate deliveries of goods from the manufacturer to the retailer, is becoming increasingly important in distribution channel management. While a well-executed ER program is expected to lower total channel costs and increase channel profit, very little is known about how this incremental channel profit is distributed between the manufacturer and the retailer and how it varies across the two common channel relationship structures, retailer price leadership and manufacturer price leadership.In this paper, we develop the conditions under which the manufacturer and the retailer gain more or less from the adoption of ER based on a game theoretic channel model of bilateral monopoly under the two channel relationship structures. We develop analytic results on the impact of ER on purchase quantity, price and the distribution of profits in three cases, namely, (1) when only the retailer adopts ER, (2) when both the manufacturer and the retailer adopt ER, and (3) when the manufacturer and the retailer are vertically integrated in the distribution channel, which adopts ER.The results, which can be generalized for all demand functions, show that the manufacturer benefits from the retailer's adoption of ER only when the manufacturer's holding cost relative to the retailer's is sufficiently large, relative to its order cost relative to the retailer's. By adopting ER, the retailer gains more than what the manufacturer gains even if the manufacturer is the price leader. Both the parties are likely to gain more if they both adopt ER than if only the retailer adopts ER. The incremental channel profit due to the retailer's ER adoption is highest in a vertically integrated distribution channel and is greater in a retailer-led channel relationship than in a manufacturer-led relationship.     

Manufacturer-Optimal Wholesale Pricing When Retailers Compete

The existing marketing science literature on channels of distribution has emphasized pricing strategies that maximize either channel or manufacturer margin. This emphasis has implicitly assumed that optimal wholesale prices are independent of any fixed fees charged by the manufacturer. While this assumption is justified in a single-manufacturer, single-retailer world, it generally does not lead to manufacturer profit maximization in a world of competing retailers. In this paper we derive a manufacturer-optimal wholesale pricing strategy by simultaneously determining both elements of a two-part tariff (consisting of a wholesale price and a fixed fee). We show that the manufacturer will always prefer this sophisticated pricing strategy to one that maximizes either channel or manufacturer margin. We also show that both elements of the optimal tariff are functions of the absolute difference between retailer fixed costs.     

Managing advertising investments in marketing channels

This paper investigates how should manufacturers optimally allocate resources to retailer-initiated (retailer) advertising through cooperative advertising programs and own (manufacturer) advertising in a bilateral monopoly. Retailer advertising stimulates immediate sales but may also harm long-term (post-advertising) demand, whereas manufacturer advertising aims at building brand equity and stimulates both immediate and long-term sales. A game-theoretic model in which a manufacturer and a retailer set pricing and advertising decisions over a two-period planning horizon is developed to account for the differences between manufacturer and retailer advertising. We characterize equilibrium solutions for four advertising scenarios for the manufacturer, ranging from no investment in any advertising activity to undertaking own advertising and supporting retailer advertising simultaneously. Comparing the two players’ equilibrium strategies and profits across these scenarios, we find that manufacturers should avoid offering exclusively cooperative advertising programs to retailers. When retailer advertising positively influences long-term sales, manufacturers should offer cooperative advertising supports to retailers in addition to undertaking their own advertising. When retailer advertising negatively affects long-term sales, manufacturers can still undertake own advertising and offer cooperative advertising under certain conditions. However, if these conditions are not met, focusing exclusively on own advertising is their best advertising strategy. Retailers also prefer scenarios in which manufacturers advertise, but may choose not to participate in manufacturers’ cooperative advertising programs. This leads to suboptimal outcomes if cooperative advertising programs are not enhanced by additional incentives (e.g., side payments or other services).     

Empirical investigation of channel reactions to brand introductions

We investigate how incumbent manufacturers and retailers alter their pricing behavior in response to new product introduction. In performing our analysis, we need to be cognizant of the fact that the observed price changes can be due to entry-induced changes in a) demand conditions or b) costs or, on the other hand, to the competitive behavior of c) manufacturers and/or d) the retailer. In order to separate these four changes, we posit that manufacturer and retailer pricing is an outcome of maximizing a combination of shares and profits. This enhanced objective function allows us to measure competitive conduct benchmarked as less or more competitive than under the Bertrand-Nash framework. Our empirical analysis is based on the toothpaste category for the time period January 1993–February 1995. During this period, there were three brand introductions in two rounds of entry. Using the estimates from the demand and the supply model, we compute the changes in the retail and wholesale prices that are attributable to changes in demand conditions, manufacturer and retailer competitive conduct, and cost changes. These results support our conjecture that inferring the change in conduct solely based on a change in observed prices is likely to be erroneous. For the first new brand entry, we find that the brand introduction did not significantly increase competition between manufacturers. As a result, the balance of channel power between the manufacturers and the retailers remained unaltered. Both retailer and manufacturer profit margins increased after the first entry. However, subsequent to the second entry, retailer share of channel profits increased at the expense of the manufacturers; manufacturers even saw a decline in their absolute profit margins. We believe that this research will provide insight for manufacturers and retailers regarding how the various channel participants are likely to react to new product introduction. Furthermore, policymakers interested in understanding competitive reactions to new product introduction should find this research useful.     

Strategic Role of Retailer Bundling in a Distribution Channel

We study retailer bundling in a distribution channel when the manufacturer for one bundled product can strategically set the wholesale price. We show that the retailer can use a bundling option as a strategic leverage to extract concessions from the manufacturer in form of a lower wholesale price. This finding contributes a novel rationale for retailer bundling to the bundling literature. Whenever the bundling option causes this concession-extraction effect, the retailer always benefits from the lower wholesale price. The manufacturer, nevertheless, does not necessarily suffer because bundling can lead to a higher consumer demand. We also show that the manufacturer's marginal production cost plays a critical role in driving the retailer's bundling decision, concession extraction behavior and consequently the total channel profit.     

Perceptions of price (un)fairness in a channel context

This article extends prior research on perceptions of price (un)fairness by attempting to disentangle where in the marketing channel (un)fairness inferences lie. Extant research in this area overwhelmingly considers (un)fairness perceptions with respect to the pricing action only, ignoring attributions aimed at specific channel actors. This article illustrates differences in (un)fairness inferences with respect to retailers and manufacturers given price increases accompanied by decreased product supply, increased demand, or increased variable costs. We show that a retailer is considered relatively more unfair than a manufacturer given a price increase accompanied by a demand increase, as well as when no explicit reason is given for the price increase. Conversely, a manufacturer is considered relatively more unfair given a price increase accompanied by a supply decrease. Both channel entities are considered equally fair given a price increase accompanied by a channel (both retailer and manufacturer) or manufacturer cost increase, while a retailer is deemed relatively more unfair given a price increase accompanied by a retailer cost increase. This research generally suggests that inferences of causality for specific pricing actions may differentially skew toward upstream or downstream channel entities depending on the particular economic circumstances of the price change.     

Distribution Channel Decentralization and Strategic Durability Choice

In a simple two‐period setting we examine a decentralized distribution (marketing) channel consisting of an up‐stream durable‐goods manufacturer and down‐stream retailer. The manufacturer sets the wholesale price and the product’s durability while the retailer selects an output level. We show that in this setting, the profit‐maximizing manufacturer unambiguously selects a higher durability than the socially efficient (cost‐minimizing) level in both uncommitted sales and rental markets. We show this ‘reversed planned obsolescence’ result is due to the strategic benefit of durability in this double‐marginalization (double monopoly mark‐up) setting. This is in stark contrast to the usual integrated channel result where the profit‐maximizing manufacturer will select an efficient level of durability in rental markets and an inefficiently low durability in uncommitted sales markets (due to the selling firm’s commitment problem with potential buyers). Intuitively, with a decentralized distribution channel, the manufacturer faces potential commitment problems with both current buyers and its down‐stream retailer. We show, only in cases where both sources of commitment issues are removed (i.e. the manufacturer can credibly commit to both potential buyers and its retailer), will the profit‐maximizing durability choice be socially efficient.     

Retailer's decoy strategy versus consumers' reference price effect in a retailer-Stackelberg supply chain

Decoy strategy for bundling is an important marketing option because it can reflect the behavior resulting from consumers' reference price effect. This paper develops a game-theoretic model of a dyadic supply chain to study the joint decisions on pricing and decoy strategies in the presence of consumers' reference price effect. The retailer chooses one of the decoy strategies (phantom decoy-mixed bundling, decoy-mixed bundling) and selling prices to maximize her profit. Our study shows that: under both decoy strategies, the retailer and the manufacturer benefit from consumers' low reference price effect; however, the high reference price effect hurts their profits.     

具有服务策略的双渠道供应链定价问题研究

本文研究了零售商提供服务的双渠道供应链,分析了零售商在不同的服务成本下提供服务对于供应商和零售商定价策略的影响。研究发现提供服务对于零售商不仅可以扩大利润,还可以把提供服务当作一种有效策略,应对来自电子商务渠道的利润吞噬,通过利润分享从而延缓渠道之间的冲突;只有服务系数小于一个临界值时,提供服务才能使零售商和供应商同时得到帕累托改进。因此,零售商应不断提高服务效率,为消费者提供更高效的服务。     

基于需求与储量相关条件下的供应链协调研究

供应链模型由一个制造商和零售商组成,其中制造商向零售商供应商品,零售商面临客户的商品需求与储量相关。在该模型中,制造商欲通过批发价和储量成本补偿方式来协调分散式供应链并赢利,使供应链分散式时的系统总储量等于集中控制时的储量水平。假定商品需求是依赖储量的函数和一个储量成本补偿。在单个零售商情形下,制造商需要增大批发价及支付给零售商的储量成本补贴来协调整个渠道并盈利。当两个及多个零售商竞争时,假定市场需求依赖于总储量水平,零售商按照储量比例分割市场。     

合作广告下制造商与零售商联合利润分配分析

从制造商和零售商合作广告这一背景出发,首先将Nash非合作与Pareto有效合作策略下供应链联合利润进行比较,得出制造商与零售商选择Pareto有效合作策略会比选择非合作策略时获得更多的联合利润;其次,在Pareto有效合作的基础上,运用讨价还价模型对供应链上的联合利润在制造商与零售商之间的分配问题进行了分析;最后,探讨了制造商和零售商各自的贴现率和破裂风险对制造商与零售商讨价还价力的影响。     

Dynamic cooperative promotion in the presence of consumer reference effect with competing retailers

This paper studies the cooperative promotion problem in the presence of the promotion reference effect. We consider retailer price-reduction promotion activities that enhance their sales but may impair brand image for the manufacturer. Moreover, because frequently used promotion induces a promotion reference effect on customers, we investigate how the promotion reference effect influences cooperative control strategies. We do so by examining the context in a supply chain with one leading manufacturer and two competing retailers, where the manufacturer implements a cooperative promotion program for the retailers. We use differential game models vis-a-vis dynamic promotion control strategies and cooperative promotion strategies under the scenario of existence and non-existence of the reference effect. Findings show that the presence of a promotion reference effect increases profit for the manufacturer but generates reduced profit for the retailers. We also find that the manufacturer augments the level of national brand advertising when incorporating the reference effect, and retailers raise (lower) their degree of promotion when the negative effect is low (high).     

Ownership coordination in a channel: Incentives,returns, and negotiations

In many industries firms have to make quantity decisions before knowing the exact state of demand. In such cases, channel members have to decide which firm will own the units until demand uncertainty is resolved. The decision about who should retain ownership depends on the balance of benefit and risk to each member. Ownership, after all, is costly. Whichever member owns the units accepts the risk of loss if more units are produced than can be sold. But ownership also grants firms the flexibility to respond to demand once it becomes known by adjusting price. In this study, we analyze ownership decisions in distribution channels and how those decisions are affected by demand uncertainty. We model demand based on micro-modeling of consumer utility functions and capture demand uncertainty related to market size and price sensitivity. This study shows that as long as the degree of uncertainty about market size is intermediate, the retailer and the manufacturer both benefit when the manufacturer maintains ownership of the units. But when there is substantial uncertainty about market size, the retailer and the channel are better off if the retailer takes ownership but the manufacturer still prefers to maintain ownership. Thus, there is potential for channel conflict regarding ownership under high levels of uncertainty. We show that, using product returns, the manufacturer can achieve the same outcome under retailer ownership as under manufacturer ownership. This provides an additional new rationale for the prevalence of product returns. The first-best outcome (from the perspective of total channel profit), however, is under retailer ownership without product returns when uncertainty is high (i.e., product returns reduce the total channel profit). Negotiations between the manufacturer and the retailer can lead to the first-best outcome but only under quite restrictive constraints that include direct side payments by the retailer to the manufacturer and the retailer being pessimistic about its outside option (when an agreement cannot be reached) during the negotiation.     

Why would a big retailer refuse to collaborate on manufacturer SPIFF programs?

Big retailers that carry a large assortment of products rely on knowledgeable salespeople to provide purchase advice to customers and match customers with suitable products. Interestingly, big retailers vary in their policies regarding whether to allow their salespeople to receive manufacturer SPIFF (Sales Person Incentive Funding Formula) payments, which motivate salespeople advising at no cost of the retailer. In this study, we investigate a big retailer’s incentive to block manufacturer SPIFF programs, which has the consequence of demotivating salespeople from advising customers, from the perspective of vertical channel interactions. We scrutinize a big retailer’s decision to maximize its profit through managing its channel interactions with upstream manufacturers offering horizontally differentiated products, customers uncertain about true fits with competing products, and its salesperson who can match customers with suitable products through offering purchase advice. Our analysis shows that motivating the salesperson to advise customers is profitable for the retailer only if the such advising has moderate effectiveness in matching consumers and suitable products, and only in this case would the retailer collaborate on manufacturer SPIFF programs. Otherwise, salesperson advising hurts retailer profit and the big retailer benefits from blocking manufacturer SPIFF programs. Our study reveals the interesting theoretical insight that the incentives of a big retailer and upstream manufacturers to motivate sales advising reside in their incentives to battle for a more favorable channel status.     

Pure Components versus Pure Bundling in a Marketing Channel

This paper examines how channel interactions influence product bundling decisions by channel members. Specifically, what products or bundles should be offered, at what prices, and by which channel members, in equilibrium. To answer this, we analyze Stackelberg games between a manufacturer and retailer, with pricing and bundling as decision variables, under discrete and uniform continuous distributions of reservation prices. We find that selling pure components by both manufacturer and retailer is the equilibrium except in a narrow region of the parameter space. However, if the manufacturer can sell bundles and prevent unbundling, then such a bundling strategy is optimal in many cases. Interestingly, the channel and retailer also benefit from this strategy.