An Empirical Study of the Effect of Brand Proliferation on Private Label – National Brand Pricing Behavior

This paper investigates the competitive pricing interaction between national brand and private label food products, focusing on the effect of brand proliferation. IRI scanner data from 1991 and 1992 for 135 food product categories and 59 geographic markets are used. Empirical findings are grouped into three categories: i) price, promotion and competitive effects, ii) brand proliferation and entry deterrence, and iii) local market effects. Results indicate that both private label and national brand reaction functions are positively sloped and asymmetric. Successful private label penetration, as measured by total private label share, lowers the average price of national brands. The paper's central finding is that the impact of brand proliferation on market pricing behavior is multi-dimensional. First, an increase in the number of brands increases the ability of national brand manufacturers to raise price. Second, the effectiveness of a brand proliferation strategy depends upon the distribution of market share. The more concentrated the brand structure, the lower the market price of national brands. Thus, the net effect of brand proliferation strategies is dependent upon not only the number of brands, but upon the actual distribution of brand shares. Finally, local market conditions play only a small role in the competitive interaction between private labels and national brands.     

Market Share and Price Setting Behavior for Private Labels and National Brands

In this paper, we focus on the nature of demand and competitive response in the market for private label and national branded grocery products. Specifically,we employ less restrictive functional forms than usedin prior research. Specifically, we incorporateLA/AIDS demands and the corresponding price reactionequations to estimate consumer price sensitivities andsupply side price strategies for national brand andprivate label products. Oligopolistic priceinterdependence is explored further by specifyingbrand share, brand Herfindahl, and a measure of thestructure of the local retail markets in the supplyside relations to evaluate explicitly the impact ofmarket structure.In our empirical analysis, we estimate a system of market share and price equations simultaneously inorder to examine (i) the determinants of the demandresponse to pricing and promotion decisions and (ii)the determinants of private label and national brandpricing behavior. Using data for 143 food productcategories and 59 geographic markets, we develop amodel that captures the variation in privatelabel-national brand share and pricing acrosscategories and markets. Key findings include: (i)demand response to price and promotion is decidedlyasymmetric, (ii) price followship between privatelabels and national brands is positive, but notstrong, and (iii) markets characterized by highernational brand market share and higher supermarketconcentration tend to have higher prices forboth national brands and private labels.     

The Nature and Benefits of National Brand/Private Label Competition

The article highlights the history of national brand/private label competition. Itargues that the private labels of large retail chains possess unique competitiveweapons to constrain the market power of powerful national brands that are notavailable to rival manufacturers' brands. Consumer welfare is maximized whenprivate labels and national brands compete vigorously rather than when eitherone is too dominant. There is some ominous recent evidence that the vigor ofnational brand/private label competition is sometimes being diminished bycollusion between the two kinds of brands.     

How social media shapes the fashion industry: The spillover effects between private labels and national brands

Social media has become one of the major industrial marketing channels for companies. Because of the nature of social media, social media marketing produces a strong branding effect for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the fashion industry. This study contributes to social media analytics research by exploring the interactions between private labels and national brands in fashion social media and investigating how these interactions influence the popularity and subsequent sales of private labels. Our main findings suggest the presence of large national brands has a positive spillover effect on the popularity of private labels in fashion social media and ultimately influences sales of private label products. The results add to our understanding of the impact of Business-to-Business (B2B) social media marketing on brand competition in the fashion industry.     

Manufacturer's retailer dependence: A private branding perspective

With the recent increase in the power of major retailers through consolidations, the world of brands has divided in two categories: national brands belonging to manufacturers and private brands belonging to retailers. While national brands are well studied in the literature, there is a dearth of studies on private brand phenomenon particularly from a manufacturer's point of view as opposed to that of retailers and consumers. To address this gap, we explore the antecedents and consequences of a manufacturer's private brand retailer dependence with a focus on the manufacturer's relationship with retailers. Drawing on the Resource Dependence Theory and Transaction Cost Economics, we examine various products and market characteristics as potential antecedents of a manufacturer's private brand retailer dependence while adopting private brand sales growth and returns from private brand production as outcomes using a sample of 153 South Korean manufacturers currently involved in private brand production. The results show that the private brand retailer dependence of a manufacturer leads to private brand sales growth directly and returns from private brand production indirectly through private brand sales growth, and has a negative effect on return from private brand production directly. Furthermore, product characteristics, such as product innovativeness through collaboration with retailers and search goods, and market characteristics, such as high retailer power and knowledge specificity of a retailer, increase a manufacturer's private brand retailer dependence and, therefore, private brand sales growth. The theoretical and managerial implications of the findings are discussed at the end.     

Modelling Price Dispersion as an Outcome of Competition in the Irish Grocery Market

The paper empirically models price dispersion between related brands within product categories of the Irish Independent Grocery market. Retail brand prices are averaged over the independent shops stocking the brand. Since individual brands are retailed through different groups of shops, brands are priced over heterogeneous consumer segments. Brand price dispersion is estimated to increase with competition when conditioned on brand distribution structures, while controlling for other observed and unobserved deterministic factors. The data suggest that brand pricing across consumer groups induce varying degrees of localised price competition rather than pricing across segments to extract consumer willingness to pay.     

The effect of online shopping channels on brand choice,product exploration and price elasticities

This paper analyzes the effect of an online shopping channel on private label purchases, product exploration and price elasticities. Variation in the timing that an online shopping service was introduced is utilized as a source of exogenous variation in the decision to shop online. Event study estimates indicate a 0.3 to 1.0 (1.0 to 2.0) percent increase (reduction) in the proportion of private label (new) products purchased after the introduction of the online shopping service. Price elasticities are then estimated utilizing an Exact Affine Stone Index (EASI) demand model. Comparisons of in-store and multichannel price elasticities indicate that households are, on average, less price sensitive when shopping across both the in-store and online channels. Own-price (cross-price) elasticities are 1.07 (5.56) times larger in-store than they are in a multichannel setting. These findings suggest that retailers manipulate the online search platform and(or) the provision of substitutes to favor private label products, which have a higher margin. Additionally, these results suggest that retailers may find it profit maximizing to raise prices as consumer baskets become more sticky in the multichannel purchasing regime.     

Switching costs in the US seed industry: Technology adoption and welfare impacts

We evaluate the role of brand and technology switching costs in the US soybean seed industry using a unique dataset of actual seed purchases by about 28,000 farmers from 1996 to 2016. Using a random coefficients logit model of demand, we estimate brand and technology switching costs, characterize the distributions of buyers’ willingness to pay for seed brands and the glyphosate tolerance (GT) trait, and assess the implications of brand and technology switching costs for farmers’ welfare, technology adoption, firm profits, and firm market shares. We find that farmers are willing to pay large premiums for brand labels, and even larger premiums for the GT trait, although there is considerable heterogeneity in these values. Switching costs play an important role in the soybean seed industry. Eliminating these costs would significantly increase buyers’ welfare, reduce seed prices and firm profits, decrease adoption of the GT trait, and impact industry consolidation by expanding smaller firms’ market shares.     

Hedonic prices in the German market for mobile phones

This paper provides a hedonic price analysis of mobile telephones for the German market, based on data of 302 different handsets from 25 manufacturers over the period from May 1998 to November 2003. By measuring shadow prices for different product characteristics, the authors find that volume, for example, has a negative effect on the price of a mobile handset, while the number of ringtones and the talk time battery life relative to the handset's weight positively affect mobile phone prices. Perhaps somewhat surprisingly, radiation is statistically insignificant. Also handsets have become cheaper over time, and handsets with additional features, such as MMS, MP3 or Bluetooth, command a higher price. In addition, there are positive brand name effects for some brands. According to the estimations presented in this paper the brand name premiums may range from 57 to 172 euro.     

Transaction cost implication of private branding and empirical evidence

Branding and transaction cost economics represent two research streams that rarely cross paths in the literature. In this study, I explore the transaction cost implication of private branding, a practice whereby products supplied by unaffiliated manufacturers are sold under private brands owned by retailers. The main thesis is that private branding can preempt a special case of asset specificity called brand specificity, where retailers also invest in the marketing of an outsourced product, but subsequent reputation effects (positive or negative) are specific to the manufacturer who brands the product. Retailers, thus, will not be fully motivated to optimize their investment in product marketing unless they take over the branding right. With potential barriers to private branding being controlled, data obtained from a national chain reveal that the retailer deploys its marketing resources according to the branding status of a product, implying that private branding can deflect the transaction cost of solving the brand specificity problem. The results offer new theoretical insights into branding and transaction cost analysis. This efficiency‐based approach to private branding also provides practitioners with useful guidelines for crafting a branding strategy that will facilitate cooperation between manufacturers and retailers. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Market-structure Determinants of National Brand–Private Label Price Differences of Manufactured Food Products: Comment

Conor and Peterson [1992] analysed structural behavioural characteristics explaining differences in price between competing national and private label brands of manufactured food products. Hinloopen and Martin's comment points out an error in reporting results and an ambiguity in variable construction, and also comment on the interpretation of regression results. Connor and Peterson reply.     

Should leading brand manufacturers supply private label brands to retailers: Calibrating the trade-offs

The consolidation of retailers across markets has considerably altered the competitive dynamics between leading brand manufacturers and retailers. The era in which brand manufacturers dictate the game to compliant retailers is long gone. Nowadays, with more equal negotiation power retailers are no longer just channel partners but rather business partners with whom to build business-to-business relationships. This has become apparent especially since retailers have developed their own private label brands (PLB) and actively seek brand manufacturers to supply them. For brand manufacturers supplying PLB may bring potential benefits but may also harm profits. Thus, this research investigates conditions under which a leading brand manufacturer would be better or worse off in terms of profitability producing PLB for retailers. Using a game theoretic model, we calibrate the trade-offs between the shelf space devoted by the retailer to the manufacturer brand and the amount of profit required from supplying the PLB necessary to counteract cannibalization and to generate profits for the manufacturer, under different levels of uncertainty regarding the availability of alternative suppliers. Calibrating these trade-offs provides brand manufacturers clear guidelines for negotiations with retailers regarding shelf space allocation and wholesale prices to be profitable supplying PLB.     

Product Hierarchy and Brand Strategy Influences on the Order of Entry Effect for Consumer Packaged Goods

Manufacturers focus on becoming more agile, software firms deploy rapid application development tools—everyone is in a hurry. Although we all understand the benefits of being first to market, we understand just as clearly that not all first-to-market products enjoy the same, sustainable benefits from being market pioneers. Why do some pioneering products experience a more significant order-of-entry effect than others? Roger A. Kerin, Gurumurthy Kalyanaram, and Daniel J. Howard examine two factors–product hierarchy and brand strategy—which may influence the magnitude of this effect for new consumer packaged goods. First, they hypothesize that pioneering a new product class offers a greater advantage than introducing a new form to an existing product class. Second, they predict that the order-of-entry effect will be greater for brand extensions than for entirely new brands. Finally, considering both product hierarchy and brand strategy, they expect that the order-of-entry advantage for brand extensions over new brands will be significantly greater within new product classes than for new forms of existing products. These hypotheses are tested using data from the Information Resources, Inc. Behaviorscan° data set. Collected from 2,500 household panel members, 75 supermarkets, and 25 drugstores, this database contains weekly measures of brand trial penetration as well as brand distribution, price, and promotion information in eight geographic markets from the period 1983–1988. The models developed in this study explore the relationships among brand trial penetration, product hierarchy, brand strategy, order of entry, lag time between successive brand entrants, and marketing mix variables (i.e., price, promotion, distribution, and advertising). The study strongly supports all three hypotheses. In particular, the analysis clearly demonstrates that the order-of-entry effect is greatest for a new product class pioneered by a brand extension. Order of entry has the least effect on a new product form pioneered by an entirely new brand. For a company seeking a competitive advantage from being first to market, innovation in product function offers greater potential benefit than innovation in product form. Such a company can also benefit from building on the name and reputation of its established brands. Although the study finds these order-of-entry effects significant, the effects of marketing mix variables such as product price and promotion are consistently stronger.     

The Impact of Private Label Introduction on Assortment,Prices, and Profits of Retailers*

We study how introducing private-label brands (PLs) affects retail prices and profits, accounting for assortment adjustments of national brands (NBs). We employ an event-study framework and scanner data on the US beef market. When a PL is added to the low-priced market segment, we find that retail stores further differentiate NBs from the PL and remove same-segment NBs. When a PL is added to the high-priced segment, however, NB assortment changes are limited. PL introduction and PL-driven NB assortment changes impose small price effects on NB, but strongly cannibalize NB demand and steer consumers toward PLs, likely increasing store profits.     

National brand's local advertising and wholesale-price incentive under prior versus no prior information

We study the context of one private label (PL) competing against one national brand (NB) through a unique retailer. We propose a novel utility-demand function that includes the consumer's brand valuation, the retail prices, and the brands' qualities. We investigate the effect of the NB local advertising strategy on supply chain players' profits when either one of the players supports the advertising. Also, we explore the role of prior information about the manufacturer's incentive function on supply chain players' behaviors. We show that although the support for advertising from either the manufacturer or the retailer is Pareto improving, the manufacturer prefers to incite the retailer to invest in local NB advertising through profit sharing instead of using its money to counter the threat of the PL. Furthermore, we also show that the wholesale price incentive motivating the retailer to invest further in advertising is not preferred as expected, and all supply chain players are better off without prior information about the manufacturer's behavior in the context of branding competition and advertising-level dependent incentive.     

Private labels in marketplaces

Regulators are concerned that by introducing their own private labels, dominant online marketplace operators distort competition in their own favor. This paper addresses this concern by studying how online marketplaces differ from classic retailers with a wholesale arrangement. In online marketplaces individual sellers set their own consumer prices, while the marketplace operator collects fees from their sales. I show that when introducing a private label, the marketplace operator does not have an incentive to distort competition and foreclose the outside seller. On the contrary, when introducing a private label, there is an incentive to decrease the fee charged to the outside seller and to vertically differentiate its own product in order to protect the seller’s channel. However, relative to the wholesale model of classic retailers, online marketplace operators offer a lower quality with higher consumer prices, leading to less improvement in consumer surplus and potentially less harm to the outside seller.     

Assessing Consequences of Component Sharing across Brands in the Vertical Product Line in the Automotive Market

Component sharing may look great in the boardroom but not in the showroom. Indeed, savings on research and development and production costs could be offset by a plunge in customer brand attractiveness. The central objective of this paper is to investigate consumer and market responses toward component sharing between brands. More specifically, by combining experimental with econometric studies, this paper investigates the impact of component sharing on customer evaluation of luxury, volume, and economy brands offered in a car manufacturer's vertical product line. An experimental study in which component sharing between automotive brands was made explicit aimed to understand the impact of brand combinations and type of sourcing on the evaluations of the two brands sharing components. This experimental study shows that the evaluation of luxury brands sharing with a volume brand suffers more than when a volume brand shares components with an economy brand. This experimental study was executed for two different brand combinations including one luxury, one volume, and one economy brand: (1) Audi, Volkswagen, and Skoda; and (2) Lexus, Toyota, and Suzuki. The evaluation of an economy brand benefits more from sharing with a volume brand than a volume brand suffers from sharing with an economy brand. The magnitude of these effects depends on several factors, such as component type, the source of the component sharing, and the salience of component sharing to the consumers. One important limitation of the experiment is that component sharing is made rather salient, and no behavioral effects of component sharing are studied. Therefore, a second was executed in which market share data on brands of the Volkwagen company (i.e., Audi, Volkswagen, Seat, and Skoda) were collected, while also data on the component‐sharing practices between these brands were gathered. A market share model was estimated in which market shares of the four studied brands were explained by component‐sharing practices and some control variables (i.e., price, model changes) in an exploratory fashion. The explorative examination of market share effects confirms that luxury brands may suffer, while economy brands may benefit from component sharing. In sum, this research suggests that component sharing between brands has negative effects for the higher‐end, and positive effects for the lower‐end brand. However, it also shows that sourcing matters. This study is considered as the first study investigating the phenomenon of component sharing, and it points to multiple future research issues, such as studying this phenomenon in other markets.     

Investigating the Cross-Category Effects of Store Brands

Our study examines the cross-category effects of store brand productsin other categories on the products in a target category. Using scannerdata for 13 product categories, we find that higher number of storebrands in other categories increases the store brand share in the targetcategory. In addition, share of the leading national brand in the targetcategory is negatively affected by the number of store brands in othercategories. Our results do not offer evidence for the effects of storebrand promotions in other categories on both the store brand and thenational brands in the target category.     

The Strategic Positioning of Store Brands in Retailer–Manufacturer Negotiations

Store brands are the only brands for which the retailer is responsible not onlyfor promotion, shelf placement, and pricing, but also for positioning the brandin product space. We argue that retailers strongly value control over store brandpositioning because they will be unable to source a national brand with theirdesired product positioning. This is because retailers have an incentive to positionstore brands as close substitutes to leading national brands – a location in productspace which other national brand manufacturers would not find profitable. We presentempirical evidence that is consistent with the results of our model.     

Price Competition and Market Segmentation in Retail Gasoline: New Evidence from South Korea

I examine price dispersion in retail gasoline and focus on differentiation along the service dimension: full service versus self service. Consistent with more intensive search by self-service customers, I find that price dispersion always decreases with the number of nearby self-service stations, but does not decrease with the number of nearby full-service stations. When I segment the market by brand, I observe that the estimates are sensitive to how brands are separated into different types. These findings show that the market is more clearly segmented by service level than by brand type and also highlight the importance of product differentiation when modeling price dispersion.