Consumer deliberation and quality signaling

Consumers are often uncertain about their product valuation before purchase. They may bear the uncertainty and purchase the product without deliberation. Alternatively, consumers can incur a deliberation cost to find out their true valuation and then make their purchase decision. This paper proposes that consumer deliberation about product valuation can be an endogenous mechanism to enable credible quality signaling. We demonstrate this point in a simple setup in which product quality influences the probability that the product has high valuation. We show that with endogenous deliberation there may exist a unique separating equilibrium in which the high-quality firm induces consumer deliberation by setting a high price whereas the low-quality firm prevents deliberation by charging a low price. Compared to the case of complete information, the price of the high-quality firm can be distorted upward to facilitate consumer deliberation, or distorted downward to avoid the low-quality firm’s imitation. In an extension we show that dissipative advertising can facilitate quality signaling. The high-quality firm can utilize advertising spending to avert imitation from the low-quality firm without distorting price downward, earning a higher profit than that without advertising. However, advertising mitigates the distortion at the expense of consumer surplus and social welfare.     

The asymmetric effect of warranty payments on firm value: The moderating role of advertising,R&D,and industry concentration

Changes in firms’ warranty payments are informative signals that enable investors to form timely expectations about potential changes in product quality. The authors’ survey shows that warranty payments affect potential investors’ product quality assessments and stock investment likelihood. Their quantitative analysis reveals an asymmetric stock market reaction: unanticipated increases in warranty payments (which signal quality “losses”) lower stock returns but unanticipated decreases do not affect stock returns. Two important factors moderate this relationship. First, boosting advertising spending attenuates the negative stock return effect of unanticipated increases in warranty payments. Second, unanticipated decreases in warranty payments, which signal quality “gains”, translate into higher stock returns when the industry has become less concentrated. Interestingly, changes in R&D spending do not moderate investors’ response to unanticipated increases or decreases in warranty payments. The authors advise firms to use advertising to lessen the harm from warranty payment increases and to strongly communicate warranty payment decreases in the face of intensified competition. The authors also caution that offering warranties in general does not ensure greater firm value as declining quality firms that myopically offer warranty programs experience lower firm value than those that do not provide warranties.     

Strategic Implications of Keeping Product Value Secret from Competitor’s Customers

Customers can sometimes learn unanticipated or hidden use value of a firm’s product whereas the non-customers remain uninformed about that extra value. A monopolist will increase its profit by informing the non-customers of its product’s hidden value. However, our analysis reveals that this may not be true when the firm faces competition in the market—the firm may actually make a higher profit if it keeps its hidden value secret from its competitor’s customers even if advertising to inform those customers is costless. This is because no advertising leads to information heterogeneity among consumers about the existence of the firm’s hidden value, which gives an incentive for both firms to continue targeting their own existing customers rather than poaching each other’s customers, alleviating price competition and increasing firms’ profits. This beneficial strategic effect of keeping some product value secret from the competitor’s customers can persist even when the firms anticipate the hidden value and compete more aggressively for customers in the early period. Our research suggests that firms can benefit from an “under-promise and over-deliver” strategy if they refrain from communicating their extra value to the competitor’s customers. Moreover, positive word of mouth about a firm’s product will not necessarily benefit the firm and can in fact make all firms worse off.     

New product preannouncements,advertising investments,and stock returns

This study examines the synergistic effects of advertising spending and new product preannouncements (NPPAs) on stock market responses. The empirical results indicate that returns of preannouncing firms over both the short- and long-term could be improved by an increase in advertising expenditure. Additionally, the results also show that the positive impacts of earnings and revenues can be enhanced, while the negative influence of trading costs can be reduced, for preannouncing firms with higher advertising expenditures. The holding returns of institutional investors can also increase with greater spending on advertising. Therefore, marketing communication strategies that aim to reduce information asymmetry within NPPAs, coupled with greater advertising expenditures, would yield more favorable investor responses.     

Can socially irresponsible firms benefit from corporate advertising?

Abstract

Can corporate advertising improve firm performance following a brand crisis borne out of corporate social irresponsibility (CSI)? This article investigates socially irresponsible firms and their corporate advertising expenditures, which can be used to counter negative opinions. First, we examine whether firms experiencing a negative brand image due to socially irresponsible behavior alter their corporate advertising expenditures. Next, we assess the resulting impact of corporate advertising spending by CSI firms on overall performance. Using a sample of firms engaging in socially irresponsible behavior between 1995 and 2011, we find that such firms tend to increase their corporate advertising. Such changes in corporate advertising expenditures ultimately impact firm performance. Specifically, an increase in corporate advertising helps to reduce the negative effect of CSI on firm performance.     

Media Coverage and Firm Valuation: Evidence from China

Drawing on both a managerial discipline perspective and an information intermediary perspective, we explore how media coverage of a firm’s controlling shareholder influences firm valuation in corporate China. Using 366 listed family firms in China from 2003 to 2006, we find that firms in which controlling shareholders receive more neutral media reports enjoy higher valuation, whereas negative media reports on controlling shareholders impose adverse effects on firm valuation. Interestingly, favorable media coverage of the controlling shareholders does not enhance firm value. Further analyses reveal that ownership structure and audit quality moderate the relationship between media coverage and firm valuation. Our study complements the emerging literature on the monitoring role of the media on the stock markets.     

Direct effect of advertising spending on firm value: Moderating role of financial analyst coverage

Previous research distinguishes between direct and indirect effects of advertising spending on firm value. This research focuses on the direct effect of advertising based on the spillover and signaling effect of advertising. Both effects are the result of increased public information flow about the firm created by advertising. Another source of public information flow about firms is information produced by financial analysts. We hypothesize that the direct effect of advertising on firm value will be stronger for firms not covered by financial analysts than for those that are covered because investors may rely on information flow from financial analysts for covered firms and rely on information flow from advertising in the absence of analyst coverage. Using financial and accounting databases for publicly traded firms for a period from 1975 to 2015, we test this hypothesis and find empirical evidence for the moderating role of analyst coverage in the relationship between advertising spending and firm value.     

The Advertising–price Relationship: Theory and Evidence

The relationship between advertising and price is important because the welfare effect of advertising depends upon the price effect of advertising. We attempt to provide a better understanding of the theoretical relationship between advertising and price. We establish theoretical conditions sufficient for advertising to raise prices. This will occur, for example, when firms play a supermodular game – a structure that considers the type of advertising (i.e., persuasive, image creating, or informative) and the effect that advertising has on a firm’s demand and costs. We also compare results from two simple duopoly models, one with horizontal and the other with vertical differentiation, and find that only the model with horizontal differentiation is supermodular for the forms of advertising that are thought to raise price (e.g., persuasive advertising). In consideration of these theoretical issues, we then develop an empirical model to determine whether advertising raises prices in the US brewing and cigarette industries.     

Can Sinful Firms Benefit from Advertising Their CSR Efforts? Adverse Effect of Advertising Sinful Firms’ CSR Engagements on Firm Performance

This study investigates corporate social responsibility (CSR) of sinful firms, which refer to ones that are operating in controversial industries, including the production and distribution of alcohol, tobacco, gambling, adult entertainment, firearm, military, and nuclear power. We attempt to answer two questions in this study: (1) Do these sinful firms actively advertise their CSR engagements compared to non-sinful firms? And (2) do their advertising efforts really yield increased financial performance? Positing that advertising not only can make sinful firms’ good deeds visible, but also can highlight the contradiction between these firms’ stigma and their prosocial activities, we claim that sinful firms are likely to advertise their CSR engagement to overcome their stigmatized firm image, but these advertising activities will make the firms’ performance vulnerable by inducing skepticism from stakeholders. Using KLD database in conjunction with COMPUSTAT and Center for Research in Security Prices from 1991 to 2010, where 337 firms are involved in the controversial sinful industries, namely tobacco, alcohol, gaming, firearms, military, and nuclear power, we examine the effect of advertising spending of sinful firms’ CSR engagement on performance vulnerability, which is instantiated with idiosyncratic risk. The empirical results indicate that sinful firms increase their advertising expenditure when they engage in CSR programs, but these efforts for advertising CSR tend to increase idiosyncratic risk. This finding indicates that even though sinful firms can benefit from engaging in socially responsible initiatives, advertising their CSR efforts may backfire.     

Taking marketing strategy risks with seemingly no expected gains

This paper investigates the competitive rationale for firms to invest in marketing activities aiming to enhance valuation and achieve differentiation and competitive advantage, while carrying the strategic risks of causing unintended negative consequences. We build a stylized theoretical model where firms offering similar (homogenous) products are competing by determining their marketing strategy and pricing. Each firm must choose between several marketing activities that have different potentials of enhancing consumers’ product valuations while carrying some risk of lowering consumer valuation if unintended negative outcomes occur. The stochastic nature of marketing implies that (1) even when both firms invest the same amount of money aiming to enhance product valuations by the same level, there will be a variety of (posterior) vertical differentiation scenarios where the consumers could value either firm’s product as better as or worse than the rival’s. (2) The firms may employ marketing activities that do not even lead to gains in consumer product valuation in expectation. The duopoly model analysis indicates that associated with strategic pricing, even such stochastic marketing activities may constitute desirable strategies for two a priori symmetric firms in order to avoid a Bertrand type competition as the benefit from differentiation is found to be significant enough to offset the unintended negative outcomes. The oligopoly model analysis indicates that there is an increased incentive to take marketing risk when there is a greater level of competitive intensity in the marketplace. Preliminary experimental evidence is presented to support the main findings from theoretical model analyses. The paper thus provides important managerial implications for firms contemplating investment in seemingly risky marketing activities.

     

To Groupon or not to Groupon: The profitability of deep discounts

We examine the profitability and implications of online discount vouchers, a relatively new marketing tool that offers consumers large discounts when they prepay for participating firms’ goods and services. Within a model of repeat experience good purchase, we examine two mechanisms whereby a discount voucher service can benefit affiliated firms: price discrimination and advertising. For vouchers to provide successful price discrimination, the valuations of consumers with access to vouchers must generally be lower than those of consumers who do not have access to vouchers. Offering vouchers tends to be more profitable for firms that are patient or relatively unknown, and for firms with low marginal costs. Extensions to our model accommodate the possibilities of firm price reoptimization and multiple voucher purchases. We find potential benefits of online discount vouchers to certain firms in certain circumstances, but vouchers are likely to increase firm profits under relatively narrow conditions.     

The Value Relevance of Reputation for Sustainability Leadership

This study investigates whether the market valuation of the two summary accounting measures, book value of equity and net income, is higher for firms with reputation for sustainability leadership, when compared to firms that do not enjoy such reputation. The results are interpreted through the lens of a framework combining signalling theory and resource-based theory, according to which firms signal their commitment to sustainability to influence the external perception of reputation. A firm’s reputation for being committed to sustainability is an intangible resource that can increase the value of a firm’s expected cash flows and/or reduce the variability of its cash flows. Our findings are according to expectations and show that the net income of firms with good sustainability reputation has a higher valuation by the market, when compared to their counterparts.     

A Rose by Any Other Name: Are Family Firms Named After Their Founding Families Rewarded More for Their New Product Introductions?

The authors explore the relation between the way different family firms are named, and the shareholder value impact of these firms’ new product introductions. Using an event study of 1,294 product introduction announcements of 107 publicly listed U.S. family firms, the authors find that the presence of the founding family’s name as part of a family firm’s name acts as a valuable firm resource, increasing the abnormal stock returns surrounding the firm’s new product introductions. Superior returns to family-named firms’ new product introductions are partially mediated by these firms’ history of ethical product-related behavior: family-named firms, particularly those with corporate branding, and those wherein a founding family member holds the CEO or chairman position, are more likely to exhibit a history of avoiding such product-related controversies as product safety issues, and deceptive advertising. The authors highlight the managerial and theoretical contributions of this research.     

What if your owners also own other firms in your industry? The relationship between institutional common ownership,marketing, and firm performance

The growth in institutional holdings of public firms has led to increased interest in the concept of common ownership, in which the same investor owns stakes in multiple firms within the same industry. Economic theory suggests that common ownership could affect firm performance, but little empirical research has examined the nature of this effect or how a firm’s extant marketing potentially relates to this effect. This paper addresses this gap by proposing a relationship between common ownership and firm performance that is moderated by the firm’s extant marketing capabilities and its relative marketing strategic emphasis. Our empirical approach employs data from over 43 million institutional holdings to develop a measure of common ownership and accounts for empirical issues like endogeneity and unobserved heterogeneity. The results document a positive relationship between common ownership and firm performance and provide some evidence that this effect is stronger for firms with lower marketing capabilities and a relative strategic emphasis towards R&D spending. These results suggest that public policymakers should consider the firms’ extant strategic marketing when assessing regulations on common ownership.     

Toward Understanding Persuasion Expressions: The Activation of Attitudes

In response to sales representatives’ closing expressions, consumers’ stored attitudes are activated spontaneously from memory and influence product evaluations. Studies 1a and 1b examined the levels of favorability associated with several persuasive expressions. Study 2 then examined whether a sales representative's use of a more (Authority) or a less (Scarcity) favorable persuasive expression would affect consumers’ subsequent product and advertisement evaluations. The expressions were found to work differently depending upon two moderator variables: Need for Cognition and argument quality. The effect of Scarcity heightened subsequent product evaluation as Need for Cognition decreased, whereas the effect of Authority heightened subsequent product evaluation as Need for Cognition increased. The Scarcity statement did not affect product evaluations given strong or weak message claims in the advertisement, whereas the Authority statement produced more favorable product evaluations given strong versus weak messages claims. Cognitive response analyses and mediation patterns also indicated that the two persuasive expressions were distinct based upon individuals’ Need for Cognition. Implications for both sales representatives and consumers are drawn from these findings.     

Consistency and commonality in advertising content: Helping or Hurting?

Scholars and practitioners widely argue that strong, successful brands are built on consistent and unique positioning, which should be reflected in the brands’ advertising. Surprisingly, however, little empirical evidence supports this claim, especially with regard to advertising content. The authors investigate whether and to what extent brands’ advertising content consistency—the similarity in the firm’s own advertising content over time—and commonality—the similarity between the firm’s and competitors’ advertising content—affect brands’ sales. Insights emerge from the analysis of the impact on sales of the content of 247 television ads aired by 33 brands in six consumer packaged goods categories over a four-year period. Results indicate that more than advertising spending, both consistency and commonality in advertising content affect sales, especially with respect to long-term cumulative sales. However, brands differ considerably regarding the direction of the effects. While small brands tend to benefit from increased consistency and commonality in advertising content, large brands tend to suffer from increased consistency. Thus, whether consistency and commonality in advertising content will help or hurt depends on the size of the brand.     

Cost of capital and market power: The effect of size dispersion & entry barriers on market equilibrium

A market power explanation for the observed empirical fact that large firms in a given industry pay less for their capital than small is developed. Larger firms in an industry are shown to pay less for their capital than small because they have more control over the market and the riskiness of their divided stream is correspondingly smaller. More firms in an industry with a given size dispersion raises the cost of capital to the incumbents, but proportionately more to smaller firms. However, the most significant result is that a greater dispersion of sizes will reduce the riskiness of the dividend stream of the larger firm and increase the riskiness of the smaller firm, causing an increase in the dispersion of capital costs. Hence product market power enhances capital cost efficiencies.     

R&D spending,strategic position and firm performance

Based on R&D investment data from Chinese listed manufacturing firms, this paper examines the effect of R&D spending on firms’ future performance conditional on their strategic positions. We find that firms pursing a product differentiation strategy have more R&D spending than those with a cost leadership strategy. In addition, we document a positive effect of R&D spending on firms’ future performance if they adopt a product differentiation strategy. Meanwhile, for the firms that adopt a cost leadership strategy, the relationship between R&D spending and firm performance resembles an inversed U-shape. Furthermore, we find this inversed U-shape relationship only exists for non-state-owned firms. Overall, this paper provides guidance and useful suggestions on the efficient allocation of R&D resources for Chinese manufacturing firms.     

Competition and product innovation in dynamic oligopoly

We investigate the relationship between competition and innovation using a dynamic oligopoly model that endogenizes both the long-run innovation rate and market structure. We use the model to examine how various determinants of competition, such as product substitutability, entry costs, and innovation spillovers, affect firms’ equilibrium strategies for entry, exit, and investment in product quality. We find an inverted-U relationship between product substitutability and innovation: the returns to innovation initially rise for all firms but eventually, as the market approaches a winner-take-all environment, laggards have few residual profits to fight over and give up pursuit of the leader, knowing he will defend his lead. The increasing portion of the inverted-U reflects changes in firm’s investment policy functions, whereas the decreasing portion arises from the industry transiting to states with fewer firms and wider quality gaps. Allowing market structure to be endogenous yields different results compared to extant work that fixes or exogenously varies the market structure.     

The capital market spillover effect of product market advertising: Evidence from stock price synchronicity

We analyze whether product market advertising has a spillover effect on stock price synchronicity by transmitting firm-specific information to the capital market and attracting more investor attention. Using a sample of Chinese listed firms from 2009 to 2017, we find that firms with greater advertising expenditures have lower stock price synchronicity. The results are robust after we address endogeneity concerns. In accord with our hypothesis that product market advertising increases the amount of firm-level information capitalized into stock prices through the information channel, we find that the impact of advertising on synchronicity is more pronounced for firms with a higher degree of information asymmetry and firms in the consumer-product industry. Further tests show that product market advertising enhances the ability of current period returns to reflect future earnings, and thus rules out that the negative relationship between advertising and synchronicity is driven by noise trading. Our results imply that product market advertising plays an informative role and improves information efficiency in a capital market.