The determinants of store brand market share – a temporal and cross-sectional analysis

International Journal of Market Research Vol. 51 Issue 4

501© 2009 The Market Research Society

DOI: 10.2501/S1470785309200700

The determinants of store brand market shareA temporal and cross-sectional analysis

Natalia Rubio and María Jesús YagüeUniversidad Autónoma de Madrid

This. research. proposes. a. fixed. effects. panel. data. model. to. study. store. brand.market. share .. The. analysis. is. performed. on. the. Spanish. consumer. products.market. for. almost. all. Nielsen. categories,. with. information. about. store. brands.from. 1996. to. 2000 .. The. results. of. this. research. show. both. determinant.variables.of. the.evolution.of. store.brand.market. share.at. temporal. level. (retail.stock. turnover. for. a. category,. manufacturer. and. retailer. concentration,. price.differential.and.economic.risk,.among.others).and.determinant.variables.of.cross-sectional.differences.in.store.brand.market.share.(price.elasticity.of.demand.and.manufacturer.brand.differentiation,.and. so.on) ..They. reveal. the. importance.of.considering.time.in.the.analysis.of.the.effect.of.price.differential.and.economic.risk.on.the.store.brand.market.share ..Important.implications.for.manufacturers.and.retailers.in.the.management.of.their.brands.are.stated .

Introduction

The. specialised. literature. has. shown. particular. interest. in. store. brand.market. share,. examining. how. it. is. influenced. by. certain. characteristics.of. product. categories. (Sethuraman. &. Cole. 1997),. and. by. strategic. and.structural. variables. (Hoch. &. Banerji. 1993;. Raju. et al .. 1995a;. Dhar. &.Hoch.1997;.Putsis.&.Cotterill.1999;.Cotterill.et al ..2000,.among.others) ..In.spite.of.the.large.quantity.of.research.that.proposes.alternative.models.for. explaining. the. market. share. of. these. brands,. almost. all. the. studies.approach. the. problem. by. performing. cross-sectional. analyses .. Authors.such. as. Raju. et al .. (1995a). warn. of. the. risks. of. the. broad,. generalised.application. of. such. studies,. which. have. occasionally. led. to. unexpected.

Received.(in.revised.form):.1.October.2007

IJMR_51(4).indb 501 08/06/2009 17:59:45

The determinants of store brand market share

502

results,. such. as. the. negative. influence. of. the. price. differential. between.manufacturer.and.store.brands.on.the.market.share.of.the.latter.(Raju.&.Dhar. 1991;. Sethuraman. 1992;. Mills. 1995) .. Raju et al .. (1995a). suggest.that. these. limitations. may. be. overcome. by. framing. the. analysis. in. a.longitudinal.approach .

In. this. research. we. use. a. comprehensive. model. to. consider. cross-sectional.(50.product.categories).and.time.effects.(five.years).in.studying.store.brand.market.share ..The.main.aim.of.this.research.is.to.understand.the. inter-category. differences. and. intra-category. evolution. of. the. store.brand.market.share.in.a.European.country.during.the.consolidation.period.of.these.brands ..More.specifically,.the.empirical.analysis.of.this.research.refers. to. the.Spanish.market.of.mass.consumer.products. from.the.years.1996.to.2000 .

We. develop. a. theoretical. model. using. the. main. determinants. of. the.demand. for. store. brands. (competitive. strategy,. market. structure. and.performance.determinants) ..We.then.formulate.an.empirical.model.based.on. the. theoretical. model. and. estimate. it. using. the. panel. methodology ..This.methodology.enables.us. to.understand.the. time.and.cross-sectional.differences. in. the. study.of. store.brands ..We.prove. the.positive.expected.relationship. for. the. effect. of. the. price. differential. on. the. store. brand.market. share. when. longitudinal. effects. are. considered. in. the. modelling.of.store.brand.market.share ..The.results.obtained.in.this.research.reveal.significant.managerial.implications.that.are.finally.stated .

Literature review

The. studies. performed. in. the. area. of. store. brands. have. traditionally.considered. a. set. of. determinant. variables. affecting. the. market. share.of. these. brands:. variables. of. competitive. strategy. related. to. price. and.differentiation;. variables. of. market. structure. such. as. market. growth,.manufacturer. structure. and. retailer. structure;. variables. related. to. basic.market. conditions;. and. a. final. group. of. variables. that. incorporates. the.effect.of.the.retailer’s.economic-financial.results.for.the.product.category ..Figure. 1. graphically. represents. the. theoretical. explanatory. variables.whose.effect.on.store.brand.market.share.is.analysed.in.this.research ..The.arguments.supporting.the.effects.of.each.of.the.determinant.variables.on.store.brand.market.share.are.presented.below .

First, competitive. strategy. influences. the. store. brand. market. share.through.the.actions.of.manufacturers.and.distributors.on.price.and.through.differentiation.of.the.brands.that.compete.in.each.product.category .

IJMR_51(4).indb 502 08/06/2009 17:59:45


503

Connor.and.Peterson.(1992),.Raju et al ..(1995a),.Dhar.and.Hoch.(1997).and.Cotterill.et al ..(2000).observe.that.higher.price.differentials.between.both. brands. represent. an. incentive. for. consumers. to. purchase. store.brands .. Nevertheless,. the. magnitude. of. the. price. differential. needed. to.increase.the.store.brand.market.share.depends.on.the.cross-price.elasticity.between.the.brands.of.a.category ..The.price.differential.can.thus.be. less.when.the.cross-price.elasticity.between.manufacturer.brands.is.lower.and.when.the.cross-price.elasticity.between.the.manufacturer.and.store.brands.in.a.product.category.is.higher.(Raju et al ..1995b) .

Moreover,. manufacturers. and. distributors. can. influence. store. brand.market. share. through. their. respective. differentiation. policies .. Hoch.and. Banerji. (1993). find. that. the. advertising. investment. allocated. to.manufacturer. brands. creates. considerable. barriers. that. make. it. difficult.for.store.brands.to.grow ..Research.by.Putsis.and.Cotterill.(1999),.Cotterill.

Figure 1 Determinant variables of store brand market share

Store brandmarket share

Source: Own preparation from Hoch and Banerji (1993), Dhar and Hoch (1997), Sethuraman and Cole (1997), Raju et al. (1995a,b), Putsis (1997), Putsis and Cotterill (1999) and Cotterill et al. (2000)

Market structure

Market growth (+) Manufacturer structure– Manufacturer brand concentration (–)– Competitive rivalry among the most

concentrated manufacturer brands (–)

Retailer structure– Retailer concentration (+)– Competitive rivalry among the most

concentrated retailers (+)

Economic-financial results

Retail profit margin for the product category (+)Retail stock turnover for the product category (+)

Basic market conditions

Perceived risk associated with the product category– Economic risk (–)

Price elasticity of demand in the product category– Direct price elasticity of demand (+)

Competitive strategy

Price– Price differential between manufacturer brands

and store brands (+)

Differentiation– Advertising of manufacturer brands (–)

IJMR_51(4).indb 503 08/06/2009 17:59:46


504

et al ..(2000).and.Scott-Morton.and.Zettelmeyer.(2004).also.demonstrates.the.negative.effect.of.the.advertising.expenditure.allocated.to.manufacturer.brands.on.store.brand.market.share .

A.second.group.of.variables. that.affects.store.brand.market.share.are.those.related.to.market.structure ..Next,.we.analyse.the.effects.of.market.growth,.manufacturer.structure.and.retailer.structure .

Growing.markets.are.characterised.by.high.marketing.costs,.considerable.investment,. low.and.even.negative.cash.flows,.and.growing.productivity.and. demand. (Szymanski et al .. 1993) ..Traditionally,.manufacturers. have.intensified.the.presence.of.their.brands.in.growing.markets ..Nevertheless,.store.brands.have.established.themselves.in.mature.markets,.in.proven.and.high-demand.categories,.capitalising.on.the.effort.made.by.manufacturers.with.their.brands.(Quelch.&.Harding.1996) .

The. manufacturer. structure. and. the. retailer. structure. comprise. the.analyses.of.(1).the.effect.of.concentration.levels.and.(2).the.effect.of.the.competitive.rivalry.among.the.most.concentrated.manufacturer.brands.or.retailers .

Retail. concentration. gives. retailers. higher. negotiating. power. in. the.channel,. greater. market. power,. and. allows. them. to. enjoy. economies.of. scale. and. scope .. The. combination. of. these. three. aspects. favours. the.store. brand. market. share. (Dhar. &. Hoch. 1997;. Putsis. 1997;. Putsis. &.Cotterill. 1999;. Cotterill. et al .. 2000) .. Likewise,. rivalry. among. the. most.concentrated.retailers.positively.affects.store.brand.market.share.through.the. application. of. more. competitive. prices. for. the. store. brands. and.through.the.improvement.of.the.overall.quality.of.these.brands.(Dhar.&.Hoch.1997;.Corstjens.&.Lal.2000) .

Similar.arguments.about.negotiating.power,.market.power,.and.economies.of.scale.and.scope.indicate.that.manufacturer.brand.concentration.has.a.negative. impact. on. store. brand. market. share .. As. to. the. rivalry. among.top.manufacturer.brands.in.a.product.category,.the.specialised.literature.reveals. a. negative. effect. on. store. brand. market. share .. Simmons. and.Meredith. (1983). and. McMaster. (1987). notice. that. the. growth. of. store.brands. is. greater. in. categories. where. there. is. no. strong. leader,. causing.various.manufacturer.brands.to.compete.for.the.leading.position .

Price.elasticity.of.demand.in.a.product.category.and.the.perceived.risk.of. the.purchase. constitute. a. third. group.of. variables,. classified. as. basic.market. variables. due. to. their. relative. structural. stability,. that. affect. the.store.brand.market.share .

Products.with.a.store.brand.have.traditionally.been.perceived.as.having.a. lower. quality. and. price. when. compared. with. manufacturer. brand.

IJMR_51(4).indb 504 08/06/2009 17:59:46


505

products ..Therefore,. in.the.specialised.literature,.Hoch.(1996).and.Dhar.and. Hoch. (1997). argue. that. these. products. are. primarily. purchased. by.more.price-sensitive.consumers,.and.that.a.store.brand.achieves.a.higher.market. share. in. categories. in. which. there. is. greater. price. elasticity. of.demand .

The.effectiveness.of.the.marketing.strategy.on.store.brand.market.share.is.conditioned,.to.a.large.extent,.by.the.risk.perceived.by.consumers.in.the.purchase.of.the.products.that.comprise.a.certain.category.(Sethuraman.&.Cole.1997) ..Studies.by.Mills.(1995).and.Narasimhan.and.Wilcox.(1998).determine.that,.given.the.same.price.for.manufacturer.and.store.brands,.the.consumer.always.chooses.the.manufacturer.brand .

A. last. group. of. variables. with. influence. on. the. store. brand. market.share. is. related. to. variables. of. economic-financial. results .. In. particular,.we. consider. the. effect. of. the. retailer’s. profit.margin. and. retailer’s. stock.turnover.for.a.category ..Profit.expectations.act.on.distributor.willingness.to.invest.in.store.brands.and.thus.affect.the.market.share.of.these.brands.(Hoch. &. Banerji. 1993) .. Retailers. must. bear. the. stock. and. marketing.expenses. for. their. own. brands. (Hoch. 1996) .. In. categories. with. low.return.on.investment.and/or.low.stock.turnover,.distributors.invest.lower.marketing.effort.in.their.brands,.which.hurts.their.market.share.even.when.the.quality.level.of.the.store.brands.in.these.categories.is.high .

The model

This. research. presents. a. comprehensive. analysis. of. store. brand. market.share.by.incorporating.both.cross-sectional.effects.and.time.effects .

The.analysis.is.made.in.the.Spanish.consumer.products.market,.specifically.for.50.Nielsen.product.categories.belonging.to.the.food,.personal.hygiene.and.household.cleaning.sectors,.for.a.five-year.period.from.1996.to.2000 ..The.first.year.of.the.analysis. is.1996,.when.ACNielsen.began.to.provide.retail. data. obtained. by. scanner. technology .. The. 50. product. categories.analysed. include. almost. all. the. categories. for. which. Nielsen. provides.information.about.store.brands.from.1996.to.2000 ..From.2000.onwards,.ACNielsen. expanded. its. base. of. analysis. due. to. the. great. acceptance. of.store.brands.by.consumers,.and.the.interest.in.these.brands.on.the.part.of.manufacturers.and.retailers.in.the.Spanish.consumer.products.market .

Store.brand.market. share.and. the.variables. likely. to. influence. it.have.been.measured.using.secondary.information ..Table.1.describes.and.details.the.measurement.of.each.of.these.indicators ..The.Eviews.5 .0.and.SPSS.13 .0.computer.programs.were.the.analysis.techniques.used .

IJMR_51(4).indb 505 08/06/2009 17:59:46


506

Table 1 Measurement of the variables used in the analysis

Variable Measurement Source*

Store brand market share (SBMS)

Average volume market share for store brands, in the ith category, jth year (LSBMS –natural logarithm–).

ACNielsen

Price differential (PDIF)

Average price differential between manufacturer brands and store brands over the manufacturer brand price, in the ith category, jth year.

ACNielsen

Advertising of manufacturer brands (ADVERT)

Average advertising effort for the manufacturer brands in the ith category, based on the information provided by the source for the year 1996 and the year 2000, relative to the total advertising expenditures for all manufacturer brands in the ith category in relation to total advertising expenditures for all manufacturer brands in the consumer goods market.

InfoAdex

Market growth (MKGROWTH)

Inter-annual growth rate of the sales volume, in the ith category, jth year. ACNielsen

Manufacturer brand concentration (CR3MB)

Aggregate volume market share for the top three manufacturer brands, in the ith category, jth year (LCR3MB –natural logarithm–).

ACNielsen

Competitive rivalry among manufacturer brands (DPCR3MB)

Dispersion (Pearson’s coefficient of variation) of the average volume market shares for the top three manufacturer brands, in the ith category, jth year (inverse indicator of the competitive rivalry). When this variable is used to explain the fixed effects of the panel model, average values by product category from 1996 to 2000 are considered.

ACNielsen

Retailer concentration (CR4RET)

Aggregate volume market share for the top four grocery retailers, in the jth year (LCR4RET –natural logarithm–).

Alimarket

Competitive rivalry among retailers (DPSALES)

Dispersion of the average volume market shares by the retail formats that market store brands, in the ith category, jth year (inverse indicator of the competitive rivalry). When this variable is used to explain the fixed effects of the panel model, average values by product category from 1996 to 2000 are considered.

ACNielsen

Price elasticity of demand (ELST)

Average variation of the volume sales in the ith category when the prices are modified. The indicator used is based on the average volume sales of the ith category in the jth year achieved by each of the commercial formats that market it, and the average price of the ith category in the jth year in each of these commercial formats. The years 1996 to 2000 are considered.

ACNielsen

Economic risk (ECORISK)

Average purchase price in the ith category, jth year (LECORISK –natural logarithm–).

ACNielsen

Retail profit margin (RPM)

Average retail profit margin over sales in the ith category, jth year (the source includes all major retailers in the consumer product market) (LRPM –natural logarithm–).

CABSA

Retail stock turnover (RST)

Average retail stock turnover in the ith category, jth year (the source includes all major retailers in the consumer product market) (LRST –natural logarithm–).

CABSA

* In general, ACNielsen is used. However, InfoAdex is used for the differentiation of manufacturer brands, Alimarket for the retailer concentration, and Cabsa for the variables of retail profit margin and retail stock turnover of the category. InfoAdex carries out the control and analysis of advertising in Spain. Its study InfoAdex presents complete annual information on the real investment by media, sectors, advertisers and brands. More information at: www.infoadex.es. Publicaciones Alimarket, SA is a firm that specialises in economic and market information on the sectors and firms in Spain. Its publication, Alimarket Revista, publishes an annual monograph on commercial distribution in the consumer goods sector (food, beverages and non-food). More information at: www.alimarket.es. Cabsa (Central de Análisis de Balances, SA) is pioneering the economic-financial analysis of firms in Spain. It has a database comprising more than 160,000 Spanish companies in 102 economic sectors. Its sector databases are widely accepted in the Spanish market, since they provide economic-financial information for all companies in a large number of sectors. More information at: www.cabsa.es.

IJMR_51(4).indb 506 08/06/2009 17:59:46


507

We.use.panel.methodology.for.estimating.store.brand.market.share ..Panel.data.models.take.into.account.the.cross-sectional.and.time.variability.of.the.information.analysed.for.estimating.the.parameters ..Two.data.models.are.typically.used:.the.fixed.effects.panel.data.model.(equation.1).and.the.random.effects.panel.data.model.(equation.2):

•. fixed.effects.model:.yit.=.ηi.+.βxit.+.υit. (1)•. random.effects.model:.yit.=.α.+.βxit.+.(ηi.+.it). (2)

where:

i.=.1.….n,.identifies.the.cross-sectionst.=.1.….t,.identifies.the.time.sectionsη.=.cross-sectional.heterogeneityυ.=.random.disturbance .

The.difference.between.one.model.and.the.other.lies.in.the.relation.between.the.cross-sectional.heterogeneity.(ηi).and.the.random.disturbance.(υit) ..In.a.fixed.effects.panel.model,.heterogeneity.is.considered.fixed.or.determining,.while.in.a.random.effects.panel.heterogeneity.is.defined.as.the.composition.of.a.common.fixed.part.plus.a.specific.random.one.for.each.individual .

The. decision. to. use. one. model. or. the. other. must. be. based. on. the.character. of. the. phenomenon. studied;. it. cannot. be. based. solely. on. the.use.of.a.statistical.contrast ..However,.the.most.frequently.used.statistical.contrast.in.this.area.is.the.Hausman.Test,.and.its.application.is.found.to.be.relevant.for.making.the.decision.when.there.is.no.certainty.about.the.relationship.between.xit.and.ηi ..The.null.hypothesis.of.the.Hausman.Test.is.the.absence.of.correlation.between.xit.and.ηi ..Under.this.assumption,.the.estimator.of.random.effects.(βRE).is.consistent,.as.is.the.estimator.of.fixed.effects.(βFE).(although.somewhat.less.efficient),.such.that.the.similarity.is.significant ..There.is.no.difference.between.the.two.estimators,.and.random.effects.are.used .

In.this.research,.fixed.effects.panel.data.models.are.used ..The.decision.to.apply.a.fixed.effects.panel.data.model.rather.than.a.random.effects.model.is. guided. fundamentally. by. economic. arguments. that. prove. that. each.category.has.its.own,.and.not.random,.characteristics.that.differentiate.it.from.other.categories,.and.that.affect.the.level.of.the.store.brand.market.share. in. that. category ..The.decision. to.adopt. this.kind.of.model. is. also.supported. by. the. Hausman. Test. applied. to. the. panel. model. proposed.in. this. research. (chi. square. ×. 10–14:. 61 .03;. p-value:. 5 .58. ×. 10–14). and.

IJMR_51(4).indb 507 08/06/2009 17:59:46


508

shows. clearly. that. the. random. effects. estimators. are. not. consistent. and.recommends.the.use.of.fixed.effects .

Specifically,. the. fixed. effects.panel.model.proposed. for. explaining. the.store.brand.market.share.mathematically.adopts.the.expression.in.equation.4. and. is. estimated. by. its. logarithmic. formulation. (equation. 5) .. A. non-linear.formulation,.commonly.used.in.estimations.of.demand.functions,.is.adopted ..Non-linear.formulation.is.consistent.with.the.results.obtained.in.the.specialised.literature.on.the.effect.of.the.main.variables,.especially.those.that.consider.the.effect.of.price.on.store.brand.market.share ..Research.by.Raju.et al .. (1995b),. for.example,. finds.that.the.effective.magnitude.of.a.price.differential.for.increasing.store.brand.market.share.can.be.less,.to.the.extent.that.the.cross-price.elasticity.between.manufacturer.brands.is.lower.and. to. the. extent. that. the. cross-price. elasticity. between. manufacturer.brands.and.store.brands.in.a.product.category.is.higher ..In.such.cases,.the.store.brand.market.share.is.higher ..And.the.greater.the.store.brand.market.share,.the.lower.the.effect.of.price.differentials,.meaning.that.the.sensitivity.to.price.differentials.increases.as.store.brand.market.share.decreases .

SBMSit.=. .Ai.×.eβ1PDIFit.+.β2MKGROWTHit.×.CR3MBitβ3.×.CR4RETt

β4..×.ECORISKit

β5.×.RSTitβ6.+.εit. (4)

LSBMSit.=. .ηi.+.β1PDIFit.+.β2MKGROWTHit.+.β3LCR3MBit..+.β4LCR4RETt.+.β5LECORISKit.+.β6LRSTit.+.υit. (5)

where:

i.=.product.categoryt.=.year .

As. explanatory. variables,. the. expression. includes. those. that. have. time.variation. or. time. and. cross-sectional. variation .. For. the. variable. of.differentiation. (ADVERT). and. price. elasticity. (ELST). only. a. cross-sectional.indicator.is.available.for.the.set.of.years.considered ..Therefore,.these.variables.are.used.to.explain.the.fixed.effects.of.the.panel.–.in.other.words,.the.inter-category.differences.in.the.store.brand.market.share .

On.the.other.hand,.due.to.problems.of.multicolinearity.between.the.retail.profit.margin.(RPM).of.the.category.and.retail.concentration.(CR4RET),.we.cannot.consider.these.two.variables.together ..The.panel.model.revealed.more. explanatory. capacity. for. the. retail. concentration .. Likewise,. due.to. problems. of. multicolinearity,. the. two. variables. used. to. measure. the.manufacturer. structure. and. the. retailer. structure. (concentration. and.

IJMR_51(4).indb 508 08/06/2009 17:59:46


509

competitive. rivalry. among. the. most. concentrated. brands). were. not.introduced. together. in. the. panel. model. for. either. manufacturer. brands.or.retailers ..The.panel.model.showed.more.explanatory.capacity.for.the.concentration. measures. (manufacturer. brand. concentration. –CR3MB–.and.retail.concentration.–CR4RET–) .

Empirical results

The.results.obtained.for.the.empirical.model.of.store.brand.market.share.are.presented.in.two.sections ..The.first.presents.the.results.of.the.proposed.panel. model,. with. the. estimators. of. the. parameters. and. of. the. fixed.effects ..The.estimations.of.the.parameters.provide.information.about.the.time.effects.of. the.explanatory.variables.on.store.brand.market.share.at.an.intra-category.level,.while.the.fixed.effects.refer.to.the.cross-sectional.differences .. The. second. section. analyses. the. fixed. effects,. using. the. fit.of. a. multiple. regression. model .. It. presents. the. results. obtained. for. the.variables.that.were.statistically.significant.in.explaining.the.inter-category.differences.in.the.store.brand.market.share .

Intra-category results

Table.2. shows. the. results. from. the. estimation.of. the. fixed. effects.panel.model. finally. selected. to. explain. the. store. brand. market. share .. The.estimation.is.made.by.pooled.least.squares .

The.model.shows.a.high.explanatory.capacity.with.an.adjusted.R2.=.0 .957.and.F.=.101 .984 ..Analysis.of.the.signs.and.magnitudes.for.the.regressors.reveals. issues. of. considerable. interest. to. store. brand. management .. As.regards.the.effect.of.the.price.differential.between.manufacturer.and.store.brands,. the.results.clearly. show.that.an. increase. in. the.price.differential.between.manufacturer.and.store.brands.provides.an.incentive.to.purchase.the.store.brands.of.a.category.over.time .

The. results. obtained. support. the. arguments. for. the. unsuitability. of. a.cross-sectional.analysis.as.the.only.focus.in.studying.store.brand.market.share .. The. panel. methodology. avoids. the. unexpected. negative. sign. of.cross-sectional.analysis.for.the.effect.of.the.price.differential.on.the.store.brand.market.share.(Raju.&.Dhar.1991;.Sethuraman.1992;.Mills.1995),.because.it.controls.the.inter-category.component.of.the.effect.by.including.the.fixed.effects.of.the.category .

In.order.to.provide.additional.evidence.that.supports.the.unsuitability.of. cross-sectional. analyses. in. studying. the. effect. of. price. differential. on.

IJMR_51(4).indb 509 08/06/2009 17:59:46


510

Table 2 Results of the estimation of the store brand market share in the fixed effects panel model

Dependent variable: LSBMSMethod: Pooled least squaresSample: 1996–2000Total panel (balance) observations: 250

Explanatory variable Coefficient

Price differential (PDIF) 0.009** (6.295)Market growth (MKGROWTH) –0.002* (–2.118)Manufacturer brand concentration (LCR3MB) –0.587** (–4.310)Retailer concentration (LCR4RET) 0.454** (6.139)Economic risk (LECORISK) 0.367** (2.800)Retail stock turnover (LRST) 1.175** (4.336)

Adjusted R-squared 0.957SE of regression 0.108F-statistic 101.984**Mean dependent variable 3.050SD dependent variable 0.520Sum squared residual 2.247Durbin–Watson stat 1.843

Coefficient statistically significant at **1% and *5%; t-ratios in parentheses. SE = standard error; SD = standard deviation

Product category Fixed effects (FE) Product category Fixed effects (FE)

Air fresheners –5.144** (–3.211)Aluminium foil –3.970* (–2.496)Automatic dishwasher detergents –4.767** (–2.786)Bath gel –5.376** (–3.407)Bleach –4.277** (–2.798)Chocolate bars –4.869* (–2.962)Cocoa spreads –4.369** (–2.644)Corn –4.090* (–2.513)Dehydrated soups 5.271** (–3.159)Deodorant –6.083** (–4.058)Detergents –5.431** (–3.318)Domestic gloves –3.784* (–2.438)Domestic napkins –3.819* (–2.429)Dust pads and wipes –4.595** (–2.863)Feminine hygiene products –4.977** (–3.035)Floor cleaner –4.221** (–2.706)Floor cleaner refills –4.581** (–2.908)Hand dishwashing detergents –4.741** (–2.968)Insecticides –4.797 (–3.026)Instant coffee –4.809** (–2.806)Juice –4.771** (–2.917)Legumes –4.340** (–2.789)Margarine –4.891** (–2.981)‘Maria’ cookies –5.154** (–3.173)Marmalade –4.620** (–2.832)

Mayonnaise –4.780** (–2.957)Milk –5.326** (–3.202)Mineral water –5.755** (–3.653)Mussels –4.760** (–2.932)Nappies –5.571** (–3.136)Natural tomato sauce –3.972** (–2.530)Olive oil –5.061** (–2.950)Packaged pineapple –4.782** (–3.070)Packaged rice –4.497** (–2.804)Paper towels –3.969* (–2.475)Pastas –4.301 (–2.687)Prepared dishes –4.819** (–2.832)Preserved asparagus –4.833** (–3.016)Roasted coffee –4.960** (–2.973)Scouring pads –4.538** (–2.911)Shampoo –6.051** (–3.830)Sliced bread –4.397** (–2.655)Softeners –4.411** (–2.725)Spirits –5.621** (–3.289)Tissues –3.951* (–2.474)Toilet paper –4.227** (–2.607)Toothpaste –5.596** (–3.406)Tuna –4.914** (–2.944)Whisky –6.232** (–3.578)Yoghurt –5.239** (–3.065)Pearson’s correlation FE–SBMS 0.691**

Coefficient statistically significant at **1% and *5%; t-ratios in parentheses.

IJMR_51(4).indb 510 08/06/2009 17:59:46


511

store.brand.market.share,.we.perform.correlation.analyses.between.price.differential.and.store.brand.market.share,.year.to.year.(Table.3) ..We.can.see.a.negative.and.significant.sign.systematically.for.all.years.of.the.period.analysed .. This. finding. suggests. that. the. economic. basis. for. a. positive.relationship. between. the. price. differential. and. the. store. brand. market.share.is.found.in.intra-category.competition.analysis .

The. variables. of. market. structure. and. of. economic-financial. results.have. the. expected. signs .. For. the. market. structure. variables,. a. negative.and. significant. relationship. is. observed. between. the. growth. rate. of. a.market. and. the. store. brand. market. share .. The. negative. sign. obtained.in. the. intra-category.analysis.of. the.panel.model.provides. evidence. that.market. growth. is. linked. to. the.development.of.manufacturer.brands .. It.is.also.clearly.shown.that.store.brand.market.share. increases.with.retail.concentration.levels.and.decreases.with.manufacturer.brand.concentration.levels ..The.results.obtained.indicate.that.the.progressive.increase.of.retail.concentration.gives.sufficient.negotiating.power.to.distributors.to.favour.their. store. brands. (Marion. 1979;. Cotterill. 1986;. Cotterill. et al .. 2000) ..However,.an.increase.in.the.market.power.of.manufacturer.brands.offsets.the. growing. negotiating. power. of. distributors. and. slows. the. growth. of.store.brands,.as.pointed.out.by.Cotterill.and.Haller.(1996),.Putsis.(1997).and.Cotterill et al ..(2000) .

A. positive. and. significant. relationship. can. be. noted. between. the.economic-financial.results.–.specifically.the.retailer’s.stock.turnover.for.the.category.–.and.store.brand.market.share,.such.that,.as.the.stock.turnover.of.a.category.increases,.distributors.are.more.willing.to.invest.in.the.store.brand. of. that. category,. ultimately. improving. the. market. share. of. this.brand.(Hoch.&.Banerji.1993) .

As.to.basic.market.conditions,.the.results.reveal.that.an.increase.in.the.average.purchase.price.of. the.product.category.(used.as. indicator.of. the.economic.risk.perceived.by.the.consumer).contributes.to.shifting.demand.from.manufacturer.towards.store.brands ..We.use.the.concept.of.economic.risk. to. analyse. the. influence. of. some. relevant. variables. on. store. brand.

Table 3 Correlation analysis between store brand market share and the price differential between manufacturer and store brands (1996–2000)

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pearson’s correlation –0.327* –0.352** –0.484** –0.398** –0.419**

Coefficient statistically significant at **1% and *5%.

IJMR_51(4).indb 511 08/06/2009 17:59:46


512

market.share,.but.we.do.not.measure.economic.risk.directly ..We.use.the.average.purchase.price.of.the.product.category.–.the.greater.the.average.price.of.the.product.category,.the.greater.the.economic.risk.perceived.by.consumers.(Grewal.et al ..1994;.Sethuraman.&.Cole.1997) ..Therefore,.the.economic. risk. is. considered. a. variable. of. basic. market. condition. in. the.theoretical.model.because.it.is.an.aspect.with.relative.structural.stability;.nevertheless.the.measure.used.can.change.in.the.short.term .

The.sign.of.the.intra-category.effect.of.economic.risk.for.the.consumer.differs.from.the.sign.of.the.inter-category.effect.obtained.by.cross-sectional.correlation.analysis.(Table.4) ..The.inter-category.analysis.shows.a.negative.and. significant. relationship. between. economic. risk. and. store. brand.market.share,.confirming.the.effect.verified.in.previous.studies ..However,.the.positive.sign.obtained.in.the.panel.modelling.suggests. the.possibility.of. a. lack. of. control. in. the. cross-sectional. analyses. of. other. risk. factors.inherent. to. the. category,. which. could. distort. the. relationship. detected ..A. univariate. analysis. for. this. variable. revealed. that. the. categories. with.the. greatest. economic. risk. included. nappies,. whisky,. spirits,. dishwasher.detergent,.hand.dishwashing.detergents,. insecticides,.milk,. instant.coffee.and. prepared. dishes .. These. categories. are. also. characterised. by. one. or.more.of.the.following.aspects:.a.greater.functional.or.social.risk,.greater.advertising. effort,. or. manufacturer. brands. with. considerable. market.power .

The. intra-category. analysis. over. time. gives. evidence. for. a. positive.and. significant. relationship. between. the. variables. of. economic. risk. and.store. brand. market. share,. such. that,. as. the. average. price. per. purchase.in.a.category.increases,.consumers.have.greater.incentive.to.change.their.purchase.decision.in.favour.of.the.store.brand .

Inter-category results

The. fixed. effects. obtained. in. the. panel. modelling. represent. the. cross-sectional.heterogeneity. in. the.store.brand.market.share ..Each.sector.has.

Table 4 Correlation analysis between store brand market share and the economic risk of a category (1996–2000)

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Pearson’s correlation –0.283* –0.278* –0.280* –0.301* –0.297*

Coefficient statistically significant at *5%.

IJMR_51(4).indb 512 08/06/2009 17:59:46


513

characteristics.that.differentiate.it.from.the.rest.and.that.affect.the.market.share.obtained.by.a.store.brand.in.a.product.category ..This.section.presents.the.results.of.the.analysis.of.the.fixed.effects.of.the.panel.by.applying.the.multiple.regression.technique .

Table.5. contains. the. results.of. the. estimation.of. the. regression.model.finally. selected .. All. the. coefficients. show. the. correct. sign. and. are.statistically.significant.for.explaining.the.fixed.effects,.with.a.confidence.level.of.at.least.99% .

The.set.of.variables.considered.explains.48 .7%.of. the.variance.of. the.fixed. effects .. The. explanatory. capacity. of. the. model. can. be. considered.acceptable. according. to. the. values. reached. by. Snedecor’s. F. statistic,.significant.at.1% .

To. explain. the. estimated. differences. in. the. store. brand. market. share.among. categories,. a. detailed. analysis. of. the. sign. and. magnitude. of. the.parameters.proves.the.significant.influence.of.(1).the.competitive.strategy.variables. related. to. actions. by. manufacturers. on. differentiation. of. their.products,.(2).the.competitive.rivalry.at.a.manufacturer.and.a.retailer.level,.and.(3).the.price.elasticity.of.the.category ..Store.brands.achieve.a.higher.market. share. in.product. categories.with.high.price. elasticity.of.demand.and.more.intense.competition.among.the.retail.formats.that.market.these.brands .. Conversely,. store. brands. reach. lower. market. shares. in. product.categories. in. which. manufacturer. brands. have. high. differentiation. and.in.which.there.is.greater.competitive.rivalry.among.the.leading.brands.of.these.agents .

Table 5 Explanatory variables of the inter-category differences in the store brand market share

Explanatory variable Coefficient β t-student

Constant –4.308** –21.143Competitive rivalry among retailers (DPSALES) –0.094** –4.498Competitive rivalry among manufacturer brands (DPCR3MB) 0.476** 2.957Advertising of manufacturer brands (ADVERT) –0.114** –3.787Price elasticity of demand (ELST) –0.066** –2.913

Adjusted R-squared 0.487 F-Snedecor 12.628 Sig. 0.000

**Coefficient statistically significant at 1%.

IJMR_51(4).indb 513 08/06/2009 17:59:46


514

Conclusion

The. proposed. model. integrates. a. cross-sectional. and. time. analysis. to.explain. store. brand. market. share .. It. enables. verification. of. almost. all.the.relationships.previously.described. in. the.specialised. literature.on. the.topic ..The. coefficients.obtained. for. the. explanatory.variables.are.highly.significant. and. the. goodness. of. fit. acceptable .. It. can. thus. be. concluded.that.the.proposed.model.constitutes.a.good.analytical.framework.for.the.study.of.the.magnitude.and.evolution.of.store.brand.market.share.in.mass.consumer.products .

At. time. level,. we. observe. the. significant. influence. of. the. retailer’s.economic-financial. results. for. the. product. category. (specifically. for.the. stock. turnover),. of. competitive. strategy. (particularly. for. the. price.differential.between.manufacturer.and.store.brands),.of.market.structure.(especially. for. retailer. concentration,. manufacturer. brand. concentration.and.market.growth.rate).and.of.economic.risk .

As.to.the.heterogeneity.of.store.brand.market.shares.among.categories,.the. price. elasticity. of. the. category,. competitive. rivalry. at. a. retailer.and. manufacturer. level,. and. brand. differentiation. are. found. to. be. the.explanatory.variables .

Managerial implications

The. retailers’. investments. in. a. store. brand. contribute. positively. to. the.growth.of.store.brand.market.share.in.a.product.category ..Retailers.can.invest. in. the. store. brands. of. categories. with. high. stock. turnover. levels,.since,.in.such.categories,.the.income.earned.from.these.brands.can.more.easily.compensate.for.the.stock.and.marketing.costs.that.distributors.incur.for.them .

In. addition,. the. application. of. wider. price. differentials. between.manufacturer. and. store. brands. or. an. increase. in. the. average. price. of.a. category,. act. as. incentives. for. the. purchase. of. store. brands .. In. mass.consumer. products,. intrinsic. attributes. have. considerable. weight. in. the.purchase.choice.(Olson.&.Jacoby.1972;.Etgar.&.Malhotra.1978;.Darden.&. Schwinghammer. 1985) .. The. production. processes. also. tend. to. be.technologically.simple,.and.there.are.no.significant.objective.differences.of.quality.among.brands.(Hoch.&.Banerji.1993) ..In.these.product.categories,.price.thus.constitutes.an.important.incentive.in.the.purchase.choice .

Furthermore,.the.evolution.of.store.brands.is.stronger.where.the.retail.concentration.is.higher.and.the.manufacturer.brand.concentration.lower ..

IJMR_51(4).indb 514 08/06/2009 17:59:46


515

Retail.concentration.gives.the.distributor.greater.negotiating.power.and.the.possibility.of.benefiting.from.economies.of.scale.and.scope ..Distributors.can.take.advantage.of.their.negotiating.power.to.obtain.lower.list.prices.when.purchasing.the.brands.in.which.they.deal.(Chintagunta.et al..2002;.Steiner.2004) ..They.can.also.obtain.better.manufacturing.agreements.for.their.store.brands,. including.the.specification.of.certain.quality. levels.or.the.incorporation.of.the.latest.innovations.or.assortment.variety.(Burt.&.Sparks.2003) ..Moreover,.a.high. retail. concentration.allows. these.agents.to. benefit. from. economies. of. communication. for. store. brands .. Because.these.brands.are.the.only.ones.repeated.throughout.all.the.establishments.belonging.to.the.same.chain,.they.do.not.require.the.advertising.levels.of.manufacturer.brands .

The.progressive.evolution.of.store.brands.in.a.product.category.can.be.curbed.by.manufacturer.brand.concentration ..Progressive.increase.in.the.aggregate.concentration.of.the.leading.manufacturer.brands.in.a.category.means.homogenisation.of. consumer. tastes.and.preferences.around. these.brands,.which.results.in.greater.market.power.(Putsis.1997) ..Under.such.conditions,.a.distributor.is.limited.in.its.ability.to.decrease.the.assortment.of.manufacturer.brands.and.accentuate.the.presence.of.store.brands.in.the.category.due.to.the.existence.of.manufacturer.brands.with.high.value.for.consumers ..Retailers.feel.obliged.to.distribute.certain.manufacturer.brands.in.a.category,.which.gives.their.producers.greater.negotiating.power.in.the.channel.and.the.power.to.increase.the.list.prices.of.their.brands.(Dhar.&.Hoch.1997;.Cotterill et al ..2000) .

On.the.other.hand,.at.an.inter-category.level,.store.brands.work.better.in.elastic.categories ..Store.brands.have.traditionally.been.positioned.with.low. costs. and. prices,. comparatively. lower. than. those. of. manufacturer.brands .. In. categories. with. elastic. demand,. price. is. the. variable. in. the.marketing.mix.with. the.most. influence.on. the. creation.and.distribution.of. demand. among. brands .. Therefore,. in. price-elastic. categories,. where.quality.differences.are.relegated.to.the.background.in.brand.choice,.store.brands.achieve.a.competitive.advantage.over.manufacturer.brands .

The.homogeneity.of.the.market.shares.belonging.to.the.establishments.that.operate.with.store.brands.in.a.product.category.intensifies.competition.in.the.management.of.store.brands.and.favours.the.market.share.of.these.brands .. In. the. current. stage. of. these. brands’. development,. it. is. very.probable. that. an. increase. in. competition. among. the. various. formats. in.which.they.are.marketed.would.cause.the.initiation.of.quality.improvement.programmes.for.these.brands,.which.would.contribute.positively.to.their.growth .

IJMR_51(4).indb 515 08/06/2009 17:59:46


516

This. research. verifies. the. negative. influence. of. the. variables. of. brand.differentiation. and. competitive. rivalry. among. the. leading. manufacturer.brands.on. store.brand.market. share,. such. that. categories.with. a.higher.value.for.both.indicators.have.lower.store.brand.market.share .

The. specialised. literature. emphasises. that. categories. with. low. price.elasticity.of.demand,.low.cross-price.elasticity.between.manufacturer.brands.and. store. brands,. and. high. cross-price. elasticity. between. manufacturer.brands. have. a. poorer. store. brand. market. share .. Low. price. elasticity. of.demand.and.low.cross-price.elasticity.between.manufacturer.brands.and.store. brands. occur. in. categories. with. strong. brand. differentiation. (Lal.&.Narasimhan.1996) ..High. cross-price. elasticity. between.manufacturer.brands. characterises. categories. with. intense. competition. among. these.brands .

Categories.with.strong.brand.differentiation.show.high.loyalty.towards.manufacturer.brands.and.a.high.price.differential.between.manufacturer.and. store. brands,. which. consumers. consider. to. be. justified. due. to. the.differentiation.achieved.by.the.manufacturer.brands.in.these.markets ..In.categories. with. intense. competition. among. manufacturer. brands,. these.agents. try. to.maintain.and. increase. the.market. share.of. their.brands.at.the. cost. of. the. competitor. brands .. These. markets. are. characterised. by.high. innovation. expenses,. high. proliferation. of. products,. considerable.advertising.investments.and.aggressive.price.policies.among.manufacturer.brands ..All.these.factors.harm.store.brand.market.share .

Limitations and further research

This. research. is. not. without. limitations .. The. main. conditioning. factors.come. from. the. restrictions. on. the. information. available .. It. was. not.possible. to. include. in. the.model. important. strategic. variables. related. to.promotional. activity,. variety.of. assortment. in. the.product. category,. and.the.quality.differential.between.manufacturer.and.store.brands ..In.future.research,. it.would.be.advisable. to. expand. the. framework.of. analysis. to.overcome.this.limitation .

It. would. be. especially. interesting. to. (1). include. endogeneity. in. the.price-setting.process.in.the.model,.(2).recognise.the.difference.between.the.premium.store.brands.and.value.store.brands.that.retailers.are.beginning.to.apply.in.order.to.segment.their.potential.customers,.and.(3).incorporate.consumer.variables.pertaining.to.product.knowledge,.purchase.frequency,.attitude.towards.store.brands,.and.the.functional,.social.or.hedonistic.risk.perceived.in.the.category .

IJMR_51(4).indb 516 08/06/2009 17:59:47


517

Finally,. further. research. might. examine. differences. between. markets.over.a.similar.time.period.and.try.to.develop.a.time-based.theory.of.the.dynamic. evolution. of. the. store. brand. market. share. or. a. theory. of. why.differences.among.markets.exist .

Acknowledgements

We.gratefully.acknowledge.support.from.the.Spanish.Ministry.of.Science.and. Education,. through. the. project. SEJ2005-06105/ECON,. ‘Gestión.de. las. promociones. y. de. las. marcas. de. distribuidor. para. un. desarrollo.eficiente.de.la.estrategia.de.marketing.del.minorista’ .

References

Burt,.S .L ..&.Sparks,.L ..(2003).Power.and.competition.in.the.UK.retail.grocery.market ..British Journal of Management,.14,.3,.pp ..237–254 .

Chintagunta,.P .K .,.Bonfrer,.A ..&.Song,.I ..(2002).Investigating.the.effects.of.store.brand.introduction ..Management Science,.48,.10,.pp ..1242–1268 .

Connor,.J .M ..&.Peterson,.E .B ..(1992).Market.structure.determinants.of.national.brand.private.label.price.differences.of.manufactured.food.products ..Journal of Industrial Economics,.40,.2,.pp ..157–171 .

Corstjens,.M ..&.Lal,.R ..(2000).Building.store.loyalty.through.store.brands ..Journal of Marketing Research,.37,.3,.pp ..281–291 .

Cotterill,.R .W ..(1986).Market.power.in.the.retail.food.industry:.evidence.from.Vermont?.Review of Economics and Statistics,.68,.3,.pp ..379–386 .

Cotterill,.R .W ..&.Haller,.L .E ..(1996).Evaluating.traditional.share–price.and.residual.demand.measures.of.market.power.in.the.catsup.industry ..Review of Industrial Organization,.11,.3,.pp ..293–306 .

Cotterill,.R .W .,.Putsis.Jr,.W .P ..&.Dhar,.R ..(2000).Assessing.the.competitive.interaction.between.private.labels.and.national.brands ..Journal of Business,.73,.1,.pp ..109–137 .

Darden,.W .R ..&.Schwinghammer,.J .K .L ..(1985).The.influence.of.social.characteristics.on.perceived.quality.in.patronage.choice.behavior ..In:.J ..Jacobi.&.J ..Olson.(eds).Perceived Quality ..Lexington,.MA:.Lexington.Books,.pp ..161–172 .

Dhar,.S .K ..&.Hoch,.S .J ..(1997).Why.store.brand.penetration.varies.by.retailer ..Marketing.Science.Institute,.Working.Paper.No ..97–114,.July .

Etgar,.M ..&.Malhotra,.N .K ..(1978).Consumers’.reliance.on.different.product.quality.cues:.a.basis.for.market.segmentation ..In:.S .C ..Jain.(ed .).Researches Frontiers in Marketing: Dialogues and Directions, 1978 Educators’ Proceedings ..Chicago:.American.Marketing.Association,.pp ..143–147 .

Grewal,.D .,.Gotlieb,.J ..&.Marmorstein,.H ..(1994).Moderating.effects.of.message.framing.and.source.credibility.on.the.price-perceived.risk.relationship ..Journal of Consumer Research,.21,.1,.pp ..145–153 .

Hoch,.S .J ..(1996).How.should.national.brands.think.about.private.labels?.Sloan Management Review,.37,.2,.pp ..89–102 .

Hoch,.S .J ..&.Banerji,.S ..(1993).When.do.private.labels.succeed?.Sloan Management Review,.34,.4,.pp ..57–67 .

IJMR_51(4).indb 517 08/06/2009 17:59:47


518

Lal,.R ..&.Narasimhan,.C ..(1996).The.inverse.relationship.between.manufacturer.and.retailer.margins:.a.theory ..Marketing Science,.15,.2,.pp ..132–151 .

Marion,.B ..(1979).The Food Retailing Industry ..New.York:.Praeger .McMaster,.D ..(1987).Own.brands.and.the.cookware.market ..European Journal of Marketing,.

21,.1,.pp ..83–94 .Mills,.D ..(1995).Why.retailers.sell.private.labels ..Journal of Economics & Management

Strategy,.4,.3,.pp ..509–528 .Narasimhan,.C ..&.Wilcox,.R .T ..(1998).Private.labels.and.the.channel.relationship:.a.cross-

category.analysis ..Journal of Business,.71,.4,.pp ..573–600 .Olson,.J ..&.Jacoby,.J ..(1972).Cue.utilization.in.the.quality.perception.process ..Proceedings of

the 3rd Annual Conference of tbe Association for Consumer Research,.Iowa,.pp ..167–179 .Putsis.Jr,.W .P ..(1997).An.empirical.study.of.the.effect.of.brand.proliferation.on.private.label–

national.brand.pricing.behavior ..Review of Industrial Organization,.12,.3,.pp ..355–371 .Putsis.Jr,.W .P ..&.Cotterill,.R .W ..(1999).Share,.price.and.category.expenditure:.geographic.

market.effects.and.private.labels ..Managerial and Decision Economics,.20,.4,.pp ..175–187 .Quelch,.J .A ..&.Harding,.D ..(1996).Brand.versus.private.labels:.fighting.to.win ..Harvard

Business Review,.74,.1,.pp ..99–109 .Raju,.J .S ..&.Dhar,.S .K ..(1991).Cross-category.differences.in.store.brand.market.share ..

University.of.California,.Working.Paper .Raju,.J .S .,.Sethuraman,.R ..&.Dhar,.S .K ..(1995a).National.brand–store.brand.price.differential.

and.store.brand.market.share ..Pricing Strategy and Practice: An International Journal,.3,.2,.pp ..17–24 .

Raju,.J .S .,.Sethuraman,.R ..&.Dhar,.S .K ..(1995b).The.introduction.and.performance.of.store.brands ..Management Science,.41,.6,.pp ..957–978 .

Scott-Morton,.F .M ..&.Zettelmeyer,.F ..(2004).The.strategic.positioning.of.store.brands.in.retailer.manufacturer.negotiations ..Review of Industrial Organization,.24,.2,.pp ..161–194 .

Sethuraman,.R ..(1992).The.effect.of.marketplace.factors.on.private.label.penetration.in.grocery.products ..Marketing.Science.Institute,.Working.Paper.No ..92–128 .

Sethuraman,.R ..&.Cole,.C ..(1997).Why.do.consumers.pay.more.for.national.brands.than.for.store.brands?.Marketing.Science.Institute,.Working.Paper.No ..97–126 .

Simmons,.M ..&.Meredith,.B ..(1983).Own.label.profile.and.purpose ..Journal of the Market Research Society,.26,.1,.pp ..3–27 .

Steiner,.R .L ..(2004).The.nature.and.benefits.of.national.brand/private.label.competition ..Review of Industrial Organization,.24,.2,.pp ..105–127 .

Szymanski,.D .M .,.Bharadwaj,.S .G ..&.Varadarajan,.P .R ..(1993).An.analysis.of.the.market.share–profitability.relationship ..Journal of Marketing,.57,.3,.pp ..1–18 .

About the authors

Natalia.Rubio.is.Assistant.Professor.of.Marketing.Management,.Universidad.Autónoma. de. Madrid .. Her. research. interests. are. brand. management,.distribution. and. marketing. research .. She. has. published. articles. in.the. European Journal of Marketing,. International Review of Retail,.Distribution and Consumer Research,.Journal of Marketing Management,.Journal of Product and Brand Management.and.International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management ..Her.research.has.also.appeared.in.prestigious. Spanish. journals. such. as. Revista Española de Investigación

IJMR_51(4).indb 518 08/06/2009 17:59:47


519

de Marketing,. Información Comercial Española and Estudios Sobre Consumo ..She.has.presented.several.papers.at.the.annual.conferences.of.EMAC,.EAERCD.and.EIRASS,.among.others .

María. Jesús. Yagüe. is. Full. Professor. of. Marketing. Management,.Universidad. Autónoma. de. Madrid .. Her. research. interests. are. brand.management,. distribution. and. product. innovation .. She. has. published.articles. in. the. Spanish. journals. listed. above. and. in. several. international.journals,. such. as. the. International Review of Retail,. Distribution and Consumer Research,.International Journal of Market Research,.Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,.International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management.and.Food Service Technology,.among.others ..She.is. also. author. of. conference. proceedings. for. the. EMAC,. EAERCD. and.EIRASS.conferences,.among.others .

Address.correspondence.to:.Natalia.Rubio,.Departamento.de.Financiación.e.Investigación.Comercial,.Facultad.de.CC ..Económicas.y.Empresariales,.Universidad.Autónoma.de.Madrid,.Ctra ..de.Colmenar.Km.15 ..Campus.de.Cantoblanco,.28049.Madrid,.España .

Email:.natalia .rubio@uam .es

IJMR_51(4).indb 519 08/06/2009 17:59:47

The determinants of store brand market share – a temporal and cross-sectional analysis

Documents

Transcript of The determinants of store brand market share – a temporal and cross-sectional analysis