IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v17y1998i3p181-195.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mail versus Mall: A Strategic Analysis of Competition between Direct Marketers and Conventional Retailers

Author

Listed:
  • Sridhar Balasubramanian

    (Department of Marketing Administration, CBA 7.202, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712-1176)

Abstract

Consumers now purchase several offerings from direct sellers, including catalog and Internet marketers. These direct channels exist in parallel with the conventional retail stores. The availability of multiple channels has significant implications for the performance of consumer markets. The literature in marketing and economics has, however, been dominated by a focus on the conventional retail sector. This paper is an effort toward modeling competition in the multiple-channel environment from a strategic viewpoint. At the outset, a parsimonious model that accommodates the following consumer and market characteristics is introduced. First, the relative attractiveness of retail shopping varies across consumers. Second, the fit with the direct channel varies across product categories. Third, the strength of existing retail presence in local markets moderates competition. Fourth, in contrast with the fixed location of the retail store that anchors its localized market power, the location of the direct marketer is irrelevant to the competitive outcome. The model is first applied in a setting where consumers have complete knowledge of product availability and prices in all channels. In the resulting equilibrium, the direct marketer acts as a competitive wedge between retail stores. The direct presence is so strong that each retailer competes against the remotely located direct marketer, rather than against neighboring retailers. This outcome has implications for the marketing mix of retailers, which has traditionally been tuned to attract consumers choosing between retail stores. In the context of market entry, conditions under which a direct channel can access a local market in retail entry equilibrium are derived. Our analysis suggests that the traditional focus on retail entry equilibria may not yield informative or relevant findings when direct channels are a strong presence. Next, the role of information in multiple-channel markets is modeled. This issue is particularly relevant in the context of direct marketing where the seller can typically control the level of information in the marketplace, sometimes on a customer-by-customer basis (e.g., by deciding on the mailing list for a catalog campaign). When a certain fraction of consumers does not receive information from the direct marketer, the retailers compete with each other for that fraction of the market. The retailer's marketing mix has to be tuned, in this case, to jointly address direct and neighboring retail competition. The level of information disseminated by the direct marketer is shown to have strategic implications, and the use of market coverage as a lever to control competition is described. Even with zero information costs, providing information to all consumers may not be optimal under some circumstances. In particular, when the product is not well adapted to the direct channel, the level of market information about the direct option should ideally be lowered. The only way to compete with retailers on a larger scale with a poorly adapted product is by lowering direct prices, which lowers profits. Lowering market information levels and allowing retailers to compete more with each other facilitates a higher equilibrium retail price. In turn, this allows a higher direct price to be charged and improves overall direct profit. On the other hand, when the product is well adapted, increasing direct market presence and engaging in greater competition with the retail sector yields higher returns. The finding that high market coverage may depress profits raises some issues for further exploration. First, implementing the optimal coverage is straightforward when the seller controls the information mechanism, as in the case of catalog marketing. The Internet, in contrast, is an efficient mechanism to transmit information, but does not provide the sellers with such control over the level of market information. A key reason is that the initiative to gather information on the Internet lies largely with consumers. The design and implementation of mechanisms to control aggregate information levels in electronic markets can, therefore, be an important theme for research and managerial interest. Second, direct marketers have traditionally relied on the statistical analysis of customer records to decide on contact policies. The analysis in this paper reveals that these policies can have significant strategic implications as well. Research that integrates the statistical and strategic aspects could make a valuable contribution. The paper concludes with a discussion of issues for future research in multiple-channel markets, including avenues to model competition in settings with multiple direct marketers.

Suggested Citation

  • Sridhar Balasubramanian, 1998. "Mail versus Mall: A Strategic Analysis of Competition between Direct Marketers and Conventional Retailers," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 181-195.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:17:y:1998:i:3:p:181-195
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.17.3.181
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.17.3.181
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.17.3.181?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Greenhut, John G & Greenhut, M L, 1975. "Spatial Price Discrimination, Competition and Locational Effects," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 42(168), pages 401-419, November.
    2. Boyer, Marcel & Moreaux, Michel, 1993. "Strategic market coverage in spatial competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 299-326, September.
    3. Amoz Kats & Jacques-François Thisse, 1993. "Spatial Oligopolies with Uniform Delivered Pricing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Hiroshi Ohta & Jacques-François Thisse (ed.), Does Economic Space Matter?, chapter 14, pages 274-302, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Vicki G. Morwitz & David C. Schmittlein, 1998. "Testing New Direct Marketing Offerings: The Interplay of Management Judgment and Statistical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(5), pages 610-628, May.
    5. Kats, Amoz, 1995. "More on Hotelling's stability in competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 89-93, March.
    6. Sumit K. Majumdar & Venkatram Ramaswamy, 1995. "Going direct to market: The influence of exchange conditions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(5), pages 353-372.
    7. Birger Wernerfelt, 1994. "On the Function of Sales Assistance," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 68-82.
    8. Hiroshi Ohta & Jacques-François Thisse (ed.), 1993. "Does Economic Space Matter?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-349-22906-2, December.
    9. Steven C. Salop, 1979. "Monopolistic Competition with Outside Goods," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 141-156, Spring.
    10. Geoffrey Heal, 1980. "Spatial Structure in the Retail Trade: A Study in Product Differentiation with Increasing Returns," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(2), pages 565-583, Autumn.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hrachya Kyureghian & Maria Plotnikova & Sudipta Sarangi, 2013. "When Consumers and Firms Share Transportation Costs," Studies in Microeconomics, , vol. 1(1), pages 91-111, June.
    2. Sudipta Sarangi & Hrachya Kyureghian, 2001. "Transport Cost Sharing and Spatial Competition," Departmental Working Papers 2001-03, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    3. Kleer, Robin & Piller, Frank T., 2019. "Local manufacturing and structural shifts in competition: Market dynamics of additive manufacturing," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C), pages 23-34.
    4. Sudipta Sarangi & Hrachya Kyureghian, 2002. "Transport Cost Sharing," Departmental Working Papers 2002-08, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    5. Han, Haipeng & Lien, Donald & Lien, Jaimie W. & Zheng, Jie, 2022. "Online or face-to-face? Competition among MOOC and regular education providers," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 857-881.
    6. Toshihiro Matsumura, 2003. "Consumer-benefiting exclusive territories," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 36(4), pages 1007-1025, November.
    7. van Raalte, Chris & Webers, Harry, 1998. "Spatial competition with intermediated matching," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 477-488, March.
    8. King, Ruth C. & Sen, Ravi & Xia, Mu, 2002. "Impact of Web-Based e-Commerce on Channel Strategy," Working Papers 02-0123, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    9. Murooka, Takeshi, 2013. "A note on credible spatial preemption in an entry–exit game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 26-28.
    10. Ayd{i}n Alptekinou{g}lu & Charles J. Corbett, 2008. "Mass Customization vs. Mass Production: Variety and Price Competition," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 204-217, August.
    11. Bouckaert, Jan, 2000. "Monopolistic competition with a mail order business," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 303-310, March.
    12. Gilbert E. Metcalf & George Norman, 2002. "Oligopoly Deregulation in General Equilibrium: A Tax Neutralization Result," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0210, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    13. Noriaki Matsushima & Toshihiro Matsumura, 2003. "Mixed oligopoly and spatial agglomeration," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 36(1), pages 62-87, February.
    14. Aldashev, Gani & Verdier, Thierry, 2010. "Goodwill bazaar: NGO competition and giving to development," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 48-63, January.
    15. Yuetao Gao, 2018. "On the Use of Overt Anti-Counterfeiting Technologies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(3), pages 403-424, May.
    16. Thisse, Jacques-Francois & Zenou, Yves, 2000. "Skill mismatch and unemployment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 415-420, December.
    17. Jen-Te Yao, 2019. "The impact of transportation asymmetry on the choice of a spatial price policy," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 793-811, October.
    18. Haiyan Wang & Tatsuhiko Nariu, 2012. "Distribution Channel Management in an Internet Age: Equilibrium and Social Welfare," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 285-298, September.
    19. Graubner, Marten & Balmann, Alfons & Sexton, Richard J., 2011. "Spatial Pricing and the Location of Processors in Agricultural Markets," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114601, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Marten Graubner & Richard J. Sexton, 2023. "More competitive than you think? Pricing and location of processing firms in agricultural markets," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(3), pages 784-808, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:17:y:1998:i:3:p:181-195. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.