IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v4y1985i3p177-198.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A New Class of Market Share Models

Author

Listed:
  • Richard R. Batsell

    (Rice University)

  • John C. Polking

    (Rice University)

Abstract

Applications of market share models which (implicitly) rely on Luce's choice axiom have been widely criticized because they cannot account for the effects of differential product substitutability and product dominance. Three types of choice models—Tversky's Elimination-By-Aspects model, Tree Models, and Generalized PROBIT—have been offered as solutions to the problems identified with the Luce model, but they each suffer from limitations which have prevented their widespread application in marketing contexts. Tversky's elegant EBA model has not been widely used because it requires a large number of parameters and no special-purpose parameter estimation software has yet emerged. Tree models have been offered as more parsimonious special cases of EBA, but they are more restrictive in that they presume: (1) that products, and the process of choosing from among them, can be characterized in terms of hierarchical, attribute-based trees; and (2) that the aspects governing choice are well-known. Generalized PROBIT can paramorphically handle the problems with the Luce model, but parameter estimation software has proved problematic because it cannot guarantee a globally optimum solution. This paper proposes a new class of market share models. Rather than model the choice process explicitly, the new models simply scale the effects competing products have on each other's market share. These competitive effects are scaled in the context of a class of market-share models which: (1) do not assume a tree-like structure for the competing products; (2) do not presume any a priori knowledge about the attributes governing choice; (3) are characterized in terms of parameters that can be estimated using ordinary least-squares; and (4) provide clear managerial insight into the sources of competition. The paper begins with a brief review of previous work. Following the review, the paper offers a theorem and proof which guarantees the existence of the new class of models. The empirical validity and strategic utility of the models are demonstrated using two separate sets of data.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard R. Batsell & John C. Polking, 1985. "A New Class of Market Share Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 177-198.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:4:y:1985:i:3:p:177-198
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.4.3.177
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.4.3.177
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.4.3.177?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Qi Feng & Yuanchen Li & J. George Shanthikumar, 2022. "Negotiations in Competing Supply Chains: The Kalai-Smorodinsky Bargaining Solution," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(8), pages 5868-5890, August.
    2. Qi Feng & J. George Shanthikumar & Mengying Xue, 2022. "Consumer Choice Models and Estimation: A Review and Extension," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(2), pages 847-867, February.
    3. Chavez, Daniel E. & Palma, Marco A. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Mjelde, James W., 2020. "Product availability in discrete choice experiments with private goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    4. Arjun Seshadri & Johan Ugander, 2020. "Fundamental Limits of Testing the Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives in Discrete Choice," Papers 2001.07042, arXiv.org.
    5. Cermak, Gregory W., 1996. "Budget allocation as a measure of potential demand," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 591-613, November.
    6. Zhaonan Qu & Alfred Galichon & Johan Ugander, 2023. "On Sinkhorn's Algorithm and Choice Modeling," Papers 2310.00260, arXiv.org.
    7. Sang-June Park & Minhi Hahn, 1998. "Direct Estimation of Batsell and Polking's Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 170-178.
    8. Anocha Aribarg & Thomas Otter & Daniel Zantedeschi & Greg M. Allenby & Taylor Bentley & David J. Curry & Marc Dotson & Ty Henderson & Elisabeth Honka & Rajeev Kohli & Kamel Jedidi & Stephan Seiler & X, 2018. "Advancing Non-compensatory Choice Models in Marketing," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 5(1), pages 82-92, March.
    9. Cristiano Franceschinis & Riccardo Scarpa & Mara Thiene & John Rose & Michele Moretto & Raffaele Cavalli, 2016. "Exploring the Spatial Heterogeneity of Individual Preferences for Ambient Heating Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-19, May.
    10. Eugene J. S. Won, 2007. "—A Theoretical Investigation of the Effects of Similarity on Brand Choice Using the Elimination-by-Tree Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 868-875, 11-12.
    11. Thao Thai & Michiel Bliemer & Gang Chen & Jean Spinks & Sonja de New & Emily Lancsar, 2023. "Comparison of a full and partial choice set design in a labeled discrete choice experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(6), pages 1284-1304, June.
    12. Thill, Jean-Claude & Wheeler, Aaron, 1999. "Tree Induction of Spatial Choice Behavior," ERSA conference papers ersa99pa282, European Regional Science Association.
    13. Gensch, Dennis H. & Ghose, Sanjoy, 1997. "Improving PRETREE's predictive capabilities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 465-479, March.
    14. Francesco Rigoli & Christoph Mathys & Karl J Friston & Raymond J Dolan, 2017. "A unifying Bayesian account of contextual effects in value-based choice," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-28, October.
    15. Park, Sehoon & Jain, Dipak & Krishnamurthi, Lakshman, 1998. "A hierarchical elimination modeling approach for market structure analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 328-350, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:4:y:1985:i:3:p:177-198. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.