IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/asumwp/28545.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Strategic Interaction With Multiple Tools: A New Empirical Model

Author

Listed:
  • Richards, Timothy J.
  • Patterson, Paul M.

Abstract

The Lanchester model of strategic interaction typically considers only two-firm rivalry and one strategic tool. This paper presents an alternative that considers rivalry among several firms using multiple tools. Marketing decisions are dynamically optimal and use equations of motion for market share that are consistent with optimal consumer choice. Using a single-market case study that consists of five years of monthly data on ready to eat cereal sales, advertising, product development investments and new product introductions, we test our model against a similar Lanchester specification. Non-nested specification tests fail to reject the proposed model, but reject the Lanchester alternative.

Suggested Citation

  • Richards, Timothy J. & Patterson, Paul M., 2002. "Strategic Interaction With Multiple Tools: A New Empirical Model," Working Papers 28545, Arizona State University, Morrison School of Agribusiness and Resource Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:asumwp:28545
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.28545
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/28545/files/wp020008.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.28545?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. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G, 1981. "Several Tests for Model Specification in the Presence of Alternative Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(3), pages 781-793, May.
    2. Kenneth S. Corts, 1998. "Third-Degree Price Discrimination in Oligopoly: All-Out Competition and Strategic Commitment," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(2), pages 306-323, Summer.
    3. Mark J. Roberts & Larry Samuelson, 1988. "An Empirical Analysis of Dynamic, Nonprice Competition in an Oligopolistic Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 200-220, Summer.
    4. Moschini, GianCarlo & Vissa, Anuradha, 1992. "A Linear Inverse Demand System," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 17(2), pages 1-9, December.
    5. Heien, Dale & Wessells, Cathy Roheim, 1990. "Demand Systems Estimation with Microdata: A Censored Regression Approach," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 8(3), pages 365-371, July.
    6. Ronald W. Cotterill, 1999. "High cereal prices and the prospects for relief by expansion of private label and antitrust enforcement," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(2), pages 229-245.
    7. Kenneth R. Deal, 1979. "Optimizing Advertising Expenditures in a Dynamic Duopoly," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 682-692, August.
    8. Gasmi, F & Laffont, J J & Vuong, Q, 1992. "Econometric Analysis of Collusive Behavior in a Soft-Drink Market," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(2), pages 277-311, Summer.
    9. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    10. Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Vithala R. Rao, 1996. "Pricing Strategies in a Dynamic Duopoly: A Differential Game Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(11), pages 1501-1514, November.
    11. Pollak, Robert A & Wales, Terence J, 1980. "Comparison of the Quadratic Expenditure System and Translog Demand Systems with Alternative Specifications of Demographic Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(3), pages 595-612, April.
    12. Gasmi, F. & Vuong, Q.H., 1988. "An Econometric Analysis Of Some Duopolistic Games In Prices And Advertising," Papers m8903, Southern California - Department of Economics.
    13. Gary M. Erickson, 1997. "Note: Dynamic Conjectural Variations in a Lanchester Oligopoly," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(11), pages 1603-1608, November.
    14. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    15. Barry L. Bayus & William P. Putsis, Jr., 1999. "Product Proliferation: An Empirical Analysis of Product Line Determinants and Market Outcomes," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 137-153.
    16. Gary M. Erickson, 1992. "Empirical Analysis of Closed-Loop Duopoly Advertising Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(12), pages 1732-1749, December.
    17. Ronald Cotterill & William Putsis, 2000. "Market Share and Price Setting Behavior for Private Labels and National Brands," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 17(1), pages 17-39, August.
    18. Engelbert Dockner & Steffen Jørgensen, 1988. "Optimal Pricing Strategies for New Products in Dynamic Oligopolies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 315-334.
    19. Gustav Feichtinger & Richard F. Hartl & Suresh P. Sethi, 1994. "Dynamic Optimal Control Models in Advertising: Recent Developments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(2), pages 195-226, February.
    20. Pollak, Robert A. & Wales, Terence J., 1991. "The likelihood dominance criterion : A new approach to model selection," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2-3), pages 227-242, February.
    21. Kalai, Ehud & Stanford, William, 1985. "Conjectural variations strategies in accelerated cournot games," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 133-152, June.
    22. Fudenberg, Drew & Tirole, Jean, 1984. "The Fat-Cat Effect, the Puppy-Dog Ploy, and the Lean and Hungry Look," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(2), pages 361-366, May.
    23. Slade, Margaret E, 1995. "Product Rivalry with Multiple Strategic Weapons: An Analysis of Price and Advertising Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(3), pages 445-476, Fall.
    24. Larry S. Karp & Jeffrey M. Perloff, 1993. "A Dynamic Model of Oligopoly in the Coffee Export Market," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(2), pages 448-457.
    25. Maskin, Eric & Tirole, Jean, 1988. "A Theory of Dynamic Oligopoly, I: Overview and Quantity Competition with Large Fixed Costs," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(3), pages 549-569, May.
    26. M. L. Vidale & H. B. Wolfe, 1957. "An Operations-Research Study of Sales Response to Advertising," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 370-381, June.
    27. Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Dipak C. Jain, 1995. "Empirical Analysis of a Dynamic Duopoly Model of Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 109-131, March.
    28. Sorger, Gerhard, 1989. "Competitive dynamic advertising : A modification of the Case game," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 55-80, January.
    29. Deaton, Angus S & Muellbauer, John, 1980. "An Almost Ideal Demand System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 312-326, June.
    30. repec:cdl:agrebk:440237 is not listed on IDEAS
    31. George E. Kimball, 1957. "Some Industrial Applications of Military Operations Research Methods," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 201-204, April.
    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. Richards, Timothy J., 2002. "Dynamic Strategic Interaction: A Synthesis Of Modeling Methods," Western Economics Forum, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 1(1), pages 1-5.
    2. Richards, Timothy J. & Patterson, Paul M., 2006. "Firm-Level Competition in Price and Variety," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-22, December.
    3. Huang, Jian & Leng, Mingming & Liang, Liping, 2012. "Recent developments in dynamic advertising research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 220(3), pages 591-609.
    4. Frank M. Bass & Anand Krishnamoorthy & Ashutosh Prasad & Suresh P. Sethi, 2005. "Generic and Brand Advertising Strategies in a Dynamic Duopoly," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 556-568, February.
    5. Dengpan Liu & Subodha Kumar & Vijay S. Mookerjee, 2012. "Advertising Strategies in Electronic Retailing: A Differential Games Approach," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(3-part-2), pages 903-917, September.
    6. Yanwu Yang & Baozhu Feng & Joni Salminen & Bernard J. Jansen, 2022. "Optimal advertising for a generalized Vidale–Wolfe response model," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 1275-1305, December.
    7. Cotterill, Ronald W & Putsis, William P, Jr & Dhar, Ravi, 2000. "Assessing the Competitive Interaction between Private Labels and National Brands," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 73(1), pages 109-137, January.
    8. Fruchter, Gila E. & Kalish, Shlomo, 1998. "Dynamic promotional budgeting and media allocation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 15-27, November.
    9. Toker Doganoglu & Daniel Klapper, 2006. "Goodwill and dynamic advertising strategies," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-29, March.
    10. Barry L. Bayus & William P. Putsis, Jr., 1999. "Product Proliferation: An Empirical Analysis of Product Line Determinants and Market Outcomes," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 137-153.
    11. A. Prasad & S. P. Sethi, 2004. "Competitive Advertising Under Uncertainty: A Stochastic Differential Game Approach," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 163-185, October.
    12. Wang, Qinan & Wu, Zhang, 2007. "An empirical study on the Lanchester model of combat for competitive advertising decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 183(2), pages 871-881, December.
    13. Gary M. Erickson, 2009. "Advertising Competition in a Dynamic Oligopoly with Multiple Brands," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 1106-1113, October.
    14. Wang, Qinan & Wu, Zhang, 2001. "A duopolistic model of dynamic competitive advertising," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(1), pages 213-226, January.
    15. Putsis, William P., Jr., 1998. "Empirical Analysis of Competitive Interaction in Food Product Categories," Research Reports 25221, University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center.
    16. Erickson, Gary M., 2009. "An oligopoly model of dynamic advertising competition," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(1), pages 374-388, August.
    17. Richards, Timothy J., 2004. "Price and Product-Line Rivalry Among Supermarket Retailers," Working Papers 28535, Arizona State University, Morrison School of Agribusiness and Resource Management.
    18. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    19. Golan, Amos & Karp, Larry S & Perloff, Jeffrey M, 2000. "Estimating Coke's and Pepsi's Price and Advertising Strategies," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 18(4), pages 398-409, October.
    20. Naufel J. Vilcassim & Vrinda Kadiyali & Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 1999. "Investigating Dynamic Multifirm Market Interactions in Price and Advertising," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(4), pages 499-518, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Marketing;

    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:ags:asumwp:28545. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/msasuus.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.