IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/mktlet/v27y2016i4d10.1007_s11002-016-9411-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do stock prices undervalue investments in advertising?

Author

Listed:
  • Yun Kyung Oh

    (Dongduk Women’s University)

  • Huseyin Gulen

    (Purdue University)

  • Jung-Min Kim

    (University of Seoul)

  • William T. Robinson

    (Purdue University)

Abstract

Under the efficient market hypothesis, the stock price incorporates the full value of a firm’s advertising. If so, advertising spending should not be associated with future abnormal stock returns. Nevertheless, from 1995 to 2015, advertising spending often leads to abnormal stock returns the following year. The strongest results surface for consumer goods and services where advertising used to build brand equity can carryover from one year to the next. No significant differences arise for healthcare, industrial goods, or retailer advertising. Healthcare and industrial goods advertising is often modest. Retailer advertising that builds traffic should have little if any carryover into the following year. These results may help marketing managers defend an advertising budget whose benefits carryover into the following year, but hurt current profits. Having more investment analysts on Wall Street with a marketing background should help reduce this overly conservative “wait and see” discount for carryover advertising.

Suggested Citation

  • Yun Kyung Oh & Huseyin Gulen & Jung-Min Kim & William T. Robinson, 2016. "Do stock prices undervalue investments in advertising?," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 611-626, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:mktlet:v:27:y:2016:i:4:d:10.1007_s11002-016-9411-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11002-016-9411-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11002-016-9411-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11002-016-9411-4?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Jacobson & Natalie Mizik, 2009. "The Financial Markets and Customer Satisfaction: Reexamining Possible Financial Market Mispricing of Customer Satisfaction," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 810-819, 09-10.
    2. Kamel Jedidi & Carl F. Mela & Sunil Gupta, 1999. "Managing Advertising and Promotion for Long-Run Profitability," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 1-22.
    3. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 2015. "A five-factor asset pricing model," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 1-22.
    4. Louis K. C. Chan & Josef Lakonishok & Theodore Sougiannis, 2001. "The Stock Market Valuation of Research and Development Expenditures," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(6), pages 2431-2456, December.
    5. Singal, Vijay, 2006. "Beyond the Random Walk: A Guide to Stock Market Anomalies and Low-Risk Investing," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195304220.
    6. Chien-Wei Chen & Min-Hsien Chiang & Chi-Lin Yang, 2014. "New product preannouncements, advertising investments, and stock returns," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 207-218, June.
    7. Carhart, Mark M, 1997. "On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(1), pages 57-82, March.
    8. Allan C. Eberhart & William F. Maxwell & Akhtar R. Siddique, 2004. "An Examination of Long-Term Abnormal Stock Returns and Operating Performance Following R&D Increases," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 59(2), pages 623-650, April.
    9. Natalie Mizik & Robert Jacobson, 2007. "Myopic Marketing Management: Evidence of the Phenomenon and Its Long-Term Performance Consequences in the SEO Context," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 361-379, 05-06.
    10. Leonard M. Lodish & Magid M. Abraham & Jeanne Livelsberger & Beth Lubetkin & Bruce Richardson & Mary Ellen Stevens, 1995. "A Summary of Fifty-Five In-Market Experimental Estimates of the Long-Term Effect of TV Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3_supplem), pages 133-140.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Mahabubur Rahman & M. Ángeles Rodríguez-Serrano & Mary Lambkin, 2019. "Advertising efficiency and profitability: Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," Post-Print hal-02096913, HAL.

    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. Adam Zaremba & Jacob Koby Shemer, 2018. "Price-Based Investment Strategies," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-319-91530-2, June.
    2. Oh, Jong-Min, 2017. "Absorptive capacity, technology spillovers, and the cross-section of stock returns," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 146-164.
    3. Chen, Sheng-Syan & Chen, Yan-Shing & Liang, Woan-lih & Wang, Yanzhi, 2020. "Public R&D spending and cross-sectional stock returns," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    4. Christine Moorman & Simone Wies & Natalie Mizik & Fredrika J. Spencer, 2012. "Firm Innovation and the Ratchet Effect Among Consumer Packaged Goods Firms," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 934-951, November.
    5. David Hirshleifer & Po-Hsuan Hsu & Dongmei Li, 2018. "Innovative Originality, Profitability, and Stock Returns," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(7), pages 2553-2605.
    6. Lee, Charles M.C. & Sun, Stephen Teng & Wang, Rongfei & Zhang, Ran, 2019. "Technological links and predictable returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(3), pages 76-96.
    7. Gu, Lifeng, 2016. "Product market competition, R&D investment, and stock returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 441-455.
    8. Anindita Chakravarty & Rajdeep Grewal, 2011. "The Stock Market in the Driver's Seat! Implications for R&D and Marketing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(9), pages 1594-1609, March.
    9. Leung, Woon Sau & Evans, Kevin P. & Mazouz, Khelifa, 2020. "The R&D anomaly: Risk or mispricing?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    10. Robert Jacobson & Natalie Mizik, 2009. "The Financial Markets and Customer Satisfaction: Reexamining Possible Financial Market Mispricing of Customer Satisfaction," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 810-819, 09-10.
    11. Alldredge, Dallin M. & Caglayan, Mustafa O. & Celiker, Umut, 2022. "How do investors trade R&D-intensive Stocks? Evidence from hedge funds and other institutional investors," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    12. Po-Hsuan Hsu & Dongmei Li & Qin Li & Siew Hong Teoh & Kevin Tseng, 2022. "Valuation of New Trademarks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(1), pages 257-279, January.
    13. Cederburg, Scott & O’Doherty, Michael S. & Wang, Feifei & Yan, Xuemin (Sterling), 2020. "On the performance of volatility-managed portfolios," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(1), pages 95-117.
    14. Basse Mama, Houdou, 2018. "Nonlinear capital market payoffs to science-led innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1084-1095.
    15. Jiaju Miao & Pawel Polak, 2023. "Online Ensemble of Models for Optimal Predictive Performance with Applications to Sector Rotation Strategy," Papers 2304.09947, arXiv.org.
    16. Cameron Truong & Thu Ha Nguyen & Thanh Huynh, 2021. "Customer satisfaction and the cost of capital," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 293-342, March.
    17. Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Huang, Dayong, 2010. "Technology prospects and the cross-section of stock returns," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 39-53, January.
    18. Kewei Hou & Haitao Mo & Chen Xue & Lu Zhang, 2019. "Which Factors?," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 23(1), pages 1-35.
    19. Liu, Xin & Yin, Chengxi & Zheng, Weinan, 2021. "The invisible burden," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    20. Stephen H. Penman & Xiao-Jun Zhang, 2021. "Connecting book rate of return to risk and return: the information conveyed by conservative accounting," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 391-423, March.

    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:kap:mktlet:v:27:y:2016:i:4:d:10.1007_s11002-016-9411-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.