IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jgsmks/v31y2021i4p563-579.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Store brand vs. national brand prices: Willingness to pay ≠ willingness to accept

Author

Listed:
  • Peter J. Boyle
  • E. Scott Lathrop
  • Hyoshin Kim

Abstract

Determining the appropriate price for store brands relative to national brands is important. When setting the price, consumers’ perceptions of price and quality need to be considered. Two past approaches employed by store brand researchers to reveal consumers’ value of store brands include asking either: (1) the price discount they would need to be offered to switch from a national brand to a store brand (a measure of “willingness-to-accept”); or (2) the price premium they would be willing to pay to switch from a store brand to a national brand (a measure of “willingness-to-pay”). Research in other domains reveals that willingness-to-accept (WTA) and willingness-to-pay (WTP) estimates can diverge. We formally tested whether WTA estimates differ from WTP estimates elicited from consumers with respect to store and national brand prices. As predicted, WTA price estimates exceeded those of WTP. This pattern held regardless of whether product-quality equivalence of store and national brands was explicitly provided to respondents or whether respondents were free to make their own assumptions of product quality. Implications for private label researchers and product brand managers are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter J. Boyle & E. Scott Lathrop & Hyoshin Kim, 2021. "Store brand vs. national brand prices: Willingness to pay ≠ willingness to accept," Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(4), pages 563-579, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jgsmks:v:31:y:2021:i:4:p:563-579
    DOI: 10.1080/21639159.2020.1808820
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/21639159.2020.1808820
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/21639159.2020.1808820?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.

    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:taf:jgsmks:v:31:y:2021:i:4:p:563-579. 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 Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RGAM20 .

    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.