IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea16/235436.html

Do Firms Price and Advertise to Maximize Profits? Evidence from U.S. Food Industries

Author

Listed:
  • He, Xi
  • Lopez, Rigoberto

Abstract

Based on a model that incorporates brand entry deterrence through advertising and pricing strategies, this paper investigates whether firms’ advertising and pricing policies deviate from their short-run profit maximization strategies and how advertising and pricing entry deterrence strategies vary with market conditions. We estimate the advertising and pricing response of incumbents to entrants in four food industries: beer, carbonated soft drinks, ready-to-eat cereal and yogurt, and find that incumbents deviate significantly from profit maximization advertising and pricing policies. There is a U-shaped relationship between the potential market share of an entrant and incumbents’ pricing but an inverse U-shape with respect to advertising level. This means that incumbents are more likely to price higher and advertise less to deter entry when potential entrants are more competitive in terms of potential market share. Empirically, we show this to be the case in the four food industries studied.

Suggested Citation

  • He, Xi & Lopez, Rigoberto, 2016. "Do Firms Price and Advertise to Maximize Profits? Evidence from U.S. Food Industries," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235436, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea16:235436
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.235436
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/235436/files/Do%20firms%20advertise%20to%20maximize%20profits.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.235436?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. Gary S. Becker & Kevin M. Murphy, 1993. "A Simple Theory of Advertising as a Good or Bad," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(4), pages 941-964.
    2. Kessides, Ioannis N, 1986. "Advertising, Sunk Costs, and Barriers to Entry," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(1), pages 84-95, February.
    3. K. Sudhir, 2001. "Competitive Pricing Behavior in the Auto Market: A Structural Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 42-60, January.
    4. Scott Morton, Fiona M., 2000. "Barriers to entry, brand advertising, and generic entry in the US pharmaceutical industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(7), pages 1085-1104, October.
    5. Chang-Yang Lee, 2002. "Advertising, Its Determinants, and Market Structure," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 21(1), pages 89-101, August.
    6. Gene M. Grossman & Carl Shapiro, 1984. "Informative Advertising with Differentiated Products," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 51(1), pages 63-81.
    7. Avinash Dixit & Victor Norman, 1978. "Advertising and Welfare," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, Spring.
    8. Daniel Simon, 2005. "Incumbent pricing responses to entry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(13), pages 1229-1248, December.
    9. Richard Schmalensee, 1978. "Entry Deterrence in the Ready-to-Eat Breakfast Cereal Industry," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 305-327, Autumn.
    10. Glenn Ellison & Sara Fisher Ellison, 2011. "Strategic Entry Deterrence and the Behavior of Pharmaceutical Incumbents Prior to Patent Expiration," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 1-36, February.
    11. K. Sudhir, 2001. "Competitive Pricing Behavior in the US Auto Market: A Structural Analysis," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm228, Yale School of Management.
    12. Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Vrinda Kadiyali & Naufel J. Vilcassim, 2006. "Endogeneity and Simultaneity in Competitive Pricing and Advertising: A Logit Demand Analysis," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 79(6), pages 2761-2788, November.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Schmalensee, Richard, 1983. "Advertising and Entry Deterrence: An Exploratory Model," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(4), pages 636-653, August.
    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. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107069978, January.
    2. Bilgehan Uzunca & Bruno Cassiman, 2023. "Entry diversion: Deterrence by diverting submarket entry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 11-47, January.
    3. Qi, Shi, 2019. "Advertising, industry innovation, and entry deterrence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 30-50.
    4. Kurt R. Brekke & Odd Rune Straume, 2008. "Pharmaceutical Patents: Incentives for R&D or Marketing?," CESifo Working Paper Series 2433, CESifo.
    5. Griffith, Rachel & Dubois, Pierre & O'Connell, Martin, 2014. "The Effects of Banning Advertising on Demand, Supply and Welfare: Structural Estimation on a Junk Food Market," CEPR Discussion Papers 9942, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Keisuke Hattori & Keisaku Higashida, 2023. "Who should be regulated: Genuine producers or third parties?," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 249-286, April.
    7. Ulrich Doraszelski & Sarit Markovich, 2004. "Advertising Dynamics and Competitive Advantage," Computing in Economics and Finance 2004 61, Society for Computational Economics.
    8. Giovanni Immordino, 2002. "no Logo," CSEF Working Papers 77, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    9. Königbauer, Ingrid, 2006. "Dealing with Rising Health Care Costs: The Case of Pharmaceuticals," Munich Dissertations in Economics 5640, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    10. Konigbauer, Ingrid, 2007. "Advertising and generic market entry," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 286-305, March.
    11. Ulrich Doraszelski & Sarit Markovich, 2007. "Advertising dynamics and competitive advantage," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(3), pages 557-592, September.
    12. Dhaval M. Dave, 2013. "Effects of Pharmaceutical Promotion: A Review and Assessment," NBER Working Papers 18830, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Brekke, Kurt R. & Kuhn, Michael, 2006. "Direct to consumer advertising in pharmaceutical markets," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 102-130, January.
    14. Bart J. Bronnenberg & Jean-Pierre H. Dubé, 2016. "The Formation of Consumer Brand Preferences," NBER Working Papers 22691, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Simon P. Anderson, 2005. "Regulation of Television advertising," Virginia Economics Online Papers 363, University of Virginia, Department of Economics.
    16. Massimo Motta, 2013. "Advertising bans," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 61-81, March.
    17. Wang, Shinn-Shyr & Stiegert, Kyle W., 2006. "The Duopolistic Firm with Endogenous Risk Control: Case of Persuasive Advertising and Product Differentiation," Staff Paper Series 496, University of Wisconsin, Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    18. O. Cem Ozturk & Sriram Venkataraman & Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 2016. "Price Reactions to Rivals’ Local Channel Exits," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(4), pages 588-604, July.
    19. Ivan Pastine & Tuvana Pastine, 2002. "Comsumption Externalities, Coordination, and Advertising," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 43(3), pages 919-943, August.
    20. E. Glen Weyl & Michal Fabinger, 2013. "Pass-Through as an Economic Tool: Principles of Incidence under Imperfect Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(3), pages 528-583.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:aaea16:235436. 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/aaeaaea.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.