IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/cudawp/55928.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Market Experiment on Trade Promotion Budget and Allocation

Author

Listed:
  • Gomez, Miguel I.
  • Rao, Vithala R.
  • Yuan, Hong

Abstract

We design a market experiment to examine how firm size and ability to choose trade promotion types influence trade promotion budget, its allocation and channel profits. Our experimental results show that larger manufacturers offer smaller trade promotion budgets. Manufacturers with ability to influence the allocation decision favor scan-backs while retailers favor off-invoices. Trade promotion decisions affect profit sharing within the channel but not total channel profit. We validate these findings with an econometric analysis of survey data from supermarket executives. Overall, our results suggest that market experiments can shed light on trade promotion outcomes for which industry data are sparse.

Suggested Citation

  • Gomez, Miguel I. & Rao, Vithala R. & Yuan, Hong, 2009. "A Market Experiment on Trade Promotion Budget and Allocation," Working Papers 55928, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:cudawp:55928
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.55928
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/55928/files/Cornell_AEM_wp0928.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.55928?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. Stephen F. Hamilton, 2003. "Slotting Allowances as a Facilitating Practice by Food Processors in Wholesale Grocery Markets: Profitability and Welfare Effects," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(4), pages 797-813.
    2. David Besanko & Jean-Pierre Dubé & Sachin Gupta, 2005. "Own-Brand and Cross-Brand Retail Pass-Through," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 123-137, July.
    3. Charles A. Holt & Lisa R. Anderson, 1996. "Classroom Games: Understanding Bayes' Rule," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 179-187, Spring.
    4. Thomas Reardon & Spencer Henson & Julio Berdegué, 2007. "'Proactive fast-tracking' diffusion of supermarkets in developing countries: implications for market institutions and trade," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(4), pages 399-431, July.
    5. Ronald W. Cotterill, 2001. "Neoclassical explanations of vertical organization and performance of food Industries," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(1), pages 33-57.
    6. Bresnahan, Timothy F., 1989. "Empirical studies of industries with market power," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 17, pages 1011-1057, Elsevier.
    7. Kadiyali, Vrinda & Vilcassim, Naufel & Chintagunta, Pradeep, 1998. "Product line extensions and competitive market interactions: An empirical analysis," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 339-363, November.
    8. Kurata, Hisashi & Yue, Xiaohang, 2008. "Trade promotion mode choice and information sharing in fashion retail supply chains," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 507-519, August.
    9. Scott A. Neslin & Stephen G. Powell & Linda Schneider Stone, 1995. "The Effects of Retailer and Consumer Response on Optimal Manufacturer Advertising and Trade Promotion Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(5), pages 749-766, May.
    10. Tony Haitao Cui & Jagmohan S. Raju & Z. John Zhang, 2008. "A Price Discrimination Model of Trade Promotions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(5), pages 779-795, 09-10.
    11. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 2.
    12. Linda M. Young & Jill E. Hobbs, 2002. "Vertical Linkages in Agri-Food Supply Chains: Changing Roles for Producers, Commodity Groups, and Government Policy," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 24(2), pages 428-441.
    13. Ailawadi, Kusum L. & Beauchamp, J.P. & Donthu, Naveen & Gauri, Dinesh K. & Shankar, Venkatesh, 2009. "Communication and Promotion Decisions in Retailing: A Review and Directions for Future Research," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 42-55.
    14. Papke, Leslie E & Wooldridge, Jeffrey M, 1996. "Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to 401(K) Plan Participation Rates," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(6), pages 619-632, Nov.-Dec..
    15. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    16. Brown, James R. & Dant, Rajiv P., 2008. "Scientific method and retailing research: A retrospective," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 1-13.
    17. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    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. Villas-Boas, Sofia B., 2006. "Vertical relationships between manufacturers and retailers: inference with limited data," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt0z26d2v9, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    2. 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.
    3. K. Sudhir, 2001. "Structural Analysis of Manufacturer Pricing in the Presence of a Strategic Retailer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 244-264, October.
    4. Dae‐Wook Kim & Christopher R. Knittel, 2006. "Biases In Static Oligopoly Models? Evidence From The California Electricity Market," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 451-470, December.
    5. Presbitero, Andrea F. & Zazzaro, Alberto, 2011. "Competition and relationship lending: Friends or foes?," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 387-413, July.
    6. Dae-Wook Kim & Christopher R. Knittel, 2004. "Biases in Static Oligopoly Models? Evidence from the California Electricity Market," NBER Working Papers 10895, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    8. Lukáš Čechura & Tinoush Jamali Jaghdani, 2021. "Market Imperfections within the European Wheat Value Chain: The Case of France and the United Kingdom," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-21, August.
    9. Jie Wu & Zhixin Chen & Xiang Ji, 2020. "Sustainable trade promotion decisions under demand disruption in manufacturer-retailer supply chains," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 290(1), pages 115-143, July.
    10. Kuhn, Dieter, 2011. "Delayering and Firm Performance: Evidence from Swiss firm-level Data," Working papers 2011/02, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    11. Nicholas ECONOMIDES, 2011. "Broadband Openness Rules Are Fully Justified by Economic Research," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(84), pages 127-151, 4th quart.
    12. Martin Gaynor, "undated". "What Do We Know About Competition and Quality in Health Care Markets?," GSIA Working Papers 2006-E62, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
    13. Tesfatsion, Leigh, 2001. "Structure, behavior, and market power in an evolutionary labor market with adaptive search," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 25(3-4), pages 419-457, March.
    14. Françeska Tomori & Erik Ansink & Harold Houba & Nick Hagerty & Charles Bos, 2024. "Market power in California's water market," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(3), pages 1274-1299, May.
    15. Hovhannisyan, Vardges & Stiegert, Kyle W., 2011. "Imperfect Competition between Milk Manufacturers and Retailers in a Midwestern State in the U.S," 2011 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2011, Corpus Christi, Texas 98844, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    16. Helmut Fryges & Joachim Wagner, 2016. "Exports and Profitability — First Evidence for German Manufacturing Firms," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Microeconometrics of International Trade, chapter 7, pages 245-277, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    17. Anthony N. Rezitis & A. Blake Brown & William E. Foster, 1998. "Adjustment costs and dynamic factor demands for U.S. cigarette manufacturing," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 18(3), pages 217-231, May.
    18. Joachim Wagner, 2003. "Unobserved firm heterogeneity and the size-exports nexus: Evidence from German panel data," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 139(1), pages 161-172, March.
    19. Micha Gisser & Raymond Sauer, 2000. "The Aggregate Relation between Profits and Concentration is Consistent with Cournot Behavior," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 16(3), pages 229-246, May.
    20. Rajeev K. Goel & Michael A. Nelson, 2021. "How do firms use innovations to hedge against economic and political uncertainty? Evidence from a large sample of nations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 407-430, April.

    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:cudawp:55928. 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/dacorus.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.