IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

An Econometric Analysis of Brand Level Strategic Pricing Between Coca Cola and Pepsi Inc

  • Dhar, Tirtha Pratim
  • Chavas, Jean-Paul
  • Cotterill, Ronald W.
  • Gould, Brian W.

Market structure and strategic pricing for leading brands sold by Coca Cola and Pepsi Inc. are investigated in the context of a flexible demand specification and structural price equations. This approach is more general than prior studies that rely upon linear approximations and interactions of an inherently nonlinear problem. We test for Bertrand equilibrium, Stackelberg equilibrium, collusion, and a general conjectural variation (CV) specification. This nonlinear Full Information Maximum Likelihood (FIML) estimation approach provides useful information on the nature of imperfect competition and the extent of market power.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center in its series Research Reports with number 25231.

in new window

Date of creation: 2002
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:uconnr:25231
Contact details of provider: Postal:
1376 Storrs Road, Unit 4021, Storrs, CT 06269-4021

Phone: (860) 486-2836
Fax: (860) 486-1932
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-33, March.
  2. Gasmi, Farid & Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Vuong, Quang, 1992. "Econometric Analysis of Collusive Behavior in a Soft Drink Market," IDEI Working Papers 16, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
  3. Alston, Julian M & Foster, Kenneth A & Green, Richard D, 1994. "Estimating Elasticities with the Linear Approximate Almost Ideal Demand System: Some Monte Carlo Results," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(2), pages 351-56, May.
  4. William P. Putsis Jr. & Ronald W. Cotterill & Ravi Dhar, 1999. "Assessing the Competitive Interaction between Private Labels and National Brands," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm131, Yale School of Management.
  5. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-42, March.
  6. Cotterill, Ronald W. & Franklin, Andrew W. & Ma, Li Yu, 1996. "Measuring Market Power Effects in Differentiated Product Industries: An Application to the Soft Drink Industry," Research Reports 25229, University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center.
  7. Richard Blundell & Jean-Marc Robin, 2000. "Latent Separability: Grouping Goods without Weak Separability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(1), pages 53-84, January.
  8. William F. Hahn, 1994. "Elasticities in AIDS Models: Comment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(4), pages 972-977.
  9. Giancarlo Moschini, 1995. "Units of Measurement and the Stone Index in Demand System Estimation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(1), pages 63-68.
  10. Chen, Kevin Z., 1998. "The symmetric problem in the linear almost ideal demand system," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 309-315, June.
  11. Patrick Bajari & Lanier Benkard, 2001. "Discrete Choice Models as Structural Models of Demand: Some Economic Implications of Common Approaches," Working Papers 01016, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
  12. Benkard, C. Lanier & Bajari, Patrick, 2001. "Discrete Choice Models as Structural Models of Demand: Some Economic Implications of Common Approaches," Research Papers 1710, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
  13. Dixit, Avinash K, 1986. "Comparative Statics for Oligopoly," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(1), pages 107-22, February.
  14. McElroy, Marjorie B., 1977. "Goodness of fit for seemingly unrelated regressions : Glahn's R2y.x and Hooper's r2," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 381-387, November.
  15. Moschini, GianCarlo & Moro, D. & Green, Richard D., 1994. "Maintaining and Testing Separability in Demand Systems," Staff General Research Papers Archive 11247, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  16. David Genesove & Wallace P. Mullin, 1995. "Validating the Conjectural Variation Method: The Sugar Industry, 1890- 1914," NBER Working Papers 5314, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  17. Nevo, Aviv, 1998. "Identification of the oligopoly solution concept in a differentiated-products industry," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 391-395, June.
  18. Kadiyali, Vrinda & Vilcassim, Naufel J & Chintagunta, Pradeep K, 1996. "Empirical Analysis of Competitive Product Line Pricing Decisions: Lead, Follow, or Move Together?," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 69(4), pages 459-87, October.
  19. J. Miguel Villas-Boas & Russell S. Winer, 1999. "Endogeneity in Brand Choice Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(10), pages 1324-1338, October.
  20. 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.
  21. Deaton,Angus & Muellbauer,John, 1980. "Economics and Consumer Behavior," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521296762, September.
  22. Adolf Buse, 1998. "Testing Homogeneity in the Linearized Almost Ideal Demand System," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 208-220.
  23. Cotterill, Ronald W., 1994. "Scanner Data: New Opportunities For Demand And Competitive Strategy Analysis," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 23(2), October.
  24. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
  25. Aviv Nevo, 2000. "Mergers with Differentiated Products: The Case of the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(3), pages 395-421, Autumn.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:uconnr:25231. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.