IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uconnr/25231.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

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

Author

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

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Dhar, Tirtha Pratim & Chavas, Jean-Paul & Cotterill, Ronald W. & Gould, Brian W., 2002. "An Econometric Analysis of Brand Level Strategic Pricing Between Coca Cola and Pepsi Inc," Research Reports 25231, University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:uconnr:25231
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/25231
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Richard Blundell & Jean-Marc Robin, 2000. "Latent Separability: Grouping Goods without Weak Separability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(1), pages 53-84, January.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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 107-122, February.
    6. Giancarlo Moschini & Daniele Moro & Richard D. Green, 1994. "Maintaining and Testing Separability in Demand Systems," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(1), pages 61-73.
    7. Cotterill, Ronald W., 1994. "Scanner Data: New Opportunities for Demand and Competitive Strategy Analysis," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(02), pages 125-139, October.
    8. Nevo, Aviv, 1998. "Identification of the oligopoly solution concept in a differentiated-products industry," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 391-395, June.
    9. Gasmi, F & Laffont, J J & Vuong, Q, 1992. "Econometric Analysis of Collusive Behavior in a Soft-Drink Market," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(2), pages 277-311, Summer.
    10. 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.
    11. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    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. 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 351-356, May.
    14. 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 459-487, October.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Chen, Kevin Z., 1998. "The symmetric problem in the linear almost ideal demand system," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 309-315, June.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-333, March.
    22. 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.
    23. 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.
    24. 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.
    25. Deaton,Angus & Muellbauer,John, 1980. "Economics and Consumer Behavior," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521296762, May.
    26. J. Miguel Villas-Boas & Russell S. Winer, 1999. "Endogeneity in Brand Choice Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(10), pages 1324-1338, October.
    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. Richards, Timothy J. & Patterson, Paul M., 2006. "Firm-Level Competition in Price and Variety," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(03), December.
    2. Richards, Timothy J., 2004. "Price and Product-Line Rivalry Among Supermarket Retailers," Working Papers 28535, Arizona State University, Morrison School of Agribusiness and Resource Management.
    3. Jad Chaaban & Alban Thomas, 2008. "A Structural Model for Evaluating the Sector-specific Impacts of Preferential Trade Agreements," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 73-88, 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: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). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/fmuctus.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.