IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/umrfwp/14342.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Price Of Launching A New Product: Empirical Evidence On Factors Affecting The Relative Magnitude Of Slotting Allowances

Author

Listed:
  • Mahi, Humaira
  • Rao, Akshay R.

Abstract

Slotting allowances are a relatively recent trend, particular to the retail food industry. These allowances are lump-sum up-front transfer payments from manufacturer to retailer when the manufacturer launches a new product. The practice has attracted some scrutiny because of uncertainty about its purposes and consequences. We draw from the extant literature to identify factors that potentially influence the relative magnitude of slotting allowances. Based on analysis of primary survey data from retailers and manufacturers, we observe that the charging and paying of slotting allowances is seemingly affected by the relative strength of the players. Among retailers, the relative magnitude of slotting fees increases with retailers' informational advantage over the manufacturer about the likely success of the new product. Similarly, the relative magnitude of slotting fees paid is lower for manufacturers who have a strong market share position. We discuss the theoretical, managerial and public policy implications of our findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Mahi, Humaira & Rao, Akshay R., 2001. "The Price Of Launching A New Product: Empirical Evidence On Factors Affecting The Relative Magnitude Of Slotting Allowances," Working Papers 14342, University of Minnesota, The Food Industry Center.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:umrfwp:14342
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.14342
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/14342/files/tr01-05.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.14342?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. Preyas S. Desai, 2000. "Multiple Messages to Retain Retailers: Signaling New Product Demand," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 381-389, August.
    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. Steve McCorriston, 2002. "Why should imperfect competition matter to agricultural economists?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 29(3), pages 349-371, July.

    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. Carlyle Farrell & Gervan Fearon, 2005. "Renting Goodwill in International Marketing Channels: An Analysis of Pricing Strategies and Bargaining Power," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 33(3), pages 285-296, September.
    2. Stefan Buehler & Dennis L. Gärtner, 2013. "Making Sense of Nonbinding Retail-Price Recommendations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(1), pages 335-359, February.
    3. Özalp Özer & Upender Subramanian & Yu Wang, 2018. "Information Sharing, Advice Provision, or Delegation: What Leads to Higher Trust and Trustworthiness?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 474-493, January.
    4. Baojun Jiang & Kinshuk Jerath & Kannan Srinivasan, 2011. "Firm Strategies in the "Mid Tail" of Platform-Based Retailing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 757-775, September.
    5. Staahl Gabrielsen, Tommy & Johansen, Bjørn Olav & Shaffer, Greg, 2018. "When is Double Marginalization a Problem?," Working Papers in Economics 7/18, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
    6. Glenn, David, 2004. "Returns Policies for a Pessimistic Retailer," Working Papers 04-0111, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    7. Sreya Kolay & Greg Shaffer, 2022. "Slotting Fees and Price Discrimination in Retail Channels," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(6), pages 1145-1162, November.
    8. Chuan He & Johan Marklund & Thomas Vossen, 2008. "—Vertical Information Sharing in a Volatile Market," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 513-530, 05-06.
    9. Ho, Jason Y.C. & Dhar, Tirtha & Weinberg, Charles B., 2009. "Playoff payoff: Super Bowl advertising for movies," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 168-179.
    10. Juan Feng, 2008. "—Optimal Mechanism for Selling a Set of Commonly Ranked Objects," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 501-512, 05-06.
    11. Øystein Foros & Hans Jarle Kind & Jan Yngve Sand, 2009. "Slotting Allowances and Manufacturers' Retail Sales Effort," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 76(1), pages 266-282, July.
    12. Lømo, Teis Lunde & Meland, Frode & Sandvik, Håvard Mork, 2020. "Do slotting allowances reduce product variety?," Working Papers in Economics 7/20, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
    13. Dmitri Kuksov & Kangkang Wang, 2013. "A Model of the "It" Products in Fashion," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 51-69, July.
    14. Md. FarhanFaruqui & Fabliha Tasnim Hride, 2019. "Influence of Shelf Space Arrangement on Buying Behavior," International Journal of Business and Social Research, LAR Center Press, vol. 9(3), pages 52-60, March.
    15. Xiaotong Li, 2005. "Cheap Talk and Bogus Network Externalities in the Emerging Technology Market," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 531-543, October.
    16. Pfeiffer, Thomas, 2016. "A comparison of simple two-part supply chain contracts," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 114-124.
    17. Yu‐Hung Chen & Baojun Jiang, 2021. "Dynamic Pricing and Price Commitment of New Experience Goods," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(8), pages 2752-2764, August.
    18. Claire Chambolle & Clémence Christin, 2017. "New Product Introduction and Slotting Fees," Working Papers hal-01458949, HAL.
    19. Amy Wenxuan Ding & Shibo Li, 2019. "Herding in the consumption and purchase of digital goods and moderators of the herding bias," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 460-478, May.
    20. Krafft, Manfred & Goetz, Oliver & Mantrala, Murali & Sotgiu, Francesca & Tillmanns, Sebastian, 2015. "The Evolution of Marketing Channel Research Domains and Methodologies: An Integrative Review and Future Directions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(4), pages 569-585.

    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:umrfwp:14342. 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/rfumnus.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.