IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hbs/wpaper/09-044.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Concentration Levels in the U.S. Advertising and Marketing Services Industry: Myth vs. Reality

Author

Listed:
  • Alvin J. Silk

    (Harvard Business School)

  • Charles King III

    (Greylock McKinnon Associates, Cambridge, MA)

Abstract

This paper analyzes changes in concentration levels in the U.S. Advertising and Marketing Services (A&MS) industry using publicly released data that have been largely ignored in past discussions of the industrial organization of this industry, namely those available from the U.S. Census Bureau's quinquennial Economic Census and the Service Annual Survey. We define the A&MS industry in terms of nine sectors, each of which is represented by a separate 5 digit NAICS category. In so doing, we have sought to redress some of the measurement problems surrounding estimates found in the existing literature. Our main findings are threefold. First, in the case of the core and largest sector, Advertising Agencies, firm level concentration as measured by Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) increased slightly but remained relatively low from 1977 to 2002. All of the HHI estimates readily satisfied the standard widely used to characterize an industry as "unconcentrated." We find mixed support for the hypotheses that the ranks of mid-sized agencies were depleted by ongoing waves of mergers and acquisitions and resulted in a polarized size structure. The size distributions of agency revenue have become more polarized in the sense that over time they appear more skewed, more dispersed, and exhibit greater inequality. The share of total receipts realized by small agencies fell while that of large agencies rose. However, the position of mid-sized agencies appears to have changed little over the period 1977- 2002, as measured by the shares of agencies and receipts they represent. Second, concentration levels in 1997 and 2002 varied across the nine sectors comprising the A&MS industry, but all were within the range generally considered as indicative of a competitive industry. Third, we developed concentration ratios at the level of holding companies (HC's) and find that the four largest HC's captured between a fifth and a quarter of total revenue from the A&MS industry, a share that remained quite stable over the period, 2002-2006. These estimates are lower by an order of magnitude than estimates often cited in the trade press. Reasons for the discrepancy are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Alvin J. Silk & Charles King III, 2008. "Concentration Levels in the U.S. Advertising and Marketing Services Industry: Myth vs. Reality," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-044, Harvard Business School.
    • Handle: RePEc:hbs:wpaper:09-044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/09-044.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sharon Horsky, 2006. "The Changing Architecture of Advertising Agencies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 367-383, 07-08.
    2. D Leslie, 1997. "Flexibly Specialized Agencies? Reflexivity, Identity, and the Advertising Industry," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 29(6), pages 1017-1038, June.
    3. Horst Mendershausen, 1946. "Changes in Income Distribution during the Great Depression (Studies in Income and Wealth, vol. 7)," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number mend46-1, March.
    4. West, Douglas, 1988. "Multinational Competition in the British Advertising Agency Business, 1936–1987," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(3), pages 467-501, October.
    5. Lawrence J. White, 2002. "Trends in Aggregate Concentration in the United States," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(4), pages 137-160, Fall.
    6. Frederic Pryor, 2001. "New Trends in U.S. Industrial Concentration," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 18(3), pages 301-326, May.
    7. Mohammad Arzaghi & Ernst R. Berndt & James C. Davis & Alvin J. Silk, 2008. "Economic Factors Underlying the Unbundling of Advertising Agency Services," NBER Working Papers 14345, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Schmalensee, Richard, 1977. "Using the H-Index of Concentration with Published Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 59(2), pages 186-193, May.
    9. Alvin J. Silk & Ernst R. Berndt, 1993. "Scale and Scope Effects on Advertising Agency Costs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 53-72.
    10. MacDonald, Glenn M & Slivinski, Alan, 1987. "The Simple Analytics of Competitive Equilibrium with Multiproduct Firms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 941-953, December.
    11. Richard van der Wurff & Piet Bakker & Robert Picard, 2008. "Economic Growth and Advertising Expenditures in Different Media in Different Countries," Journal of Media Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 28-52.
    12. Charles King & Alvin J. Silk & Niels Ketelhöhn, 2003. "Knowledge Spillovers and Growth in the Disagglomeration of the Us Advertising‐Agency Industry," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 327-362, September.
    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. Andrew von Nordenflycht, 2011. "Firm Size and Industry Structure Under Human Capital Intensity: Insights from the Evolution of the Global Advertising Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 141-157, February.

    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. Arzaghi Mohammad & Berndt Ernst R. & Davis James C. & Silk Alvin J., 2012. "The Unbundling of Advertising Agency Services: An Economic Analysis," Review of Marketing Science, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-55, December.
    2. Mohammad Arzaghi & Ernst R. Berndt & James C. Davis & Alvin J. Silk, 2008. "Economic Factors Underlying the Unbundling of Advertising Agency Services," NBER Working Papers 14345, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Sharon Horsky & Steven C. Michael & Alvin J. Silk, 2008. "The Internalization of Advertising Services: An Inter-IndustryAnalysis," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-007, Harvard Business School.
    4. Andrew von Nordenflycht, 2011. "Firm Size and Industry Structure Under Human Capital Intensity: Insights from the Evolution of the Global Advertising Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 141-157, February.
    5. Alvin J. Silk & Marta M. Stiglin, 2016. "Build It, Buy It, or Both? Rethinking the Sourcing of Advertising Services," International Journal of Marketing Studies, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(1), pages 1-13, February.
    6. Mitton, Todd, 2008. "Institutions and concentration," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 367-394, June.
    7. Maria Alipranti & Evangelos Mitrokostas & Emmanuel Petrakis, 2013. "Comparative versus Informative Advertising in Oligopolistic Markets," Working Papers 1301, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
    8. Alvin J. Silk & Ernst R. Berndt, 2003. "Scale and Scope Economies in the Global Advertising and Marketing Services Business," NBER Working Papers 9965, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Alipranti, Maria & Mitrokostas, Evangelos & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2016. "Non-comparative and comparative advertising in oligopolistic markets," DICE Discussion Papers 231, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    10. Alvin J. Silk & Ernst R. Berndt, 1994. "Costs, Institutional Mobility Barriers, and Market Structure: Advertising Agencies as Multiproduct Firms," NBER Working Papers 4826, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Del Barrio-García, Salvador & Kamakura, Wagner A. & Luque-Martínez, Teodoro, 2019. "A Longitudinal Cross-product Analysis of Media-budget Allocations: How Economic and Technological Disruptions Affected Media Choices Across Industries," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 1-15.
    12. Bradley J. Ruffle, 2005. "Buyer Countervailing Power: A Survey of Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 0512, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    13. Robert C. Kloosterman, 2004. "Recent Employment Trends In The Cultural Industries In Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague And Utrecht: A First Exploration," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 95(2), pages 243-252, April.
    14. Maurizio Naldi & Marta Flamini, 2018. "Dynamics of the Hirschman–Herfindahl Index under New Market Entries," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 37(3), pages 344-362, September.
    15. Daron Acemoglu & James A. Robinson, 2015. "The Rise and Decline of General Laws of Capitalism," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(1), pages 3-28, Winter.
    16. Sharon Horsky, 2006. "The Changing Architecture of Advertising Agencies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 367-383, 07-08.
    17. Henri L.F. de Groot & Jacques Poot & Martijn J. Smit, 2007. "Agglomeration, Innovation and Regional Development: Theoretical Perspectives and Meta-Analysis," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 07-079/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    18. Richard B. FREEMAN, 2010. "It's financialization!," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 149(2), pages 163-183, June.
    19. Angela ALBU & Andrei SAFTIUC & Daniel MAFTEI, 2018. "Reflection of Business Activities by Mass Media," Book chapters-LUMEN Proceedings, in: Carmen NÄ‚STASE (ed.), The 14th Economic International Conference: Strategies and Development Policies of Territories: International, Country, Region, City, Location Challen, edition 1, volume 6, chapter 11, pages 100-112, Editura Lumen.
    20. Schmalensee, Richard., 1985. "Testing the differential efficiency hypothesis," Working papers 1628-85., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.

    More about this item

    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:hbs:wpaper:09-044. 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: HBS (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/harbsus.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.