Asymmetric Competition in Choice and the Leveraging of Competitive Disadvantages

Timothy B. Heath, Gangseog Ryu, Subimal Chatterjee (), Michael S. Mccarthy, David L. Mothersbaugh, Sandra J. Milberg and Gary J. Gaeth
Additional contact information
Timothy B. Heath: Graduate School of Business - PITT - University of Pittsburgh - Pennsylvania Commonwealth System of Higher Education (PCSHE)
Gangseog Ryu: NUS - National University of Singapore
Subimal Chatterjee: School of Management - Binghamton University [SUNY] - SUNY - State University of New York
Michael S. Mccarthy: Department of Marketing - MU - Miami University [Ohio]
David L. Mothersbaugh: UA - University of Alabama [Tuscaloosa]
Sandra J. Milberg: GU - Georgetown University [Washington]
Gary J. Gaeth: University of Iowa [Iowa City]

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: Studies of grocery sales show that consumers of store brands switch to (price) discounted national brands more than consumers of national brands switch to discounted store brands. Such asymmetric price competition can be explained with numerous mechanisms proposed here and elsewhere. We report a choice experiment that replicates asymmetric price competition favoring higher‐quality competitors and demonstrates asymmetric quality competition favoring lower‐quality competitors. Also demonstrated are multiple mechanisms contributing to competitive asymmetries, where dominance involving the otherwise preferred brand is particularly potent (e.g., when a higher‐quality competitor matches the price of an otherwise preferred lower‐quality brand). The findings implicate modifications to (1) theories of decision making when extended to repeat choice, (2) empirical models of secondary purchase data, and (3) strategies for positioning and attacking brands. Whereas improving competitive disadvantages often attracts consumers from competitors more than does improving competitive advantages, this benefit must be weighed against the differentiation sacrificed by improving competitive disadvantages (improving competitive advantages, in contrast, increases differentiation).

Keywords: behavioral decision theory; choice; economic psychology; pricing; promotions (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2000-12
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (13)

Published in Journal of Consumer Research, 2000, vol. 27, issue 3, pp. 291-308. ⟨10.1086/317586⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00668916

DOI: 10.1086/317586

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().