Although brands have increased their promotional spending substantially in many categories over the past decade, panel-based research into consumer stockpiling behavior typically has assumed that consumers’ decisions regarding whether and how much to purchase have remained invariant to this increase. The authors develop a varying parameter model of purchase incidence and purchase quantity to ascertain whether this increase in promotions has affected households’ stockpiling decisions in the long term. The authors estimate the model on the basis of more than eight years of panel data for a frequently purchased, nonfood, consumer packaged-goods product. The results suggest that consumers’ stockpiling behavior has changed over the years. The increased long-term exposure of households to promotions has reduced their likelihood of making category purchases on subsequent shopping trips. However, when households do decide to buy, they tend to buy more of a good. Such behavior is indicative of an increasing tendency to “lie in wait” for especially good promotions. This change appears to have some deleterious ramifications for category profitability.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AilawadiKusum, and NeslinScott A. (1998), “The Effect of Promotion on Consumption: Buying More and Consuming It Faster,”Journal of Marketing Research, forthcoming.
2.
AssunçaoJoao L., and MeyerRobert J. (1993), “The Rational Effect of Price Promotions on Sales and Consumption,”Management Science, 39(May), 517–35.
3.
BellDavid R., and BucklinRandolph E. (1996), “Investigating the ‘Incidence’ of Reference Effects: A Nested Logit Approach with Latent Segments,” working paper, Anderson School, UCLA.
4.
BlattbergRobert C., and BrieschRichard, and FoxEdward J. (1995), “How Promotions Work,”Marketing Science, 14(3), G122–32.
5.
BlattbergRobert C., and BrieschRichard, and NeslinScott A. (1989), “Sales Promotion: The Long and Short of It,”Marketing Letters, 1(1), 81–97.
6.
BlattbergRobert C., and BrieschRichard, and NeslinScott A. (1990), Sales Promotion: Concepts, Methods, and Strategies.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
7.
BodapatiAnand V., and LalRajiv, and PadmanabhanV. (1997), “Correlation Between Choice and Quantity Behavior, or, Does Loyalty Matter?” paper presented at 1997 Marketing Science Conference, Berkeley, CA (March).
8.
BouldingWilliam, and LeeEunkyu, and StaelinRichard (1994), “Mastering the Mix: Do Advertising, Promotion, and Sales Force Activities Lead to Differentiation?”Journal of Marketing Research, 31(May), 159–72.
9.
BucklinRandolph E., and GuptaSunil (1992), “Brand Choice, Purchase Incidence, and Segmentation: An Integrated Modeling Approach,”Journal of Marketing Research, 29(May), 201–205.
10.
BucklinRandolph E., and LattinJames M. (1991), “A Two-State Model of Purchase Incidence and Brand Choice,”Marketing Science, 10(1), 24–39.
11.
ClarkeDarral G. (1976), “Econometric Measurement of the Duration of Advertising Effects on Sales,”Journal of Marketing Research, 13(November), 345–57.
12.
ChintaguntaPradeep K. (1993), “Investigating Purchase Incidence, Brand Choice, and Purchase Quantity Decisions of Households,”Marketing Science, 12(2), 184–208.
13.
DekimpeMarnik G., and HanssensDominique M. (1995a), “The Persistence of Marketing Effects on Sales,”Marketing Science, 14(1), 1–21.
14.
DekimpeMarnik G., and HanssensDominique M. (1995b), “Empirical Generalizations About Market Evolution and Stationarity,”Marketing Science, 14(3), G109–21.
15.
DillonWilliam R., and GuptaSunil (1996), “A Segment-Level Model of Category Volume and Brand Choice,”Marketing Science, 15(1), 38–59.
16.
ErdemTulin, and KeaneMichael P. (1996), “Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Capturing Dynamic Brand Choice Processes in Turbulent Consumer Goods Markets,”Marketing Science, 15(1), 1–20.
17.
FaderPeter S., HardieBruce G.S., LittleJohn D.C., and AbeMakato (1992), “Market Response with Purchase Feedback,” working paper, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.
18.
FaderPeter S., LattinJames M., and LittleJohn D.C. (1992), “Estimating Nonlinear Parameters in the Multinomial Logit Model,”Marketing Science, 11(4), 372–85.
19.
Forbes (1991), “The Trend is Not Their Friend,”148 (September), 114–19.
20.
GönülFüsun, and SrinivasanKanaan (1996), “Estimating the Impact of Consumer Expectations of Coupons on Purchase Behavior: A Dynamic Structural Model,”Marketing Science, 15(3), 262–79.
21.
GönülFüsun, and SrinivasanKanaan (1993), “Modeling Multiple Sources of Heterogeneity in Multinomial Logit Models: Methodological and Managerial Issues,”Marketing Science, 12(3), 213–3.
22.
GuadagniPeter M., and LittleJohn D.C. (1983), “A Logit Model of Brand Choice Calibrated on Scanner Data,”Marketing Science, 2(3), 203–208.
23.
GuptaSunil (1988), “Impact of Sales Promotions on When, What, and How Much to Buy,”Journal of Marketing Research, 25(November), 342–56.
24.
GuptaSunil (1991), “Stochastic Models of Interpurchase Time with Time-Dependent Covariates,”Journal of Marketing Research, 28(February), 1–15.
25.
HelsenKristiaan, and SchmittleinDavid C. (1992), “Some Characterizations of Stockpiling Behavior Under Uncertainty,”Marketing Letters, 3(1), 5–16.
26.
JacobsonRobert, and ObermillerCarl (1990), “The Formation of Expected Future Price: A Reference Price for Forward-Looking Consumers,”Journal of Consumer Research, 16(March), 420–32.
27.
JainDipak C., and VilcassimNaufel J. (1991), “Investigating Household Purchase Timing Decisions: A Conditional Hazard Function Approach,”Marketing Science, 10(1), 1–23.
28.
KalyanaramGurumurthy, and WinerRussell S. (1995), “Empirical Generalizations from Reference Price Research,”Marketing Science, 14(3), G161–69.
29.
KrishnaAradhna (1991), “The Effect of Dealing Patterns on Consumer Perceptions of Deal Frequency and Willingness to Pay,”Journal of Marketing Research, 28(November), 441–51.
30.
KrishnaAradhna (1992), “The Normative Impact of Consumer Price Expectations for Multiple Brands on Consumer Purchase Behavior,”Marketing Science, 11(3), 266–86.
31.
KrishnaAradhna (1994), “The Impact of Dealing Patterns on Purchase Behavior,”Marketing Science, 13(4), 351–73.
32.
KrishnamurthiLakshman, and MazumdarTradib, and RajS.P. (1992), “Asymmetric Response to Price in Consumer Brand Choice and Purchase Quantity Decisions,”Journal of Consumer Research, 19(December), 387–400.
33.
KrishnamurthiLakshman, and MazumdarTradib, and RajS.P. (1988), “A Model of Brand Choice and Purchase Quantity Price Sensitivities,”Marketing Science, 7(1), 1–20.
34.
KrishnamurthiLakshman, and MazumdarTradib, and RajS.P. (1991), “An Empirical Analysis of the Relationship between Brand Loyalty and Consumer Price Elasticity,”Marketing Science, 10(2), 172–83.
35.
LalRajiv, and PadmanabhanV. (1995), “Competitive Response in Equilibria,”Marketing Science, 14(3), G101–108.
36.
LeeLung-Fei, and TrostRobert P. (1978), “Estimation of Some Limited Dependent Variable Models with Applications to Housing Demand,”Journal of Econometrics, 8, 357–82.
37.
MaddalaG.S. (1983), Limited Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Economics.New York: Cambridge University Press.
38.
MaddalaG.S. (1985), “A Survey of the Literature on Selectivity Bias as It Pertains to Health Care Markets,”Advances in Health Economics and Health Services Research, 6, 3–18.
39.
MaddalaG.S. (1991), “A Perspective on the Use of Limited Dependent and Qualitative Variables Models in Accounting Research,”The Accounting Review, 66(October), 788–807.
40.
The Marketer (1990), “Trade Promotion Junkies,” (October), 30–33.
41.
MelaCarl F., and GuptaSunil, and JedidiKamel (1998), “Assessing Long-Term Promotional Influences on Market Structure,”International Journal of Research in Marketing, forthcoming.
42.
MelaCarl F., and GuptaSunil, and LehmannDonald R. (1997), “The Long-Term Impact of Promotion and Advertising on Consumer Brand Choice,”Journal of Marketing Research, 34(May), 248–61.
43.
MelaRichard L. (1965), “Sales Budgeting for Controlled Growth Objectives,”Journal of Marketing Research, 2(May), 133–40.
44.
NelsonForrest D. (1977), “Censored Regression Models with Unobserved Stochastic Censoring Thresholds,”Journal of Econometrics, 6(3), 309–27.
45.
PapatlaPurushottam, and KrishnamurthiLakshman (1996), “Measuring the Dynamic Effects of Promotions on Brand Choice,”Journal of Marketing Research, 33(February), 20–35.
46.
Progressive Grocer (1995), “The Prisoner's Dilemma,” (May), 99–101.
47.
SiddarthS., BucklinRandolph E., and MorrisonDonald G. (1995), “Making the Cut: Modeling and Analyzing Choice Set Restriction in Scanner Panel Data,”Journal of Marketing Research, 32(August), 255–67.
48.
TellisGerald J. (1988), “The Price Elasticity of Selective Demand: A Meta-Analysis of Econometric Models of Sales,”Journal of Marketing Research, 25(November), 331–41.
49.
The Wall Street Journal (1996), “P&G Bets on Low Prices ‘Every Day’ To Cut Out Need for Company Coupons,” (January 8).
50.
WansinkBrian, and DeshpandéRohit (1994), “Out of Sight, Out of Mind: Pantry Stockpiling and Brand-Usage Frequency,”Marketing Letters, 5(January), 91–100.
