The Role of Retail Prices and Promotions in Determining Cigarette Brand Market Shares

Abstract

Over the past two decades, two forms of price competition have emerged within the cigarette industry: the introduction and spread of discount and deep discount cigarettes and the increased use of price-related promotions. In this paper, we use quarterly market-level, scanner-based data on cigarette prices, promotions, and sales for 50 US markets over the period from 1994-IV through 2002-II to examine the impact of price and promotions on market shares for premium, discount, and deep discount brand cigarettes. Our estimates indicate that changes in relative prices, including those resulting from promotions, account for much of observed changes in market shares. Copyright Springer 2006brand choice, cigarettes, master settlement agreement, premium, discount and deep discount brands, price and promotion, JEL classification, L1, L66, M30,

An Empirical Analysis of the Counterfactual: A Merger and Divestiture in the Australian Cigarette Industry

“…Therefore the theory is that greater differentiation should translate into greater degrees of market power. Our results also appear to go against results found in other studies, such as Tauras, Peck and Chaloupka (2006) who found that market shares for discount and deep discount cigarettes are three or more times as responsive to own price changes than the mainstream market shares.…”

Trends in cigarette pricing and purchasing patterns in a sample of US smokers: findings from the ITC US Surveys (2002-2011)

“…Bulk purchases were indicated by purchases of more than a single package of cigarettes (ie, either multiple packs or cartons). Previous studies have described multipack sales in terms of manufacturers’ ‘buy one get one free’ promotions;11 however, multipacks do not need to be part of a special price promotion offer.…”

The effect of marketing regulations on efficiency: LeChatelier versus coordination effects

“…This is consistent with our finding that firms over-invested in the ''other advertising'' category during this period. For further discussion of marketing activity after the Settlement, see Tauras et al (2006).…”

“…In follow-up studies using the event study approach, however, Johnson et al (1991) and Lamdin (1999) find evidence that the Ban did not raise industry performance, measured by tobacco stock returns. 4 Tauras et al (2006) investigate the effect of the National Tobacco Settlement on the market share of the leading brands of cigarettes, but the effect of the Settlement on economic performance has yet to be examined.…”