Wholesale- and farm-level impacts of generic advertising: The case of catfish

Zidack, Walter; Kinnucan, Henry W.; Hatch, Upton

doi:10.1080/00036849200000073

Cited by 38 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies indicate that productivity growth takes place not only in producing the fish, but also in processing, marketing and moving the fish down the value chain (Kinnucan HW DO, 1988;Zidack, Kinnucan and Hatch, 1992). This is as expected since it is likely that there are returns to scale in the value chain with larger quantities.…”

Section: $Phulfdq Anddwilvksupporting

confidence: 53%

Market interactions for aquaculture products

Asche

Bjørndal

Young

2001

Aquaculture Economics & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: $Phulfdq Anddwilvksupporting

confidence: 53%

Market interactions for aquaculture products

Asche

Bjørndal

Young

2001

Aquaculture Economics & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Equation (1a) differs from Zidack, Kinnucan, and Hatch's (1992) demand equation in that poultry price is included to test whether poultry is a substitute for catfish. Unfortunately no reliable me-MCI t , a proxy for retailers' cost, is expected to decrease the demand for catfish at the wholesale level.…”

Section: Kinnucan and Miaomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The potential for one medium to enhance the effectiveness of another is taken into account by equation (1a)'s log-linear and log-square root specifications of the sales-advertising relationship. In their analysis, Zidack, Kinnucan, and Hatch (1992) used a Nerlovian specification that implies a geometrically-declining lag distribution. (For a thorough discussion of advertising complementarity and functional form, see Kinnucan & Fearon, 1986, pp.…”

Section: Kinnucan and Miaomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A key decision faced by the managers ment-error problems associated with tracking data or other secondary sources (Kinnucan & Belleza, 1991). Finally, the catfish advertising program has been the subject of several econometric analyses since its inception in March 1987 (Kinnucan, Nelson, & Xiao, 1995;Kinnucan & Venkateswaran, 1990;Zidack, Kinnucan, & Hatch, 1992). This replication permits testing whether advertising responses are robust, a growing concern in the advertising effectiveness literature (Kinnucan, Xiao, Hsia, & Jackson, 1997).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Media‐specific returns to generic advertising: The case of catfish

Kinnucan

Miao

1999

Agribusiness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A key decision faced by managers of generic advertising programs is the allocation of the budget among media (e.g., television, radio, print). In this article, the economics of media allocation are addressed using catfish as a case study. The hypothesis that demand responds equally to all media was rejected. Further analysis indicated that the media with relatively modest expenditures (newspapers and television) had no reliable effect on demand, which suggests that scale is important. Losses sustained from the apparently ineffectual media were more than offset by gains from the effective media (magazines and radio), so that returns overall, net of opportunity cost, were positive. The historical media allocation, however, was inefficient in the sense that a different media mix would have resulted in greater industry profits.

show abstract

“…Nyankori (1991) showed that a link price transmission to farmers is less than to processors and market intermediaries. Zidack et al (1992) showed a price transmission of -.68. Hudson and Hanson (1999) showed long-term price transmission elasticities of 0.617 and 0.434 for the whole fish and fillet markets, respectively.…”

Section: Marketingmentioning

confidence: 98%

Present and Future Trends in the U.S. Catfish Industry: Strategies and Concerns for Millennium Years

Jolly¹,

Ligeon²,

Crews³

et al. 2001

Reviews in Fisheries Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The U.S. catfish industry is one of the fastest growing businesses in the agricultural sector. Annual production growth rate has been above 6.0% from 1991 to 2000. While sales have increased, real prices have fallen. There is expansion of production in nontraditional producing states and reduction in growth rates in others. Yields and surface area continue to increase, while the number of operators continues to decline. There is concern that structural changes may result in uncertainty, which may require changes in strategies and a new research agenda. In this article, we critically examine the structure, production, consumption, and marketing changes in the catfish industry. We forecast demand, supply and prices, and evaluate management and marketing strategies to meet competition in coming years. Research priorities to meet these changes are proposed.

show abstract

Wholesale- and farm-level impacts of generic advertising: The case of catfish

Cited by 38 publications

References 18 publications

Market interactions for aquaculture products

Market interactions for aquaculture products

Media‐specific returns to generic advertising: The case of catfish

Present and Future Trends in the U.S. Catfish Industry: Strategies and Concerns for Millennium Years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About