Does triple jeopardy exist for retail chains?
Date
2005
Authors
Riebe, E.L.
Sharp, B.M.
Editors
Advisors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Type:
Journal article
Citation
Journal of Empirical Generalisations in Marketing Science, 2005; 9
Statement of Responsibility
Conference Name
Abstract
The famous 'double jeopardy' empirical generalisation has been well documented for many competitive choice situations, including store shopping. A third 'disadvantage' (hence triple jeopardy) has been proposed (Bhat and Fox, 1996; Uncles, 1995) that grocery chains with lower market share have fewer customers, who shop slightly less often, and who also spend less each visit. Unlike double jeopardy there is no theoretical explanation for why such a third jeopardy effect might occur. We examined panel data on grocery shopping in an Australasian region in the late 1990's and found double, but no triple jeopardy. Differences between chains in terms of average spend per visit seem instead easily explained by idiosyncratic brand differences of average store size and pricing policy. The research has implications for how average spend per visit might be changed.
School/Discipline
Dissertation Note
Provenance
Description
Access Status
Rights
Copyright status unknown