IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/col/000122/011812.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Lanzamiento de nuevas marcas en industrias de productos homogéneos básicos con altos niveles de concentración

Author

Listed:
  • Hernán Herrera Echeverry

Abstract

El presente trabajo aplica los modelos de Cournot y de Stackelberg a una industria de productos homogéneos con alto nivel de concentración. El objeto es usar estos modelos como criterio de decisión acerca de la alternativa de introducir una nueva marca por parte de un competidor actual. Se trata de establecer si lanzar una nueva marca sería una estrategia relevante para una empresa en la búsqueda de captar mayor mercado. Se asume que en un mercado de bienes básicos y homogéneos, la demanda no se modifica ante el ingreso de una nueva marca y que el espacio de mercado que absorbe la nueva marca, procede de la participación que resta de las marcas existentes. Se muestra como, la cantidad que produce cada competidor nuevamente converge con el equilibrio de Cournot, por lo cual, no existe beneficio adicional producto del lanzamiento de la marca nueva, si se supone racionalidad. Teóricamente las firmas con mejor posición en el mercado se verán menos inclinadas a lanzar nuevas marcas y preferirán mantener o mejorar su posicionamiento, las firmas con menos participación en el mercado serán las más inclinadas a realizar nuevos lanzamientos. Se concluye que la introducción de marcas en mercados homogéneos de bienes básicos poco diferenciados no es una estrategia interesante para incrementar la participación en el mercado cuando las marcas de quienes lanzan los productos no están bien posicionadas. Para los efectos de la ilustración de los planteamientos anteriores se utilizó como base la industria molinera de arroz blanco en Colombia. ***** This work applies the models of Cournot and Stackelberg to a homogenous product industry with high level of concentration. The object is to use these models as decision criterion over the alternative to introduce a new mark by incumbent not leader. It is wanted to establish if to send a new mark it would be a good strategy for a firm in the search to catch greater market. It is assumed that in a market of basic and homogenous goods, the demand is not modified before the entrance of a new mark and that the market space that absorbs the new mark comes from the participation that reduces of the existing marks. The results indicate that the amount that produces each competitor again converges with the balance of Cournot, thus, does not exist additional benefit product of the launching of the new mark, if rationality assumes. Theoretically the firms with better position in the market will be seen less inclined send new marks and will prefer to maintain or to improve their positioning, the companies with less participation in the market will be most inclined to make new launchings. The conclusion is the introduction of marks in homogenous markets of basic goods little differentiated is not an interesting strategy to increase the participation in the market when the marks of those who send products are not well positioned. The mill industry of white rice on Colombia was used for illustration of conclusions.

Suggested Citation

  • Hernán Herrera Echeverry, 2007. "Lanzamiento de nuevas marcas en industrias de productos homogéneos básicos con altos niveles de concentración," Documentos de Trabajo de Valor Público 11812, Universidad EAFIT.
  • Handle: RePEc:col:000122:011812
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repository.eafit.edu.co/bitstream/handle/10784/2693/2007_11_Hernan_Herrera.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "Rationalizability, Learning, and Equilibrium in Games with Strategic Complementarities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(6), pages 1255-1277, November.
    2. Wiggins, Steven N & Raboy, David G, 1996. "Price Premia to Name Brands: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(4), pages 377-388, December.
    3. A. Michael Spence, 1977. "Entry, Capacity, Investment and Oligopolistic Pricing," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 8(2), pages 534-544, Autumn.
    4. Dixit, Avinash, 1980. "The Role of Investment in Entry-Deterrence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(357), pages 95-106, March.
    5. Schmalensee, Richard, 1982. "Product Differentiation Advantages of Pioneering Brands," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 349-365, June.
    6. Thomas, Louis A, 1995. "Brand Capital and Incumbent Firms' Positions in Evolving Markets," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(3), pages 522-534, August.
    7. Michael Conlin & Vrinda Kadiyali, 2006. "Entry‐Deterring Capacity in the Texas Lodging Industry," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 167-185, March.
    8. Richard Schmalensee, 1978. "Entry Deterrence in the Ready-to-Eat Breakfast Cereal Industry," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 305-327, Autumn.
    9. Schmalensee, Richard, 1983. "Advertising and Entry Deterrence: An Exploratory Model," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(4), pages 636-653, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:dgr:rugsom:07009 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Clemens Lutz & Ron Kemp & S. Gerhard Dijkstra, 2010. "Perceptions regarding strategic and structural entry barriers," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 19-33, July.
    3. Lutz, Clemens & Kemp, Ron & Dijkstra, S. Gerhard, 2007. "SME's perceptions regarding strategic and structural entry barriers," Research Report 07009, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    4. Lalit Manral, 2015. "The demand-side dynamics of entrant heterogeneity," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 401-445, April.
    5. Qi, Shi, 2019. "Advertising, industry innovation, and entry deterrence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 30-50.
    6. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107069978.
    7. Karaer, Özgen & Erhun, Feryal, 2015. "Quality and entry deterrence," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 292-303.
    8. Clarissa Yeap, 2011. "Capacity use in multi-unit firms: evidence for efficiency gains or strategic competition in the US restaurant industry?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(22), pages 2953-2968.
    9. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    10. de Haas, Samuel & Herold, Daniel & Schäfer, Jan Thomas, 2022. "Entry deterrence due to brand proliferation: Empirical evidence from the German interurban bus industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    11. Scott Morton, Fiona M., 2000. "Barriers to entry, brand advertising, and generic entry in the US pharmaceutical industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(7), pages 1085-1104, October.
    12. Fernández, Zulima, 2004. "La competencia dinámica entre pioneros y seguidores: aplicación al sector de la telefonía móvil en Europa," DEE - Documentos de Trabajo. Economía de la Empresa. DB db040805, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía de la Empresa.
    13. Wipo, 2013. "World Intellectual Property Report 2013 - Brands: Reputation and Image in the Global Marketplace," WIPO Economics & Statistics Series, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, number 2013:944, April.
    14. Bae, Hyung, 2002. "Product innovation, sell-off, and entry deterrence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 577-588, April.
    15. Ganslandt, Mattias, 2001. "Strategic Investment and Market Integration," Working Paper Series 560, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    16. Rajiv Dewan & Bing Jing & Abraham Seidmann, 2003. "Product Customization and Price Competition on the Internet," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(8), pages 1055-1070, August.
    17. Peter-J. Jost, 2023. "Price commitment and the strategic launch of a fighter brand," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 381-435, September.
    18. Catherine Matraves & Laura Rondi, 2007. "Product Differentiation, Industry Concentration and Market Share Turbulence," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 37-57.
    19. Glenn Ellison & Sara Fisher Ellison, 2011. "Strategic Entry Deterrence and the Behavior of Pharmaceutical Incumbents Prior to Patent Expiration," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 1-36, February.
    20. Nie, Jiajia & Zhong, Ling & Li, Gendao & Cao, Kuo, 2022. "Piracy as an entry deterrence strategy in software market," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(2), pages 560-572.
    21. Goo, Moon Mo, 1997. "The measurement of market power: short-run, long-run, and dynamic adjustment models," ISU General Staff Papers 1997010108000012985, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Duopolio; Modelo de Cournot; Modelo de Stackelberg; Nuevas marcas;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • D86 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Economics of Contract Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:col:000122:011812. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Valor Público EAFIT - Centro de estudios e incidencia (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cieafco.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.