IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ems/eureri/7867.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

When Should Nintendo Launch its Wii? Insights From a Bivariate Successive Generation Model

Author

Listed:
  • Franses, Ph.H.B.F.
  • Hernández-Mireles, C.

Abstract

November 2006 most likely marks the launch of Sony’s PS3, the successor to PS2. Later, Nintendo is expected to launch the Wii, the successor to the GameCube. We answer the question in the title by analyzing the diffusion of the earlier generations of these consoles, and by using a new model that extends the successive-generations model of Norton and Bass (1987) by introducing two market players. Based on interviews with consumers and with retailers, we calibrate part of this model. The main outcome is that an optimal launch time is around June 2007, as then total sales of Nintendo’s GameCube and Wii would get maximized.

Suggested Citation

  • Franses, Ph.H.B.F. & Hernández-Mireles, C., 2006. "When Should Nintendo Launch its Wii? Insights From a Bivariate Successive Generation Model," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2006-032-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    • Handle: RePEc:ems:eureri:7867
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repub.eur.nl/pub/7867/ERS-2006-032-MKT.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Boswijk, H. Peter & Franses, Philip Hans, 2005. "On the Econometrics of the Bass Diffusion Model," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 23, pages 255-268, July.
    2. Demetrios Vakratsas & Frank M. Bass, 2002. "A segment-level hazard approach to studying household purchase timing decisions," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(1), pages 49-59.
    3. Bridges, Eileen & Ensor, Katherine B. & Norton, John A., 1993. "Forecasting the number of competing products in high-technology markets," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 399-405, November.
    4. Frank M. Bass, 1969. "A New Product Growth for Model Consumer Durables," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 215-227, January.
    5. F. M. Scherer, 1967. "Research and Development Resource Allocation Under Rivalry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 81(3), pages 359-394.
    6. Sergei Savin & Christian Terwiesch, 2005. "Optimal Product Launch Times in a Duopoly: Balancing Life-Cycle Revenues with Product Cost," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 26-47, February.
    7. Barry L. Bayus, 1992. "The Dynamic Pricing of Next Generation Consumer Durables," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 251-265.
    8. Fishman, Arthur & Gandal, Neil & Shy, Oz, 1993. "Planned Obsolescence as an Engine of Technological Progress," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 361-370, December.
    9. Swan, Peter L, 1972. "Optimum Durability, Second-Hand Markets, and Planned Obsolescence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(3), pages 575-585, May-June.
    10. Leslie Olin Morgan & Ruskin M. Morgan & William L. Moore, 2001. "Quality and Time-to-Market Trade-offs when There Are Multiple Product Generations," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 89-104, June.
    11. Kim, Namwoon & Srivastava, Rajendra K. & Han, Jin K., 2001. "Consumer decision-making in a multi-generational choice set context," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 123-136, September.
    12. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1985. "Preemption and Rent Equalization in the Adoption of New Technology," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 52(3), pages 383-401.
    13. Lynn O. Wilson & John A. Norton, 1989. "Optimal Entry Timing for a Product Line Extension," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 1-17.
    14. Jeremy Bulow, 1986. "An Economic Theory of Planned Obsolescence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(4), pages 729-749.
    15. Morris A. Cohen & Jehoshua Eliasberg & Teck-Hua Ho, 1996. "New Product Development: The Performance and Time-to-Market Tradeoff," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(2), pages 173-186, February.
    16. Islam, Towhidul & Meade, Nigel, 2000. "Modelling diffusion and replacement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(3), pages 551-570, September.
    17. Devavrat Purohit, 1994. "What Should You Do When Your Competitors Send in the Clones?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 392-411.
    18. Kamien, Morton I & Schwartz, Nancy L, 1972. "Timing of Innovations Under Rivalry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 40(1), pages 43-60, January.
    19. In Ho Lee & Jonghwa Lee, 1998. "A Theory of Economic Obsolescence," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 383-401, September.
    20. Namwoon Kim & Dae Ryun Chang & Allan D. Shocker, 2000. "Modeling Intercategory and Generational Dynamics for A Growing Information Technology Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(4), pages 496-512, April.
    21. Michael Waldman, 1993. "A New Perspective on Planned Obsolescence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(1), pages 273-283.
    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. Hernández-Mireles, C. & Franses, Ph.H.B.F., 2010. "The Launch Timing of New and Dominant Multigeneration Technologies," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2010-022-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    2. Peres, Renana & Muller, Eitan & Mahajan, Vijay, 2010. "Innovation diffusion and new product growth models: A critical review and research directions," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 91-106.
    3. Qiu_Hong Wang & Kai-Lung Hui, 2005. "Technology Timing and Pricing In the Presence of an Installed Base," Industrial Organization 0512013, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Hao Zhao, 2003. "R&D Competition Between an Incumbent and an Entrant: An Integrated Model of R&D Investment, Performance Improvement, and Time-to-Market," Review of Marketing Science Working Papers 2-2-1023, Berkeley Electronic Press.
    5. Il-Horn Hann & Byungwan Koh & Marius F. Niculescu, 2016. "The Double-Edged Sword of Backward Compatibility: The Adoption of Multigenerational Platforms in the Presence of Intergenerational Services," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 112-130, March.
    6. Druehl, Cheryl T. & Schmidt, Glen M. & Souza, Gilvan C., 2009. "The optimal pace of product updates," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(2), pages 621-633, January.
    7. Chen, Yuwen & Carrillo, Janice E., 2011. "Single firm product diffusion model for single-function and fusion products," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(2), pages 232-245, October.
    8. Kivi, Antero & Smura, Timo & Töyli, Juuso, 2012. "Technology product evolution and the diffusion of new product features," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 107-126.
    9. Yogesh V. Joshi & David J. Reibstein & Z. John Zhang, 2009. "Optimal Entry Timing in Markets with Social Influence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(6), pages 926-939, June.
    10. Kuppelwieser, Volker G. & Klaus, Phil & Manthiou, Aikaterini & Boujena, Othman, 2019. "Consumer responses to planned obsolescence," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 157-165.
    11. Ron N. Borkovsky, 2017. "The timing of version releases: A dynamic duopoly model," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 187-239, September.
    12. Liao, Shuangqing & Seifert, Ralf W., 2015. "On the optimal frequency of multiple generation product introductions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(3), pages 805-814.
    13. Ilan Lobel & Jigar Patel & Gustavo Vulcano & Jiawei Zhang, 2016. "Optimizing Product Launches in the Presence of Strategic Consumers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(6), pages 1778-1799, June.
    14. Laksana, Kamonkan & Hartman, Joseph C., 2010. "Planning product design refreshes with service contract and competition considerations," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 189-203, August.
    15. Fethke, Gary & Jagannathan, Raj, 2002. "Monopoly with endogenous durability," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1009-1027, June.
    16. Byungyeon Kim & Oded Koenigsberg & Elie Ofek, 2022. "I Don’t “Recall”: The Decision to Delay Innovation Launch to Avoid Costly Product Failure," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 8889-8908, December.
    17. Gilvan C. Souza & Barry L. Bayus & Harvey M. Wagner, 2004. "New-Product Strategy and Industry Clockspeed," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(4), pages 537-549, April.
    18. Fethke, Gary & Jagannathan, Raj, 2000. "Why would a durable good monopolist also produce a cost-inefficient nondurable good?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 793-812, July.
    19. Shi, Xiaohui & Li, Feng & Bigdeli, Ali Ziaee, 2016. "An examination of NPD models in the context of business models," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 2541-2550.
    20. Samuel Sale, R. & Mesak, Hani I. & Inman, R. Anthony, 2017. "A dynamic marketing-operations interface model of new product updates," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(1), pages 233-242.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Competition; New Products; Successive Generations; Video Consoles;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • L19 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Other
    • M - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics
    • M31 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Marketing

    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:ems:eureri:7867. 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: RePub (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/erimanl.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.