(3.235.108.188) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/03/07 19:45
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:朱俊旻
研究生(外文):JIUNN-MIN JU
論文名稱:零售商價格促銷短期效果之實証研究-----以台灣連鎖便利商店飲料商品為例
論文名稱(外文):The Empirical Study on Short Term Effect of Retailer Price Promotion-----Based on the Sales of Beverage Products in CVS
指導教授:翁景民翁景民引用關係蔣明晃蔣明晃引用關係
指導教授(外文):JAMES C. M. WENG Ph.D.DAVID M. H. CHIANG Ph.D.
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:商學研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:一般商業學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2002
畢業學年度:90
語文別:中文
論文頁數:68
中文關鍵詞:價格促銷不對稱競爭價格彈性促銷彈性
外文關鍵詞:price promotionasymmetric competitionprice elasticitypromotion elasticity
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:322
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:5
當越來越多的零售商以價格促銷作為吸引消費者之手段時,市場上同時間內可能會有無數個同質或是不同質的商品在進行價格促銷,對產品製造商來說,在每天幾乎都會有不同的商品進行價格促銷下,是否應該隨競爭品牌起舞?亦或者具有優勢策略解呢?
本研究為了提供零售商與產品製造商有用之行銷決策資訊,將著重於分析價格促銷下之短期效果。藉由研究不對稱競爭(asymme-tric competition)、商品促銷彈性(promotion elasticity)與商品價格彈性(price elasticity)之關係等兩項議題,了解各類品間以及各品牌之競爭關係。而為了研究上述之議題,本研究選擇以連鎖便利商店(CVS)飲料項商品的實際銷售資料作為研究對象,建立多元迴歸模型分析,以實證研究的方式來探討這些相關議題。
經過多元迴歸模型分析後,本研究之結論為:在將市場上所有具有競爭性的替代品納入模型中考慮後,在同類商品中品牌間不對稱競爭之現象並不顯著,而在不同分類商品中之不對稱競爭現象,本研究之結論則是,當市場接受度最高之商品類別進行促銷會對市場接受度較低的商品類別之銷售量造成影響,但是市場接受度較低之商品類別進行促銷並不能對市場接受度較高之商品造成相同程度之影響。
在商品價格促銷效果與商品調整正常價格效果對於銷售量的影響之大小關係方面,本研究在觀察連鎖便利商店之商品價格促銷效果與商品調整正常價格效果時,發現兩者之間並無差異,參照前人之研究結論,認為消費者購買加速效果之不同,為造成在便利商店中商品價格促銷效果與商品調整正常價格效果無差異之主因,並推論消費者之購買加速效果或許為造成商品促銷彈性大於商品價格彈性之部分原因。
Promotion activities are frequently used to maintain competitive parity based on the belief that market share distribution among competing brands are influenced by advertising, features, price discounts, …etc. As the price promotion becomes one of the most important means to catch attentions of consumers, you may see both homogeneous products and substitution products promoted everyday. As a result, how manufacturers can identify their major competitors becomes an interesting and important issue for both manufacturers and retailers.
This research aims to provide useful analysis to help retailers and product manufacturers understand the competition relationship among all competing brands and products. The analysis emphasizes the short term effect of price promotion and study the issue of asymmetric competition, the relative strength between promotion elasticity and price elasticity. Furthermore, an empirical study based on the sales of beverage product in CVS is also analyzed in this research.
We found that the asymmetric competitions between homogeneous product categories are not significant when all competitively substitutable brands are considered. However, the analysis of the asymmetric competition between substitutable product categories does suggest that if the highly popular product categories are promoted, the sales volume of the less popular categories would be affected, while the opposite does not hold.
In addition to those mentioned above, this research finds that the promotion elasticity and price elasticity of beverage product are the same in CVS. This result reveals that this finding may be contributed by the lack of purchase acceleration effect.
目錄
致謝……………………………………………………………………….i
中文摘要…………………………………………………………………ii
英文摘要………………………………………………………………...iii
目錄……………………………………………………………………...iv
圖次……………………………………………………………………...vi
表次……………………………………………………………………..vii
第一章 緒論……………………………………………………………..1
1.1研究背景與動機………………………………………………...1
1.2研究目的………………………………………………………...3
1.3研究對象………………………………………………………...4
1.4論文架構……………………………………………………...…5
第二章 文獻探討………………………………………………………..6
2.1促銷效果………………………………………………………..7
2.2促銷效果之發生……………………………………………….10
2.3有關不對稱的交叉彈性……………………………………….12
2.4有關促銷彈性與價格彈性…………………………………….21
第三章 研究方法………………………………………………………26
3.1研究架構 …………………………………………………….26
3.2消費情境與品牌競爭情形…………………………………….27
3.2.1 本研究消費者之消費情境假定………………………...27
3.2.2 商品競爭空間描述……………………………………...29
3.2.3 價格促銷效果與調整正常售價效果之描述…………...29
3.3建立分析模式…………………………………………….……30
3.3.1 品牌轉換之不對稱競爭現象……………………….…..30
3.3.2 價格促銷效果與調整正常售價效果之關係…………...35
3.4多元迴歸模型建立………………………………………….…35
3.5資料收集與整理……………………………………………….38
3.5.1資料收集………………………………………………...38
3.5.2資料整理………………………………………………...41
第四章 研究結果……………………………………………………...44
4.1多元迴歸模式檢驗…………………………………………….44
4.2不對稱之競爭狀態分析描述………………………………….47
4.3價格促銷與調整正常售價效果之分析比較………………….53
第五章 結論與建議…………………………………………………...58
5.1本研究之結論……………………………………………………58
5.2給商品製造商之建議……………………………………………59
5.3研究限制…………………………………………………………59
5.4給後續研究者之建議……………………………………………60
參考文獻………………………………………………………………..61
附錄……………………………………………………………………..64
參考文獻
1. Allenby,G.M. and P.E. Rossi(1991),”Quality Perceptions and Asymmetric Switching Between Brands,” Marketing Science,10(3),185-205.
2. Bemmaor, A. C. and D. Mouchoux(1991),”Measuring the Short-Term Effect of In-Store Promotion and Retail Advertising on Brand Sales: A Factorial Experiment ,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28(May), pp. 202-214.
3. Blattberg, Robert C. and Kenneth J. Wisniewski(1989),”Price-Induced Patterns of Competition,” Marketing Science,Vol.8,no.4 ,pp.291-309.
4. Blattberg, Robert C., Richard Briesch , Edward .Fox(1995),”How promotions work,”, Marketing Science,Vol.14,no.3,Part2 of 2 ,pp.G122-G132.
5. Blattberg, Robert C. and Scott A. Neslin(1989),”Sales Promotion: The long and the short of it ,”Marketing Letters,Vol.1 no.1 ,pp.81-97.
6. Blattberg, Robert C. and Scott A. Neslin(1990),”Sales Promotion: Concept, Methods, and Strategies Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, Inc.
7. Cooper, Lee G.(1988),”Competitive Maps: The Structure Under-lying Asymmetric Cross-elasticities ,” Management Science, Vol. 34(June),pp. 96-108.
8. Bell, David R., Jeongwen Chiang ,V. Padmanabhan (1999),”The Decomposition of Promotional Response :An Empirical Generalization,” Marketing Science,Vol.18,no. 4,pp.504-526.
9. Lilien , Gary L. & Philip Kotler & K.Sridhar Moorthy (1992),”Marketing Models”, chapter 7,Prentice Hall, Inc.
10. Guadagni, P.M. and J. D. C. Little (1983),”A Logit Model of Brand Choice Calibrated on Scanner Data,” Marketing Science, Vo2. no. 2 ,pp. 203-238.
11. Gupta, Sunil (1988),”Impact of Sales Promotion on When, What, and How Much to Buy,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.25 (November), pp. 342-355.
12. Hardie, B. G. S., E. J. Johnson , and P.S. Fader(1993),”Modeling Loss Aversion and Reference Dependence Effects on Brand Choice ,” Marketing Science ,12(4),pp.378-394
13. Kahneman , D. and A. Tversky(1979),”Prospect Theory:An Analysis of Decision Under Risk,”Econometrica,47(March), pp.263-291.
14. Kamakura, W.A. and G.J. Russell (1989),”A Probabilistic Choice Model for Market Segmentation and Elasticity Structure,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.26,no.4 , pp. 379-390
15. Lattin, J.M. and R.E. Bucklin (1989),”Reference Effects of Price and Promotion on Brand Choice Behavior,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.26(August), pp. 299-310.
16. Litvack, David S., Roger J. Calantone , and Paul R. Warshaw (1985),”An Examination of Short-Term Retail Grocery Price Effects,” Journal of Retailing , Vol.61,no.3(Fall 1985),pp.9-26.
17. Abraham* , Magid M. and Leonard M.Lodish(1987) ,”Promoter: An Automated Promotion Evaluation System,” Marketing Science , Vol.6, no.2 , pp.101-123.
18. Mcfadden,Daniel(1973),”Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior,” in Frontiers of Econometrics, P.Zarembka(Ed.), New York:
Academic Press.
19. Mulhern, F.J. and R.P. Leone(1991),”Implicit Price Bundling of Retail Products: A Multi-product Approach to Maximizing Store Profitability,” Journal of Marketing , Vol.55(October), pp. 63-76.
20. Neslin, Scott A. and Robert W. Shoemaker,” An Alternative Ex-planation for Lower Repeat Rate After Promotion Purchases,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.26 , no.2 (May 1989), pp.80-86.
21. Neslin, Scott A., Caroline Henderson, and John Quelch, ”Consumer Promotions and the Acceleration of Product Purchase,” Marketing Science, Vol.4,n0.2 (Spring 1985),pp.147-165.
22. Raj Sethuraman (1996),”A Model of How Discounting High-Priced Brands Affects the Sales of Low-Priced Brands,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 33(November), pp. 399-409.
23. Tversky, A. and D.Kahneman(1991),”Loss Aversion and Riskless Choice :A Reference Dependent Model ,”Quarterly Journal of Economics,106(November),1039-1061.
24. Vilcassim, N.J. and D.C. Jain(1991),”Modeling Purchase Timing and Brand-Switching Behavior Incorporating Explanatory Variables and Unobserved Heterogeneity,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.28
(February), pp. 29-41.
25. Walters, R.G.(1991),”Assessing the Impact of Retail Price Promotions on Product Substitution ,Complementary Purchase ,and Interstore Sales Displacement,” Journal of Marketing , Vol.55(April), pp.17-28.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 74、萬育維、王春雅:政策規劃與需求的落差-失智老人的家屬分析。社區發展季刊,1998;83:92-114。
2. 86、劉雪娥:慢性病家屬生活品質量表心理測定學之探討。護理研究,1993;1(2):127-135。
3. 47、林笑:骨關節炎病患生活品質及其相關因素之探討。護理研究,1994;2(4):371-378。
4. 88、謝瀛華:老年健康維護 :「老化理論」與「抗老研究」。社區發展季刊,1996;74:57-61。
5. 40、吳聖良、胡杏佳、姚克明:臺灣地區居家照護老人主要照顧者負荷情況及需求之調查研究。公共衛生,1991;18(3):237-248。
6. 81、劉淑娟、蘇秀娟、謝美娥:北市身心障礙老人其主要照顧者資源需求之初探。長期照護雜誌,1998;2(2):31-47。
7. 35、吳淑瓊:從健康服務的供需探討我國老人健康照護問題。經社法制論叢,1994:85-100。
8. 79、潘依琳、田聖芳、張媚:居家臥床病人其主要照顧者之壓力源、因應行為與身心健康之探討。公共衛生,1998;24(4):219-234。
9. 46、林春香、劉雪娥、廖張京隸:腎臟移植病患生活品質及其相關因素之探討。護理研究,1993;1(4):369-379。
10. [10]鄭光凱,郭宗南,葉瑞鴻,陳慶安,李鴻志,『高密度電漿設備及其相關製程技術之研發』,電子月刊,pp126-130,2000
11. 94、藍忠孚、熊惠英:臺灣地區長期照護服務之現況及其問題。護理雜誌,1993 40(3):15-24。
12. 92、戴玉慈、余玉眉、連倚南:罹患中風對家庭的衝擊。公共衛生,1990;17(2):171-178。
13. 31、呂寶靜:老人家庭照顧者在社會服務體系角色之初探。主計月報,1997b;84(6):35-38。
14. 30、呂寶靜:臺灣地區老人日間照護方案功能之初探:從老人使用者及其家屬的觀點出發。國立政治大學社會學報,1997a;27:89-120。
15. 22、余玉眉、吳凱勳、陳心耕,陳月枝,陳涵寧,趙殿妮:我國居家護理的需求教育及納入全民健康保險的可行性研究。護理新象,1990;2(1):52-75。
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔