Accounting for Primary and Secondary Demand Effects with Aggregate Data
Published Online:1 Aug 2005https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1040.0101
References
- A choice model for packaged goods: dealing with discrete quantities and quantity discounts. Marketing Sci. (2004) 23(1):95–108Link, Google Scholar
- Quality perceptions and asymmetric switching between brands. Marketing Sci. (1991) 10:185–205Link, Google Scholar
- A hierarchical Bayes model of primary and secondary demand. Marketing Sci. (1998) 17:29–44Link, Google Scholar
- The decomposition of promotional response: an empirical generalization. Marketing Sci. (1999) 18(4):504–526Link, Google Scholar
- Estimating discrete choice models of product differentiation. Rand J. Econom. (1994) 25(2):242–262Crossref, Google Scholar
- Automobile prices in market equilibrium. Econometrica (1995) 60(4):841–890Crossref, Google Scholar
- Logit demand estimation under competitive pricing behavior: an equilibrium framework. Management Sci. (1998) 44(11):1533–1547Link, Google Scholar
- Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model. Transportation Res. (2001) 35B:677–693Crossref, Google Scholar
- Price-induced patterns of competition. Marketing Sci. (1989) 8:291–310Link, Google Scholar
- The simultaneous approach to the whether, what, and how much to buy questions. Marketing Sci. (1991) 10:297–315Link, Google Scholar
- Investigating purchase incidence, brand choice and purchase quantity decisions of households. Marketing Sci. (1993) 12:184–208Link, Google Scholar
- A flexible aggregate logit demand model. (2003) . Working paper, Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
- Balancing profitability and customer value: an application to zone-pricing by a supermarket chain. Quant. Marketing Econom. (2003) 1(1):111–117Crossref, Google Scholar
- GMM estimation with cross sectional dependence. J. Econom. (1999) 92:1–45Crossref, Google Scholar
- A segment-level model of category volume and brand choice. Marketing Sci. (1996) 15(1):38–59Link, Google Scholar
- Multiple discreteness and product differentiation: demand for carbonated soft drinks. Marketing Sci. (2004) 23(1):26–81Link, Google Scholar
- A model of consumer brand and quantity choice dynamics under price uncertainty. Quant. Marketing Econom. (2003) 1(1):5–64Crossref, Google Scholar
- Do household scanner data provide representative inferences from brand choices: a comparison with store data. J. Marketing Res. (1996) 3:383–393Crossref, Google Scholar
- Discrete/continuous models of consumer demand. Econometrica (1984) 52:541–561Crossref, Google Scholar
- Large sample properties of generalized method of moments estimators. Econometrica (1982) 50:1029–1054Crossref, Google Scholar
- . Sales and consumer inventory. (2003) . Working paper, Department of Economics, Northwestern University, Evanston, ILGoogle Scholar
- Determinants of store-level price elasticity. J. Marketing Res. (1995) 32:17–30Crossref, Google Scholar
- Modeling consumer demand for variety. Marketing Sci. (2002) 21(3):229–250Link, Google Scholar
- A model of brand choice and purchase quantity price sensitivities. Marketing Sci. (1988) 7:1–20Link, Google Scholar
- . Multivariate Statistical Methods (1996) (McGraw-Hill, New York) Google Scholar
- A structural model of quantity and brand choice: estimation issues and managerial implications. (1998) . Working paper, Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Ontario, CanadaGoogle Scholar
- Simulation and the asymptotics of optimization estimators. Econometrica (1989) 57(5):1027–1057Crossref, Google Scholar
- Demand system specification and estimation. (1992) (Oxford University Press, New York) 53–66Google Scholar
- Structural analysis of competitive pricing in the presence of a strategic retailer. Marketing Sci. (2001) 20(3):244–264Link, Google Scholar
- . Is 3/4 of the sales promotion bump due to brand switching? No, it is 1/3. J. Marketing Res. (2003) 40(4):481–491Crossref, Google Scholar
- Decomposing the sales promotion bump with store data. Marketing Sci. (2004) 23(3):317–334Link, Google Scholar

