Gibrat's law in marketing: The case of liquor brand sales☆

Abstract We test the applicability of Gibrat's Law in the liquor brand market. Basically, we model annual changes in the unit sales of the top fifty liquor brands as white noise. Our results reject this model, but we do find that changes in sales are independent of starting market sales. This leads to the interpretation that brands with above average market share do not tend to gain market share, i.e., initial market share does not affect the subsequent change in market share. Furthermore, brands with above average sales do not have more stable sales than do firms with below average sales. Changes in sales appear highly positively correlated between periods, i.e., brands that gain sales in one period tend to gain sales in the next. Finally, no major liquor type or manufacturer had consistently and significantly greater or lower success across our various annual time periods.

[1]  R. Brodie,et al.  Attraction versus Linear and Multiplicative Market Share Models: An Empirical Evaluation , 1984 .

[2]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Size Distribution of Business Firms , 1958 .

[3]  Marcel Weverbergh,et al.  Market Share Specification, Estimation, and Validation: Toward Reconciling Seemingly Divergent Views , 1985 .

[4]  Uriel G. Rothblum,et al.  Asymptotic behavior of market shares for a stochastic growth model , 1985 .

[5]  V. Cook.  The Net Present Value of Market Share , 1985 .

[6]  Frank M. Bass,et al.  An Investigation into the Order of the Brand Choice Process , 1984 .

[7]  R. Bagozzi.  A Prospectus for Theory Construction in Marketing , 1984 .

[8]  H. A. Simon,et al.  Skew Distributions and the Size of Business Firms , 1977 .

[9]  Andrew Chesher,et al.  Testing the Law of Proportionate Effect , 1979 .

[10]  Robin Wensley,et al.  In Search of the Market Share Effect. , 1981 .

[11]  D. Vining.  Autocorrelated Growth Rates and the Pareto Law: A Further Analysis , 1976, Journal of Political Economy.

[12]  Richard B. Mancke,et al.  Causes of Interfirm Profitability Differences: A New Interpretation of the Evidence , 1974 .

[13]  T. Breurch,et al.  A simple test for heteroscedasticity and random coefficient variation (econometrica vol 47 , 1979 .

[14]  R. Royall.  The Effect of Sample Size on the Meaning of Significance Tests , 1986 .

[15]  Aneel Karnani,et al.  Minimum Market Share , 1983 .

[16]  R. D. Buzzell,et al.  Modelling changes in market share: A cross‐sectional analysis , 1981 .

[17]  D. Aaker,et al.  Is Market Share all that It's Cracked up to Be? , 1985 .

[18]  Peter S. H. Leeflang,et al.  On the Predictive Power of Market Share Attraction Models , 1984 .

[19]  A. Tschoegl,et al.  Size, Growth, and Transnationality among the World's Largest Banks , 1983 .

[20]  Dominique M. Hanssens,et al.  Alcohol Control Laws and the Consumption of Distilled Spirits and Beer , 1985 .

[21]  J. Stock,et al.  DOES GNP HAVE A UNIT ROOT , 1986 .

[22]  W. Fuller,et al.  Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root , 1979 .

[23]  V. Droucopoulos.  International Big Business, 1957–77: A Sequel on the Relationship between Size and Growth , 1982 .

[24]  F. Scherer,et al.  Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance. , 1971 .

[25]  R. D. Buzzell,et al.  Are There “Natural” Market Structures? , 1981 .

[26]  D. Padberg,et al.  The Use of Markov Processes in Measuring Changes in Market Structure , 1962 .

[27]  Frank M. Bass,et al.  The Theory of Stochastic Preference and Brand Switching , 1974 .

[28]  Chris Chatfield,et al.  Introduction to Statistical Time Series. , 1976 .

[29]  A. Buse,et al.  Elements of econometrics , 1972 .

[30]  S. Prais,et al.  A NEW LOOK AT THE GROWTH OF INDUSTRIAL CONCENTRATION , 1974 .

[31]  Scott A. Neslin,et al.  A Comparison of Market Share Models and Estimation Procedures , 1984 .

[32]  A. Sen.  On Economic Inequality , 1974 .