Private Labels: Facilitators or Impediments to Supply Chain Coordination

We consider a retailer’s decision of whether to develop an internally produced, private label version of a national brand and the role that this decision plays in coordinating the supply chain. Our model assumes that the perceived quality of the private label is lower than that of the national brand, and we allow for the two products to have different marginal costs. We further allow for a fixed development cost that the retailer must incur to develop private label capability, and distinguish two types of private labels depending upon whether they would or would not be developed as product line extensions by a vertically integrated supply chain. We refer to these two types as first-best (FB) and non-first-best (NFB) product line extensions, respectively. When the private label can be characterized as a NFB product line extension, its development creates adverse cannibalization effects, yet it also helps to mitigate the effects of double marginalization with respect to the national brand. We characterize the conditions under which the retailer will develop private label capability, and distinguish among the conditions under which this is either beneficial or detrimental to the overall performance of the supply chain.

[1]  David E. Mills Why Retailers Sell Private Labels , 1995 .

[2]  Philippe Bontems,et al.  Strategic Effects of Private Labels , 1999 .

[3]  R. Steiner,et al.  The Nature and Benefits of National Brand/Private Label Competition , 2004 .

[4]  S. Rosen,et al.  Monopoly and product quality , 1978 .

[5]  Koen Pauwels,et al.  Who Benefits from Store Brand Entry , 2004 .

[6]  J. M. Villas-Boas Product Line Design for a Distribution Channel , 1998 .

[7]  Stephen M. Gilbert,et al.  Strategic interactions between channel structure and demand enhancing services , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[8]  Andy A. Tsay,et al.  Channel Dynamics Under Price and Service Competition , 2000, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[9]  J. M. Villas-Boas,et al.  The Targeting of Advertising , 2005 .

[10]  Hans Sebastian Heese,et al.  Supply Chain Conflict Due to Store Brands: The Value of Wholesale Price Commitment in a Retail Supply Chain , 2010, Decis. Sci..

[11]  David E. Mills Private labels and manufacturer counterstrategies , 1999 .

[12]  Florian Zettelmeyer,et al.  The Strategic Positioning of Store Brands in Retailer–Manufacturer Negotiations , 2004 .

[13]  L. Beril Toktay,et al.  Market Segmentation and Product Technology Selection for Remanufacturable Products , 2005, Manag. Sci..

[14]  Kusum L. Ailawadi,et al.  An Empirical Analysis of the Determinants of Retail Margins: The Role of Store-Brand Share , 2004 .

[15]  Terry A. Taylor,et al.  Supply Chain Coordination Under Channel Rebates with Sales Effort Effects , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[16]  Preyas S. Desai Quality Segmentation in Spatial Markets: When Does Cannibalization Affect Product Line Design? , 2001 .

[17]  Philip M. Parker,et al.  The economics of quality-equivalent store brands , 2006 .

[18]  Evan L. Porteus,et al.  The Impact of an Integrated Marketing and Manufacturing Innovation , 2000, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[19]  Anne T. Coughlan,et al.  Private label positioning: Quality versus feature differentiation from the national brand , 2006 .

[20]  Ronald T. Wilcox,et al.  Private-Labels and the Channel Relationship: A Cross-Category Analysis , 1998 .

[21]  Jagmohan S. Raju,et al.  Positioning of Store Brands , 2002 .

[22]  K. Moorthy Market Segmentation, Self-Selection, and Product Line Design , 1984 .

[23]  I. Png,et al.  Market segmentation, cannibalization, and the timing of product introductions , 1992 .

[24]  Roman Kapuscinski,et al.  Coordinating Contracts for Decentralized Supply Chains with Retailer Promotional Effort , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[25]  Jagmohan S. Raju,et al.  The introduction and performance of store brands , 1995 .