Abstract

This paper develops a game-theoretic model that analyzes how a grocery store responds to the entry of a Walmart Supercenter using its store-format choice. By adopting a set of realistic assumptions, such as the cost advantage of Walmart and differentiated services of grocery stores, we find that the distance to a Walmart Supercenter is a key moderating factor in the store-format choice of grocery stores. Grocery stores would prefer to sell non-food items, but when sufficiently close to Walmart Supercenters they would specialise in food items, as consumers find it less costly to engage in two-stop shopping, making the gain from non-food items smaller. So an asymmetric equilibrium becomes feasible, wherein grocery stores carrying increasingly more non-food products and a new grocery store concept like Whole Foods and Wild Oats emphasising high-quality, organic foods can coexist. Our results yield important managerial implications. Under the specialisation strategy, the quality of its differentiated services should be sufficiently high, at least two to four times the disutility of two-stop shopping. Under the expansion strategy, grocery stores should engage in loss leadership, pricing non-food items below cost to lure large-basket consumers while earning higher margins from food items to compensate for the loss.

摘要

本文开发了一个博弈论模型，该模型分析杂货店如何使用其商店格式选择来响应沃尔玛超级中心的进入。通过采用一系列现实假设，例如沃尔玛的成本优势和杂货店的差异化服务，我们发现到沃尔玛超级中心的距离是杂货店选择商店格式的关键调节因素。杂货店更愿意出售非食品类商品，但当距离沃尔玛超级中心足够近时，它们会专注于食品类商品，因为消费者发现进行两站式购物的成本较低，因此非食品类商品的收益较小。所以不对称平衡变得可行，其中，越来越多的非食品杂货店与强调高品质有机食品的 Whole Foods 和 Wild Oats 等新的杂货店概念可以共存。我们的结果产生了重要的管理启示。在专业化战略下，其差异化服务的质量应该足够高，至少是二站购物负效用的两到四倍。在扩张战略下，杂货店应发挥亏损领导作用，以低于成本的价格定价非食品以吸引大篮子消费者，同时从食品中赚取更高的利润以弥补损失。至少是两站购物的两到四倍的负效用。在扩张战略下，杂货店应发挥亏损领导作用，以低于成本的价格定价非食品以吸引大篮子消费者，同时从食品中赚取更高的利润以弥补损失。至少是两站购物的两到四倍的负效用。在扩张战略下，杂货店应发挥亏损领导作用，以低于成本的价格定价非食品以吸引大篮子消费者，同时从食品中赚取更高的利润以弥补损失。