"Is it correct to interpret the results from Marketing Research Study #47 in a cumulating style? That is, if 12% of potential customers prefer a value of '8', 21% prefer a value of "20", and 33% prefer a value of '32', then 12%+21%+33%=66% prefer a value of '32.' After all, don't customers always want 'more' so a product with an attribute value of 32 is always preferred to a product with an attribute value of '20'?"
There are two different type of attributes which comprise vaporware. There are physical raw materials, attributes #1-#5, and there are directional elements, attributes #6-#7 (Compatibility and Warranty). The physical raw materials are of the "ideal-point" variety. Customers want what they want. Deviations, in either direction (too little or too much), are bad. For directional attributes (Compatibility and Warranty, and Dealer Price too), more-is-better or less-is-better are always the cases.
For physical raw materials (attributes #1-#5), too much or too little are presumably both bad, although not necessarily with equal dispreference to customers. Do not cumulate the percentages in Marketing Research Study #47. A value of "56" is NOT a preferred value to those who really want "24"; 56 is a long-way from "24". "56" is just different from "24."
Attributes #6-#7 are directional, with more always being better. All customers should want high levels, "9"s if possible. Whether you should offer such a level is, of course,
and Warranty. Since more-is-always-better for Compatibility and Warranty, research is not needed to learn that everyone prefers a value of "9" for vaporware attributes #6 and #7.
Marketing Research Study #48
"Is a 100% brand satisfaction score possible? I've just found one, for a newly launched product. Any comments?"
A 100% brand satisfaction score for a newly launched product presumably represents a lot of statistical noise associated with the initial launch of one or more brands into a market region. It's also possible that the very early buyers for a new product might be somewhat different than later buyers who represent a broader and more realistic cross- section of vaporware customers. After customers and channel members really get to know a newly launched product and its associated marketing program after another quarter or two, things will settle down to a more realistic brand satisfaction score.
Marketing Research Study #50
"I am troubled by Marketing Research Study #50 ('Price Sensitivity Analysis'). It always seems to show that the lower the prices, the higher the profitability. What is going on?"
Marketing Research Study #50 only predicts long-run market share, based on very specific assumptions (see the marketing research study details in the student manual). It is necessary to translate the long-run market share estimate into a profitability estimate (a spreadsheet would be needed to do so). Obviously, lower prices would increase market share, but lower prices also reduce margins. In addition, lower prices might invite competitive retaliation and lead to all prices in the industry being lower, with consequent lower margins and lower profitability for all.
Please do look carefully at your spreadsheet to ensure that profits are calculated correctly. My experience is that most students' spreadsheets don't have profits calculated correctly.
Several cautions are in order with regard to Marketing Research Study #50. First, Marketing Research Study #50 ("Price Sensitivity Analysis") estimates market share only based on price and product attributes. "Convenience" is not factored into this estimate (price sensitivity analysis is equivalent to a choice simulation in conjoint analysis). Second, price sensitivity analysis estimates could be quite unstable at the beginning of a simulation, when the products are all so similarly positioned. Use caution in commodity-like environments. Third, it might be appropriate to follow-up price sensitivity analysis with a test marketing experiment, since that's a more reliable (albeit expensive) form of long-term marketing mix evaluation.
Marketing Research Study #55
"What is Marketing Research Study #55? Firms appear to be billed for this study automatically every quarter."
Marketing Research Study #55 represents the management information system charges of $1,000 per page associated with all financial and marketing research reports. Q#2 charges will normally be the same for all firms, since the Q#1 financial reports will normally be identical for all firms and no marketing research will have been ordered. Starting at Q#3 (with the charges for Q#2 marketing research being recognized within the Q#3 financial results), these management information system charges will vary across firms due to the varying amounts of marketing research ordered by the firms.
Market Region "9"
"One of my student teams tried to do Marketing Research Study # 12 ('Concept Testing') and there seems to be a problem. This industry has three market regions and when the students selected all regions, the confirmation said they had ordered the study for region 9. I had them use both the lower and upper case 'A' for all regions, but the confirmation came back each time as region 9. They were able to enter one region at a time. What's going on here?"
Region "9" is a valid market region number. It is actually an internal software code for "all regions." For some of the marketing research studies, individual regions are listed by number and a request for "all regions" results in each region being listed separately. For other marketing research studies, region "9" is listed and that is the internal software code for "all regions."