Market Timing Strategy
Market Entry Timing Strategy
Empirical study (Robinson and Fornell, 1985) shows that first mover 20%, early followers 17%, and late entrants 13% market share. Robinson (1988) believes that the order of entry alone explain 8.9% of the variation in market shares. It has been shown that the longer the elapsed time between entry of the first mover and that of later entrants, the more opportunities becomes available to the first mover to achieve cost and differentiation advantages. A longer response time provides the first mover to promote awareness and trial that contribute to category learning and for consumers to integrate into their memory additional information through media and WoM.
Lieberman and Montgomery (1988) believe that first-mover advantages arise from three primary sources: Technological leadership, pre-emption of assets, and buyer switching costs. Technological leadership provides a learning curve, where unit production fall with cumulative output, which generates a sustainable cost advantage for the early entrant if learning can be kept proprietary and the firm can maintain leadership in market share. If the first-mover has superior information, it may be able to purchase assets at market prices below those that will prevail later in the evolution of the market, such as natural resources and retailing or manufacturing locations. Where there is room for only a limited number of profitable firms, the first-mover can often select the most attractive niches and may be able to take strategic actions that limit the amount of space available for subsequent entrants. With switching costs, late entrants must invest extra resources to attract customers away from the first-mover firm. Buyer may rationally stick with the first brand they encounter that performs the job satisfactorily. Brand loyalty of this sort may be particularly strong for low-cost convenience goods. Thus, late entrants must have a truly superior product, or else advertise more frequently or
Empirical study (Robinson and Fornell, 1985) shows that first mover 20%, early followers 17%, and late entrants 13% market share. Robinson (1988) believes that the order of entry alone explain 8.9% of the variation in market shares. It has been shown that the longer the elapsed time between entry of the first mover and that of later entrants, the more opportunities becomes available to the first mover to achieve cost and differentiation advantages. A longer response time provides the first mover to promote awareness and trial that contribute to category learning and for consumers to integrate into their memory additional information through media and WoM.
Lieberman and Montgomery (1988) believe that first-mover advantages arise from three primary sources: Technological leadership, pre-emption of assets, and buyer switching costs. Technological leadership provides a learning curve, where unit production fall with cumulative output, which generates a sustainable cost advantage for the early entrant if learning can be kept proprietary and the firm can maintain leadership in market share. If the first-mover has superior information, it may be able to purchase assets at market prices below those that will prevail later in the evolution of the market, such as natural resources and retailing or manufacturing locations. Where there is room for only a limited number of profitable firms, the first-mover can often select the most attractive niches and may be able to take strategic actions that limit the amount of space available for subsequent entrants. With switching costs, late entrants must invest extra resources to attract customers away from the first-mover firm. Buyer may rationally stick with the first brand they encounter that performs the job satisfactorily. Brand loyalty of this sort may be particularly strong for low-cost convenience goods. Thus, late entrants must have a truly superior product, or else advertise more frequently or