درباره ارتباط ارزش هزینه های تبلیغات خرده فروش و رشد فروش فروشگاه مشابه

In response to recent calls to study factors that determine a retailer's stock price, this study draws on signaling theory to examine the impact of two key marketing metrics that are widely disclosed by retailers to investors, advertising spending and growth in same-store sales (COMPS), and highlights the moderating role of various firm- and sector-specific factors. Using a stock-response model estimated on a sample of 1,646 observations for 257 retailers, the authors find that the value relevance of advertising spending and COMPS depends on the financial condition of, and the competitive pressures faced by, the retailer. In addition, the positive effect of COMPS on stock returns is found to be stronger in the presence of decreases in advertising spending.

In spite of recent assertions that “it would be particularly useful to develop an understanding of the factors that influence a retailer's stock price” (Petersen et al. 2009, p. 106, italics added), few studies have considered if (and how) investors react to unanticipated changes in marketing metrics in the retail industry. This is surprising, as an increasing number of studies have recently examined whether marketing metrics are value relevant, i.e., whether unanticipated changes in marketing metrics have a significant effect on stock returns, above and beyond the effects of conventional accounting and financial metrics (see Srinivasan and Hanssens 2009 for a recent review). Interestingly, most prior research on the value relevance of marketing metrics either uses a cross-industry sample where retailers constitute only a small portion of the sample (e.g., Bharadwaj et al., 2011 and Mizik and Jacobson, 2008),4 or focuses on other industries, such as automobiles (Srinivasan et al. 2009) or pharmaceuticals (Gu and Li 2010). However, significant cross-industry differences are known to exist in the financial valuation of marketing metrics (see Jacobson and Mizik 2009). Accordingly, the primary objective of this study is to examine whether, and to what extent, two marketing metrics widely reported by retailers, advertising spending and growth in same-store sales, are valued by investors. The study draws on signaling theory (see Aboody and Lev 2000 or Cohen and Dean, 2005; see also Kirmani and Rao 2000 and Joshi and Hanssens 2010 for recent discussions in a marketing context), and seeks to contribute to the literature along three key dimensions.

Since most prior work in the marketing-finance interface has focused on manufacturing firms, recent literature calls for research whether the same principles also hold for retail firms (Petersen et al. 2009). Accordingly, the current study examines the value relevance of the two marketing metrics that are most widely and consistently disclosed by retailers: the more general advertising spending variable (also studied in other sectors) and the retail-specific COMPS measure. In doing so, we respond to Gupta and Zeithaml's (2006) call for more research linking different types of marketing metrics to a firm's financial performance (value), that is, (i) what firms do (i.e., advertising spending), and (ii) the outcome of their actions (i.e., COMPS as a store performance indicator). Our findings have both theoretical and managerial implications. The key theoretical contribution of this study is that we identify moderating factors that influence the value relevance of these two marketing metrics. Developing hypotheses on, and testing the role of, moderators is important, as it advances theory development by identifying boundary conditions for existing theory. To the best of our knowledge, prior studies in marketing (e.g., Joshi and Hanssens, 2009, Joshi and Hanssens, 2010 and Srinivasan et al., 2009) and accounting (e.g., Cole and Jones, 2004 and Francis et al., 2003) have not explored whether the value relevance of advertising spending and COMPS differs in the presence of firm- and/or sector-specific financial signals (see Table 1). The current study underscores the importance of these moderators, and offers three key insights.