The theory of Double Jeopardy is described as a behavioural phenomenon which relates to the size structure of a market (Bandyopadhyay, Gupta & Dube 2005). This indicates that in any given time a smaller brand typically has fewer buyers compared to those of a larger brand as larger brands often have a higher percentage of penetration and market share (Ehrenberg, Goodhardt & Barwise 1990). A brand with more market share indicates that consumers purchase these brands more frequently compared to other brands.
There are a number of reasons why this occurs.
For example firms offering products that a consumer perceives as better quality and value, will grow larger (Jacobson 1988). Also, a firm that creates power advantages by introducing inferior products which competitors cannot offer to customer’s also results in a higher market share. Careful analyses of all team members’ individual purchases over the tracking period, it can be noted that a large number of different brands were consumed.
By viewing the Duplication of Purchases Table for fast food, out of all the 11 types of brands, McDonalds and Max Brennars were the most frequently purchased brands resulting in a higher percentage of penetration and market share compared to other brands. This is because McDonalds and Max Brennars have multiple locations within Australia which provides better access to customers, both brands participate in extensive television and both brands provide regular promotions in order to make customers more alert and aware.
These facts all enforce the theory of the double jeopardy; larger brands have more buyers and have a higher market share. To review the occurrence of the Double Jeopardy effect, Ehrenberg et al. (1990) states that there exists two market level explanations. The first market level consists of the differences in consumer exposure to the market mix efforts (price, promotion, advertising, point of purchase display, discount) of a brand. If a brand has less consumer exposure, it is more likely to suffer (Ehrenberg et al. 990) because they have fewer buyers and lower repeat purchase. Looking at the DOP tables for fast food, TGI Friday’s and Koko Black displayed as the least frequently purchased brands. A reason why these two fast food outlets were the least purchased brands is because of their location as many customers may not have close access to it. Another reason is because there is not much advertising and promotion when compared to fast food outlets such as McDonalds and Max Brennars.
The second market level relies on stochastic models of buying behaviour (Ehrenberg et al. 1990) which helps predict the Double Jeopardy trends for competitive brands. This is solely based on the heterogeneity in popularity such as the market share as earlier research shows that the average customer of smaller brands buys less, have lower favourable attitude and manifest lower loyalty than the average customer of larger brands (Ehrenberg et al. 1990).