Skip to main content

Should retail stores locate close to a rival?

Abstract

I simulate firms competing in an urban landscape that is segregated by income level. Some firms are located close to wealthy neighborhoods and far from competitors, but other firms do not enjoy these advantages. The probability that a household selects a certain firm to patronize depends on that firm’s price and its distance from the household. The firms have almost no information about the urban market they inhabit, but they can experiment with prices and learn what actions lead to higher profits. Firms that experience persistent losses go out of business. When transportation costs are low, households shop aggressively and the result that emerges resembles perfect competition. When transportation costs are high, households shop less aggressively, which gives firms greater market power. The results here more closely resemble monopolistic competition, with more firms surviving, higher prices and higher profits. However, this collusion is implicit, as there is no mechanism for the firms to communicate or explicitly collude with each other. I validate the model by conducting a Probit analysis of the factors that determine firm survival. I also conduct an econometric analysis of the factors that determine a firm’s price, quantity sold, and profit. Firms locating close to rival have a higher probability of going out of business. If these firms do survive, on average their profits are no different than the profits of firms that are not located close to a rival.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Code availability

Will provide if required.

References

  1. Akhundjanov SB, Toda AA (2019) Is Gibrat’s “economic inequality” lognormal? Empir Econ 1–21

  2. Arifovic J (1994) Genetic algorithm learning and the cobweb model. J Econ Dyn Control 18(1):3–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. d'Aspremont C, Gabszewicz JJ, Thisse J-F (1979) On Hotelling’s "Stability in competition”. Econom J Econom Soc 47:1145–1150

  4. Auchincloss AH et al (2011) An agent-based model of income inequalities in diet in the context of residential segregation. Am J Prevent Med 40(3):303–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bandourian R, McDonald J, Turley RS (2002) A comparison of parametric models of income distribution across countries and over time

  6. Barr J, Saraceno F (2005) Cournot competition, organization and learning. J Econ Dyn Control 29(1–2):277–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Brenner S (2005) Hotelling games with three, four, and more players. J Reg Sci 45(4):851–864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gabszewicz JJ, Thisse J-F (1979) Price competition, quality and income disparities. J. Econ. Theory 20(3):340–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gode DK, Sunder S (1993) Allocative efficiency of markets with zero-intelligence traders: market as a partial substitute for individual rationality. J Polit Econ 101(1):119–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gupta B, Pal D, Sarkar J (1997) Spatial Cournot competition and agglomeration in a model of location choice. Reg Sci Urban Econ 27(3):261–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gupta B et al (2004) Where to locate in a circular city? Int J Ind Org 22(6):759–782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hotelling H (1929) Stability in competition. Econ J 39(153):41–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Huang A, Levinson D (2011) Why retailers cluster: an agent model of location choice on supply chains. Environ Plann B Plann Des 38(1):82–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Huff DL (1963) A probabilistic analysis of shopping center trade areas. Land Econ 39(1):81–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Irmen A, Thisse J-F (1998) Competition in multi-characteristics spaces: hotelling was almost right. J Econ Theory 78(1):76–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kimbrough SO (2011a) Chapter 9: Monopoly stories. In: Agents, games, and evolution: strategies at work and play. CRC Press, pp 185–199

  17. Kimbrough SO (2011b) Chapter 10: Oligopoly: Cournot competition. In: Agents, games, and evolution: strategies at work and play. CRC Press, pp 201–242

  18. Kimbrough SO (2011c) Chapter 11: Oligopoly: Bertrand competition. In: Agents, games, and evolution: strategies at work and play. CRC Press, pp 243–249

  19. Kimbrough SO, Murphy FH (2009) Learning to collude tacitly on production levels by oligopolistic agents. Comput Econ 33(1):47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kimbrough SO, Murphy FH (2013) Strategic bidding of offer curves: an agent-based approach to exploring supply curve equilibria. Eur J Oper Res 229(1):165–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Larralde H, Stehlé J, Jensen P (2009) Analytical solution of a multi-dimensional Hotelling model with quadratic transportation costs. Reg Sci Urban Econ 39(3):343–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Neven DJ (1986) On Hotelling’s competition with non-uniform customer distributions. Econ Lett 21(2):121–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Schelling TC (1969) Models of segregation. Am Econ Rev 59(2):488–493

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sturley C, Newing A, Heppenstall A (2018) Evaluating the potential of agent-based modelling to capture consumer grocery retail store choice behaviours. Int Rev Retail Distrib Consum Res 28(1):27–46

    Google Scholar 

  25. Suresh SSG, Schauder SA (2020) Income segregation and access to healthy food. Am J Prevent Med 59(2):e31–e38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Tabuchi T (1994) Two-stage two-dimensional spatial competition between two firms. Reg Sci Urban Econ 24(2):207–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Tabuchi T, Thisse J-F (1995) Asymmetric equilibria in spatial competition. Int J Ind Organ 13(2):213–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Veendorp ECH, Majeed A (1995) Differentiation in a two-dimensional market. Region Sci Urban Econ 25(1):75–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank Steven O. Kimbrough and participants at the 2018 NYC Computational Economics & Complexity Workshop for comments on earlier versions of this paper. Any remaining errors are my own.

Funding

State of Oklahoma.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

This is a sole authored paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James Fain.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fain, J. Should retail stores locate close to a rival?. J Econ Interact Coord (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11403-021-00332-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Agent-based simulations
  • Firm location
  • Firm survival
  • Machine learning
  • Urban retail markets

JEL Classification

  • C63
  • R32
  • L11