An Empirical Comparison of New Product Trial Forecasting Models
Bruce G.S. Hardie
Peter S. Fader
Michael Wisniewski
Journal of Forecasting
Volume 17, Number 3/4
June-July 1998
Abstract
While numerous researchers have proposed different models to forecast
trial sales for new products, there is little systematic understanding
about which of these models works best, and under what circumstances these
findings change. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive investigation
of eight leading published models and three different parameter estimation
methods. Across 19 different datasets encompassing a variety of consumer
packaged goods, we observe several systematic patterns that link differences
in model specification and estimation to forecasting accuracy. Major findings
include the following observations: (1) when dealing with consumer packaged
goods, simple models that allow for relatively limited flexibility (e.g.,
no S-shaped curves) in the calibration period provide significantly better
forecasts than more complex specifications; (2) models that explicitly
accomodate heterogeneity in purchasing rates across consumers tend to offer
better forecasts than those that do not; and (3) maximum likelihood estimation
appears to offer more accurate and stable forecasts than non-linear least
squares. We elaborate on these and other findings, and offer suggested
directions for future research in this area.
|
|