• January 2002

相对于大品牌，小品牌的购买者较少，并且购买频率较低。

This report is a Chinese translation of Report 26: Double Jeopardy Revisited Again.

• Report 111
• September 2022

It is often assumed that many tiny brands (less than 1% share) are niched. But is this true, and if so, does it mean that they are unlikely to grow?
We discover that niched brands can grow, and that they usually do so by throwing off their niche positioning. However, we find that very few tiny brands are niched, instead they are more likely to be the opposite of niche brands. Instead of having deficit penetration and higher loyalty (i.e., niched), they tend to suffer from even less loyalty than the Double Jeopardy law says they should. Again, when these brands grow they tend to throw off their (deficit) loyalty deviation.
These findings suggest that tiny brands suffer from a lack of overlapping physical and mental availability eg, too many of their sales are not followed by reinforcing advertising exposure, so consumers fail to remember which brand they bought. Growth appears to require that this be corrected.

• REPORT FOR THE B2B INSTITUTE
• MAY 2021

In this Ehrenberg-Bass Institute report we provide evidence of Double Jeopardy in a wide range of B2B categories across different countries, category types, and loyalty metrics. We give you simple methods to test for Double Jeopardy in your own category. Then we highlight what this means for B2B marketers - what to do more of, and what to stop worrying about/wasting time on.

• REPORT 97
• APRIL 2020

Sometimes brands exhibit unusually high loyalty, with no apparent explanation. This is referred to as “excess loyalty”. In this report we show that it is likely to be an artefact of the brand being popular only in certain regions, channels, or stores. The phrase “excess loyalty” sounds good, but it often turns out to be better described as “deficit penetration”.

• REPORT 93
• FEBRUARY 2019

Small brands have not received the study they are due considering that, in aggregate, they are a major competitor to category leaders.  We therefore benchmarked small brands’ main buying measures (penetration and purchase frequency) in 36 packed goods categories. We make 3 big discoveries:

1) The commonly sought “niche” performance, i.e. relatively higher loyalty, is neither common (one in ten), nor a driver of growth.
A surprisingly large number, over half, of all small-share brands show a persistent loyalty deficit and yet they still survive.

2) The evidence shows that when small share brands grow, a Double Jeopardy model always predicts their performance metrics. Therefore for every small-share brand, buyer attraction must be the managerial priority.

3) This evidence strongly suggests that managers of small brands who want them to grow need to be wary of inadvertently or intentionally niching their brand.

This evidence strongly suggests that managers of small brands who want them to grow need to be wary of inadvertently or intentionally niching their brand.

• REPORT 46
• October 2008

Is "go for penetration" the most sensible growth strategy?

• REPORT 26
• January 2002

Small brands have less customers and slightly lower loyalty rates than bigger brands. We discuss the implications of and deviations to this Double Jeopardy pattern.