A replication and extension of wine retail consumer purchase patterns: double jeopardy and duplication of purchase laws

Purpose This study aims to understand the degree of predictability and value in analyzing consumer purchase patterns in the US wine retail market. The study considers whether brands in US wine retailing follow the well-established Duplication of Purchase Law and Double Jeopardy Law. Design/methodology/approach Over 20,000 customer panel wine purchases were analyzed from a number of locations within a supermarket chain based on the West Coast of the USA. Cross-purchasing behavior for the top 20 wine brands by market penetration was analyzed to assess whether the well-established Duplication of Purchase Law and Double Jeopardy Law hold up in this wine retail setting in the USA. The degree of predictability and the existence of anomalies in expected cross-purchasing behavior were identified in the analysis. Findings Results confirmed a Double Jeopardy pattern and that wine cross-purchasing patterns for the most part followed the Duplication of Purchase Law. However, exceptions to these patterns were found, which indicated areas in need of managerial attention due to the potential to remedy, develop or monitor the most prominent variations between predicted and realized cross-purchasing behavior. Repeated identification of variations has been identified in other product categories, known as market partitions. Originality/value Although it is commonly believed that wine is a unique product category, the results of this study demonstrate that consumer behavior toward wine is similar to other fast-moving consumer goods. The exceptions suggest that while similar consumer purchase patterns are evident, consumers are more likely to cross purchase wine brands and grape types more than would be expected given Duplication of Purchase Law benchmarks.