The 2011-2016 Outlook for Gardening Supplies, Outdoor Furniture, and Plants in the United States by ICONGroup

VIEWS: 2 PAGES: 740

More Info
									   The 2011-2016 Outlook for Gardening
 Supplies, Outdoor Furniture, and Plants in
             the United States




                                          by
                         Professor Philip M. Parker, Ph.D.
                       Chaired Professor of Management Science
                     INSEAD (Singapore and Fontainebleau, France)




www.icongrouponline.com                                ©2010 ICON Group International, Inc.
                                                                                                                  ii




                                             COPYRIGHT NOTICE
                                                00049818-5G


All of ICON Group International, Inc. publications are copyrighted. Copying our publications in whole or in part,
for whatever reason, is a violation of copyright laws and can lead to penalties and fines.

Should you want to copy tables, graphs or other materials from our publications, please contact us to request
permission. ICON Group International, Inc. often grants permission for very limited reproduction of our
publications for internal use, press releases, and academic research. Such reproduction requires, however, confirmed
permission from ICON Group International, Inc. Please read the full copyright notice, disclaimer, and user
agreement provisions at the end of this report.




                                          IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER



Neither ICON Group International, Inc. nor its employees or the author of this report can be held accountable for the
use and subsequent actions of the user of the information provided in this publication. Great efforts have been made
to ensure the accuracy of the data, but we can not guarantee, given the volume of information, accuracy. Since the
information given in this report is forward-looking, the reader should read the disclaimer statement and user
agreement provisions at the end of this report.




www.icongrouponline.com                                                    ©2010 ICON Group International, Inc.
                                                                                                                   iii


                                          About the Author
Dr. Philip M. Parker is the Chaired Professor of Management Science at INSEAD where he has taught courses on
global competitive strategy since 1988. He has also taught courses at MIT, Stanford University, Harvard University,
UCLA, UCSD, and the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. Professor Parker is the author of six
books on the economic convergence of nations. These books introduce the notion of “physioeconomics” which
foresees a lack of global convergence in economic behaviors due to physiological and physiographic forces. His
latest book is "Physioeconomics: The Basis for Long-Run Economic Growth" (MIT Press 2000). He has also
published numerous articles in academic journals, including, the Rand Journal of Economics, Marketing Science, the
Journal of International Business Studies, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, the International Journal
of Forecasting, the European Management Journal, the European Journal of Operational Research, the Journal of
Marketing, the International Journal of Research in Marketing, and the Journal of Marketing Research. He is also
on the editorial boards of several academic journals.

Dr. Parker received his Ph.D. in Business Economics from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania
and has Masters degrees in Finance and Banking (University of Aix-Marseille) and Managerial Economics
(Wharton). His undergraduate degrees are in mathematics, biology and economics (minor in aeronautical
engineering). He has consulted and/or taught courses in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Latin America, North America
and Europe.


                                          About this Series
The estimates given in this report were created using a methodology developed by and implemented under the direct
supervision of Professor Philip M. Parker, the Chaired Professor of Management Science, at INSEAD. The
methodology relies on historical figures across states. Reported figures should be seen as estimates of past and future
levels of latent demand.


                                        Acknowledgements
Some of the methodologies and research approaches used in this report have benefited from the R&D Committee at
INSEAD, whose research support is gratefully acknowledged.




www.icongrouponline.com                                                     ©2010 ICON Group International, Inc.
                                                                                                                     iv


                     About ICON Group International, Inc.

ICON Group International, Inc.’s primary mission is to assist managers with their international information needs.
U.S.-owned and operated, ICON Group has published hundreds of multi-client databases and global/regional market
data, industry, and country publications.

Global/Regional Management Studies: Summarizing over 190 countries, management studies are generally
organized into regional volumes and cover key management functions. The human resource series covers minimum
wages, child labor, unionization, and collective bargaining. The international law series covers media control and
censorship, search and seizure, and trial justice and punishment. The diversity management series covers a variety of
environmental context drivers that effect global operations. These include women’s rights, children’s rights,
discrimination/racism, and religious forces and risks. Global strategic planning studies cover economic risk
assessments, political risk assessments, foreign direct investment strategy, intellectual property strategy, and export
strategies. Financial management studies cover taxes and tariffs. Global marketing studies focus on target segments
(e.g. seniors, children, women) and strategic marketing planning.

Country Studies: Often managers need an in-depth, yet broad and up-to-date understanding of a country’s strategic
market potential and situation before the first field trip or investment proposal. There are over 190 country studies
available. Each study consists of analysis, statistics, forecasts, and information of relevance to managers. The studies
are continually updated to insure that the reports have the most relevant information available. In addition to raw
information, the reports provide relevant analyses which put a more general perspective on a country (seen in the
context of relative performance vis-à-vis benchmarks).

Industry Studies: Companies are racing to become more international, if not global in their strategies. For over 2000
product/industry categories, these reports give the reader a concise summary of latent market forecasts, pro-forma
financials, import competition profiles, contacts, key references, and trends across 200 countries of the world. Some
reports focus on a particular product and region (up to four regions per product), while others focus on a product
within a particular country.



                                    ICON Group Customer Service
                                    9606 Tierra Grande St., Suite 205
                                    San Diego, CA 92126 USA
                                    Fax: 1-858-635-9414
                                    E-mail: orders@icongroupbooks.com
                                    www.icongrouponline.com




www.icongrouponline.com                                                      ©2010 ICON Group International, Inc.
    Contents                                                                                         v


Table of Contents
1       INTRODUCTION                                                                             9
     1.1      Overview                                                                           9
     1.2      What is Latent Demand and the P.I.E.?                                              9
     1.3      The Methodology                                                                   10
        1.3.1   Step 1. Product Definition and Data Collection                                  11
        1.3.2   Step 2. Filtering and Smoothing                                                 12
        1.3.3   Step 3. Filling in Missing Values                                               12
        1.3.4   Step 4. Varying Parameter, Non-linear Estimation                                12
        1.3.5   Step 5. Fixed-Parameter Linear Estimation                                       13
        1.3.6   Step 6. Aggregation and Benchmarking                                            13
2       SUMMARY OF FINDINGS                                                                     14
     2.1   Latent Demand in The US                                                              15
3       FAR WEST                                                                                16
     3.1    Executive Summary                                                                   16
     3.2    Latent Demand by Year - Alaska                                                      17
     3.3    Cities Sorted by Rank - Alaska                                                      18
     3.4    Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Alaska                                                   19
     3.5    Latent Demand by Year - California                                                  21
     3.6    Cities Sorted by Rank - California                                                  22
     3.7    Cities Sorted by Zipcode - California                                               43
     3.8    Latent Demand by Year - Hawaii                                                      64
     3.9    Cities Sorted by Rank - Hawaii                                                      65
     3.10   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Hawaii                                                   68
     3.11   Latent Demand by Year - Nevada                                                      70
     3.12   Cities Sorted by Rank - Nevada                                                      71
     3.13   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Nevada                                                   72
     3.14   Latent Demand by Year - Oregon                                                      74
     3.15   Cities Sorted by Rank - Oregon                                                      75
     3.16   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Oregon                                                   79
     3.17   Latent Demand by Year - Washington                                                  84
     3.18   Cities Sorted by Rank - Washington                                                  85
     3.19   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Washington                                               93
4       GREAT LAKES                                                                            101
     4.1   Executive Summary                                                                   101
     4.2   Latent Demand by Year - Illinois                                                    102
     4.3   Cities Sorted by Rank - Illinois                                                    103
     4.4   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Illinois                                                 117
     4.5   Latent Demand by Year - Indiana                                                     132
     4.6   Cities Sorted by Rank - Indiana                                                     133
     4.7   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Indiana                                                  140
     4.8   Latent Demand by Year - Michigan                                                    147
     4.9   Cities Sorted by Rank - Michigan                                                    148
     4.10  Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Michigan                                                 157
     4.11  Latent Demand by Year - Ohio                                                        167
     4.12  Cities Sorted by Rank - Ohio                                                        168
     4.13  Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Ohio                                                     181
     4.14  Latent Demand by Year - Wisconsin                                                   195
     4.15  Cities Sorted by Rank - Wisconsin                                                   196
     4.16  Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Wisconsin                                                207


www.icongrouponline.com                                            ©2010 ICON Group International, Inc.
    Contents                                                                                    vi

5       MID-ATLANTIC                                                                      219
     5.1    Executive Summary                                                             219
     5.2    Latent Demand by Year - Delaware                                              220
     5.3    Cities Sorted by Rank - Delaware                                              221
     5.4    Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Delaware                                           222
     5.5    Latent Demand by Year - District of Columbia                                  223
     5.6    Cities Sorted by Rank - District of Columbia                                  225
     5.7    Cities Sorted by Zipcode - District of Columbia                               225
     5.8    Latent Demand by Year - Maryland                                              226
     5.9    Cities Sorted by Rank - Maryland                                              227
     5.10   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Maryland                                           234
     5.11   Latent Demand by Year - New Jersey                                            241
     5.12   Cities Sorted by Rank - New Jersey                                            242
     5.13   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - New Jersey                                         252
     5.14   Latent Demand by Year - New York                                              261
     5.15   Cities Sorted by Rank - New York                                              263
     5.16   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - New York                                           291
     5.17   Latent Demand by Year - Pennsylvania                                          319
     5.18   Cities Sorted by Rank - Pennsylvania                                          320
     5.19   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Pennsylvania                                       337
6       NEW ENGLAND                                                                       355
     6.1   Executive Summary                                                              355
     6.2   Latent Demand by Year - Connecticut                                            356
     6.3   Cities Sorted by Rank - Connecticut                                            357
     6.4   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Connecticut                                         362
     6.5   Latent Demand by Year - Maine                                                  367
     6.6   Cities Sorted by Rank - Maine                                                  368
     6.7   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Maine                                               374
     6.8   Latent Demand by Year - Massachusetts                                          380
     6.9   Cities Sorted by Rank - Massachusetts                                          381
     6.10  Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Massachusetts                                       390
     6.11  Latent Demand by Year - New Hampshire                                          399
     6.12  Cities Sorted by Rank - New Hampshire                                          400
     6.13  Cities Sorted by Zipcode - New Hampshire                                       405
     6.14  Latent Demand by Year - Rhode Island                                           409
     6.15  Cities Sorted by Rank - Rhode Island                                           410
     6.16  Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Rhode Island                                        411
     6.17  Latent Demand by Year - Vermont                                                413
     6.18  Cities Sorted by Rank - Vermont                                                414
     6.19  Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Vermont                                             418
7       PLAINS                                                                            422
     7.1    Executive Summary                                                             422
     7.2    Latent Demand by Year - Iowa                                                  424
     7.3    Cities Sorted by Rank - Iowa                                                  425
     7.4    Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Iowa                                               430
     7.5    Latent Demand by Year - Kansas                                                435
     7.6    Cities Sorted by Rank - Kansas                                                436
     7.7    Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Kansas                                             440
     7.8    Latent Demand by Year - Minnesota                                             444
     7.9    Cities Sorted by Rank - Minnesota                                             445
     7.10   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Minnesota                                          452
     7.11   Latent Demand by Year - Missouri                                              460


www.icongrouponline.com                                       ©2010 ICON Group International, Inc.
    Contents                                                                               vii

     7.12      Cities Sorted by Rank - Missouri                                      461
     7.13      Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Missouri                                   468
     7.14      Latent Demand by Year - Nebraska                                      474
     7.15      Cities Sorted by Rank - Nebraska                                      476
     7.16      Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Nebraska                                   478
     7.17      Latent Demand by Year - North Dakota                                  480
     7.18      Cities Sorted by Rank - North Dakota                                  481
     7.19      Cities Sorted by Zipcode - North Dakota                               482
     7.20      Latent Demand by Year - South Dakota                                  483
     7.21      Cities Sorted by Rank - South Dakota                                  484
     7.22      Cities Sorted by Zipcode - South Dakota                               485
8       ROCKIES                                                                      487
     8.1   Executive Summary                                                         487
     8.2   Latent Demand by Year - Colorado                                          488
     8.3   Cities Sorted by Rank - Colorado                                          489
     8.4   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Colorado                                       493
     8.5   Latent Demand by Year - Idaho                                             498
     8.6   Cities Sorted by Rank - Idaho                                             499
     8.7   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Idaho                                          501
     8.8   Latent Demand by Year - Montana                                           503
     8.9   Cities Sorted by Rank - Montana                                           504
     8.10  Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Montana                                        506
     8.11  Latent Demand by Year - Utah                                              508
     8.12  Cities Sorted by Rank - Utah                                              509
     8.13  Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Utah                                           512
     8.14  Latent Demand by Year - Wyoming                                           516
     8.15  Cities Sorted by Rank - Wyoming                                           517
     8.16  Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Wyoming                                        518
9       SOUTHEAST                                                                    520
     9.1    Executive Summary                                                        520
     9.2    Latent Demand by Year - Alabama                                          521
     9.3    Cities Sorted by Rank - Alabama                                          522
     9.4    Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Alabama                                       527
     9.5    Latent Demand by Year - Arkansas                                         533
     9.6    Cities Sorted by Rank - Arkansas                                         534
     9.7    Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Arkansas                                      538
     9.8    Latent Demand by Year - Florida                                          542
     9.9    Cities Sorted by Rank - Florida                                          543
     9.10   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Florida                                       559
     9.11   Latent Demand by Year - Georgia                                          576
     9.12   Cities Sorted by Rank - Georgia                                          577
     9.13   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Georgia                                       584
     9.14   Latent Demand by Year - Kentucky                                         591
     9.15   Cities Sorted by Rank - Kentucky                                         592
     9.16   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Kentucky                                      596
     9.17   Latent Demand by Year - Louisiana                                        601
     9.18   Cities Sorted by Rank - Louisiana                                        602
     9.19   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Louisiana                                     607
     9.20   Latent Demand by Year - Mississippi                                      612
     9.21   Cities Sorted by Rank - Mississippi                                      613
     9.22   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Mississippi                                   616
     9.23   Latent Demand by Year - North Carolina                                   619


www.icongrouponline.com                                  ©2010 ICON Group International, Inc.
 Contents                                                                                   viii

     9.24   Cities Sorted by Rank - North Carolina                                    620
     9.25   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - North Carolina                                 628
     9.26   Latent Demand by Year - South Carolina                                    636
     9.27   Cities Sorted by Rank - South Carolina                                    637
     9.28   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - South Carolina                                 642
     9.29   Latent Demand by Year - Tennessee                                         647
     9.30   Cities Sorted by Rank - Tennessee                                         648
     9.31   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Tennessee                                      653
     9.32   Latent Demand by Year - Virginia                                          659
     9.33   Cities Sorted by Rank - Virginia                                          660
     9.34   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Virginia                                       665
     9.35   Latent Demand by Year - West Virginia                                     670
     9.36   Cities Sorted by Rank - West Virginia                                     671
     9.37   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - West Virginia                                  673
10      SOUTHWEST                                                                     676
     10.1   Executive Summary                                                         676
     10.2   Latent Demand by Year - Arizona                                           677
     10.3   Cities Sorted by Rank - Arizona                                           678
     10.4   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Arizona                                        682
     10.5   Latent Demand by Year - New Mexico                                        686
     10.6   Cities Sorted by Rank - New Mexico                                        687
     10.7   Cities Sorted by Zipcode - New Mexico                                     689
     10.8   Latent Demand by Year - Oklahoma                                          692
     10.9   Cities Sorted by Rank - Oklahoma                                          693
     10.10 Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Oklahoma                                        697
     10.11 Latent Demand by Year - Texas                                              701
     10.12 Cities Sorted by Rank - Texas                                              702
     10.13 Cities Sorted by Zipcode - Texas                                           720
11      DISCLAIMERS, WARRANTEES, AND USER AGREEMENT PROVISIONS                        739
     11.1   Disclaimers & Safe Harbor                                                 739
     11.2   ICON Group International, Inc. User Agreement Provisions                  740




www.icongrouponline.com                                   ©2010 ICON Group International, Inc.
 Summary of Findings                                                                                                     9


1     INTRODUCTION
1.1    OVERVIEW

This study covers the latent demand outlook for gardening supplies, outdoor furniture, and plants across the states
and cities of the United States. Latent demand (in millions of U.S. dollars), or potential industry earnings (P.I.E.)
estimates are given across some 13,000 cities in the United States. For each city in question, the percent share the
city is of it’s state and of the United States is reported. These comparative benchmarks allow the reader to quickly
gauge a city vis-à-vis others. This statistical approach can prove very useful to distribution and/or sales force
strategies. Using econometric models which project fundamental economic dynamics within each state and city,
latent demand estimates are created for gardening supplies, outdoor furniture, and plants. This report does not discuss
the specific players in the market serving the latent demand, nor specific details at the product level. The study also
does not consider short-term cyclicalities that might affect realized sales. The study, therefore, is strategic in nature,
taking an aggregate and long-run view, irrespective of the players or products involved.

This study does not report actual sales data (which are simply unavailable, in a comparable or consistent manner in
virtually all of the cities in the United States). This study gives, however, my estimates for the latent demand, or the
P.I.E., for gardening supplies, outdoor furniture, and plants in the United States. It also shows how the P.I.E. is
divided and concentrated across the cities and regional markets of the United States. For each state, I also show my
estimates of how the P.I.E. grows over time. In order to make these estimates, a multi-stage methodology was
employed that is often taught in courses on strategic planning at graduate schools of business.


1.2    WHAT IS LATENT DEMAND AND THE P.I.E.?

The concept of latent demand is rather subtle. The term latent typically refers to something that is dormant, not
observable, or not yet realized. Demand is the notion of an economic quantity that a target population or market
requires under different assumptions of price, quality, and distribution, among other factors. Latent demand,
therefore, is commonly defined by economists as the industry earnings of a market when that market becomes
accessible and attractive to serve by competing firms. It is a measure, therefore, of potential industry earnings (P.I.E.)
or total revenues (not profit) if the United States is served in an efficient manner. It is typically expressed as the total
revenues potentially extracted by firms. The “market” is defined at a given level in the value chain. There can be
latent demand at the retail level, at the wholesale level, the manufacturing level, and the raw materials level (the
P.I.E. of higher levels of the value chain being always smaller than the P.I.E. of levels at lower levels of the same
value chain, assuming all levels maintain minimum profitability).

The latent demand for gardening supplies, outdoor furniture, and plants in the United States is not actual or historic
sales. Nor is latent demand future sales. In fact, latent demand can be either lower or higher than actual sales if a
market is inefficient (i.e., not representative of relatively competitive levels). Inefficiencies arise from a number of
factors, including the lack of international openness, cultural barriers to consumption, regulations, and cartel-like
behavior on the part of firms. In general, however, latent demand is typically larger than actual sales in a market.

For reasons discussed later, this report does not consider the notion of “unit quantities”, only total latent revenues
(i.e., a calculation of price times quantity is never made, though one is implied). The units used in this report are U.S.
dollars not adjusted for inflation (i.e., the figures incorporate inflationary trends). If inflation rates vary in a
substantial way compared to recent experience, actually sales can also exceed latent demand (not adjusted for
inflation). On the other hand, latent demand can be typically higher than actual sales as there are often distribution
inefficiencies that reduce actual sales below the level of latent demand.

As mentioned in the introduction, this study is strategic in nature, taking an aggregate and long-run view, irrespective
of the players or products involved. In fact, all the current products or services on the market can cease to exist in
their present form (i.e., at a brand-, R&D specification, or corporate-image level) and all the players can be replaced


www.icongrouponline.com                                                         ©2010 ICON Group International, Inc.
    Summary of Findings                                                                                                10

by other firms (i.e., via exits, entries, mergers, bankruptcies, etc.), and there will still be latent demand for gardening
supplies, outdoor furniture, and plants at the aggregate level. Product and service offerings, and the actual identity of
the players involved, while important for certain issues, are relatively unimportant for estimates of latent demand.


1.3     THE METHODOLOGY

In order to estimate the latent demand for gardening supplies, outdoor furniture, and plants across the states and cites
of the United States, I used a multi-stage approach. Before applying the approach, one needs a basic theory from
which such estimates are created. In this case, I heavily rely on the use of certain basic economic assumptions. In
particular, there is an assumption governing the shape and type of aggregate latent demand functions. Latent demand
functions relate the income of a state, city, household, or individual to realized consumption. Latent demand (often
realized as consumption when an industry is efficient), at any level of the value chain, takes place if an equilibrium is
realized. For firms to serve a market, they must perceive a latent demand and be able to serve that demand at a
minimal return. The single most important variable determining consumption, assuming latent demand exists, is
income (or other financial resources at higher levels of the value chain). Other factors that can pivot or shape demand
curves include external or exogenous shocks (i.e., business cycles), and or changes in utility for the product in
question.

Ignoring, for the moment, exogenous shocks and variations in utility across geographies, the aggregate relation
between income and consumption has been a central theme in economics. The figure below concisely summarizes
one aspect of problem. In the 1930s, John Meynard Keynes conjectured that as incomes rise, the average propensity
to consume would fall. The average propensity to consume is the level of consumption divided by the level of
income, o
								
To top