Hostname: page-component-669899f699-8p65j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-04T20:10:17.619Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fine Water: A Hedonic Pricing Approach*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2015

Kevin W. Capehart
Kevin W. Capehart*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, The American University of Paris, 102 rue St. Dominique, 75007 Paris, France; e-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Bottles of water vary in price with some priced as if they were bottles of fine wine. This article attempts to explain price differences between over 100 bottled waters included in a guidebook to fine waters by drawing on the hedonic pricing approach, which has been used to try to explain price differences among bottles of wine. As part of that approach, the price of each bottled water is regressed against various characteristics, including those related to its water. Water-related characteristics explain only a small part of the price differences among the bottled waters. Thus, to a large extent, the premium that consumers pay for a more expensive bottled water does not seem to be a premium for its water. (JEL Classifications: C21, Q25)

Keywords

bottled waterhedonic regression
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Wine Economics , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , November 2015 , pp. 129 - 150
Copyright
Copyright © American Association of Wine Economists 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

The author thanks Jill Hindenach, Karl Storchmann, an anonymous reviewer, and participants at the eighth annual conference of the American Association of Wine Economists for comments.

References

Ashenfelter, O. (2008). Predicting the quality and prices of Bordeaux wine. The Economic Journal, 118(529), F174–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berkeley Springs International Water Tasting. (2015). Oscars scooped at Academy Awards of Water in Berkeley Springs. URL: http://www.berkeleysprings.com/water/winners15.htm (accessed May 15, 2015).Google Scholar
Cacchiarelli, L., Carbone, A., Laureti, T., and Sorrentino, A. (2014). The value of quality clues in the wine market: Evidences from Lazio, Italy. Journal of Wine Research, 25(4), 281–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costanigro, M., McCluskey, J., and Goemans, C. (2010). The economics of nested names: Name specificity, reputation, and price premia. American Journal of Agriculture Economics, 92(5), 1339–1350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginsburgh, V., Monzak, M., and Monzak, A. (2013). Red wines of Medoc: What is wine tasting worth? Journal of Wine Economics, 8(2), 159–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haeger, J., and Storchmann, K. (2006). Prices of American Pinot Noir wines: Climate, craftsmanship, critics. Agricultural Economics, 35(1), 67–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
He, S., Jordan, J., and Paudel, K. (2008). Economic evaluation of bottled water consumption as an averting means: Evidence from a hedonic price analysis. Applied Economics Letters, 15(5), 337–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooks, C. (2013). Beyond Fiji and Perrier, with a water sommelier. New York Times, December 22, http://nyti.ms/JS7oJT (accessed May 15, 2015).Google Scholar
Kennedy, P. (1981). Estimation with correctly interpreted dummy variables in semilogarithmic equations. American Economic Review, 71(4), 801.Google Scholar
Koenker, R., and Hallock, K. (2001). Quantile regression. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(4), 143–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koenker, R., and Machado, J. (1999). Goodness of fit and related inference processes for quantile regression. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94(448), 1296–1310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lecocq, S., and Visser, M. (2006). What determines wine prices: Objective vs. sensory characteristics. Journal of Wine Economics, 1(1), 42–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, F.W., and Gartner, W. (2015). The effect of wine policy on the emerging cold-hardy wine industry in northern U.S. states. Wine Economics and Policy, forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mascha, M. (2006). Fine Waters: A Connoisseur's Guide to the World's Most Distinctive Bottled Waters. Philadelphia: Quirk Books.Google Scholar
Mascha, M. (2013). Fine Waters: A Connoisseur's Guide to the World's Most Distinctive Bottled Waters. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Quirk Books.Google Scholar
Outreville, J.F. (2011). Does the bottle size matter? An investigation into differences between posted and market price. Working Paper No. 86, American Association of Wine Economists.Google Scholar
Popken, B. (2011). Only in L.A.: A bottled water menu. Consumerist, consumerist.com/2011/08/31/only-in-la-a-bottled-water-menu/ (accessed May 15, 2015).Google Scholar
Ray's and Stark Bar. (2015). Water menu. http://patinagroup.com/restaurants/133/menus/Rays-and-Stark-Bar-Water-Menu.pdf (accessed May 15, 2015).Google Scholar
Stein, J. (2007). The making of a water snob. Time Magazine, June 7, http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1630570,00.html (accessed May 15, 2015).Google Scholar
Storchmann, K. (2012). Wine economics. Journal of Wine Economics, 7(1), 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teague, L. (2013). Minerality: Drilling down on wine's buzzword. Wall Street Journal, July 26, http://on.wsj.com/19mT4Dx (accessed May 15, 2015).Google Scholar
Thrane, C. (2004). In defense of the price hedonic model in wine research. Journal of Wine Research, 15(2), 123–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unwin, T. (1999). Hedonic price indexes and the qualities of wines. Journal of Wine Research, 10(2), 95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Garderen, K.J., and Shah, C. (2002). Exact interpretation of dummy variables in semilogarithmic equations. Econometrics Journal, 5(1), 149–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Capehart supplementary material

Capehart supplementary material 1

Download Capehart supplementary material(File)
File 82.2 KB
Supplementary material: File

Capehart supplementary material

Capehart supplementary material 2

Download Capehart supplementary material(File)
File 21.8 KB