Search results

The purpose of this paper is to show that forgotten classics, such as Melvin T. Copeland’s (1924) Principles of Merchandising, can still teach lessons to students of the history of marketing thought.

The method involved using various key words on several internet search engines. The extensive internet search produced more than a dozen contemporaneous reviews and commentaries. Additionally, there was an intensive search through the histories of marketing thought literature. The extensive and intensive searches allowed a meta-analysis reexamining Copeland’s principles in light of future historical developments from the mid-1920s to the 21st century.

Historically, Copeland’s principles established the commodity school of marketing thought. (One of the three traditional approaches to understanding marketing taught to generations of students from the mid-1920s until the mid-1960s.) Although the traditional approaches/schools have long gone out of favor, Copeland’s classification of consumer and industrial (business) goods (products and services) have stood the test of time and are still in use 100 years later. Long overlooked, Copeland’s (1924) Principles of Merchandising also anticipated the marketing management/strategy as well as the consumer/buyer behavior schools of marketing thought, dominant in the discipline since the 1960s, for which he has seldom – if ever – been acknowledged.

Historical research is limited because some relevant source material may no longer exist or may have been overlooked.

There have been no reviews of Copeland’s principles in almost a century, and no published meta-analysis of this forgotten classic exists. New discoveries reveal the value in studying marketing history and the history of marketing thought. For marketing as a social science to progress, it is invaluable to understand how ideas originated, were improved and integrated into larger conceptualizations, classification schema and theories over time.

This study investigates the asymmetric effects of exchange rate and investors' sentiments simultaneously on stock market performance in the United States context. In addition, we have also considered the potential effect of the global financial crisis of 2008 on this nexus.

We have employed the NARDL (nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag) model on monthly data ranging from January-1999 to December-2018 to investigate the asymmetric (short- and long-run) effects of exchange rate and investors' sentiments on stock market performance. We have also broken down the data into two segments, pre and post-crisis periods to capture the effect of the global financial crisis of 2008.

The findings of the study reveal that exchange rate and investors' sentiments simultaneously affect stock market performance and omitting any of these variables can produce misleading results. Results also show that the effect of sentiments is stronger than the exchange rate. There is significant evidence of asymmetric short-run and long-run effects of both explanatory variables. Moreover, we have found different outcomes for pre and post-crisis periods. Specifically, the impact of macroeconomic variables on the stock market has been substantiated in the post-crisis period.

Several studies are available which separately evidence the effects of investors' sentiments and exchange rate on performance of the stock market but they can suffer from the problem of omitted variable bias. This study is conducted to test the said effect simultaneously in a single model. Moreover, this study is considering short-run and long-run asymmetry in analyzing the effects of explanatory variables along with the inclusion of the global financial crisis of 2008.