Impacts of the Production of Private Labels on Food Retailing and Its Suppliers in Hungary

  • Gyongyi Jankune KurthyEmail author
  • Gyula Dudas
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics book series (SPBE)


The aim of this paper was to explore the spreading of Private Label (PL) food products in Hungary. We examined the aspects and strategy of both the suppliers and retailers, with special regard to the opinion of consumers in Hungary. In order to explore the strategy of Hungarian suppliers and retailers regarding PL products, we carried out in-depth interviews with experts of 5 retailers and 24 supplier companies in 2010 and 76 supplier companies in 2014. The research in 2010 concentrated on only PL producers, the research of 2014 examined the whole Hungarian food industry from many aspects, using a representative sample. According to in-depth interviews and statistical data, the Hungarian consumers more and more accept PL products. The third and fourth generations of PL products provide a very favorable price/value ratio, which is very important for the price sensitive Hungarian consumers. The increasing ratio of PL products urges the suppliers to take part in this business. According to the interviewed Hungarian food processors, the most important advantages of production of PL products are capacity utilization, calculable income and the large production volume. The most significant disadvantages are the low profitability, brand “cannibalization” and replacement of products and suppliers.


Private label Food retailer Food processor In-depths interview Survey Comparison 


  1. Bunte, F., van Galen, M., Winter, M., Dobson, P., Berges-Sennou, F., Monier-Dilhan, S., et al. (2010). The impact of private labels in the competitiveness of the European food supply chain (p. 146). Report to the European Commission, Enterprise and Industry Directorate-General, on tender ENTR/2009/031, Den Haag, October 2010.Google Scholar
  2. Dobos, K. (2007). Nagymeretu kiskereskedelmi lancok es beszallitoik kapcsolata (p. 110). Tanulmany, Bp. MKIK Gazdasag- és Vallalkozaselemzo Intezet.Google Scholar
  3. Juhasz, A., Jankune Kurthy, Gy., Koning, G., Stauder, M., & Tunyogine Nechay, V. (2010). A kereskedelmi markas termekek gyartasanak hatasa az elelmiszer-kiskereskedemre es beszallitoira (p. 163). Agrargazdasagi Konyvek, Agrargazdasagi Kutato Intezet, Budapest.Google Scholar
  4. Lamey, L., Deleersnyder, B., Dekimpe, M. G., & Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M. (2007). How business cycles contribute to private label success: Evidence from the United States and Europe. Journal of Marketing, 71(January), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Maurer, T. (2006). Marketingmethoden zur Optimierung der Produkt- und Programmpolitik im Bereich der Lebensmitteldiscounter (p. 133). Diplomarbeit Fachhochschule Ansbach. University of Applied Sciences.Google Scholar
  6. Nandan, S., & Dickinson, R. (1994). Private brands: Major brand perspective. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 11(4), 18–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Quelch, J. A., & Hardling, D. (1996). Brands versus private labels: Fighting to win. Harvard Business Review, 74(January/February), 99–109.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Institute of Agricultural EconomicsGujaratIndia

Personalised recommendations