Abstract
This confidential 1982 RJR memo was featured as an exhibit last week in the United States' Department of Justice case against the tobacco industry. It was written by Diane S. Burrows of RJR's Marketing Development Department and was used to demonstrate the marketing of cigarettes to youth. The memo discusses the effects that price increases have on cigarette sales and points out that price affects the incidence of smoking (the rate at which people start to smoke). It contains a chart describing the price elasticity of various groups of smokers by age. One group listed is "TEENS 12-17." Page two of Burrow's memo states,
"...[T]he loss of younger adult makes and teenagers is more important to the long term, drying up the supply of new smokers to replace the old. This is not a fixed loss to the industry: its importance increases with time. In ten years, increased rate per day would have been expected to raise this group's consumption by more than 50%."
The memo shows not only RJR's interest in marketing cigarettes to youth but also the importance of this group to the industry and RJR's awareness of the phenomenon of tolerance (the need to increase the amount of substance used over time, which is one of the diagnostic criteria for substance dependence).
Fields
- Quotes
CONFIDENTIAL
October 6, 1982
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
TO: Mr. L. W. Hall, Jr
FROM: Ms. D. S. Burrows
RE: NBER MODELS OF PRICE SENSITIVITY BY AGE/SEX
BACKGROUND
In 1981, the Natlonal Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) publlshed two models based on consumers' responses to government smoking surveys. Because the NBER models were cross-sectlonal (testlng differences between people rather than over time) they were able to relate price separately to incidence and rate per day, by age and sex.
The NBER elasticities may not reflect the exact effects of price increases, since their models didn't deal with changes over time. However, the effects they found for other variables (race, income, working women, etc.) are highly consistent with our understanding of market dynamics. Thus, it is likely that the NBER models have correctly identified relative price sensitivity among age/sex groups. A detailed critique of the NBER models 1 Attachment B.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
According to the NBER models:
• Teenagers and younger adult males are highly price sensitive.
• Males over 35 have above average price sensitivity.
• Women and 26-34 year old men are relatively immune to price.
• Price affects incidence; rate per day is virtually unchanged.
TEENS 12-17
EFFECT ON:
Incidence -1.19
Consumption -1.44
[From Page 2]:
CONCLUSIONS:
In terms of immediate impact, the effect of price on males 35+ is most important. Half (50%) of the total drop in industry volume is attributable to males 35+, compared to 24% from younger adult males, and 7% from teenagers. (Calculated in Attachment A)
But, the loss of younger adult males and teenagers is more important to the long term, drying up the supply of new smokers to replace the old.* This is not a fixed loss to the industry: its importance increases with time. In ten years, increased rate per day would have been expected to raise this group's consumption by more than 50%.
- Company
- R.J. Reynolds
- Author
- Burrows, Diane Stewart (RJR Market Research Analyst)
- Recipient
- Hall, Lawrence W., Jr. (RJR Marketing)
Worked for RJR Tobacco Co. as a Sales Representative, MR Analyst from 1968- , Director of Marketing Development in 1980, Vice President of Brands Marketing in 1981, Vice President of Marketing Development in 1982, and for RJR International Inc. from 1977-1980. (Source: RJR Who's Who NMLRP)
RegionUnited States
LitigationMinnesota Selected
USDOJ
Named PersonLewit, E.M.
Coate, D.
Grossman, M.
TypeREPORT
LETTER
SubjectTarget/Youth (pre-18) (Target Groups)
target market
addiction
marketing
price elasticity
Document Images
Page 1: fjn29d00
C 0 N F I D E N T I A L
October 6, 1982
TO: Mr. L. W. Hall, Jr.
FROM: Ms. D. S. Burrows
RE: NBER MODELS OF PRICE SENSITIVITY BY AGE/SEX
BACKGROUND
In 1981, the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) published two models
based on consumers' responses to government smoking surveys. Because the NBER
models were cross-sectional (testing differences between people rather than
over time) they were able to relate price separately to incidence and rate per
day, by age and sex.
The NBER elasticities may not reflect the exact effects of price increases,
since their models didn't deal with changes over time. However, the effects
they found for other variables (race, income, working women, etc.) are highly
consistent with our understanding of market dynamics. Thus, it is likely that
the NBER models have correctly identified relative price sensitivity among
age/se:x groups.
A detailed critique of the NBER models i Attachment B.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
According to the NBER models:
Teenagers and younger adult males are highly price sensitive.
Males over 35 have above average price sensitivity.
Women and 26-34 year old men are relatively immune to price.
Price affects incidence; rate per day is virtually unchanged.
NBER PRICE ELASTICITY AMONG:
TEENS AGES 20-25 AGES 35+ TOTAL
12-17 TOTAL MALES TOTAL MALES 20+
EFFECT ON:
Incidence
-1.19
- .74
-1.28
NA
NA
- .26
Consumption -1.44 - .89 -1.40 - .45 - .66 - .42
DSB/ch - 10/6/82
Code: 5.21

Page 2: fjn29d00
CONCLUSIONS
In terms of immediate impact, the effect of price on males 35+ is most
important. Half (50%) of the total drop in industry volume is attributable to
males 35+, compared to 24% from younger adult males, and 7% from teenagers.
(Calculated in Attachment A)
But, the loss of younger adult males and teenagers is more important to the
long term, drying up the supply of new smokers to replace the old.* This
is not a fixed loss to the industry: its importance increases with time. In
ten years, increased rate per day would have been expected to raise this
group's consumption by more than 50%.
~
Diane S. Burrows
MARKETING DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DSB/ ch
cc:
Mr. J.
R.
Moore
Mr. H.
Ms. E.
Mr. E.
Mr. J.
Mr. P.
Mr. W.
Mr. R.
MDIC E.
N.
J.
R.
E..
W.
A. Osmon
Monahan
Fackelman
Hribar
Galyan
Doten
Davis
t
*As discussed in my 9/21/82 memo re "Estimated Change in Industry Trend
Following F.E.T. Increase".
DSB/ch - 10/6/82
Code: 5.21
Page 3: fjn29d00
ATTACHMENT A
IMPORTANCE OF PRICE IMPACT BY AGE/SEX TO TOTAL INDUSTRY
1. 1982 IMPORTANCE TO INDUSTRY
IMPORTANCE -
% OF - RATE PER X OF TOTAL
SMOKERS DAY CONSUMPTION
Teenagers 12-17 4.0 E 17.4 E 2.2 E
Males 18-24 8.0 29.7 7.5
Males 35+ 28.7 36.9 33.6
Total 18+ 96.0 31.7 97.8
TOTAL 100.0 31.1 E 100.0
Source: Tracker (X smokers first half 1982, rate in year 1981)
adjusted for estimated teenage smoking.
II. IMPORTANCE TO PRICE IMPACT: Sample calculation assumes 10% price
increase and flat 623.0 billion industry. Importance of group to total
change is independent of total volume or price change.
IMPORTANCE
TO INDUSTRY NBER
ELAS- LOSS FOLLOWING
10% PRICE INCREASE
X BILLIONS TICITY BILLIONS IMPORTANCE
Teenagers 12-17 2.2% 13.7 -1.44 2.0 7.2%
Males 18-24 7.5 46.7 -1.40 6.5 23.6
Males 35+ 33.6 209.3 - .66 13.8 50.0
Total 18+ 97.8 609.3 - .42 25.6 92.8
TOTAL 100.0 623.0 - .44 E 27.6 100.0
DSB/ch - 10/6/82
Code: 5.21
- 3 -
Page 4: fjn29d00
ATTACHMENT B
TECHNICAL SUPPLEMENT
SUMMARY AND CRITIQUE OF THE NBER MODELS
Lewit and Coate of the National Bureau of Economic Research developed two
series of models relating cigarette prices (and other factors) to reported
incidence, rate per day, and "total demand" (incidence times rate).
Although reported rates understate true consumption, the models would still be
valid if the under-reporting was constant across the other variables --
geography, age, sex, etc. We ordinarily use this assumption ourselves.
Both studies were weakened by assuming that prices in all locales/outlets in a
state were similar to the statewide average reported by TMA, plus local tax.
This may be why both models had low adjusted R-squared values (.11 or less,
but still significant).
Other aspects of the NBER studies are critiqued separately below, since each
used aa different data source, time period, and methodology. `
THE OVER-20 MODELS
SOURCE: "The Potential for Using Excise Taxes to Reduce Smoking," Working
Paper No. 764 of the National Bureau of Economic Research, by E. M. Lewit and
and D. Coate, September, 1981.
This ordinary least squares model used data tapes of individual responses to
the Health Interview Survey of 1976. It expressed incidence, rate, and "total
demand" of respondents over age 20 as a linear function of:
o Retail price, defined as the TMA - reported average in the
respondent's state, adjusted for any local taxes.
o Family income and size
o Sex
o Marital Status
o Health status (perceived)
o Region and city size
o Race
o Working woman or not
Using the full sample, price was not found to be a statistically significant
factor in incidence, rate, or "total demand". Coefficients for most of the
other variables were significant (at the 5% level) in a direction consistent
with our consumer research findings.
H
0
.6
%o
0
m
ao
DSB/ch - 10/6/82 W
Code: 5.21
- 4 -

Page 5: fjn29d00
The models were respecified using a restricted sample which eliminated
respondents within 20 miles of a lower priced state, on the premise that the
price they actually paid might be lower than the assigned price ("border
effect"). For the restricted sample, price was found to be a statistically
significant factor in:
. Incidence and "total demand" among 20-25 year olds.
"Total demand" among those over 35.
When the regressions were done by age/sex, significant coefficients were found
only for males. Though none were found in the female regressions, the higher
elasticity for males/females combined than for males alone may imply some
effect among females.
Selected elasticities are tabulated on the next page. Only boxed values have
statistical significance at normal levels.
DSB/ch - 10/6/82
Code: 5.21
Page 6: fjn29d00
NBER ELASTICITIES AMONG PERSONS 20+ (1976)
(Sample Restricted to Eliminate Border Effect)
REPORTED REPORTED "TOTAL DEMAND"
INCIDENCE RATE _ (INC. x RATE)
RETAIL PRICE
Total 20+ .264* - .037 I - .4 16**
20-25 .74* .20
26-35 - .44 .04 - .47
3_`i+ - .15 - .15 I
Males 20+
20-25 Fl 1.276* - .171 -1.401*
26-35 - .292 + .029 - .320
3`i+ - .246 - .204 I - .6 W-1
Females 20+
20-25 - .136
- .026 - .302
., .
26-35 - .388 - .134 - .577
3'i+ + .066 - .077 - .118
S
INCOME
Total 20+ + .03 .06**
*OLS coefficient statistically significant at 5% level (2-tailed test).
**OLS coefficient statistically significant at 1% level (2-tailed test).
DSB/ch - 10/6/82
Code: 5.21
6
Page 7: fjn29d00
Since the NBER models are based on geographic differences in retail price at
one point in time (1976), they do not translate directly to national changes
over time:
., The positive income elasticity suggests that, over time, price
elasticity should be applied to retail price deflated by some measure
of consumer income. However, the price elasticities are strongly
age/sex specific and income measures/projections are not available by
age/sex.
.. Since consumer prices may continue to rise faster than income
(especially among young adults), using the CPI as a deflator probably
yields conservative estimates of the price impact.
., Restricting the sample to eliminate "border effects" improved the
model's applicability to the nation. However, it created some
regional bias -- Westerners rose from 18% to 29% of the sample while
Northeasterners fell from 24% to 11%. This may have made the price
elasticity more negative than the "true" national value, since
positive_coefficients_were_as-sosiated_with__residence in_any_regio_n_
except the West.
Thus, the adult NBER elasticities are imprecise for national price changes.
However, they probably give a reasonable idea of the groups most affected by
price and the orders of magnitude of the effects.
THE TEENAGE MODEL
SOURCE: "The Effects of Government Regulation on Teenage Smoking," by E. M.
Lewit,! D. Coate, and M. Grossman. Journal of Law and Economics, December,
1981.
These models used personal interviewdata from Cycle III of the Health
Examination Survey*, conducted 1966-70. Incidence and rate findings from HES
III seem reasonable, perhaps even a cut above most teenage studies. But it is
not recent.
A major goal of this study was pre/post assessment of the Fairness Doctrine,
which loaded television with anti-smoking commercials from 7/67 through 12/70.
Other variables included:
*In Self-Reported Health Behavior and Attitudes of Youths 12-17 Years, United
States. HEW, 1975.
DSB/ch - 10/6/82
Code: 5.21
- 7 -

Page 8: fjn29d00
TMA retail prices, adjusted to state cost-of-living and changes in the
national CPI during the 4-year survey (an improvement over no
adjustment, but still makeshift).
Fairness Doctrine intensity versus cigarette advertising and amount of
time spent watching TV
Family income deflated by state cost-of-living
Number of other children
Parents' education
Working mother or single parent
Employment/allowance of youth respondent (detailed)
Student status
Age
Sex
Race
Region and city size.
Large, negative price elasticities were found. The coefficients were stable
and statistically significant in all model specifications reported. The
authors suggest that these lar e elasticities ma incor orate other effects
which the model did not include capture separately. They suggest that the
income related variables may have failed to represent the youth's actual
discretionary income.
NBER PRICE ELASTICITIES AMONG YOUTH 12-17
REPORTED REPORTED "TOTAL DEMAND"
INCIDENCE RATE (INC. x RATE)
~.... .~.._~.
Total 12-17 - 1.19 - .25 - 1.44
The Fairness Doctrine was also found to have an important negative effect
during its first year (accounting for a 3 percentage point drop in 12-17
incidence), but showed diminishing returns during its second and third year.
Cigarette advertising on TV was found to partially offset the Doctrinw
effects. Thus, the absence of TV advertising after 1970 was implicitly a
negative effect, but the absence of the Fairness was a larger implicit
positive.
DSB/ch - 10/6/82
Code: 5.21
- 8 -

Page 9: fjn29d00
Results for other variablez were not reported.
Weaknesses in the teenage NBER model are:
Loose estimation of price, loosely deflated.
"Impure" price elasticity (probably somewhat inflated).
Data from the late 1960's, which may not reflect today's market.
National application of this model has the same problems as in the adult
model, except that the problem of estimating what teenagers perceive as "real"
price change is even worse.
DSB/ch - 10/6/82
Code: 5.21
9