A cluster analysis of petrol profit margins across various regional and urban locations in Australia.
Valadkhani, Abbas ; Chen, George ; Anderson, John 等
1. INTRODUCTION
The present study is one of the few attempts to examine the spread
between the retail and wholesale prices using disaggregate data as most
of the previous empirical studies on petrol prices in Australia utilised
mainly national and/or state level data (see inter alia Donnelly, 1982;
Newman and Kenworthy, 1989; Samimi, 1995; Fatai et al., 2004; Dodson and
Sipe, 2007; Hensher and Stanley, 2009; Li et al., 2010; Gargett, 2010).
Using a unique database, this study provides a cross-sectional
comparison of retail profit margins using a hierarchical cluster
analysis to determine whether or not the observed large variations in
petrol margins can be described as 'excessive'. As an example,
the average difference between retail and wholesale prices of petrol
varies from 24.1 cents per litre in Tennant Creek to only 2.4 cents per
litre in Mackay during the period October 2007-January 2012. This paper
seeks to identify whether such large profit spreads can be explained by
the extent of economies of scale and scope, the market size and the
associated overhead costs. In other words, is the spread between the
retail and wholesale prices high mainly in rural, less-populated and
remote areas or is it a ubiquitous phenomenon everywhere?
In order to examine these issues, a cluster analysis is conducted
to classify all retail locations into various groups each exhibiting
similar magnitudes of gross profit spread and a set of control
variables. Due to the unavailability of the data for various petrol
stations within each of the 109 retail locations, we use two proxy
variables to capture the effects of transport cost and the extent of
economies of scale and scope, namely population and the distance between
retailers and wholesalers. The major objective of this paper is to
identify several clusters in which gross profit margins are relatively
comparable. This allows us to analyse whether large existing differences
in margins across various locations can be justified against the factors
associated with location, cost and the size of the market.
The findings presented here not only contribute significantly to
our understanding of substantial regional differences in petrol margins,
but also have direct practical implications for motorists and provide a
guideline for relevant regulatory authorities across various
geographical locations. Instead of the prevailing use of aggregate data,
our disaggregated study can lead to an in-depth understanding of
competition, or lack thereof, and the extent of profiteering in the
petrol market. The location-specific results of this study make price
monitoring by regulatory bodies more cost effective as they can readily
identify and target price setting in those locations pursuing
comparatively higher margins. Hence, this study assists both motorists
and regulatory bodies to make more informed and objective assessments of
retail profit margins within the identified homogeneous clusters,
leading to greater efficiency and transparency of the petrol market.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section 2 presents
a succinct review of literature on this topic. Section 3 briefly
discusses how we conduct our cluster analysis at a disaggregate level
for benchmarking purposes. Section 4 describes the sources and summary
statistics of the data employed. Section 5 presents the results of our
cluster analysis using 109 cross-sectional observations within a
trivariate system. Section 6 discusses the policy implications of the
study followed by some concluding remarks in Section 7.
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The fuel consumption-economic activity nexus has been examined
extensively in the literature since the 1973 oil embargo. According to
Hamilton (1983), fuel price hikes were responsible for the majority of
post-war U.S. recessions until the mid-1970s. However, Hamilton's
study only focused on periods when the economy was subject to
significant upward fuel price movements and controls. Hooker (1996)
pointed out that such an inverse relationship between fuel prices and
economic activity was weakened after 1985 when falling fuel prices
failed to stimulate the U.S. economy as anticipated, a view not shared
in Hamilton's (1996) subsequent study.
Inter alia Mork (1989) and Ferderer (1996) confirmed
Hamilton's initial finding after incorporating the effect of fuel
price volatility on the US economy. Brown and Yucel (2002, p.194)
analogously summed up this inverse relationship by suggesting that
"the classic supply-side effect best explains why rising oil prices
slows GDP growth and stimulates inflation." In a recent study, Ford
(2011) concludes that vertically integrated oil companies' gross
profit margins are actually highest during the time of moderate petrol
prices. Contrary to popular belief, these companies' gross profit
margins decline when petrol prices are excessively high, and even more
so than when these prices are low.
The adverse effect of fuel prices on economic activity has been
well documented in many countries around the world. For example,
Asafu-Adjaye (2000) finds that a change in fuel consumption Granger
causes changes in income in several Asian developing countries. In a
follow-up study, Mahadevan and Asafu-Adjaye (2007) broaden the
investigation to include a total of 20 developed and developing
countries and find that fuel consumption stimulates short-run economic
activity. Chontanawat et al. (2008) is one of the studies that provides
comprehensive evidence for fuel consumption as a determinant of economic
growth. They examined the effect of fuel consumption in 100 countries
and concluded that rising fuel costs and reductions in fuel consumption
can jeopardise economic growth in the developed countries more than that
of the developing countries.
There are a number of studies in the literature which have
highlighted the significance of regional differences in the context of
petrol prices (see inter alia Hastings and Gilbert, 2005; Simpson and
Taylor, 2008; Hosken, et al. 2008; Eckert, 2013; Pennerstorfer and
Weiss, 2013). For example, Pennerstorfer and Weiss (2013) compiled a
large database consisting of 18 quarterly observations on prices of
diesel fuel (December 2000-March 2005) for an unbalanced sample of 595
to 1 370 gasoline stations in Austria. They supplemented price data with
geographical/demographical data (i.e. population density, commuting
behavior and importance of tourism) as well as individual
characteristics of petrol stations in their comprehensive analysis.
Based on a measure of spatial clustering of competitors, Pennerstorfer
and Weiss (2013) substantiated the effects of local market power on
petrol prices with a particular focus on the significance of coordinated
pricing behaviour using the difference-in-difference approach (i.e.
differentiation between the treatment and control groups). By comparing
individual observations before and after the station conversion period,
they concluded that spatial clustering of petrol stations lowers
competition and increases prices (Pennerstorfer and Weiss, (2013).
There is also an emerging consensus in the extant literature that
higher petrol prices and large retail price margins between rural and
urban areas in Australia are largely attributable to the lack of
competition in the market (Industry Commission, 1994; Australian
Competition and Consumer Commission, 1996, 2007; Walker et al., 1997;
Department of Parliamentary Services, 2004; Queensland Parliament,
2006). Setting excessive profit margins for fuel prices can adversely
affect economic activity, particularly in rural and regional Australia,
where petrol is used as a key intermediate input in the production of
goods and services. Therefore, many policymakers in Australia have been
sensitive to excessive profiteering behaviour in the fuel market since
such practices can undermine economic growth. The Australian Competition
and Consumer Commission (ACCC) (1996; 2007) launched several inquiries
into possible price collusions in the oil industry but was unable to
find any significant evidence of systematic price collusion among the
major oil companies. However, a recurring theme in these inquiries was
the significant difference between fuel prices in different geographical
locations.
After reviewing evidence of the ACCC's inquiry in 1996, Walker
et al. (1997) concluded that much of the urban-rural fuel price gap may
be attributed to the lack of competition among oil importers coupled
with limited market power of the independent discount retailers. The
systematic rise in petrol prices since 2000 sparked the second wave of
the fuel price debate. Eckert (2013, p. 140) summarises the prominence
of this issue by pointing out that: "since 2000 alone, over 75
empirical studies of gasoline retailing have been published in English
language academic journals, with many more studies existing in working
paper form or as reports issued by governments or other agencies or
institutes."
In order to enhance competition in the petrol market, the Western
Australian state government introduced the fuel price monitoring scheme
'FuelWatch' in January 2001. The FuelWatch scheme has provided
a comprehensive dataset on fuel prices down to the station level. After
analysing FuelWatch data, the ACCC (2008) failed to identify any attempt
by the oil majors to profiteer by manipulating fuel prices. However,
Davidson (2008, p.8) cast doubts over the reliability of ACCC's
conclusion by pointing to the fact that the ACCC model contained no
"diagnostic statistics such as standard errors or p-values that one
might expected in any econometric analysis". Using input-output
analysis, Valadkhani and Mitchell (2002) demonstrated that although fuel
price hikes would not have harmed the Australian economy to the extent
as they did in the 1970s, these price hikes would nevertheless adversely
affect poorer families. As a result, schemes such as FuelWatch could be
readily justified by aiming to protect the interests of lower
socioeconomic groups.
It should be noted that Valadkhani (2013 a) found that out of the
28 retail locations exhibiting significant petrol pricing asymmetry,
none were from Western Australia, where FuelWatch is effectively
monitoring petrol prices unlike the rest of the country. Valadkhani
(2013b) examined the day of the week effect in retail prices of unleaded
petrol across 114 retail locations in Australia during the period
spanning from January 2005 to April 2012. He found that in major capital
cities and urban areas prices generally peak on Thursday/Friday and then
fall until they reach their cyclical trough on Tuesday. Valadkhani
(2013b) also argues that petrol is more expensive in remote and small
towns, where the economies of scale and scope are relatively limited and
prices are less variable.
3. CLUSTER ANALYSIS OF REGIONAL LOCATIONS
For any given location, our key variable, the mean gross profit
spread (margin) is the difference between retail and wholesale prices of
petrol averaged over the sample period. It should be noted that there is
generally more than one petrol station in each retail location and thus
the retail prices in each location at any point of time are already the
average of several petrol stations. In other words, the mean retail
prices of petrol are averaged over time and over the retail outlets
within each location. The wholesale prices are averaged over time only,
as retailers purchase petrol from just one outlet which is usually the
nearest outport terminal.
After computing the mean profit spread for each of the 109 retail
locations, we need to obtain the data on transport costs, the number of
service stations in the area (as a proxy for the extent of competition)
and the extent of economies of scale and scope. Complete accurate data
on the above control variables for various petrol stations within all
109 geographical locations are not available, therefore, we use the
distance between retailers and their nearest wholesale distribution
terminal as a proxy for transport costs. Consequently the further away
each retail location is from its wholesale outport, the higher are
expected transport and overhead costs. In addition, population is used
as a proxy to capture the size of the market, the density of service
stations within a certain geographical location and the extent of
economies of scale and scope. When competition is localized in the
gasoline market, the information on local differences in demand and cost
and the share of informed vs. uniformed consumers are hard or impossible
to obtain, thus making the assessment of the effects of coordinated
behavior on prices very difficult (Pennerstorfer and Weiss, 2013).
Cluster analysis is a data-reduction technique which can be used to
minimise within-group variance, while also maximising between-group
variance, leading to a small number of heterogeneous groups with
homogeneous contents (Hair et al., 1998). We thus adopt a hierarchical
cluster analysis to group the 109 retail locations into several
manageable clusters according to the following three variables: mean
profit spread, population of the retail location, and distance to the
nearest wholesaler. Before conducting a cluster analysis, these three
variables are standardised to avoid bias resulting from variables having
substantially different magnitudes or being measured in different units.
This paper measures the similarity (in terms of the above three
variables) between two retail locations, j and k, by the following
squared Euclidean distance:
D(j,k) = [3.summation over (i=1)] [([X.sub.ij] - [X.sub.ik]).sup.2]
(1)
where [X.sub.ij] and [X.sub.ik] denote the ith variable of
locations j and k, respectively. The smaller D(j, k) is, the more
similar are locations j and k in terms of the normalised magnitude of
the three control variables. In hierarchical cluster analysis, at the
beginning of the procedure there are 109 clusters, each representing one
retail location. Then, at each stage, the two most similar locations
(clusters) are combined until, at the last stage, a single cluster of
109 locations is formed. There are several alternative methods for
merging the most similar pair of clusters at each stage namely the
average linkage, the nearest centroid sorting, and the complete linkage,
which is a conservative decision rule (Hirschberg et al., 1991), because
it uses the maximum distance between any two attributes in the two
clusters. In practice, compared to the above 3 methods, the Ward method
is more widely used. This paper uses Ward's (1963) method, which
chooses the two clusters whose merger would result in the smallest
increase to the aggregate sum of squared deviations within clusters. The
sum of squared deviations within cluster k is defined as follows:
ESS(k) = [summation over (J [member of] K)] [3.summation over
(i=1)][([X.sub.ij] - [[bar.X].sub.ik]).sup.2] (2)
where [X.sub.ij] is the ith variable in location j, and
[[bar.X].sub.ik] is the ith variable averaged across all locations in
cluster k. Given the values of ESS(k), the increment to the aggregate
sum of squared deviations within clusters resulting from the merger of
cluster k and cluster K to form cluster (k[union]K) is computed by:
[d.sub.Ward](k,K) = [summation over (j [member of] (k [union]
K)][3.summation over (i-1)] [([X.sub.ij] -
[[bar.X].sub.(K[union]k)])).sup.2] - ESS(k) - ESS(K) (3)
Based on the resulting grouping of homogenous locations within each
cluster, cluster analysis can provide a detailed understanding of the
pricing behaviour of retailers at various geographical locations and
reveal any possible evidence of abnormal pricing practices as presented
below.
4. DATABASE
Retail and wholesale petrol prices were obtained from FUELtrac
(www.fueltrac.com.au) and Informed Sources (www.informedsources.com)
using funding made available under the Australian Research
Council's Discovery Projects scheme. Close scrutiny of both
databases revealed that there are only 109 retail locations for which
consistent and complete price data (with no gap or missing observations)
were available over the period 29 October 2007 to 30 January 2012.
Petrol stations in these locations purchase petrol from their nearest
wholesale outport terminal. In total there are 18 wholesale distribution
terminals across 7 states and territories in Australia: 2 are in the
State of New South Wales (Newcastle and Sydney), 1 in the Northern
Territory (Darwin), 5 in Queensland (Brisbane, Cairns, Gladstone,
Mackay, Townsville), 2 in South Australia (Adelaide, Port Lincoln), 2 in
Tasmania (Hobart, Devonport), 1 in Victoria (Melbourne) and 5 in Western
Australia (Albany, Esperence, Geraldton, Perth, Port Hedland).
Population data were obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics
(2012), and the distance between retail locations and their nearest
wholesale terminals was approximated in kilometres using Google map
assuming a minimum distance of 5 km.
5. EMPIRICAL RESULTS
Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics and the unit root test
results using weekly data spanning from 29 October 2007 to 30 January
2012. During this period on average ten retail locations with the
highest average gross profit margin (in cents per litre) were: Tennant
Creek (24.1 cents per litre), Eucla (23.9), Alice Springs (21.1),
Carnarvon (19.5), Cunnamulla (16.6), Bega (15.4), Cooma (15.3), Hay
(14.9), Geraldton (14.4) and Ceduna (14.0). In contrast, the lowest
margins were observed at the following retail locations: Mackay (2.4
cents per litre), Townsville (2.7), Bundaberg (4.0), Dalby (4.4), Perth
metropolitan (4.7), Cairns (4.7), Caloundra (4.8), Mandurah (4.9),
Warwick (5.0), and Brisbane metropolitan area (5.1). Overall it appears
that the average margins in urban and more populous metropolitan areas
(especially those in Queensland) are conspicuously less than regional
areas, where the extent of economies of scope and scale is probably far
more limited.
The average gross margin in Sydney metropolitan, as the most
populous city in Australia, is 6.3 cents per litre, whereas in Eucla
(with a population of only 86 persons) this margin is as high as 23.9
cents. Before computing the mean margin for each of the 109 locations,
it is important to ensure that all individual 109 spread series follow a
mean reverting pattern during the sample period when the average series
are computed. According to the Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) test
results in Table 1, the null of unit root is rejected at the 5 percent
level of significance or better for all of the 109 spread series.
Therefore, we can assert that the spread series fluctuates around their
mean values without showing upward or downward trends during the sample
period. These results support the view that although the margins between
retail and wholesale prices of petrol exhibit significant differences
across various geographical locations, they follow a mean reverting
pattern over time within their individual retail locations. In the
context of the Austrian gasoline market, Pennerstorfer and Weiss (2013)
provide convincing evidence that large gasoline price differences can be
adequately explained by analysing the link between ownership structure
and spatial clustering (i.e. the sequence of stations on a road). It is
highly likely that retailers, which are generally members of a network
of multi-station firms, can coordinate their pricing attempts within the
spatial network due to the lack of competition.
A hierarchical cluster analysis is performed to identify in which
comparable locations the average retail gross margins can be considered
as relatively too high. To this end, the 109 x 109 proximity matrix is
first computed which contains the squared Euclidean distances between
all pairs of retail locations. This matrix is not reported here due to
its large size, but is available from the author on request.
Table 2 shows how the clusters (or geographical locations) are
merged at each stage of the procedure. At Stage 0 there are 109 separate
clusters with each containing a single retail location. As shown in
Table 2 (columns 2 and 3) at stage 1, Forster (Cluster 40) and Traralgon
(Cluster 96) are combined. The number of clusters at the end of Stage 1
is 108 (see Column 5). The clusters that are formed at Stages 2 and 3
also involve the merging of two similar single-location clusters. At
Stage 2, locations 57 (Katherine) and 60 (Lakes Entrance) are merged,
and at Stage 3 locations 2 (Albany) and 34 (Devonport) are clustered. In
this way, the most similar locations continue to merge until stage 37,
where Forster (Cluster 40) and Traralgon (Cluster 96), as one cluster,
are combined with location 88 (Shepparton). The individual locations, or
cluster groupings will continue to merge in the same manner until stage
108, where there will be just one cluster containing all 109 locations.
The agglomeration schedule in Table 2 shows that retail location 4
(Alice Springs), as the most dissimilar location compared to the rest,
does not join any cluster until the last stage (see stage 108) and, in
so doing, increases the agglomeration coefficient markedly from 223 to
324. Figure 1 shows how clusters (or locations) are formed in a
hierarchical clustering by using a dendrogram.
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
The maximum change in the agglomeration coefficient is used by some
practitioners as a guide to determine the optimum number of clusters.
This coefficient denotes the within-cluster sum of squares, aggregated
across all clusters that are formed by a given stage of the procedure.
Small increments in the agglomeration coefficient mean that relatively
homogeneous clusters are being combined at the corresponding stage.
Conversely, large increments in the agglomeration coefficient indicate
that relatively more heterogeneous clusters are being grouped. The use
of maximum change in the agglomeration coefficient as a stopping rule
usually suggests too few clusters (Hair et al., 1998). The cubic
clustering criterion is another alternative stopping rule that has the
tendency to identify too many clusters. In order to overcome the
shortcoming associated with adopting too few or too many cluster
solutions, we report a range of solutions, varying from two to six. This
approach offers a better understanding of the how different retail
locations are clustered. However, our preferred final grouping is based
on the six-cluster solution because the corresponding change in the
agglomeration coefficient rises from one to two digits.
Table 3 reports the cluster analysis results using Ward's
method and the normalised values of our three control variables. All
five different cluster solutions are reported in columns 2-6 of Table 3.
A cursory look at Table 3 reveals that, irrespective of the number of
clusters, Melbourne and Sydney (both with large population and minimum
distance to their supplying wholesale distributors) appear as separate
clusters in all of the cluster solutions. Similarly, Tennant Creek,
Eucla and Alice Springs are always grouped together, regardless of the
number of clusters. In this cluster, while the mean gross profit margin
is higher than that of the other clusters, their populations are
relatively lower and at the same time the distances to their
corresponding wholesale distributors are also further than others. These
groupings can also be seen in the dendrogram presented in Figure 1.
A systematic notation is used to identify each location with a
cluster membership code. For example, C6.1 denotes the first cluster
within a six-cluster solution, C5.3 indicates the third cluster within a
five-cluster solution and so forth. In the six-cluster solution the
following 16 locations are separated from cluster 3 in the five-cluster
solution (C5.3) and form a more homogeneous group (that is, C6.4):
Geraldton, Wynyard, Wonthaggi, Mansfield, Echuca, Colac, Darwin
metropolitan, Campbelltown, Ulverstone, Launceston, Burnie, Wollongong,
Albany, Devonport, Port Lincoln and Hobart metropolitan.
All clusters in Table 3 are first sorted in terms of the ascending
magnitude of the cluster average, using a six-cluster solution, and then
within each cluster the corresponding members are further sorted in
terms of individual average gross margins (in descending order). In this
way, the sixth cluster appears right at the end of Table 3 as it has the
highest average margin (that is, 23 cents per litre). Within the sixth
cluster solution, the three locations are sorted in descending order,
with Tennant Creek (24.1) appearing first and Alice Springs (21.1) last.
6. POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY
By comparing 'apples with apples' in Table 3, one can
identify which retail locations charge relatively higher or lower gross
margins than their comparable counterparts. In order to facilitate the
comparison, all of the retail locations are sorted within a six-cluster
solution in terms of a measure of the excess gross profitability index.
This index quantifies how much the average gross profitability in a
given location is above or below the corresponding cluster's
average. For instance, within C6.1, the gross margin for Newcastle is on
average 50 percent higher than the average margin for other comparable
locations. It is interesting that within this same cluster there are
other comparable locations in which the actual average gross margin is
well below 7.8 cents per litre (see Table 3).
Another example of excessive margin is Carnarvon (19.5 cents per
litre) in Western Australia within cluster C6.5 with a population of 6
333 and an approximate distance of 480 km to its wholesale outport
terminal in Geraldton. For comparison purposes, it is interesting to
note that the relevant margin in Longreach (12.4 cents per litre) in
Queensland is well below that of Carnarvon, where the former has both a
smaller population (4 384) and a longer distance to its wholesale
outport terminal (786 km). Similarly, both Geraldton and Albany (two
Western Australian country towns) in C6.4 are located only 5 kilometres
away from their wholesaler, however, the excess profitability index in
Geraldton is 29 percent above the cluster average, but 14 percent below
the cluster average in Albany. This finding is compounded by the fact
that Geraldton and Albany have similar population sizes.
A cursory look at the retail locations appearing at the top of
clusters C6.1, C6.3, C6.4 and C6.5 provides convincing evidence that
high profit margins are not observed only in remote rural and less
populated regional areas. For example, although Rockhampton and
Caloundra in C6.1 share similar attributes in terms of population size
and the distance to the wholesaler, the excess profitability index is 29
percent above the cluster average in Rockhampton, compared to 8 percent
below the cluster average in Caloundra. We also observe the same
phenomenon in C6.3 when comparing two similar Victorian country towns,
namely Benalla and Ararat, where the excess profitability indices are
respectively 38 percent above and 12 percent below the cluster average.
These results show that there may be other forces at work in determining
gross profit margins.
It is important to explain why there are large profit margins in
both rural and urban areas. Foss and Lien (2010) and Dayanandan and
Donker (2011) have highlighted the importance of changes in ownership
structures in revealing the competitive dynamics and thus profitability
of oil and gas firms. It is very useful to explore whether excessive
margins can be explained by the extent of competition, ownership
structure, local market conditions and its individual characteristics.
At this stage, we have not been able to obtain such data for all 109
locations from the ACCC, Fuelwatch or other sources. However, there is
widespread view in the literature that large regional price variations
are driven by the lack of competition and the number of independent
suppliers. For example a similar comprehensive study of the Austrian
gasoline market by Pennerstorfer and Weiss (2013) provides convincing
evidence that large gasoline price differences can be adequately
explained by analysing the link between ownership structure and spatial
clustering (i.e. the sequence of stations on a road). An increase in the
extent of spatial clustering can lower the degree of competition and
hence raise equilibrium prices. It is highly likely that retailers,
which are generally members of a network of multi-station firms, can
coordinate their pricing attempts within the spatial network due to the
lack of competition.
The Australian Institute of Petroleum (2012) report notes that the
aggregate retail net profit margin should be in the vicinity of 6 cents
per litre. However, this net profit margin appears to be well below the
retail gross profit margin of 11 cents per litre identified in this
study, even after deducting several cents per litre for overhead costs
other than transport. We argue that if gross profit margins in a
particular retail location are regarded as relatively excessive, then
further careful examination of other factors should also be taken into
account as these differences may be reasonably justifiable on other
location specific factors.
Of key importance to this study is that it clearly highlights
important geographical pricing differences at a disaggregate level. By
identifying various urban and regional areas in which profit margins
appear to be excessive, the results of this paper provide more
transparency in the petrol market particularly for consumers and
industries for which petrol is an essential intermediate input. Given
the critical role of fuel prices in both regional and urban economies,
consumers and regulatory bodies can directly benefit from greater
efficiency and transparency of the petrol market. In light of recent
debates surrounding suspected profiteering in the petrol industry, our
results are both timely and relevant for consumers as well as government
regulatory agencies.
7. CONCLUSION
Changes in petrol prices attract a great deal of attention from
consumers since they spend a significant share of their income on this
commodity. This paper examines the extent to which the average spread
between retail and wholesale prices of petrol across 109 rural, urban
geographical locations in Australia are relatively excessive. For this
purpose, we conduct a hierarchical cluster analysis using a
disaggregated database (during the period 29 October 2007-30 January
2012) not freely available to the public. We postulate that population
(as a proxy for the market size, competition and the extent of economies
of scale and scope) and the distance between retailers and wholesalers
(as a proxy for transport costs) are the major determinants of the
observed sizable differences in the gross margins across various
geographical locations. The results indicate that retailers have enough
market power to determine their margins, particularly when the local
market is subject to less competition, potentially causing substantial
cost inefficiencies for consumers and industries with high reliance on
petrol for transportation and production.
Our cluster analysis classifies all of the 109 retail locations
into six heterogeneous groups with each group containing homogenous and
comparable contents in terms of the standardised magnitudes of the
following control variables: the averaged spread between retail and
wholesale prices of petrol, population, and the distance between the
retailers and wholesalers. Within the six-cluster solution, we have
ranked all of the 109 retail locations in terms of the excess-gross
profitability index, quantifying the extent to which the average gross
profitability in a particular retail location is above or below the
corresponding cluster average.
Contrary to popular belief, our results provide compelling new
evidence that excessively high profit margins are not necessarily
observed only in remote and isolated rural areas. In other words, large
gross profit margins do also exist in major urban areas such as
Newcastle, Rockhampton, Geelong, North Coast, Wangaratta, Shepparton,
Geraldton and Bega (see the top of each of the 6 clusters in Table 3).
Despite petrol retailers being exposed to high levels of competition and
the economies of scale and scope in these locations, they continue to
charge relatively higher profit margins from motorists than their
counterparts in other similar locations. Therefore, this study can
provide important policy implications for consumers and regulators given
the recent debates in relation to the whereabouts of suspected
profiteering in the petrol market, which can equally affect both urban
and regional economies.
ACKNOWLEDGEMNTS: We wish to thank two anonymous referees, whose
invaluable inputs and comments considerably improved an earlier version
of this article. The usual caveat applies. This research was supported
under Australian Research Council's Discovery Projects funding
scheme (DP120102753). The views expressed herein are those of the
authors and are not necessarily those of the Australian Research
Council.
REFERENCES
Asafu-Adjaye, J. (2000). The relationship between energy
consumption, energy prices and economic growth: time series evidence
from Asian developing countries. Energy Economics, 22(6), pp. 615625.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2012). Regional Population Growth.
cat. no. 3218, ABS, Canberra.
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (1996). Inquiry Into
the Petroleum Products Declaration. Australian Government Publishing
Service, Canberra.
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (2007). Petrol
Prices and Australian Consumers: Report of the ACCC Inquiry Into the
Price of Unleaded Petrol. Australian Government Publishing Service,
Canberra.
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (2008). ACCC Issues
Details of Further FuelWatch Econometric Analysis. Press release, May.
Online version accessed 15 August 2012, www.accc.gov.au.
Australian Institute of Petroleum, (2012). Facts About Petrol
Prices. Online version accessed 23 September 2012
http://www.aip.com.au/pricing/pdf/Facts%20About%20Petrol%20 Prices.pdf
Brown, S.P.A. and Yucel, MK. (2002). Energy prices and aggregate
economic activity: an interpretative survey. Quarterly Journal of
Economics and Finance, 42(2), pp. 193-208.
Chontanawat, J., Hunt, L.C. and Pierse, R. (2008). Does energy
consumption cause economic growth? evidence from a systematic study of
over 100 countries. Journal of Policy Modeling, 30(2), pp. 209-220.
Davidson, S. (2008). Secret econometric business: watching
FuelWatch and the ACCC. Agenda, 15(4), pp. 5-18.
Dayanandan, A. and Donker, H. (2011). Oil prices and accounting
profits of oil and gas companies. International Review of Financial
Analysis, 20, pp. 252-257.
Department of Parliamentary Services (2004). Petrol Pricing in
Australia: Issues and trends, Current Issues Brief no. 10 (2003-04).
Information and Research Services, Parliamentary Library, Department of
Parliamentary Services, Canberra.
Dodson, J. and Sipe. N. (2007). Oil vulnerability in the Australian
city: assessing socioeconomic risks from higher urban fuel prices. Urban
Studies, 44(1), pp. 37-62.
Donnelly, W.A. (1982). The regional demand for petrol in Australia.
Economic Record, 58(4), pp. 317-327.
Eckert, A. (2013). Empirical studies of gasoline retailing: a guide
to the literature. Journal of Economic Surveys, 27(1), pp. 140-166.
Fatai, K., Oxley, L. and Scrimgeour, F.G. (2004). Modelling the
causal relationship between energy consumption and GDP in New Zealand,
Australia, India, Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand. Mathematics
and Computers in Simulation, 64(3), pp. 431-445.
Ferderer, P.J. (1996). Oil price volatility and the macroeconomy.
Journal of Macroeconomics, 18(1), pp. 1-26.
Ford, G.S. (2011). An investigation into the relationship of retail
gas prices on oil company profitability. Applied Economics, 43(27), pp.
4033-4039.
Foss, N.J. and Lien, L.B. (2010). Ownership and competitive
dynamics. Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 13, pp. 3-30.
Gargett, D. (2010). Petrol prices in Australia. Australasian
Transport Research Forum 2010. Adelaide, Australia.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (1998). Multivariate
Data Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hamilton, J.D. (1983). Oil and the macroeconomy since World War II.
Journal of Political Economy, 91(2), pp. 228-248.
Hamilton, J.D. (1996). This is what happened to the oil price
macroeconomy relationship. Journal of Monetary Economics, 38(2), pp.
215-220.
Hastings, J. and Gilbert, R. (2005). Market power, vertical
integration and the wholesale price of gasoline. The Journal of
Industrial Economics, 53(4), pp. 469-492.
Hayashi F. (2000). Econometrics, Princeton University Press:
Princeton, NJ.
Hensher, D.A., and Stanley, J.K. (2009). What if petrol increased
to $10 per litre in Melbourne? Implications for travel behaviour and
public transport demand. Road and Transport Research, 18(3), pp. 61-68.
Hirschberg, J.G., Maasoumi, E. and Slottje, D.J. (1991). Cluster
analysis for measuring quality of life across countries. Journal of
Econometrics, 50(1-2), pp. 131-150.
Hooker, M.A. (1996). What happened to the oil-macroeconomy
relationship? Journal of Monetary Economics, 38(2), pp. 195-213.
Hosken, D.S., McMillan, R. and Taylor, C.T. (2008). Retail gasoline
pricing: what do we know? International Journal of Industrial
Organization, 26, pp. 1425-1436.
Industry Commission (1994). Petroleum Products, Report no. 40,
July. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
Li, Z., Rose, J.M. and Hensher, D.A. (2010). Forecasting automobile
petrol demand in Australia: an evaluation of empirical models.
Transportation Research Part A, 44(1), pp. 16-38.
Mahadevan, R. and Asafu-Adjaye, J. (2007). Energy consumption,
economic growth and prices: a reassessment using panel VECM for
developed and developing countries. Energy Policy, 35(4), pp. 2481-2490.
Mork, K.A. (1989). Oil and the macroeconomy when prices go up and
down: an extension of Hamilton's results. Journal of Political
Economy, 97(3), pp. 740-744.
Newman, P.W.G. and Kenworthy, J.R. (1989). Gasoline consumption and
cities. Journal of the American Planning Association, 55(1), pp. 24-37.
Pennerstorfer, D. and Weiss, C. (2013). Spatial clustering and
market power: evidence from the retail gasoline market. Regional Science
And Urban Economics, 43(4), pp. 661-675.DOI:
10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2013.04.002
Queensland Parliament (2006). Inquiry Into Petrol Pricing in
Queensland. Legislative Assembly of Queensland, Brisbane.
Samimi, R. (1995). Road transport energy demand in Australia: a
cointegration approach. Energy Economics, 17(4), pp. 329-339.
Simpson, J., Taylor, C. (2008). Do gasoline mergers affect consumer
prices? the marathon Ashland petroleum and Ultramar diamond Shamrock
transaction. Journal of Law and Economics, 51, pp. 135-152.
Valadkhani, A., (2013a). Do petrol prices rise faster than they
fall when the market shows significant disequilibria? Energy Economics,
39, pp. 66-80.
Valadkhani, A. (2013b). Seasonal patterns in daily prices of
unleaded petrol across Australia. Energy Policy, 56(3), pp. 720-731.
Valadkhani, A., Mitchell. W.F. (2002). Assessing the impact of
changes in petroleum prices on inflation and household expenditures in
Australia. Australian Economic Review, 35(2), pp. 122-132.
Walker, G., Murphy, T., and Hicks. J. (1997). Country petrol
pricing: evidence and recommendations. Australasian Journal of Regional
Studies, 3(1), pp. 85-98.
Ward, J.H. (1963). Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective
function. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58(301), pp.
236-244.
Abbas Valadkhani
Swinburne Business School, Swinburne University of Technology,
Hawthorn, VIC, 3122, Australia. E-mail:
[email protected]
George Chen
UNE Business School, University of New England, Armidale, NSW,
2351, Australia. E-mail:
[email protected]
John Anderson
UNE Business School, University of New England, Armidale, NSW,
2351, Australia. E-mail:
[email protected]
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics and the Unit Root
Test Results (October 2007-January 2012).
No. Retailer Mean (a) Rank Standard
location deviation (a)
1 Adelaide Metro 5.6 95 2.43
2 Albany 9.6 47 3.67
3 Albury 5.3 98 3.77
4 Alice Springs 21.1 3 5.01
5 Ararat 6.9 79 3.84
6 Bairnsdale 7.0 77 3.64
7 Ballarat 5.6 94 4.06
8 Bathurst 9.6 46 3.65
9 Bega 15.4 6 2.87
10 Benalla 10.8 34 3.20
11 Bendigo 6.8 80 3.50
12 Bowen 5.8 91 5.83
13 Brisbane Metro 5.1 100 5.40
14 Broken Hill 11.8 27 3.70
15 Bunbury 8.3 63 2.61
16 Bundaberg 4.0 107 4.39
17 Burnie 10.4 40 2.97
18 Caboolture 5.4 97 5.57
19 Cairns 4.7 104 5.16
20 Caloundra 4.8 103 5.92
21 Campbelltown 11.4 30 2.88
22 Canberra Metro 9.2 55 3.69
23 Carnarvon 19.5 4 5.19
24 Casino 7.7 69 5.07
25 Ceduna 14.0 10 3.16
26 Charters Towers 7.6 71 5.06
27 Coffs Harbour 10.6 36 3.05
28 Colac 11.9 24 3.81
29 Cooma 15.3 7 2.87
30 Cowra 8.8 59 3.28
31 Cunnamulla 16.6 5 6.28
32 Dalby 4.4 106 5.20
33 Darwin Metro 11.5 28 4.00
34 Devonport 9.5 52 3.53
35 Dubbo 9.6 51 3.73
36 Echuca 11.9 23 3.81
37 Emerald 6.6 83 4.84
38 Eucla 23.9 2 6.74
39 Forbes 13.3 12 2.85
40 Forster 9.7 44 5.23
41 Geelong 6.2 86 2.48
42 Geraldton 14.4 9 3.90
43 Gladstone 5.2 99 4.91
44 Gold Coast 5.8 92 5.13
45 Goondiwindi 7.6 70 6.42
46 Goulburn 7.9 66 3.60
47 Grafton 9.1 56 4.61
48 Griffith 11.5 29 3.74
49 Gympie 5.9 89 6.12
50 Hervey Bay 6.9 78 5.52
51 Hay 14.9 8 3.41
52 Hobart Metro 8.7 61 3.88
53 Horsham 12.3 21 2.85
54 Inverell 10.6 35 4.18
55 Ipswich 5.5 96 5.33
56 Kalgoorlie 10.0 42 4.15
57 Katherine 11.1 32 4.70
58 Kempsey 9.9 43 3.51
59 Kingaroy 6.2 87 5.63
60 Lakes Entrance 11.0 33 3.79
61 Launceston 10.6 39 3.37
62 Lismore 8.2 64 4.74
63 Longreach 12.4 20 6.18
64 Mackay 2.4 109 5.37
65 Mandurah 4.9 102 3.11
66 Mansfield 12.7 17 3.17
67 Maryborough 5.7 93 5.32
68 Melbourne Metro 7.3 74 2.07
69 Mildura 12.5 19 3.47
70 Moree 12.7 16 4.05
71 Mt Gambier 8.7 60 3.88
72 Murray Bridge 7.3 75 2.63
73 New Norfolk 7.4 72 4.53
74 Newcastle 7.8 68 2.48
75 North Coast 6.1 88 5.32
76 Orange 11.8 25 3.04
77 Parkes 12.6 18 3.09
78 Perth Metro 4.7 105 2.60
79 Port Augusta 8.1 65 4.26
80 Port Lincoln 9.2 53 3.60
81 Port Macquarie 9.0 57 3.54
82 Port Pirie 8.7 62 2.12
83 Portland 12.8 15 3.08
84 Renmark 5.8 90 4.94
85 Rockhampton 6.7 82 5.35
86 Roma 9.6 50 5.82
87 Sale 9.2 54 3.01
88 Shepparton 10.2 41 3.56
89 Sunbury 7.3 73 2.15
90 Swan Hill 13.4 11 2.40
91 Sydney Metro 6.3 85 1.99
92 Tamworth 11.2 31 2.76
93 Taree 6.7 81 4.33
94 Tennant Creek 24.1 1 5.47
95 Townsville 2.7 108 4.62
96 Traralgon 9.6 49 3.54
97 Ulverstone 10.6 38 3.20
98 Victor Harbour 7.8 67 3.70
99 Wagga Wagga 12.3 22 3.59
100 Wangaratta 10.6 37 2.43
101 Warrnambool 8.8 58 3.42
102 Warwick 5.0 101 5.68
103 Whyalla 6.6 84 5.84
104 Wodonga 7.1 76 3.07
105 Wollongong 9.7 45 2.14
106 Wonthaggi 13.2 14 2.44
107 Wynyard 13.2 13 2.63
108 Yarrawonga 9.6 48 4.25
109 Yass 11.8 26 2.94
Average 9.5 4.00
No. Retailer ADF t stat. P-value
location (b) (c)
1 Adelaide Metro -10.96 0.00
2 Albany -5.16 0.00
3 Albury -6.12 0.00
4 Alice Springs -5.08 0.00
5 Ararat -6.38 0.00
6 Bairnsdale -4.71 0.00
7 Ballarat -4.82 0.00
8 Bathurst -5.16 0.00
9 Bega -4.74 0.00
10 Benalla -5.51 0.00
11 Bendigo -6.30 0.00
12 Bowen -4.68 0.00
13 Brisbane Metro -5.62 0.00
14 Broken Hill -5.68 0.00
15 Bunbury -5.16 0.00
16 Bundaberg -5.64 0.00
17 Burnie -5.89 0.00
18 Caboolture -5.52 0.00
19 Cairns -5.69 0.00
20 Caloundra -5.94 0.00
21 Campbelltown -5.61 0.00
22 Canberra Metro -7.60 0.00
23 Carnarvon -4.62 0.00
24 Casino -4.70 0.00
25 Ceduna -4.94 0.00
26 Charters Towers -4.68 0.00
27 Coffs Harbour -6.49 0.00
28 Colac -5.08 0.00
29 Cooma -6.01 0.00
30 Cowra -5.99 0.00
31 Cunnamulla -4.93 0.00
32 Dalby -5.37 0.00
33 Darwin Metro -4.21 0.01
34 Devonport -5.06 0.00
35 Dubbo -4.60 0.00
36 Echuca -5.28 0.00
37 Emerald -5.81 0.00
38 Eucla -3.86 0.02
39 Forbes -5.96 0.00
40 Forster -4.01 0.01
41 Geelong -7.61 0.00
42 Geraldton -5.16 0.00
43 Gladstone -4.07 0.01
44 Gold Coast -5.77 0.00
45 Goondiwindi -4.88 0.00
46 Goulburn -4.79 0.00
47 Grafton -4.79 0.00
48 Griffith -5.02 0.00
49 Gympie -4.81 0.00
50 Hervey Bay -4.67 0.00
51 Hay -5.59 0.00
52 Hobart Metro -5.38 0.00
53 Horsham -5.99 0.00
54 Inverell -5.54 0.00
55 Ipswich -6.45 0.00
56 Kalgoorlie -5.46 0.00
57 Katherine -4.54 0.00
58 Kempsey -5.34 0.00
59 Kingaroy -5.16 0.00
60 Lakes Entrance -4.15 0.01
61 Launceston -5.79 0.00
62 Lismore -4.77 0.00
63 Longreach -4.60 0.00
64 Mackay -5.76 0.00
65 Mandurah -5.22 0.00
66 Mansfield -4.85 0.00
67 Maryborough -4.72 0.00
68 Melbourne Metro -8.35 0.00
69 Mildura -5.87 0.00
70 Moree -6.05 0.00
71 Mt Gambier -5.39 0.00
72 Murray Bridge -5.30 0.00
73 New Norfolk -6.26 0.00
74 Newcastle -7.06 0.00
75 North Coast -3.73 0.02
76 Orange -5.97 0.00
77 Parkes -5.54 0.00
78 Perth Metro -5.74 0.00
79 Port Augusta -5.45 0.00
80 Port Lincoln -5.18 0.00
81 Port Macquarie -4.39 0.00
82 Port Pirie -5.99 0.00
83 Portland -5.51 0.00
84 Renmark -4.92 0.00
85 Rockhampton -5.33 0.00
86 Roma -4.43 0.00
87 Sale -5.64 0.00
88 Shepparton -4.34 0.00
89 Sunbury -8.42 0.00
90 Swan Hill -4.90 0.00
91 Sydney Metro -8.61 0.00
92 Tamworth -6.18 0.00
93 Taree -5.13 0.00
94 Tennant Creek -4.85 0.00
95 Townsville -5.99 0.00
96 Traralgon -5.75 0.00
97 Ulverstone -5.47 0.00
98 Victor Harbour -5.22 0.00
99 Wagga Wagga -4.68 0.00
100 Wangaratta -6.01 0.00
101 Warrnambool -6.68 0.00
102 Warwick -3.85 0.02
103 Whyalla -4.52 0.00
104 Wodonga -5.69 0.00
105 Wollongong -7.47 0.00
106 Wonthaggi -6.41 0.00
107 Wynyard -5.98 0.00
108 Yarrawonga -4.90 0.00
109 Yass -5.93 0.00
Average
Note.--(a) cents per litre. (b) The Schwarz information
criterion is utilised to select the optimal lag length,
including both an intercept term and a time trend
variable. (c) Following Hayashi (2000), given T=223
weekly observations, the upper bound in search of the
optimum lag length is assumed to be 14.
Source: the Authors
Table 2. Agglomeration Schedule.
Stage Cluster Combined Agglomeration No. of
Coefficients clusters
Cluster 1(a) Cluster 2(a)
1 40 96 .000 108
2 57 60 .001 107
3 2 34 .001 106
4 67 84 .003 105
5 18 55 .004 104
6 73 89 .006 103
7 77 83 .009 102
8 30 47 .012 101
9 46 62 .016 100
10 58 108 .021 99
11 6 50 .025 98
12 11 93 .030 97
13 76 109 .035 96
14 81 101 .040 95
15 2 80 .046 94
16 57 92 .051 93
17 35 56 .058 92
18 8 87 .065 91
19 53 70 .073 90
20 20 65 .081 89
21 29 51 .089 88
22 17 97 .097 87
23 9 29 .105 86
24 12 59 .114 85
25 72 98 .124 84
26 39 90 .135 83
27 64 95 .147 82
28 21 28 .160 81
29 6 103 .173 80
30 15 46 .186 79
31 16 32 .201 78
32 81 82 .216 77
33 45 104 .233 76
34 10 100 .250 75
35 19 43 .269 74
36 48 99 .290 73
37 40 88 .312 72
38 39 77 .336 71
39 5 24 .359 70
40 14 69 .383 69
41 30 79 .412 68
42 12 49 .441 67
43 36 66 .470 66
44 27 35 .502 65
45 41 85 .534 64
46 72 73 .572 63
47 7 102 .610 62
48 71 86 .650 61
49 37 45 .693 60
50 8 40 .736 59
51 11 26 .780 58
52 106 107 .828 57
53 53 76 .890 56
54 18 19 .954 55
55 7 20 1.022 54
56 17 61 1.092 53
57 41 75 1.166 52
58 9 25 1.242 51
59 5 15 1.319 50
60 12 67 1.399 49
61 38 94 1.487 48
62 2 52 1.581 47
63 14 48 1.678 46
64 10 58 1.778 45
65 17 33 1.889 44
66 21 36 2.004 43
67 30 81 2.130 42
68 6 37 2.263 41
69 13 78 2.402 40
70 5 11 2.555 39
71 53 57 2.709 38
72 27 71 2.874 37
73 3 6 3.054 36
74 14 54 3.238 35
75 17 105 3.431 34
76 44 74 3.625 33
77 42 106 3.820 32
78 8 10 4.076 31
79 7 41 4.337 30
80 12 16 4.613 29
81 68 91 4.931 28
82 22 30 5.261 27
83 7 18 5.598 26
84 2 17 5.956 25
85 39 53 6.417 24
86 31 63 6.988 23
87 8 22 7.617 22
88 21 42 8.305 21
89 1 44 9.037 20
90 5 72 9.825 19
91 14 27 10.915 18
92 3 12 12.008 17
93 7 64 13.118 16
94 9 23 14.294 15
95 2 21 17.019 14
96 3 5 19.806 13
97 14 39 22.604 12
98 1 7 25.517 11
99 9 31 29.443 10
100 4 38 33.786 9
101 3 8 38.826 8
102 9 14 46.269 7
103 1 13 58.055 6
104 2 3 71.928 5
105 1 2 92.378 4
106 4 9 138.109 3
107 1 68 223.185 2
108 1 4 324.000 1
Note.--(a) See the first and second columns in Table 1 to
identify the retail location. Source: the Authors
Table 3. Gross profitability index using a six-cluster solution.
Retailer Cluster Membership Codes AGM REPI
Location (%)
6 5 4 3 2
Newcastle C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 7.8 50
Rockhampton C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 6.7 29
Geelong C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 6.2 19
North Coast C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 6.1 17
Gold Coast C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 5.8 12
Ballarat C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 5.6 8
Adelaide Metro C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 5.6 8
Ipswich C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 5.5 6
Caboolture C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 5.4 4
Gladstone C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 5.2 0
Brisbane Metro C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 5.1 -2
Warwick C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 5.0 -4
Mandurah C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 4.9 -6
Caloundra C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 4.8 -8
Cairns C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 4.7 -10
Perth Metro C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 4.7 -10
Townsville C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 2.7 -48
Mackay C6.1 C5.1 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 2.4 -54
Cluster average C6.1 5.2 0
Melbourne Metro C6.2 C5.2 C4.2 C3.2 C2.1 7.3 7
Sydney Metro C6.2 C5.2 C4.2 C3.2 C2.1 6.3 -7
Cluster average C6.2 6.8 0
Benalla C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 10.8 38
Wangaratta C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 10.6 36
Shepparton C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 10.2 31
Kempsey C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 9.9 27
Forster C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 9.7 24
Bathurst C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 9.6 23
Yarrawonga C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 9.6 23
Traralgon C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 9.6 23
Sale C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 9.2 18
Canberra Metro C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 9.2 18
Grafton C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 9.1 17
Port Macquarie C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 9.0 15
Warrnambool C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 8.8 13
Cowra C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 8.8 13
Port Pirie C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 8.7 12
Bunbury C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 8.3 6
Lismore C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 8.2 5
Port Augusta C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 8.1 4
Goulburn C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 7.9 1
Victor Harbour C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 7.8 0
Casino C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 7.7 -1
Goondiwindi C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 7.6 -3
Charters Towers C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 7.6 -3
New Norfolk C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 7.4 -5
Sunbury C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 7.3 -6
Murray Bridge C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 7.3 -6
Wodonga C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 7.1 -9
Bairnsdale C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 7.0 -10
Hervey Bay C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 6.9 -12
Ararat C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 6.9 -12
Bendigo C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 6.8 -13
Taree C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 6.7 -14
Emerald C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 6.6 -15
Whyalla C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 6.6 -15
Kingaroy C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 6.2 -21
Gympie C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 5.9 -24
Renmark C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 5.8 -26
Bowen C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 5.8 -26
Maryborough C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 5.7 -27
Albury C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 5.3 -32
Dalby C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 4.4 -44
Bundaberg C6.3 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 4.0 -49
Cluster average C6.3 7.8 0
Geraldton C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 14.4 29
Wynyard C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 13.2 18
Wonthaggi C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 13.2 18
Mansfield C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 12.7 13
Echuca C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 11.9 6
Colac C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 11.9 6
Darwin Metro C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 11.5 3
Campbelltown C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 11.4 2
Ulverstone C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 10.6 -5
Launceston C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 10.6 -5
Burnie C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 10.4 -7
Wollongong C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 9.7 -13
Albany C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 9.6 -14
Devonport C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 9.5 -15
Port Lincoln C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 9.2 -18
Hobart Metro C6.4 C5.3 C4.1 C3.1 C2.1 8.7 -22
Cluster average C6.4 11.2 0
Carnarvon C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 19.5 56
Cunnamulla C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 16.6 33
Bega C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 15.4 23
Cooma C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 15.3 22
Hay C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 14.9 19
Ceduna C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 14.0 12
Swan Hill C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 13.4 7
Forbes C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 13.3 6
Portland C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 12.8 2
Moree C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 12.7 2
Parkes C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 12.6 1
Mildura C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 12.5 0
Longreach C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 12.4 -1
Horsham C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 12.3 -2
Wagga Wagga C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 12.3 -2
Orange C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 11.8 -6
Yass C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 11.8 -6
Broken Hill C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 11.8 -6
Griffith C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 11.5 -8
Tamworth C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 11.2 -10
Katherine C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 11.1 -11
Lakes Entrance C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 11 -12
Inverell C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 10.6 -15
Coffs Harbour C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 10.6 -15
Kalgoorlie C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 10 -20
Roma C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 9.6 -23
Dubbo C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 9.6 -23
Mt Gambier C6.5 C5.4 C4.3 C3.3 C2.2 8.7 -30
Cluster average C6.5 12.5 0
Tennant Creek C6.6 C5.5 C4.4 C3.3 C2.2 24.1 5
Eucla C6.6 C5.5 C4.4 C3.3 C2.2 23.9 4
Alice Springs C6.6 C5.5 C4.4 C3.3 C2.2 21.1 -8
Cluster average C6.6 23.0 0
Retailer Population Distance to Wholesale Wholesaler
Location (Persons) Wholesaler Distributor state
Km
Newcastle 552776 5 Newcastle NSWACT
Rockhampton 78643 109 Gladstone QLD
Geelong 180805 75 Melbourne VIC
North Coast 335273 95 Brisbane QLD
Gold Coast 600475 80 Brisbane QLD
Ballarat 97810 115 Melbourne VIC
Adelaide Metro 1212982 5 Adelaide SA
Ipswich 172738 40 Brisbane QLD
Caboolture 158988 50 Brisbane QLD
Gladstone 52949 5 Gladstone QLD
Brisbane Metro 2074222 5 Brisbane QLD
Warwick 12659 156 Brisbane QLD
Mandurah 89559 70 Perth WA
Caloundra 51991 94 Brisbane QLD
Cairns 153075 5 Cairns QLD
Perth Metro 1738807 5 Perth WA
Townsville 176347 5 Townsville QLD
Mackay 87324 5 Mackay QLD
Cluster average 434857 49
Melbourne Metro 4137432 5 Melbourne VIC
Sydney Metro 4627345 5 Sydney NSWACT
Cluster average 4382389 5
Benalla 9129 212 Melbourne VIC
Wangaratta 29018 252 Melbourne VIC
Shepparton 50373 190 Melbourne VIC
Kempsey 29581 280 Newcastle NSWACT
Forster 18372 164 Newcastle NSWACT
Bathurst 34561 203 Sydney NSWACT
Yarrawonga 5727 282 Melbourne VIC
Traralgon 31105 164 Melbourne VIC
Sale 14782 214 Melbourne VIC
Canberra Metro 417860 287 Sydney NSWACT
Grafton 24798 315 Brisbane NSWACT
Port Macquarie 44793 245 Newcastle NSWACT
Warrnambool 34193 265 Melbourne VIC
Cowra 12940 309 Sydney NSWACT
Port Pirie 18169 224 Adelaide SA
Bunbury 70037 172 Perth WA
Lismore 32617 198 Brisbane NSWACT
Port Augusta 14725 306 Adelaide SA
Goulburn 22225 197 Sydney NSWACT
Victor Harbour 14219 83 Adelaide SA
Casino 11414 229 Brisbane NSWACT
Goondiwindi 11437 348 Brisbane QLD
Charters Towers 12978 136 Townsville QLD
New Norfolk 5230 35 Hobart TAS
Sunbury 36658 40 Melbourne VIC
Murray Bridge 19724 78 Adelaide SA
Wodonga 51899 322 Melbourne VIC
Bairnsdale 11282 282 Melbourne VIC
Hervey Bay 61691 294 Brisbane QLD
Ararat 8215 205 Melbourne VIC
Bendigo 92934 154 Melbourne VIC
Taree 49453 169 Newcastle NSWACT
Emerald 18410 370 Gladstone QLD
Whyalla 23430 267 Port Lincoln SA
Kingaroy 14601 225 Brisbane QLD
Gympie 50011 169 Brisbane QLD
Renmark 9834 257 Adelaide SA
Bowen 14515 203 Townsville QLD
Maryborough 28520 256 Brisbane QLD
Albury 107086 327 Melbourne NSWACT
Dalby 11419 208 Brisbane QLD
Bundaberg 69500 185 Gladstone QLD
Cluster average 39273 222
Geraldton 37842 5 Geraldton WA
Wynyard 11530 66 Devonport TAS
Wonthaggi 6529 136 Melbourne VIC
Mansfield 7998 192 Melbourne VIC
Echuca 2261 221 Melbourne VIC
Colac 10857 152 Melbourne VIC
Darwin Metro 128073 5 Darwin NT
Campbelltown 772 130 Hobart TAS
Ulverstone 9760 21 Devonport TAS
Launceston 106655 100 Devonport TAS
Burnie 17729 48 Devonport TAS
Wollongong 293503 85 Sydney NSWACT
Albany 36551 5 Albany WA
Devonport 25639 5 Devonport TAS
Port Lincoln 14739 5 Port Lincoln SA
Hobart Metro 216656 5 Hobart TAS
Cluster average 57943 72
Carnarvon 6333 480 Geraldton WA
Cunnamulla 1217 804 Brisbane QLD
Bega 34035 425 Sydney NSWACT
Cooma 10524 399 Sydney NSWACT
Hay 3315 421 Melbourne NSWACT
Ceduna 3828 403 Port Lincoln SA
Swan Hill 22275 343 Melbourne VIC
Forbes 9818 375 Sydney NSWACT
Portland 11531 363 Melbourne VIC
Moree 14465 315 Brisbane NSWACT
Parkes 15267 358 Sydney NSWACT
Mildura 50909 542 Melbourne VIC
Longreach 4384 786 Gladstone QLD
Horsham 14125 300 Melbourne VIC
Wagga Wagga 59005 458 Sydney NSWACT
Orange 40062 258 Sydney NSWACT
Yass 15450 279 Sydney NSWACT
Broken Hill 19703 516 Adelaide NSWACT
Griffith 26001 461 Melbourne NSWACT
Tamworth 48262 306 Newcastle NSWACT
Katherine 9967 317 Darwin NT
Lakes Entrance 12070 318 Melbourne VIC
Inverell 5013 569 Sydney NSWACT
Coffs Harbour 53798 390 Brisbane NSWACT
Kalgoorlie 32841 390 Esperance WA
Roma 7191 476 Brisbane QLD
Dubbo 38383 394 Sydney NSWACT
Mt Gambier 26206 436 Adelaide SA
Cluster average 21285 424
Tennant Creek 3555 989 Darwin NT
Eucla 86 894 Port Lincoln WA
Alice Springs 27589 1498 Darwin NT
Cluster average 10410 1127
Notes: This Table is first sorted in terms of the ascending
magnitudes of the corresponding cluster averages, whereby the
cluster average for C6.1, C6.2, C6.3, C6.4, C6.5 and C6.6 are 5.2,
6.8, 7.8, 11.2, 12.5 and 23.0 (cents per litre), respectively.
Then, the retail locations within each cluster are sorted in terms
of the descending values of their gross margins. AGM=Average Gross
Margin (Cents Per Litre). REPI=Relative excess (gross) profitability
index measures how much the gross profit margin in a given location
is above or below the corresponding cluster's average.
Source: the Authors