Recently, analysis was performed for Gluten Free Pages on the growth of whole country gluten free e-markets (using Google data) for the U.S., Australia, Canada and the UK.
That research showed that the US (42%) and Canada (18%) had the largest growth (gluten free searches on Google from 2004 to 2009), while Australia had 10% per annum growth and UK essentially zero.
This information is tempered by the actual base level of searches in each country. Previous analysis of what is termed ‘Celiac searches / mth’ within each country ranks the four countries of interest as : Australia (4.2 searches), Canada (3.3), USA (2.7) and UK (2.2). The analysis adjusts values to take account of internet usage and Google market share. Of course the US has the largest population of each country under analysis so in absolute terms the US has the most searches (over 3 million) however ‘searches per celiac’ gives a truer indication (level of saturation) of a market in each country.
The GFP Matrix is a construct that compares a country’s ‘celiac searches per month’ V ‘GDP per person’. This analysis shows that there is a logarithmic relationship Seven Cities Virginia between these two variables. That is, the greater the wealth of a country, the higher the diagnosis and the higher the e-demand for gluten free products.
To better understand the dynamics of these each countries markets it is best to analyze the lowest level of analysis that Google allows – down to state level. Firstly consider the US.
Following this theory of country wealth being related to the level of gluten free market maturity, it is useful to compare the top ten economic US states with the bottom ten states and see if this rule applies within countries.
The data below is “measured by median household income” and is sourced from: The U.S. Census Bureau in 2007.
The 10 richest states with the highest median household income
STATE INCOME POPULATION
Maryland $65,144 5,296,486
New Jersey $64,470 8,414,350
Connecticut $63,422 3,405,565
Hawaii $61,160 1,211,537
Massachusetts $59,963 6,349,097
New Hampshire $59,683 1,235,786
Alaska $59,393 626,932
California $56,645 33,871,648
Virginia $56,277 7,078,515
Minnesota $54,023 4,919,479
The 10 poorest states with the lowest median household income
STATE INCOME POPULATION
Montana $40,627 902,195
Tennessee $40,315 5,689,283
Kentucky $39,372 4,041,769
Louisiana $39,337 4,468,976
Alabama $38,783 4,627,851
Oklahoma $38,770 3,450,654
Arkansas $36,599 2,673,400
West Virginia $35,059 1,808,344
Mississippi $34,473 2,844,658
US POOREST STATES ANALYSIS
For the three poorest states in the US, Google “does not have enough search volume to show graphs.” Of the other seven, data only starts in late 2008 and is very intermittent and unreliable.
You might consider that the Google data cut off applies because of low searches caused by low state populations. This might seem also seem to be the case for rich states too as the three ‘rich states’ out of the top ten that do not have data record (Hawaii, New Hampshire, Alaska) ALL have populations under 1.3 million people. However two of the rich states that Google’s does record data for: Connecticut (pop 3,405,565) and Minnesota (pop 4,919,479) both have lower populations than four of the poorest ten states that don’t have a Google record.
This rules out population size as the only predictor of data availability or market maturity. Two preliminary likely causes that may lead to lack of data for low wealth populous states is that they are likely to have low internet usage and low diagnosis rates. Without diagnosis, their need for gluten free products would not exist and search demand would be very low.