Which of the following statements about the importance of each competitive factor in determining company$-$to$-$company differences in branded sales volumes and market shares in a particular geographic region is false?

How much differences in the number of models$/$styles that companies have in their product lines matter in determining each company's unit sales$/$market share in a region is not a fixed amount but rather is an amount that varies from "big" $($when crosscompany model$/$style differences are also "big"$)$ to "small" $($when cross$-$company model$/$styles differences are "small"$)$ to "zero" $($when the models$/$styles offered by rivals are identical$).$

In the rare instance that all companies in a region should happen to offer buyers the very same number of models$/$styles$,$ then models$/$styles become a total competitive nonfactor and have zero impact on buyer appeal for one brand versus another$-$in such cases, $100\%$ of the regional sales and market share differences among company rivals stem directly from differences on the other $12$ competitive factors.

Big company$-$to$-$company differences in the number of models$/$styles offered to buyers in a region weigh heavily in accounting for company$-$to$-$company differences in branded pairs sold and market share in all four geographic regions.

While it is true that some competitive factors affect the brand choices of buyers more than others, what matters most in determining sales and market shares is the size of the difference between a company's competitive effort and the regional average on each competitive factor.

Tiny cross$-$company differences on a highly influential competitive factor $($like selling prices, or S$/$Q ratings or models$/$styles$)$ nearly always have a far bigger impact on company sales$/$market shares in a region than do large company$-$to$-$company differences on less influential competitive factors.