Search results

This study aims to examine the factors that drive consumers' trial and repeat purchases of cobranded extensions, and the amount of spillover effects on host and ingredient brands.

The analysis uses a comprehensive consumer transaction dataset that includes the actual introduction of four cobranded extensions. The authors develop a conceptual framework and three empirical models to explain how consumers' prior experience with the parent brands affect their trial and repeat purchase behaviors, and how their experiences with the cobranded extensions further affect parent brand purchases.

The results from the study indicate that repeat purchases are higher for consumers with more joint purchase incidences in both host and ingredient categories when they have complementary features. In contrast to existing research on single‐brand based extensions, it is found that host brand loyalty has a positive effect on both trial and repeat purchases when the host brand is not a market‐leader. Due to the introduction of the cobranded extension, host brand experiences a negative spillover whereas ingredient brand experiences a positive spillover.

The results from the study suggest that while initial targeting for the cobranded extension should be focused on consumers who are loyal to both host and ingredient brands, later targeting should be focused on consumers who are loyal to only the host brand.

The study contributes to the existing literature on cobranded extensions by using actual purchase data to analyze the adoption of cobranded extensions.

Cobranding is increasingly popular as a strategy for commercial success. Brand positioning strategies are central to marketing, yet the impact of perceptions of parent brands’ positioning on consumers’ perceptions of cobrand positioning has not been investigated. The aim of the present study is to fill this gap.

Employing a quasi-experimental design, the authors create cobranding scenarios in three product categories (tablet computers, cosmetics, and smart phones). The data are collected via structured questionnaires resulting in 160 valid responses. The data are analyzed employing Partial Least Squares-based Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), and consumer evaluation of cobrands is tested in relationship to the prior positioning of the parent brands, product fit and brand fit, along with post-alliance positioning perceptions of the partner brands.

The results confirm brand positioning as a robust indicator of consumer evaluation of cobrands. Positioning perceptions of partner brands are positively related to cobrand positioning perceptions. In addition, pre-alliance positioning significantly relate to post-alliance positioning, confirming cobranding as a viable strategy for partner brands.

The paper recommends research that could reveal the impact of differential brand equities of partner brands, such as, between a high-equity brand and a low/moderate-equity brand, mixed brand alliances – product/service; service/service, and at different levels of partner brand familiarity.

Managers should design cobrand positioning based on existing positioning perceptions of the partner brands, rather than focussing on product fit and brand fit.

The study demonstrates the focal role of positioning strategies of partner brands in consumer evaluation of cobrands.

This paper seeks to examine expansions of online brands into the offline market via brand extensions and via brand alliances. Specifically, it aims to compare the formation of reciprocal spillover effects for both strategies.

Empirical survey data are analyzed through a series of standard and hierarchical multiple regressions. Different combinations of online brands, product categories and offline brands are studied.

The main results indicate that: the attitude towards the new product is determined by fit and by the functional offline brand image for alliances, while it is determined by fit and by the emotional and commitment dimensions of online brand image for extensions. Moreover, the online brand image is more vulnerable in brand alliances than in extensions.

This work shows the applicability of commonly used theories in brand extensions and alliances to the online‐offline market expansion. Moreover, these theories allow differences across marketing strategies and across distinct brand image dimensions to be explained.

The results obtained may guide the management of these market expansion strategies. Particularly, the present findings are useful to predict the contribution of each brand image dimension on the attitude towards the new product and upon the feedback effects swaying the online brand image.

This study addresses “a hot topic” in branding by comparing two expansion strategies: brand extensions and brand alliances. This comparison is made within the under‐researched area of online branding, and in a novel scenario that is the online‐offline expansion.

Co-branding is popular with partnerships between well-known and new brands. In a laboratory study, this paper aims to examine the effects of a single ally and multiple allies on quality perception of a brand. The results suggest that the quality perception of the new brand depends on the co-branding strategy.

For dual-brand alliances, a single-factor design was used, with secondary brand quality level (high, medium and low) as the independent variable. Three advertisements were created by manipulating quality levels of the single partner. For multiple-brand alliances, a 2 × 3 between-subjects factorial design was used in the experiment. The two factors were diversification (homogeneous vs heterogeneous) and quality levels of the alliance (high-end, mixed and low-end).

The results suggest that the number of brand partners significantly affected the perceived quality of the primary brand. For both dual- and multi-brand alliances, the quality level of the secondary brand positively influenced the perceived quality of the primary brand. For multiple-brand alliances, even though the highest quality perceptions of the primary brand are in the heterogeneous conditions, the heterogeneity of partners (partners across different product categories) did not affect the quality perception of the primary brand.

One limitation of the current study is that it only addresses one type of brand alliance: co-promotion. The generalization of these findings to other forms of brand alliances (e.g. ingredient branding: Intel with IBM, Dell and HP) merits further investigation. Also, in this study, respondents processed the information in a relatively low-involvement condition (note that the target ad was presented along with filler ads). They were more likely to use brand names as heuristic cues to form their judgments. Because an alliance partner also assumes risks, future research should consider the effect of the alliances on the secondary brand.

Understanding brand alliances (especially multiple-brand alliances) is critical for new product managers and marketers. Introducing a new brand has higher risk and failure rates. Companies may lower these risks by co-branding with established brands. However, they should carefully consider the diversification and quality level of the partners. If brand managers position their product as “high quality (luxury)” or “low quality (budget)”, they should choose high- (or low-) quality partners from different product categories (heterogeneous high-end or low-end alliances) because diversification strengthens the primary brand. For a single-partner alliance, the secondary brand should be of high quality.

This paper extends the brand alliance literature beyond single-partner to multiple-partner alliances. With multiple partners, one can explore several critical aspects of an alliance, e.g. quality variance and product class diversity across the partners.

The purpose of this study is to review and summarise the current body of literature on brand extension feedback effects and to identify which research issues are inhibiting advancement in this stream of literature. Based on this analysis, suggestions for future research are provided.

In a systematic literature review, criteria were used to identify relevant journal publications that have specifically investigated brand extension feedback effects (n = 53). Research articles were subsequently evaluated for further analysis.

Several issues may inhibit advancement in the literature on brand extension feedback effects. These include issues related the conceptual, methodological and context of research, as well as related to the consumer, product, brand and marketing. Specific research questions are provided which address issues found in this literature stream.

This paper aims to resolve issues in research on brand extension feedback effects to facilitate more rapid advancement in this stream of literature.

This research fills a need to summarise the current state of the literature and identifies research issues that need to be addressed in the future.

This paper aims to explore Chinese hoteliers' perspectives on co‐branding between hotels and products of other industries or sectors.

A survey with both structured and open‐ended questions was distributed to 300 Chinese hotel executive level hoteliers attending the 2009 International Forum on China Hotel Brand Development.

The results of the 72 surveys indicate benefits as well as drawbacks for both hotels and their potential co‐branding partners in the Chinese hospitality industry, the most important being the lack of brand awareness for both Chinese and Western brands.

The paper contributes to the existing literature by adding the Chinese hospitality industry context into the much studied Western industry context: the research is timely given the position and significance of the Chinese market in the world tourism arena.

The Islamic world spans many different languages with different language structures. This paper aims to explore one way in which language structure affects consumer response to the marketing of cobrands.

Two between subject experiments were conducted using samples of participants from Saudi Arabia and the USA. The first manipulated partner brand category similarity and brand name order, along with the structure of the language used to communicate with the market. The data for this study includes Arabic speakers in Saudi Arabia as well as English speakers in the USA. The second study explores how targeting a population fluent in multiple languages of varied structure nullifies the findings from the first study and uses Latino participants in the USA.

This study finds that when brands come from similar product categories, name order did not affect cobrand evaluations, but it did when the brands come from dissimilar product categories. Here, evaluations of the cobrand are enhanced when the invited brand is in the position that adjectives occupy in the participant’s language. The authors also find that being proficient in two languages, each with a different default order for adjectives and nouns, quashes the effect of name order otherwise seen when brands from dissimilar product categories engage in cobranding.

By examining the impact of language structure on the effects of cobrand evaluation and conducting studies among participants with differing dominant languages, this research can rule out simple primacy or recency effects.

With rising globalization, Western and Eastern brands are increasingly collaborating and co-branding. Drawing on the theory of dialectical self that captures the degree of cognitive tendency to tolerate conflicts, inconsistencies and ambiguities in self-concept, this paper investigates the effect of consumer dialectical self on co-branding that encompasses Western and East Asian cultural brand personality traits.

Two studies were conducted using Chinese participants to examine the effects of the dialectical self on co-brand evaluation under single-and dual-personality conditions and to explore the mediating role of ideal social self-congruence and the moderating role of product type (high vs low conspicuous).

The findings suggest that counterintuitive to the received wisdom, the dialectical self negatively influences one's attitude towards a co-brand in the dual-personality condition only. Further, ideal social self-congruence mediates the relationship between the dialectical self and dual-personality co-brand evaluation in the high conspicuous product condition only.

Important implications are offered to international marketing managers for managing the dialectical self that lead to positive co-brand evaluations. Moreover, managers should highlight ideal social self-congruence for co-branding success for particular product types.

This paper examines co-branding from a novel perspective of consumer dialectical self and shows the pivotal role it plays when brands carry varying cultural traits engage in co-branding. By identifying the role of the dialectical self and the important mediator and moderator, the paper fulfils an important gap in co-branding literature and offers key implications.

Marketing managers have strategic choices when forming brand alliances. One such choice is integration, defined as the extent to which the offering is a fusion in the form and function of the partner brands. The paper aims to investigate how integration affects consumer attribution of responsibility to brand alliance partners.

This paper builds on the previous study on brand alliances and attribution theory. Multiple experiments are used to test three hypotheses.

This research shows that consumers are sensitive to the level of alliance integration, which, in turn, affects attributions of responsibility for the joint offering. Consistent with attribution theory, results show that responsibility for each brand varies systematically by integration and lead brand status vis-à-vis the alliance: while consumers perceive both brands as equally responsible for higher integration brand alliances, responsibility attributions diverge in lower integration alliances based on whether the brand is the alliance host. This pattern also holds for product-harm events.

It is important to explore brand alliance characteristics and to date, the level of integration between the partners has not been considered from a consumer standpoint. Consumers are sensitive to the level of partner brand integration and this perception influences perceptions of responsibility.

Managers should be aware that the level of brand alliance integration and lead brand status lead to different attributions of responsibility, which is strategically important, as brands seek to take credit in positive contexts and avoid blame for negative events.

This paper explores brand alliances via the level of integration and leads brand status, which are key determinants of consumer attributions of responsibility.

Branded merchandise and licensed apparel comprise a substantial portion of revenue for many organizations and public figures that choose to employ such an endeavor. Endorsement deals with apparel manufacturers have historically been utilized for athletes looking to supplement their salaries and establish greater brand awareness. However, as some athletes establish ownership of their logo and become less reliant on companies such as Nike and Adidas for merchandise distribution, assessing the influence of various entity's logos on the athlete brand has become worthy of analysis. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the influence that cobranded merchandise has on consumers when the athlete logo is displayed next to another team or manufacturer logo.

Using an online panel and survey, a final sample of 127 participants completed a questionnaire to examine their attitudes towards various athlete brand elements. ANCOVA's and MANCOVA's were utilized to assess significant findings, holding the variable of identification constant.

The results revealed that only the perceptions of merchandise quality significantly varied between an athlete brand and an apparel manufacturer (i.e. Nike) co-brand. The findings indicate that athletes should look to co-brand with high brand awareness manufacturers, and that there is no significant difference between consumers' perceptions of athlete brands when co-branding with team brands.

This is one of the first studies to evaluate the relationship between the athlete brand and external entities from a consumer perspective.