Relevance of brands and beef quality differentials for the consumer at the time of purchase

Abstract

-The objective of this study was to identify the purchase habits and preferences of beef consumers, their level of knowledge on brands and products with quality differentials (certifications, packaging, premium lines), and the relevance of different attributes in the purchase decision, and to group consumers according to the profile of purchase decision. The methodology consisted of using an information-collecting instrument applied to 271 beef consumers. The data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistical analyses, chi-square analysis, and correspondence analysis, relating socio-demographic profile of the respondents with the other variables collected. Chi-square and correspondence analyses showed that younger consumers with lower levels of income and education are influenced by posters and advertisements at the point of sale, unaware of differentiated and branded products, and that they do not choose branded beef at the time of purchase. Consumers over 60 years showed a more conservative purchase profile, with no influence. The most valued attributes are appearance, price, and type of cut, being brand and certifications little relevant as tools to help decide the product purchase.

Exploration of the Level of Interest and Performance of Beef Attributes in Supermarket in District of South Bolaang Mongondow, Indonesia

“…These findings are in accordance with previous study, arguing that packaging factor was not main determiner in purchasing decision by consumers, but beef's texture and price were deemed important to be considered by producers and marketers [20,21]. Nonetheless, this research is unlike with others investigation reporting that attribute of packaging was highly important to maintain beef's security, hygiene, and quality, so that its hygiene and security were well-protected to be consumed [22][23][24]. Additionally, to know what attributes became high priority to be developed or improved its performance and attributes had to be maintained its performance to achieve consumers' satisfaction on beef products, a measurement of suitability level (Tki) was performed, comparing mean of performance with mean of interest.…”

“…Some previous research's findings on consumer behavior of beef in modern and traditional market showed that factors of marketing mix attribute, such as nutrition, price, packaging, color, texture, fat information, halallabel, advertisement, promotion, hygiene, accessible with transportation modes, and product availability are significantly influenced on consumer behavior in purchasing beef [7][8][9][10][11]. Meanwhile, information of attribute effects comprising of beef's content, beef slices, cash payment method, payment method by credit card, outlet of separated beef selling, consumers counseling by employee, service acceleration in counter, supply continuity, brochure, toilet, storage's temperature, and information of expired date against consumer's decision were limited.…”

Attitudinal Determinants of Beef Consumption in Venezuela: A Retrospective Survey

“…Castillo and Carpio [16] conducted a survey of 574 households in Ecuador and reported that they have a positive interest in all credence attributes (i.e., sanitary control, aging, animal welfare and traceability). In Brazil, Giacomazzi et al [17] reported that the most valued attributes for beef consumers are appearance, price, and type of cut; while brand and certifications had little relevance as purchase-decision criteria.…”

Meat stores strategies in social media: a study in Porto Alegre, Brazil

“…Regarding the consumer's differentiated meats profile, it is found the following characteristics: a) medium to high income; b) experienced and appreciate beef brands with information and assistance at the point of purchase; c) buy beef from boutiques or specialized meat shops; d) is more interested in the quality of the cut than in its size; e) have a small family; and f) is concerned about their health and the intrinsic quality of the product (Morales et al, 2013;Giacomazzi et al, 2017).…”