The scourge of global counterfeiting

Nill, Alexander; Shultz, Clifford J.

doi:10.1016/s0007-6813(96)90035-x

Cited by 84 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…6, No. 2;2014 The analysis of intention to buy difference based on subjective norm uses difference test. Hypothesis testing with calculation-F significance is 0.000<0.05 that means there is intention to buy difference based on the highness or lowness of subjective norm.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6, No. 2;2014 certain medicines. The other example is when he/she is young, individual likes the loudly rock & roll music, but after old, prefers classical music.…”

Section: Theoretical Framework and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The product counterfeiting occurred because of several reasons, those were: the limitation of the original product availability in fulfilling the market demand; producers or retailers did not pay the taxes of the counterfeit products (Stewart, 2005); the prices of the counterfeit products was cheaper than the original ones, so it could bring the promising profits for the counterfeiter (Delener, 2000;Nill & Shultz II, 1996;Lynch, 2002;Wijk,products or there was the product example (Nill & Shultz, 1996;Bush et al, 1989;Bamossy & Scammon, 1985;Stewart, 2005); the business risk was very low, even without risk because promising the very cheap production and overhead cost, much cheaper compared with the production cost proportion of the original products because the used basic material was often not according to the standard; the cheap investment cost and did not need to spend research and development cost (Nill & Shultz II, 1996;Delener, 2000;Stewart, 2005); had the very great potential market because the greatness of the consumers proportion with the middle to low income who were not able to buy the original products, besides the law infrastructure was still weak, signed by the government unconcern toward the products' counterfeiting (Bush et al, 1989;Delener, 2000;Wilkie & Zaichkowsky, 1999;Lynch, 2002); the difficulty to compete with strong and popular products in consumers' eyes, so doing counterfeiting would ease the marketing because could join the original product popularity (Nill & Shultz II, 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Purchase Intention of Counterfeit Products: The Role of Subjective Norm

Budiman¹,

Wıjaya²

2014

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the research is to test the purchase intention difference based on the subjective norm role and relationship of subjective norms. The research was done by testing the purchase intention difference when the subjective norm role was high and when the subjective norm was low. The sample in this research was the executive women that had knowledge about counterfeit bags. The respondents who were successful to be collected in the research were 86 executive women respondents in Yogyakarta-Indonesia. The data analysis in this research uses the difference testing helped by Analysis of Variance. The data analysis results show that there is the purchase intention difference based on the highness and the lowness of the subjective norm role of the consumers to use the counterfeit products. There are positive corellation between subjective norm and purchase intention. Consumers with the high subjective norm role have the low intention to buy and consumers with the low subjective norm role have the high intention to buy.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6, No. 2;2014 certain medicines. The other example is when he/she is young, individual likes the loudly rock & roll music, but after old, prefers classical music.…”

Section: Theoretical Framework and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Purchase Intention of Counterfeit Products: The Role of Subjective Norm

Budiman¹,

Wıjaya²

2014

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The enormous demand for counterfeit luxury products (Nill and Schultz II, 1996;Tom et al, 1998;Argavan and Lynne, 2000), such as clothing, perfume and apparel, gradually diluted and some extent diminished the symbolic role of luxury brands as indicators of social positioning.…”

Section: Social Status and Experiential Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The history of conspicuous consumption in the United Kingdom: 1945-2000

Patsiaouras

2017

JHRM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study aims to provide a historical understanding of conspicuous consumption phenomena in the context of the United Kingdom, between 1945 and 2000. It considers how status-driven consumption has been shaped by economic, technological and cultural factors. Design/methodology/approachAdopting a periodization scheme, concerning two time structures between 1945 and 2000, this paper is based on research stemming from a wide range of data such as academic studies, research articles, narrative history books, past advertisements, novels and biographies. Rich interdisciplinary data from the realms of political economy, sociology, cultural geography and consumption studies have been synthesized so as to provide a marketing-oriented historical outlook on conspicuous consumption phenomena. FindingsStatus-driven consumption in the United Kingdom has been heavily influenced by economic policies, cultural changes and public perceptions towards wealth during the second half of the twentieth century. Post-war rationing, youth-driven fashions, free-market economics and technological advances have played a crucial role in forming consumers' tastes and engagement with ostentatious economic display. Originality/valueAlthough the vast majority of marketing studies have approached luxury consumption through a psychological angle, this examination identifies the capacity of historical research to uncover and highlight the interrelationships between socio-economic factors and status-motivated consumption.

show abstract

“…Those reasons can be examined by perusing Table 2 below. The offer of tremendous cost advantages because almost no investment is made in product research and development resulting in low financial risk business Nill & Shultz II 1996;and Delener 2000 The lower income of consumers and lack of regulations and laws that make it attractive to produce The lack the name of brand recognition, thus finding it difficult to compete with established product Nill & Shultz II 1996 …”

Section: Reasons Of Counterfeiting Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%