The act of gift-giving is one of the most significant consumption rituals that individuals perform world-wide (Antón, Camarero, and Gil, 2014) and represents a substantial industry and a major source of revenue for retailers (Segev, Shoham, and Ruvio, 2013). In addition to its economic significance, gift giving is instrumental in maintaining social bonds and functions as symbolic communication in relationships (Belk, 1979; Belk and Coon, 1993). Various researchers (e.g., Belk and Coon, 1993; Fischer and Arnold 1990; Lowrey, Otnes, and Ruth 2004; Ruth, Otnes, and Brunel 1999; Sherry and McGrath 1989) explore reasons for giving and receiving gifts. Although these studies offer valuable insights into gift giving, research on luxury brands as gifts is scarce (Reyneke, Berthon, Pitt, and Parent, 2011). Similarly, research on luxury concentrates on consumer perceptions of luxury brands and motivations behind luxury consumption (Dubois and Duquesne, 1993; Zhan and He, 2012; Roux, Tafani, and Vigneron, 2017). There is a lack of research on consumer resistance to luxury brands. This paper attempts to address these gaps from a conceptual perspective.
Drawing on gift giving, consumer resistance and luxury brand literature, this study will examine consumer resistance to luxury brands as gifts. Consumer resistance is “the way in which individuals or groups practise a strategy of appropriation in response to structures of domination” (Poster, 1992, p.1). Consumer resistance can be generic (toward all forms of consumption), or specific (toward a brand or product) (Nepomuceno, Rohani, and Grégoire, 2017). Moisio and Askegaard (2002) suggested three factors that trigger resistance: market conditions that are deemed unacceptable; products or brands that do not conform to the consumer’s self-image; and dominant cultural values that are rejected due to their hegemonic nature. Key motives for luxury brand consumption include impressing others or interpersonal aspects (Berry, 1994; Kastanakis and Balabanis, 2014), and personal or hedonic reasons (Dubois, Czellar, and Laurent, 2005; Wiedmann, Hennigs, & Siebels, 2009). The reasons for resistance to consumption are not merely the opposite of motives for consumption. Hence, to gain a comprehensive understanding of consumption, it is essential to examine resistance to consumption as an alternative consumption (Roux, 2007; Close and Zinkhan, 2009). This study will contribute theoretically to work on gift giving, consumer resistance and luxury brands. Managerial implications will be relevant to brand managers and how they can develop strategies to prevent consumer resistance to their brands.

• Ilaisaane Fifita(the University of Auckland, New Zealand)