This research aims to examine consumer e-deal proneness and anticipatory regret toward ‘daily deals’ offers from group buying websites. Data collected from a consumer panel yielded 787 useable questionnaires which were analysed through Structural Equation Modelling. The results suggest that the antecedents, namely price consciousness and susceptibility to interpersonal influence have a strong and positive influence with consumer attitudes towards e-deals. The results are validated across three different product categories (i.e., beauty, food, and travel). Consumers with favourable attitudes towards daily deals are more likely to purchase them. Furthermore, the results suggest no significant difference in consumers’ intention to buy daily deals when the consumer has to evaluate between high vs low regret circumstances. The findings suggested many practical lessons for planners of marketing strategy for the retail and e-commerce marketplace in an international context.

This study aims to gain insights into consumers’ motivations when purchasing mimics of luxury cosmetics goods and their evaluation towards mimicry products. Consumers’ desire for mimicry luxury cosmetics hinges on their motivations underlying their consumption of luxury cosmetics. Attitude functions are applied to measure consumers’ underlying motivations towards luxury products. Consumers’ attitude and familiarity with luxury cosmetics and mimicry cosmetics also influence their choice between luxury brands and mimicry brands. In addition, consumers’ personality factors and perceived risk of purchasing mimicry cosmetics and their brand loyalty towards the original luxury brands restrain their purchase intention of mimicry brands. Finally, the study examines the effect of products conspicuousness (private/public visible goods) and the effect of mimicry types (feature/theme) on consumers’ preferences on concerning mimicry consumption. The findings will provide insights for policymakers, brand managers, and academics, and better understand mimicry in the luxury cosmetics industry.

Measuring consumers’ emotion with self-report methods has remained a challenge in luxury marketing. In comparison to self-report measure, psychophysiological methods promise to provide a scientific, objective and sensitive measure of the neurophysiological basis of emotional processes. The objective of this paper is to: (1) examine the feasibility of using psychophysiological methods in luxury marketing; (2) compare the capability of psychophysiological methods to capture emotion beyond those measured by self-report methods; and (3) better under luxury consumers’ emotion processes. In this study, brain wave analysis, heart rate, skin conductance, and facial expression were used to investigate consumers’ emotional response toward luxury marketing stimuli. The psychophysiological findings identified anger, interest and arousal as key emotional processes that affect consumers’ reaction to luxury branding. These findings show that psychophysiological methods are not only feasible in informing luxury branding practices but also provide insights into luxury consumers’ emotional experience beyond those captured by self-report methods.

Shopping is a sensory experience for consumers, who use cues, such as shelf organization and stock levels to infer the luxury and perceived scarcity of the given product or brand. Therefore, affecting consumer’s perceptions, evaluations and purchase intention. This research holds implications for brand, retail and merchandising managers.

The objective of this paper is to: (1) examine the feasibility of using psychophysiological methods in luxury marketing; (2) compare the capability of psychophysiological methods to capture emotion beyond those measured by self-report methods; and (3) better under luxury consumers’ emotion processes. Measuring consumers’ emotion with self-report methods has remained a challenge in luxury marketing (Atwal & Williams, 2009; Kumar & Garg, 2010). In comparison to self-report measure, psychophysiological methods promise to provide a scientific, objective and sensitive measure of the neurophysiological basis of emotional processes (Karmarkar & Yoon, 2016; Li, Scott, & Walters, 2014; Wang & Minor, 2008). Yet, few studies in luxury marketing have used these methods. In this study, brain wave analysis, heart rate, skin conductance, and facial expression will therefore be used to investigate consumers’ emotional response toward luxury marketing stimuli. The findings of this study will therefore provide both researchers and managers a test of concept to apply multiple psychophysiological methods in luxury marketing. This provide potential avenues for managers to better understand and manage the unobservable psychological processes that underlie luxury consumers’ behaviour.

Despite an extensive literature in scarcity, limited studies have examined how scarcity appeal may deter consumers in obtaining luxury brands. This study aims to understand consumer perception towards luxury brands as underpinned by the theory of agonistic behaviour from biology literature. Introduction The luxury brand industry has long strived to achieve the perception of scarcity. Luxury brands are defined as the highest level of prestigious brands including physical and mostly intangible elements in which price and quality ratios are the highest in the market (Nueno & Quelch 1998; Vigneron & Johnson 1999). Only the wealthy are able to afford the products (Radon, 2012). Its exclusivity, rarity/scarcity, identity, perceived quality, and awareness have become the selling point of luxury brands (Pantzalis 1995; Phau & Prendergast 2000). As Smith (1776, 112) stated, “the merit of an object, which is in any degree either useful or beautiful, is greatly enhanced by its scarcity. . .”. According to literature, scarcity effect can only be created when the product is desirable yet achievable to be possessed by consumers (Verhallen 1982). It can be initiated due to low supply or high demand (Verhallen 1982, Verhallen and Robben 1994). Scarcity to high demand indicates that there is a high number of individuals who have purchased the products. This may appeal to the consumers who wish to assimilate themselves with others or called as followers (Worchel 1992; Amaldoss and Jain 2008). On the other hand, limited edition product is an example of scarcity due to low supply. In this situation, the firm intentionally limits the quantity of potential owners of the product (Gierl, Plantsch, and Schweidler 2008). Research has shown that low supply scarcity cue increases product desirability as it signals exclusivity to the owner and provides consumers with a unique image (Lynn 1989). As a result, low-supply scarcity is more appealing for leaders who wish to distinguish themselves from the group (Amaldoss and Jain 2008). Further, scarcity is often associated with perceived expensiveness (e.g. Lynn 1989; Wu and Hsing 2006). In other words, the scarcer the product, the more expensive and valuable the product is seen (Chen and Sun 2013; Gierl, Plantsch, and Schweidler 2008). This explains why numerous luxury brands companies create limited edition product at a higher price to increase the product appeal. However, in the recent years, interest in luxury goods is growing among mainstream consumers (So, 2015). The exclusivity of luxury brands starts to fade, and the circle of luxury brands owner has expanded significantly throughout the years (The Economist 2015; Yeoman & McMahon- Beattie 2014). Based on that rationale, one of the aims of this paper is to manage and improve the perception of scarcity in luxury brand industry by looking at the most basic concept of how consumers respond to scarcity. This study adopts a biology theory, specifically on animal behaviour to understand better how consumers react on scarcity. After decades of observing animal behaviour, ethologists found that there is a common pattern in the way animals respond to and compete for scarce resources (McGlone, 1986; Scott & Fredericson, 1951). Instead of fighting one another, animals tend to perform certain behaviours to scare the opponent without physically damaging the others. This behaviour is referred to as agonistic behaviour. Coined by Scott & Fredericson (1951), the term is defined as “the group of behavioural adjustments associated with fighting, which includes attack, escape, threat, and defence” (McGlone, 1986, 1130). It comprises several stages, namely threats, thought process, aggression, and submission. In the first stage, threat, the animals perform a species-specific behaviour, in term of vocalisations, facial expression, postures, and movements that signal the intention to be aggressive (McGlone, 1986). For example, when competing for food, monkeys create a threatening voice following with open-jawed and head bobbing. The threat is continued with the thought process where the animals examine the value of the resources and the internal and external factors influencing their decision. It is then led to two possible scenarios. In the first scenario, the opponent decides to withdraw the fight after being threatened, which is called as submissive behaviour. The second scenario happens when neither animal retreats. Therefore, they perform aggressive behaviours, and it stops when one party submits (submissive behaviour). Agonistic behaviour can be observed in human behaviour when competing for luxury brands. For example, when the Kanye West x Adidas Yeezy limited edition trainer shoes was released, it was sold out within 15 minutes (Tewari, 2015). Shortly after, the shoes were sold at $ 10,000 on Ebay, which originally priced for $200 a pair in a retail store (Tempesta, 2015). Similar to the agonistic behaviour in animals, although some choose to fight for the product, which means they perform the aggressive behaviour, there are those who prefer to be submissive. They opt to give up and purchase alternatives instead of pursuing the desired products. This phenomenon shows how consumers can be aggressive or submissive in competing for scarce products. Despite the similarities behaviour pattern between animals and consumers, limited research has identified the agonistic behaviour of consumers. There are research gaps within the scarcity literature. Firstly, limited studies have identified the effectiveness of different scarcity cues (supply-driven and demand-driven) in the context of luxury brands (e.g., Lynn, 1991; Worchel, Lee, & Adewole, 1975). Additionally, limited studies investigate the opposite effect of scarcity appeal (except Gierl and Huettl 2010). As identified, some consumers prefer to give up and purchase alternative such as mimic brands yet it has not been well understood in theory. As a result, this paper aims to (1) develop a framework to explain consumer behaviour towards scarce luxury products as underpinned by the theory of agonistic behaviour, (2) investigate the influence of the different type of scarcity cues (supply-driven and demand-driven) towards the purchase intention of the desired brands or alternatives. Theoretical framework and hypothesis developments Underpinning Theoretical Framework The theory of agonistic behaviour is the underpinning theoretical framework for the study which is supported by Stimulus-Organism-Response (S-O-R) model. Developed by Mehrabian & Russell (1974), S-O-R model has been widely used in a retail environment (Buckley, 1991; Chang, Eckman, & Yan, 2011) and to study different types of involvement (Arora, 1982). Stimulus is defined as any external stimuli that influence the internal states of an individual (Bagozzi, 1986; Eroglu, Machleit, & Barr, 2005). Organism is defined as the internal response which then leads to behaviour action, which is the Response from S-O-R model (Bagozzi, 1986). It is the final decision of consumers which lead to a certain action (Chang et al., 2011). The S-O-R model is outlined below: Stimulus The perceived scarcity and competition are the Stimulus which are influenced by the different scarcity cues presented. As mentioned, scarcity effect can be caused due to high demand or low supply. Hence, there may be no difference in term of the perceived scarcity. However, supply- driven scarcity is found to be more efficient for conspicuous consumption products while demand- driven scarcity is more efficient for non-conspicuous consumption products (Gierl and Huettl 2010). Therefore, luxury brands, being conspicuous consumption product by nature, are more likely to be perceived highly competed when it is presented as being scarce due to low supply. As such, the following hypotheses are developed: H1. Perceived scarcity do not differ in both scarcity conditions but differ to no scarcity condition H2. Perceived competition differs across scarcity conditions Stimulus-Organism The stimulus, perceived scarcity and competition, influence the Organism, namely perceived value. This relationships are supported by commodity theory, which describes that scarce products have relatively higher value and desirability compared to non-scarce products (Byun & Sternquist, 2012; Lynn, 1991). Further, consumers are more likely to feel a sense of competition when the stores sell unique or scarce items (Aggarwal, Jun, & Huh, 2011). As such, the following hypotheses are developed: H3. Perceived scarcity has a positive influence towards perceived value in all scarcity conditions H4. Perceived competition has a significant influence towards perceived value in all scarcity conditions Organism – Response The internal response, namely the perceived value, influence the response which is the intention to purchase. Numerous studies have found that high perceived value leads to a willingness to buy (Dodds and Monroe 1985; Monroe and Chapman 1987) and purchase (Zeithaml 1988). In this study, the intention to purchase is a representation to measure the aggressive and submissive behaviour. Purchasing the desired brand is considered as an act of aggression while choosing neither handbag or purchasing the alternative brand is seen as an act the submissive behaviour As such, the following hypothesis is developed: H5. Perceived value has a positive influence towards purchase intention of the desired brand compared to alternative brand Methodology Survey Instrument A self-administered pen and paper questionnaire was used for the survey instrument. The measurement used in the study are established scales with Cronbach Alpha higher than 0.8, fulfilling the criteria by Hair et al. (2010). The scales was presented in seven points Likert Scales, in which 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree. Purchase intention, however, is a continuum scale in which option 1 represents a strong intention to buy the mimic brand, 4 accounts for neither mimic nor desired brand, and 7 accounts for a strong intention to buy the desired brand. Experimental Design There are three experimental conditions (scarcity condition: demand-driven; supply-driven; control) between subjects factorial design. To measure the purchase intention of the desired brand, a well-known luxury branding company was selected as the stimuli for the study. The brand, Bottega Veneta, was chosen as the brand is considered as a super-premium brand (Willett 2015) and the pre-test conducted with the University students showed that the brand is well-liked and adored. A non-fictitious brand, De Lux, is also selected to measure intention of purchase of the mimic brand. Each respondent was given two different pamphlets, one of the desired brand with a chosen scarcity condition and another of the mimic brand. Therefore, a total of 8 versions of a retail pamphlet were created (3 scarcity conditions with desired brand + 1 mimic brand x 2 genders). Product description and price information are also included (Lynn 1992). The pamphlets are created as identical as possible across different versions. The signal for supply-driven scarcity was portrayed by phrases and words such as “limited edition; supplies are limited; and unique”; while demand-driven scarcity “popular; bestseller; and highly in demand, almost sold out” (Gierl and Huettl 2010). Data Collections The data were collected from a sampling frame containing undergraduate students at a University in Western Australia. A total of 932 data were collected, but 305 data were discarded. Each respondent must have purchased luxury brands priced more than AUD 1500 within the last 3 years to ensure that the students are luxury consumers. The numbers were set after pre-test was conducted to identify the amount of money spent for luxury brands among the students. Out of 627; 250 students for supply-driven scarcity, 211 students for demand-driven scarcity, and 166 students for control were collected. The respondents had an average age of 20 and were divided into males (36%) and females (64%). Results and discussion One way ANOVA was conducted to compare means across different experimental conditions in terms of the perceived competition and scarcity (H1, H2). The result shows that there is a significant difference between perceived scarcity across experimental conditions. Luxury brands with “nearly sold out” scarcity cue (M = 5.49, SD = 1.19) are seen to be scarcer compared to luxury brands with “limited edition” scarcity cue (M = 4.92, SD = 1.16). Furthermore, luxury brand with no scarcity cue (M = 3.34, SD =1.4) is perceived to be not as scarce as the other two experimental conditions. On the other hand, although there is significant difference between the control condition (M = 2.7, SD = 1.40) and the two experimental conditions, there is no significance difference between “limited edition” scarcity cue (M = 3.99, SD = 1.58) and “nearly sold out” scarcity cue (M = 4.12, SD = 1.61). Therefore, H1 and H2 are not supported. Structural Equation Modelling was used to test model fit across different experimental conditions (H3, H4, H5). The final model revealed very good fit indices with the empirical covariances, as it fits the recommended criteria (Hair et al 2010): Normed Chi Square = 1.007, RMSEA = 0.004, AGFI = 0.940, GFI = 0.959, CFI = 0.990. The model shows that there is no significance relationship between perceived scarcity and perceived value in all 3 experimental conditions (limited edition β= 0.03, p = 0.735; nearly sold out β = -0.10, p = 0.244; control β = 0.09, p = 0.315). However, as hypothesised, there is a positive relationship between perceived competition and perceived value in all 3 experimental conditions (limited edition β = 0.43, p < 0.001; nearly sold out β = 0.57, p < 0.001; control β = 0.57, p < 0.001). In turn, in all 3 experimental conditions, there is a positive relationship between perceived value and purchase intention (limited edition β = 0.18, p = 0.030; nearly sold out β = 0.23, p = 0.014; control β = 0.45, p < 0.001). Therefore, H3 is not supported but H4 and H5 are supported. The findings demonstrate that different scarcity cues create a different level of perceived scarcity, in which “nearly sold out” are seen to be the scarcest, followed by “limited edition”, and no scarcity cues. However, instead of perceived scarcity, perceived competition is the important factor that affects the perception of luxury brands value. This can be explained as perceived competition creates a cue to consumers that the product is desirable by many yet only a handful can get the product. This is consistent with the statement by Verhallen (1982). The results also show that perceived value leads to positive purchase intention of the desired brands in all scarcity conditions. Surprisingly, the finding suggests that the relationship is strongest when there are no scarcity cues, followed with “nearly sold out” and “limited edition”. This can be explained due to a few reasons: (1) limited edition products are perceived to be more expensive (Chen and Sun 2013), (2) the respondents may not be leaders in purchasing luxury brands hence prefer to buy the normal or popular luxury brands to follow the crowd (Amaldoss and Jain 2008), (3) there are other variables, such as, self-efficacy and personality traits which are not taken into account. Conclusion This study contributes in several ways to the body of literature. Firstly, it extends the theory of agonistic behaviour from biology to marketing. By using agonistic behaviour as the underpinned theory, the study takes into consideration the option of consumers being submissive and prefer not to purchase the desired brands. Secondly, this study includes perceived competition as one of the main variable to analyse consumer behaviour towards luxury brands. Methodologically, the application of non-fictitious brands helps to capture real consumers’ response. Managerially, this study provides insights to luxury brands marketers on how to manage scarcity cues. Firstly, luxury brands marketers should develop strategies to strengthen the exclusivity and scarce image as currently normal luxury brands are not perceived as being scarce. The strategies may include to (1) limit the distributions channel of the luxury brands; (2) provide limited stock in every retail store to emphasise product scarcity; (3) introduce alternatives (premium brand extension or different product tiers) to consumers, allowing consumers, who are not able to purchase the desired brands, to choose the alternatives. Secondly, luxury brands managers must ensure that the products are desired by many to increase the perceived competition among consumers. Despite contributions, there is some limitation in the study. Firstly, this study used student sample hence future studies should consider using consumer panel to participate in the study. Secondly, there are some variables not taken into account, such as personality factor (self-esteem, status consumption, the need for uniqueness, etc.), self-efficacy, leader vs. followers. In addition, this study focuses on two scarcity conditions (supply-driven and demand driven scarcity cues), luxury brand industry, and public luxury product (handbag). Future studies should look at time-restricted scarcity cues, retailing, and private luxury products (e.g. undergarment). This study also did not measure the actual purchases and different behaviour of aggression when consumers are competing for products. Future studies should observe consumer behaviour during purchase in real time.

This study aims to investigate the role of luxury brand attachment on consumer brand relationship by examining the relationship with trust, commitment, satisfaction and loyalty. This also examines the interrelationships among trust, commitment, satisfaction and loyalty from luxury branding context which provides a good number of theoretical and practical implications. Introduction The global luxury market exceeded $1 trillion in the year 2015 with a 5% annual growth (Bain & Co., 2015). However, industry experts predict that the luxury industry will face challenges in upcoming year primarily due to the economic instability and turmoil in the global foreign exchange market (Robert, 2015). Therefore, the luxury brand executives should carefully target their future consumer segment to sustain the current growth (Luxury Society, 2015). Earlier studies demonstrate that consumers seek various types of emotional benefits from luxury brands such as status seeking (Nelissen & Meijers, 2011), hedonic pleasure (Tsai, 2005), feeling good (Aaker, 1999), pleasurable experience (Atwal & Williams, 2009), mental peace (Silverstein & Fiske, 2003), and impressing others (Wiedmann, Hennigs, & Siebels, 2009). Moreover, these emotional benefits create a comprehensive and memorable experience in terms of ownership and consumption of luxury brands (Choo et al., 2012). Therefore, luxury brand marketers should emphasize more on emotional attachment for building a long term and sustainable customer relationship (Orth et al., 2010). Research Gap Existing literature on consumer-brand relationship mostly considers cross-cultural issues (Chang & Chieng, 2006), reviving brand loyalty (Fournier, 1997), consumer attitude (Aggarwal, 2004), satisfaction (Sung & Choi, 2006), self-brand connection (Cheng et al., 2012), trust-based commitment (Hess & Story, 1995) and such other dimensions on brand evaluation (e.g. Swaminathan et al., 2007). Few studies have considered luxury products (Hodge et al., 2015) and the role of emotional aspects (Hwang & Kandampully, 2012) in the consumer-brand relationship. Still, there is a lack of empirical support for understanding the role of luxury brand attachment into the construct. This research will attempt to fulfil these research gaps. Conceptual Model and Hypotheses Psychological theories explain attachment as the tie between a person and an object or any other components (Bowlby, 1979; Hazan & Shaver, 1994). Brand attachment is defined as a long-term and commitment oriented tie between the consumer and the brand (Esch et al., 2006). The conceptualization of luxury brand demonstrates that the inherent traits of luxury brands are distinctiveness, high transaction value, superior quality, inimitability, and craftsmanship; and luxury brand consumption is mostly emotion laden (Nueno & Quelch, 1998). Based on the existing attachment concepts and theories, we define luxury brand attachment as the emotional bond that connects a consumer with a specific brand and develops deep feelings toward the brand. Several past studies have found that brand attachment reinforces brand trust and there is a positive relationship between brand attachment and trust (e.g. Belaid & Behi, 2011). In addition, Esch et al. (2006) argue that brand satisfaction and brand attachment are interrelated and satisfaction results long-term consumer-brand relationships (Gladstein, 1984). Moreover, strong commitment from the consumers has been identified as a critical factor of long lasting brand relationship (Li et al., 2014; Sung and Choi, 2010). Further, Thomson et al. (2005) find that brand attachment creates behavioural loyalty for which consumers are also willing to pay higher prices. Expecting similar relationship from luxury branding context, we propose that H1: The higher the luxury brand attachment, the greater the consumers trust in that brand. H2: The higher the luxury brand attachment, the greater the consumer satisfaction for that brand. H3: The higher the luxury brand attachment, the greater the consumer commitment to that brand. H4: Higher luxury brand attachment leads to higher behavioural loyalty to that brand. Scholars explain that satisfaction is an essential element of brand loyalty and both the constructs are positively related (e.g. Agustin and Singh, 2005). Past researches find that highly satisfied consumers demonstrate repeat purchases (e.g. Bennett et al, 2005). Past studies also show that trust toward the brand results brand loyalty and strengthen the relationship (Bansal et al., 2014; Belaid & Behi, 2011). Fournier (1997) identify brand trust as the key determinant of brand loyalty. Thus, we propose that H5: Higher satisfaction to the luxury brand leads to higher behavioural loyalty to that brand. H6: Higher trust to the luxury brand leads to higher behavioural loyalty to that brand. Ganesan (1994) argue that a satisfied customer develop trust toward a specific brand. In support of this, Belaid & Behi (2011) state that if a brand becomes successful in fulfilling the promise with consistence performance, the consumer will have satisfaction and positive feeling about the brand. In addition, the authors find a positive relationship between brand commitment and behavioural loyalty. Expecting similar relationship from luxury branding context, we propose that H7: The higher the trust in luxury brand, the more customer satisfaction in that brand. H8: Higher commitment to the luxury brand leads to higher behavioural loyalty to that brand. Summary of the hypothesised relationships are illustrated in Figure 1. Methodology The simple random sampling will ensure proper representation of the target population and eliminate the sampling bias (Cook & Campbell, 1979; Zikmund, 2002). The sample population will be 300 young Australian consumers aged between 20-30 years. Previous studies have found that there is a growth in luxury brand purchase by individuals in younger age groups e.g. 20 – 30 (Hung et al., 2011). Therefore, this is representative of the possible drift in the ages of consumers in the market for luxury brand purchase (Han et al., 2010). A consumer panel from Qualtrics database will be used and the sample frame consists of consumers who have higher brand likeability (Martin & Stewart, 2001). Established scales will be used to measure the constructs. All items will be measured on a seven-point Likert scale with 1 representing “strongly disagree” and 7 representing “strongly agree”. Research Significance This would be the very first study to investigate the role of luxury brand attachment in consumer brand relationship. This research will provide meaningful insights for the brand managers, brand strategists and advertising managers. This research will assist luxury brand managers in allocation of resources for the action plans that will ensure a stronger tie with the consumers in a cost efficient way. For brand managers luxury brand attachment may help them with segmentation process and well as providing direction on improving attachment to the consumers to influence trust, commitment, satisfaction, and loyalty.

This research aims to provide a conceptual framework to explore how consumers respond to genuinuity claims made by organisations and how it affects perceptions towards the brand. Further, this proposal explores the influence of brand familiarity and inferences of manipulative intent on consumer’s cognition of the genuine claim. The Affect Transfer Hypothesis, Dual Mediation Hypothesis, Independent Influence Hypothesis and Reciprocal Mediation Hypothesis Models are tested parallel to determine the most effective model in line with previous studies. A total of 12 studies have been designed, comparing across 4 different levels of genuinuity, and 3 different product categories (luxury car brands, luxury hotels & spa resorts). A self-administered survey will be used while collecting data using panel data and mall intercept to ensure the ecological validity of the study. The study contributes conceptually by proposing a conceptual definition for genuinuity appeals. It contributes methodologically in its development of a brand genuinuity scale. Finally, the study will contribute managerially by providing practitioners, policy makers and firms with new ways to distinguish themselves as genuine amongst the clutter of unsubstantiated claims and to change consumer’s perceptions of industries such as banks which are renowned for unsubstantiated claims.

The conceptualisation of brand charisma is multi-disciplinary, using luxury branding context. This research adds value by making significant contributions by extending and building theory; holds managerial implications for policymakers and brand managers in shaping and communicating brand charisma; additionally to develop a research framework and scale to measure brand charisma. Introduction Charisma in grounded in anthropology and sociology; which has been divided into three key definitions. At the root of the sociological construct it is associated with a leader who generates extremes of loyalty and motivation among followers (Smothers 1993).The primary reason charisma is used, historically speaking, is to gain control over a group of people, and create a strong following (Weber 1946; Dow 1968; Smothers 1993). Research has demonstrated that charismatic leaders are more likely to effect and motivate individuals (followers) beyond expectations and command extremes of attachments (Bass 1985, 1988; Conger 1988; House et al 1988). This implies that charisma can inspire devotion to a leader that surpasses mere loyalty (Spencer 1973; Dow 1968); an irrational bond and inspiration between leader and follower (Marcus, 1961). As competition continues to grow within the luxury sector brand resonance is increasingly important as some of the effects include: higher loyalty to the brand, increased number of followers, ease to move consumers, development and diffusion of new products and greater consumer accommodation for the brand. In recent years, as brands try to become more ‘accessible’ to consumers and provide them with more brand experiences online we see the brand become diluted and evidence of brand fatigue set in (Business Insider 2015). Brand experience has been conceptualised as ‘sensations, feelings, cognitions, and behavioural responses evoked by brand related stimuli’ (Brakus et al 2009); which are often subjective and internal responses (Brakus et al 2009). Most experiences occur directly when consumers shop, buy, and consume products. Experiences can also occur indirectly—for example, when consumers are exposed to advertising and marketing communications, including Web sites. As a majority of luxury brand consumers are deemed to be loyal to the brand, it is important to capitalise on these followers (Levitt 1975) to further foster brand- follower- consumer engagement. Pastor et al (2007) were able to demonstrate that followers’ emotional responses have a significant influence on charismatic leaders; where followers experienced higher levels of arousal, they were more likely to rate leaders as charismatic. Brands can have charisma through social construction, compelling emotional associations that build on imagery, symbolism and prestige. Thus, it leads to extraordinary levels of motivation and attachment- achieving brand resonance. Thus, followers and consumers will view the brand as being sacred, and imbued with deeply significant and metaphorical meaning (Smothers 1993). It is evident that brand charisma allows the brand to exercise control and influence over a following or group of consumers. As brand charisma serves as a motivational tool to inspire and communicate their brand vision to followers, it allows the charisma to remain unique and rare (only for those in the community). While the ability to attain this brand charisma is always kept out of reach for everyday consumers, in order to motivate them to perform and engage with the brand beyond expectation. From the followers perspective, charisma is used to communicate or signal to others their social belonging and identity to a particular community. The presence therefore of brand charisma serves as a guide, or vision, of the brand that is aspirational and inspirational for the followers, with the promise of the ‘dream’ being attainable by belonging to this group. It is interesting, and pivotal to note that brand charisma is not like a normal brand- follower relationship, but rather a unique bond that is value laden, ongoing and influential on perceptions. Some key characteristics have been used in forming a conceptual definition of brand charisma, form both the brand and follower perspective. These include “exercise diffuse and intense influence over the beliefs, values, behaviour and performance of others through own behaviour and example” (Dow 1969; House et al 1991; Shils 1965); “unique connection between leader and follower that can account for extraordinary performance and accomplishments of individuals, work groups, units and organisations” (Yammarino et al 1992; Bensman and Givant; Conger and Kanungo 1998); “transcendent from the ordinary” ; “the process is both parallel and analogous process…both change meaning and perceived value” (Weber 1922; 1966; Levitt 1975; Smothers 1993). Drawing from the above emerging characteristics, which is reflective of the literature, a tentative conceptual definition of brand charisma has been proposed below: “The ability to articulate the brand vision, elicit a positive emotional response by its audience or followers that is characterised by extremes of motivational attachment” Through a content analysis of luxury brands and a rigorous literature review, has identified ‘core’ and ‘supplementary’ characteristics for the presence of brand charisma, which is aimed to be further explored. The Core characteristics of brand charisma can be thought of as the source of the brands charismatic aura and this must be present for charismatic brands; while the supplementary characteristics are not crucial or inherent to every charismatic brand. Research Gaps Based on the extended literature review, the following key gaps have been identified: 1. To the best of my knowledge there has been no conceptualisation of brand charisma in marketing and branding (e.g. Smothers 1993; Dion and Arnould 2011) a. Lack of working definition for brand charisma and lack of research framework and scale to measure brand charisma 2. Diminutive studies have used the concept of charisma in luxury branding or marketing 3. Assessing whether brand charisma should be implemented or is present across various ‘categories’ of luxury (e.g. inaccessible vs. affordableluxury) 4. Past studies have not addressed the influence of brand charisma on consumer emotions and perceptions (e.g. Dion and Arnould 2011) Based on the above research gaps the following research questions have been developed: RQ1: What is brand charisma? RQ2: How does the presence of brand charisma influence brand resonance? RQ3: Does the presence of brand charisma differ between affordable and inaccessible luxury? RQ4: What are the emotional responses elicited by the presence of brand charisma? Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses Development Stimulus- Organism- Response (S-O-R) model is the underpinning theoretical framework for the proposed research (Mehrabian and Russell 1974). The S-O-R model has been widely used in retail environment (e.g. Buckley 1991; Chang et al. 2011) and to study different types of involvement (Arora 1982). Based on the S-O-R model, the stimulus is defined as any external stimuli that influence the internal states of an individual which consist of both environmental influence and marketing mix variable (Bagozzi 1978; Eroglu et al. 2003). In this proposed research the presence of brand charisma will serve as the external stimuli that influence consumers’ perception of luxury and brand affect. The perception of luxury is affected by brand related stimuli and imagery (Brakus et al 2009), which include but not limited to, elements such as; brand name, products sold and communications. Organism is defined as the internal emotional response which influences the relationship between external stimuli and the behavioural response (Bagozzi 1978). In this study, perception of luxury and brand affect will serve as the internal consumer responses (sensations, feelings and cognitions) which is degree to which a consumer is effected via the environment, being either direct or indirect, through the 5 senses (sensory appeal). In this study, the resulting response will be brand resonance, as this extends beyond loyalty and encapsulates a brand follower or consumer to willingly and proactively engage in word of mouth, have deep attachment or connection with the brand, feel proud of association with this brand and community followers (Keller 2001). Supporting Theory As brand charisma is a set of activities to capture the distinctive brand essence, which creates a strong sensory appeal compelling consumers to strongly advocate for the brand; we see the transfer of charisma onto the brand through concepts such as brand experience (consumer touchpoints) and brand resonance (brand- follower relationships). Thus, the Law of Contagion is the underpinning theory to support the effects of brand charisma (Frazer 1959, Mauss 1972; Tylor 1974). The Law of Contagion for the proposed research focuses on sympathetic magic, namely the effects of contagion, which deem that whatever is done to a material object will affect equally the person with whom the object was once in contact, whether it formed part of his body or not (Frazer 1889). This can be extended to brand activities such as communications, Furthermore, Spillover Effects, is the secondary effect of brand charisma as we are assessing the ‘spillover’ of charisma onto the brand and the effects it will have on the proposed relationships (Simonin and Ruth 1998) between perception of luxury, brand affect and brand resonance. Charismatic Leadership Theory (Weber [1922] 1978) has been deemed ‘transformational’, ‘visionary’ or ‘inspirational’ throughout the organisational literature (e.g. House 1977; Conger and Kanungo 1988). These theories focus on exceptional leaders who have extraordinary effects on their followers and larger social systems (Shamir et al 1993); hence leaders transform the needs, desires, values and aspirations of followers from self- interest to collective interest. This is demonstrated through brand communities, and kinship, as followers become highly committed to the leader’s mission and often perform above and beyond what is expected of them. Charismatic Leadership is further demonstrated through the strong relationship between follower and brand by; emotional and motivational arousal through brand behaviour, nonverbal communications, visionary and inspirational messages and ideological appeals. Therefore, in layman terms, the more charismatic brands are, the more likely they are to experience overall higher brand resonance. Brand resonance is the outcome variable proposed for this research. Brand resonance aims to capitalise on previously acquired loyalty and equity (Huang et al 2014); thus brands add value to consumer goods by supplying meaning, and consumers like brands because they package meaning derived from interaction with the brand (Biel 1970). This can further be explained by an enduring sense of communal kinship and affiliation; which sees followers of the brand invest personal resources in order to stay connected (Keller 2001; Huang et al 2014). Social Identification Theory (Tafjel and Turner 1985) is used to support the outcome variable of brand resonance, as one of the primary drivers of brand resonance is that followers draw some association or similarity between themselves and the brand. Social Identification Theory is also closely linked to Charismatic Leadership Theory (Shamir et al 1993) (discussed below), as brand behaviours define the boundaries of the collectivity to emphasise its distinctiveness, prestige and competition with other groups. Such leader behaviour increases the salience of the collective identity in members’ self- concepts (Ashforth and Mael 1989); therefore, identification with the leader (brand) as it is perceived via a representative character (brand activities). Based on the above, we postulate the following: H1: High Presence of brand charisma will lead to high perception of luxury H2: High perception of luxury will lead to high brand affect H3: High presence of brand charisma will lead to high brand affect H4: Perception of luxury mediates the relationship between presence of brand charisma and brand affect H5: High presence of brand affect will lead to high brand resonance Methodology My research will encompass a mixed methods approach and be split into three predominant phases. The first being scale development, followed by stimulus development and finally the main study. The mixed method offers greater depth and breadth of understanding and corroboration (Johnson et al 2007) and is in line with the underlying pragmatist paradigm of this study (Johnson and Onwuegbzie 2004). A convenience sample will be used comprising of consumer panel data. The sampling frame will consist of everyday consumers, as these consumers need not be buyers of luxury brands. Phase 1: Scale Development The scale development phase will use methods by Churchill (1979) and Devillis (1991). The purification, CFA, EFA and validity will be undertaken to refine and test the scale. The approximate sample for this phase is approximately 200 respondents. Phase 2: Stimulus Development This phase will use expert panel to select the most appropriate charismatic brand and stimulus to use for this research. The potential brands of interest, thus far guided by literature, are; Hermes, Chanel, Dolce & Gabanna, Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Valentino and Oscar de la Renta. The sample size of the expert panel will comprise of approximately 15-30 respondents (Endacott et al 1999; Keeney et al 2010). Phase 3: Main Study This phase will comprise of the self-administered questionnaire, with all sclaes measured on a 7- pinot Likert scale. With the use of an embedded stimulus, using consumer panel data with the sample size of approximately 800. Validation study will be included using psycho-physiological equipment available in the School of Marketing to validate the brand charisma scale; and to test whether there is positive emotions elicited that can be attributed to the charisma of the brand. This sample will consist of approximately 120, in line with recommended JCR guidelines. Significance Theoretical Contributions • Building and extending the current branding literature by conceptualising brand charisma, which has only been attempted in fragments throughout the literature. •Developing a scale to measure brand charisma in a luxury context. Until now, a brand charisma scale demonstrating rigour and validation is lacking within the literature • Empirically evaluating the developed brand charisma scale, validating the applicability and the moderating effects of brand charisma on the relationships between perception of luxury, brand experience and brand resonance. Methodological Contributions • This study will develop a brand charisma scale, employing psychometric properties to demonstrate reliability and validity. • This scale will then be used to further develop a Brand Charisma Index Managerial Contributions This study aims to provide a blueprint for luxury brand managers, owners and policymakers on: • How to use brand charisma to grow brand community, brand attachment and brand engagement; vis-a – vis the brand. • Build stronger brands, that are resilient to market changes and fluctuation • Segmentation process to identify consumers with high brand resonance To identify what cues of brand charisma should be present for brand content and campaigns and how to augment these • For inaccessible and affordable luxury offerings, identify whether the presence of brand charisma should be used for both. Provide insights how the presence of brand charisma can impact and influence consumer’s perceptions and emotional responses.

This paper presents how guilt statements can affect luxury Fairtrade chocolate products. Specifically, the study will examine how willingness to pay more can affect Fairtrade through guilt advertising. Fairtrade is a labelling certification aimed at helping farmers in marginalised countries (Méndez et al., 2010). Huhmann and Brotherton (1997) explained that ‘informative statements’ can help evoke guilt and these statements are used on the packaging to investigate consumers’ perceptions of ad credibility, inferences of manipulative intent, guilt arousal, attitudes towards the ad, purchase intention and willingness to pay more for Fairtrade chocolate products. A combination of statements and logos were used as stimuli. The results of this study has shown that guilt statements may be too intense and may have caused inferences of manipulative intent in a Fairtrade context, resulting in lower purchase intention and willingness to pay more. This study is the first study to explore how guilt statements and logos influence consumers’ purchases for Fairtrade products. This study has managerial applications in developing marketing strategies to promote Fairtrade products and other charitable co-branding schemes.

Luxury brands are explicitly marketed to appear rare, exclusive, prestigious, and authentic (Phau & Prendergast, 2000; Turunen & Laaksonen, 2011; Tynan, McKechnie, & Chhuon, 2010). The glamour and distinction that these brands generate appeal to consumers’ desire to signal their accomplishments, success, or social superiority (Mandel, Petrova, & Cialdini, 2006; McFerran, Aquino, & Tracy, 2014). It is, therefore, unsurprising that the marketing communication of many luxury brands explicitly portray images of successful, sophisticated, and confident people expressing their social superiority. However, the empirical evidence supporting the effectiveness of such portrayal in luxury communication is scant. Only a pilot study showed that exposure to a story of a similar successful other may increase desire for luxury goods (Mandel et al., 2006). In the present research, we propose that envy is a key determinant of how consumers perceive display of pride and social superiority. Our findings from two studies showed that benign (malicious) envy predisposes consumers to perceive portrayal of social superiority on luxury marketing communication to be an expression of authentic (hubristic) pride. This relationship between benign (malicious) envy and authentic (hubristic) pride enhances (reduces) the luxury perception and positive brand attitude toward the luxury brand in the advertisement. These findings were replicated in a correlational study on genuine advertisements (Study 1) and an experiment that successfully manipulated consumers’ experience of benign envy (Study 2). Separate studies have recently shown that experience of benign envy can increase consumers’ willingness to pay toward the envied product (Van de Ven et al., 2011) and that the experience of authentic pride increases luxury consumption (McFerran et al., 2014). However, no existing research has explored the complementary effect of envy and pride on consumers’ response toward luxury marketing communication. The current research is therefore the first to demonstrate the differential effect of benign and malicious envy on: (1) consumers’ interpretation of social superiority as an expression of authentic and hubristic pride; (2) consumers’ response toward the portrayal of social superiority in luxury marketing; and (3) how portrayal of social superiority enhances or reduces luxury perception and brand attitude of a luxury brand. These findings also provide insights into the complementary relationship between envy and pride in consumer psychology. Lange and Crusius (2015) suggested that other’s authentic and hubristic pride expression may evoke the experience of benign and malicious envy, respectively. The current research, however, shows that the Luxury brands are explicitly marketed to appear rare, exclusive, prestigious, and authentic (Phau & Prendergast, 2000; Turunen & Laaksonen, 2011; Tynan, McKechnie, & Chhuon, 2010). The glamour and distinction that these brands generate appeal to consumers’ desire to signal their accomplishments, success, or social superiority (Mandel, Petrova, & Cialdini, 2006; McFerran, Aquino, & Tracy, 2014). It is, therefore, unsurprising that the marketing communication of many luxury brands explicitly portray images of successful, sophisticated, and confident people expressing their social superiority. However, the empirical evidence supporting the effectiveness of such portrayal in luxury communication is scant. Only a pilot study showed that exposure to a story of a similar successful other may increase desire for luxury goods (Mandel et al., 2006). In the present research, we propose that envy is a key determinant of how consumers perceive display of pride and social superiority. Our findings from two studies showed that benign (malicious) envy predisposes consumers to perceive portrayal of social superiority on luxury marketing communication to be an expression of authentic (hubristic) pride. This relationship between benign (malicious) envy and authentic (hubristic) pride enhances (reduces) the luxury perception and positive brand attitude toward the luxury brand in the advertisement. These findings were replicated in a correlational study on genuine advertisements (Study 1) and an experiment that successfully manipulated consumers’ experience of benign envy (Study 2). Separate studies have recently shown that experience of benign envy can increase consumers’ willingness to pay toward the envied product (Van de Ven et al., 2011) and that the experience of authentic pride increases luxury consumption (McFerran et al., 2014). However, no existing research has explored the complementary effect of envy and pride on consumers’ response toward luxury marketing communication. The current research is therefore the first to demonstrate the differential effect of benign and malicious envy on: (1) consumers’ interpretation of social superiority as an expression of authentic and hubristic pride; (2) consumers’ response toward the portrayal of social superiority in luxury marketing; and (3) how portrayal of social superiority enhances or reduces luxury perception and brand attitude of a luxury brand. These findings also provide insights into the complementary relationship between envy and pride in consumer psychology. Lange and Crusius (2015) suggested that other’s authentic and hubristic pride expression may evoke the experience of benign and malicious envy, respectively. The current research, however, shows that the

The study investigates the influence of “country of ingredient authenticity” towards product and brand evaluations of luxury brands and ultimately how these constructs influence the willingness to buy and recommend luxury brands.

The notion of brand mimicry is not a new one. Drawing its roots from Darwin’s theory of evolution, Bate (1862, 502) described mimicry as a visible “resemblance in external appearance, shapes and colours between members of widely distinct families”. Further development of the theory led it to the concept of natural selection and the survival of the fittest. In order to survive, many organisms in nature employ mimicry (Vane-Wright, 1976). This strategy is similarly reflected in marketing (Kapfarer, 1995; Shenkar, 2010; 2012) and has been deemed as a form of “imitative innovation” (Levitt, 1966). Based on the accounts of the rampant copying in the industry, there is evidence that there are observed parallels between the types of mimicry identified in the discipline of biological and natural sciences and mimicry in marketing. However, there is still very little that is known within this area at present. In addition, based on the review of the key classification studies within the discipline of biological and natural sciences (Vane-wright, 1976; 1980; Pasteur, 1982), Vavilovian mimicry was identified. Vavilovian mimicry was found to convey a close resemblance to mimicry in marketing. Therefore, the development of a scale serves as a foundation to conceptualize the theory of mimicry further into the luxury-branding context within marketing. Mimicryis defined as the visible “resemblance in external appearance, shapes and colours between members of widely distinct families” (Bates, 1865, 502). There are three key roles in the system of mimicry, which are namely the model, the mimic and the signal receiver (dupe/operator) (Pasteur, 1982; Vane-Wright, 1976). The mimic, is the imitating organism that can be any species of organism produces a mimetic signal; the model, is the entity that is being imitated; and the signal receiver or operator (Vane-Wright, 1976), or sometimes termed as the dupe is the organism that is duped to believe similarities between the mimic and the model. Vavilovian mimicry in nature Vavilovian mimicry is classified as a form of crop mimicry (Pasteur, 1982; Barrett, 1983) that involves weeds, such as rye (Secale) that mimicked the first crops of man (dupe) through their evolution in the wheat (model) fields (Williamson, 1982). Subjected to the methods of man to gather and separate weed from wheat, rye have developed seeds and seed dispersal mechanisms that mimicked those of wheat (Williamson, 1982). Through such means, rye has forcefully made its way into being accepted by man and to compete with wheat in the fields. Based on Vavilov’s (1951) explanation, he calls the cereals (e.g. rye, domestic oats, rye, etc.) that originated from mimetic weeds as secondary crops. This form of mimicry is the result of unintentional selection by human beings due to the close similarities between the mimic and the model (Barrett, 1983). Therefore the mimic can evade eradication as a result (Vane-Wright, 1976). Vavilovian mimicry in marketing There are a number of parallels found within marketing that can serve to explain Vavilovian mimicry. One of the brands that employed the Vavilovian mimicry strategy lies within the beverage sector and is none other than Nudie Juice. Nudie Juice (mimic) started in 2002 by employing similar strategies to that of Innocent Juice (model) from the UK (Diagram 2). Nudie Juice has drawn many similarities from Innocent Juice such as the brand character (a small child like character), the packaging, and the concept of offering “premium fruit juice”. While many critics and consumers have suggested high level of similarities between the two brands (Ho, 2005), the founder Tim Pethick argued that they are not the same. It was suggested he initially drew inspiration from Innocent Juice but has evolved the brand from being similar to “something different” (Ho, 2005). After more than a decade in the Australian market, the Nudie brand has evolved from juice to beyond just another juice brand to differentiate from Innocent Juice. Therefore, based on the above examples, Vavilovian brand mimicry is when the mimic deceives or possibly confuses the signal receiver through symbolic and functional similarities, but as a result evades prosecution. Subsequently, it evolves, innovates and establishes itself away from the model brand over time and becomes an independent brand. They are often moderately similar mimics or so called imitative innovations. Method and Results Two studies were designed to develop the Vavilovian mimicry scale. All the studies were based on an experimental approach and were conducted in a classroom style setting using a homogenous sample aged between 18 to 35. Study One The purpose of Study One was to explore the concept of Vavilovian mimicry. In line with the scale development outlined by DeVellis (2003), it is important that existing theory should be reviewed and consulted prior to developing the scale. This study will closely follow the procedures set out by DeVellis (2003), Churchill (1979) and Li, Edwards and Lee (2002) using three methods to generate potential scale items which are 1) a thorough literature review, 2) thesaurus searches, and 3) expert surveys. Through the three techniques, an initial pool of 55 items was identified. The pool of items that was initially generated for Vavilovian mimicry scale was tested using a series of stimuli of real life brands befitting the concept of Vavilovian mimicry within the luxury branding industry (e.g. Lacoste vs. Crocodile, Rolls Royce vs, Geely). The product stimuli were pre-tested on a group of judges to ensure that the concept of Vavilovian mimicry is accurately measured. The stimuli were kept constant in the number of pairs of brands, and the duration to the stimuli that the subjects are exposed was all controlled for in the experiments. The first set of scales developed for Vavilovian mimicry was administered to a sample size of 195 respondents. Students were used as it has been indicated in past studies that students are appropriate subjects for scale development as they serve as surrogate consumers (Yavas, 1994). The data is checked for missing values and responses that are either incomplete or inappropriately completed are removed. Hence, only 177 useable responses were retained. Results of EFA As the study intended to develop scales to measure Vavilovian mimicry, the initial pool of items were cleaned to reveal five factors that seem to qualify as potential items for use. Items with double or triple loadings and that show factor loadings below .3 were eliminated. The items in the other unexpected factors were examined and items that were found to have little relevance to the study were removed. From the 55 items that were factor analyzed, 23 items remained within that is used to measure Vavilovian mimicry (α = .947; KMO and Bartlett’s test =.000; .808). From the factor analysis, the inconsistent items were also removed based on the co-efficient alphas (Nunnally, 1978). The initial Cronbach’s alphas for the factors were above .7, suggesting that the initial scales are still considerably long. As such, the next stage will be to optimize the scale length and to purify the data. Study Two This stage was performed to examine the dimensions of the scales in Study One, and to further purify the items. Churchill (1979) suggested that the scale purification step is to examine the dimensionality of the items. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) has been used to reduce scales by identifying the items that needs to be trimmed from the scale, which assists by confirming the scale in its final form (Netemeyer, Bearden & Sharma, 2003) using AMOS 19. A new survey instrument is produced consisting of the 23-item Vavilovian mimicry items, as well as the demographics collected in Study One. Respondents were exposed to only stimulus (pair of brands) that is tested to show Vavilovian mimicry and asked to respond to a self-administered survey. The respondents are students who fall between 18 to 35 years of age. Useable responses for this study was 206. Results of CFA Prior to completing the measurement model, the congeneric model for each of the factors within the Vavilovian mimicry scale is tested to ensure model fit before testing it as a measurement model. CFA further refined the scales resulting in three dimensions, which are namely symbolic characteristics, physical characteristics and beneficial characteristics. Symbolic (Chi-Square =9.390, Degrees of Freedom = 8, Probability level = .310, RMSEA = .029, RMR = .033, AGFI = .956, CFI = .998) and physical characteristics (Chi-Square =12.571, Degrees of Freedom = 11, Probability level = .322, RMSEA = .026, RMR = .029, AGFI = .954, CFI = .998) dimensions resulted in seven items each and beneficial characteristics (Chi-Square =3.203, Degrees of Freedom = 2, Probability level = .202, RMSEA = .054, RMR = .018, AGFI = .954, CFI = .997) resulted in five items. According Raubenheimer (2004), multi-dimensional scales should have a minimum of three items to load significantly on each factor in order to be successfully identified. Based on the congeneric models for the three dimensions of Vavilovian mimicry, it is shown by the results to achieve acceptable measures (Hu and Bentler, 1999). These three factors are then being used in the measurement model to ensure that the three dimensions of the scale are of acceptable measures. In the next step of the measurement procedure, the three-factor structure was tested using CFA (Kelloway, 1998). Based on the measurement model (Figure 1), model identification was achieved with the 15 items and the model fit statistics are found to be of acceptable range and can be used for further analysis (Hu and Bentler, 1999) Chi-Square =104.183, Degrees of Freedom = 83, Probability level = .058, RMSEA = .035, RMR = .063, AGFI = .914, CFI = .989).These 15 items have indicated a good model fit within three dimensions. The scale items were validated using predictive, nomological, convergent and discriminant validity tests. The paper is one of the first (at the time of the study) to develop a scale to measure Vavilovian mimicry. The final 15 items for the scale fills an important gap in the literature as it conceptualizes and measures a specific type of mimicry that is abundant in the marketplace. At present, studies have yet to extend the established theory of mimicry from the discipline of biology and natural sciences. In addition, the scale allows the model brand managers, mimic brand managers and policy makers to better identify the type of mimicry that are in question. In addition, rather than only addressing mimicry from the luxury brand owners’ perspective, the Vavilovian mimicry scale allows mimic brand managers to understand if Vavilovian mimicry is an effective innovation strategy to deploy. Typically, policy makers have often struggled in copyright laws and identifying different types of infringement in the marketplace, especially when understanding consumer confusion in relation to brand “copycats”. This Vavilovian mimicry scale can be used to measure and identify mimics more effectively and therefore to have better strategies in either educating consumers or to formulate policies and strategies. This study provides insights into means to address competition from mimic brands especially in countries such as China. However, at present the scale is currently still under development and requires further validation and generalization. Future studies will need to measure construct, criterion, discriminant and convergent validity. Furthermore, the scale warrants generalizability across specific product luxury product categories such as cars, jewellery, clothing and so on. In addition, the scale will need to be tested in relation to other constructs such as brand familiarity, consumer perceptions and evaluations in order to understand the true extend and influence of brand mimicry. Lastly, this study attempts to bridge the gap in the literature and pave the foundation to better understanding of brand mimicry.

This paper examines the phenomenon of co-branding in the context of luxury lifestyle co-brands. Specifically, it seeks to understand the viability of co-branding as a market strategy for prototypical luxury brands launching co-branded lifestyle products with other luxury brands. This study contributes to the co-branding literature by providing a perspective on the use of co-branding as a brand strategy for prototypical luxury brands.

This study sets out to examine how status consumption and prominence of brand markings influence consumer’s desire to purchase luxury fashion goods. Significant findings include emotional value’s powerful influence over purchase intention of luxury goods, and the empirical differences observed between two levels of brand prominence.

This research is underpinned by the theory of planned behaviour to examine how past experience impacts on intention to engage in cosmetic procedures. Findings are expected to help researchers understand decision-making related to cosmetic procedures and assist industry practitioners to identify factors that drive consumers to repeat a cosmetic procedure.