Counterfeit luxury is big business in China (Chen et al. 2018). The U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimates China to be the source of 86% of the world’s counterfeit luxury goods worth about $397bn (USCC 2016). Counterfeit luxury encompasses not only low quality replicas (Lai and Zaichkowsky 1999), but also high quality products that are appear almost identical to original brands. However, the price of high quality counterfeits amounts in many cases to only 10% of that of the originals (Geiger-Oneto et al. 2013). This makes high quality counterfeit luxury brands a major threat to established luxury brands. Luxury brand marketers, therefore, require a better understanding of what motivates target consumers to purchase either original or counterfeit luxury brands.

Inspired by the success of the Dove real beauty campaign, companies such as Amazon Fashion, Nike and Walmart have started to adopt authentic branding strategies, i.e., strategies based on the use of ordinary looking models to reflect real consumers in brand communications (e.g., Zombeck, 2015). Authentic branding is an alternative to the strategy of aspirational branding, where companies use “attractive” models to communicate that consuming their brands will bring consumers closer to an idealized view of themselves (e.g., being an attractive person like the models in the ads; D'Alessandro and Chitty, 2011). However, the body of evidence on their superiority over aspirational strategies is inconclusive. We expand knowledge on aspirational vs. authentic branding strategies by focusing on a new context of major economic importance for brand marketers, China, as well as by testing the moderating effect of a to date not considered contingency: local vs. foreign brand origin perceptions (i.e., low vs. high perceived brand foreignness). Data was gathered through an online survey of non-student consumers based in China recruited through Qualtrics online survey panels (n=623). Tests of reliability, convergent and discriminant validity of the measurement models deliver overall satisfactory results. R2 and Q2 values demonstrate that the tested models show good explanatory power and predictive relevance of emotional brand attachment (R2 = 0.699 to 0.759; Q2 = 0.527 to 0.696). Results support H1, as authentic branding has a positive effect on emotional brand attachment (β = 0. 293, p < 0.001), thus adding support to the efficacy of authentic branding strategies across West and East. Results also support H2, as aspirational branding has a positive effect on emotional brand attachment (β =0.598, p < 0.001). These findings support recent evidence from the UK and USA (e.g., Japutra et al., 2017) yet are out of line with recent studies in Switzerland and India, which fail to support this link (e.g., Malär et al., 2011). Results support H3, as aspirational branding has as stronger effect on EBA than authentic branding (t = 4.603, p < 0.001). Our findings question recent evidence suggesting a generic superiority of authentic over aspirational branding (e.g., Japutra et al., 2017). Results support H4, as for brands perceived as local, the effect of aspirational branding on EBA is significantly stronger than that of authentic branding (t= 4.125, p < 0.001). Thus, results support the notion that brands low on social signalling value, i.e., those perceived as local, can develop stronger attachment with consumers when they employ aspirational strategies. Finally, results do not support H5, as the data shows that for brands perceived as foreign, aspirational branding (β = 0.536, p < 0.001) still has a significantly stronger effect (t= 2.123, p < 0.05) on EBA than authentic branding (β =0.339, p < 0.001). In other words, brands perceived as foreign can still benefit from conveying aspiration over authenticity.